Open 46 - Strawberry (Game Over!), before 508

[competentpsycho]

fastest way to get into another game, why not take it. Glad to play with you again. Hello everyone else.

vote: lemming

cuz they walk off cliffs blindly

[competentpsycho]

OMGUS

unvote
vote killerbob

[competentpsycho]

LOL the vicious OMGUS circle.

And white - what are you blabbing about - do we think Cornelius is really a townie or do we think Green Day is really a scum or do we think Boing is scum for defending Green Day? Which one are you talking about. be specific

[competentpsycho]

unvote
vote: lemming

for the pot calling the kettle black

[competentpsycho]

LOL yeah bandwagoning with 2 votes when 7 needed? The killerbob vote was an OMGUS vote and I had voted lemming before and was just going back to him. Seeing as how I haven't really spotted anything scummy, and the only suspicious thing was the Cornelius/Boing wierd thing on pg 1:

unvote
FOS: Erg0

[competentpsycho]

Lol White, take it easy on the new guy man. Either he is being a retarded n00b, or is mafia. Either way it already shows and you don't need to argue, but other people need to post - this is ridiculous. All the fucking lurkers.

[competentpsycho]

He won't cuz he'll give an excuse about being page 3. Corn has a weird way of playing, but I'm definitely not convinced he is scum. Oh and sorry for the cussing but there are 12 people in this game and only about 3 were posting, along with it being about a post/day if not less there for a while. That's kinda unacceptable. I don't want to still be on day 1 a couple months from now.

[competentpsycho]

EBWOP now he'll use the page 4 excuse - should have looked at the post count i guess

[competentpsycho]

I don't see how you think White thinks Corn is town from that post - he's saying give Corn some time to make more mistakes and out his scum buddies. This seemed very obvious to me, so the fact that you are using an argument full of holes to take pressure off of Corn makes me think you and him are scum.

unvote, vote d3sisted

FOS: Corn

[competentpsycho]

Hmmm... rereading the thread has brought Corn and killerbob(replaced Green Day) to the front of my suspicious list. killerbob's refusal to put Corn at -1 (and then -2 after he realized his mistake of the unvote, if it was a mistake) in a game with 3 mafia which means that -3 is technically dangerous (though no smart mafia is gonna jump to a quick hammer D1) makes me think distancing between mafia members, just like the

Green Day is mafia.

vote: Green Day

2nd post of the game. Still not sure who the 3rd partner is though.

unvote
vote: Cornelius
FOS: killerbob

now he is at -2. Let's see a defense.

[competentpsycho]

no, you should have put him at -2 (wouldn't have been -1). Mafia aren't going to quick lynch from -2 on D1, that would be stupid and we would have 2 lynches the next 2 days with 3 nights to get investigations going for other mafia (not including night 0 which already had an investigation). The mafia would have little to no chance of winning in that situation. Hence, you are protecting Corn - distancing yet protecting at the same time.

[competentpsycho]

White was talking about claiming on POST 6 - the first page, one of the very first POSTS of the game. Claiming at -1 is acceptable. Claiming at the very beginning of the game is odd at the least and very suspicious to me. Just clearing that up.

[competentpsycho]

Corn did that this game - and he is gonna be lynched as soon as White hammers, or anyone else that isn't already voting for him. So if he does end up getting lynched and being scum as we suspect, I would say my top choices for scum buddies would be killerbob and d3sisted. d3sisted's last post seems like distancing without actually pointing a finger at Corn (and killerbob I have explained before). Just putting it out there while its still day.

[competentpsycho]

Ok, so last game I played I was scum with White. He acted EXACTLY the same as he is now, which made me suspicious of him. I then went and searched out his other games and it seems he acts this way when scum and not as townie. Specifically, I have seen the giving an ultimatum before rather than hammering in the hopes that someone else will hammer to take suspicion off of him.

FOS: White

Since we need 6 votes to lynch and there is only 7 townies left... that means we basically need 6 of 7 townies to vote on a scum, since I doubt any scum will vote for their scumbuddies, unless they are going to sacrifice one, but we would have to have a bandwagon on one to get them to do that anyway. We NEED to make sure we have the right guy this time.

Neraren is up on my scum list too since he is really lurking. My other suspicions lie on desisted mostly, followed by Max and skitzer. Zeppo seems a little suspicious but less than the others. Mr Mean seems on the fence leaning toward town for me. Boing and killerbob seem town to me (so far).

[competentpsycho]

Wow, Erg0, do you do anything but monitor this to get the first post on every page and change your avatar (I like this one better than the eye and the b&w of the guy btw)?

[competentpsycho]

Newbie 463 was the last game I played that was with him.

bussing scum? What do you mean?

[competentpsycho]

Yeah, I was including that in sacrificing - didn't know there was an actual name for it.

[competentpsycho]

Since we need 6 votes to lynch and there is only 7 townies left... that means we basically need 6 of 7 townies to vote on a scum, since I doubt any scum will vote for their scumbuddies, unless they are going to sacrifice one, but we would have to have a bandwagon on one to get them to do that anyway. We NEED to make sure we have the right guy this time.

Are you pushing for a bandwagon? That's not very good-looking. We should sniff em out before we immediately go bandwagoning.

Vote: competentpsycho

You've got to be kidding me!! Read my post again - I am saying DON'T bandwagon as you just did because we need to be SURE (ie not just take other people's opinions about someone and say "Yeah sure that sounds good I will vote for that guy") that they are scum. Let me repeat this incase any other people somehow misunderstood me. DO NOT BANDWAGON. There are 3 scum left and only 7 townies. 6 votes to lynch. Therefore, if you start a bandwagon then the mafia can finish it with only 3 votes from actual townies. Make sure to make your own decision. Again, DO NOT BANDWAGON. It is true we need 6 of 7 townies to vote for scum, but if we start a bandwagon on someone random it is a 70 % chance it is a townie. The fact that you just went with a bandwagon on me from Mean's no explanation vote (YOU STILL NEED TO EXPLAIN MR MEAN) makes me think you and mean are scum. Additionally, be careful with your votes until you are sure that person is scum, as half the votes needed to lynch can come from scum. Use FOS's.

Summed up:
1) Do not bandwagon
2) Use FOS's
3) Mr. Mean explain your vote (and skitzer if you have any reasons but your misinterpretation of my last post)

Strong FOS: skitzer
FOS: Mr. Mean

[competentpsycho]

Ok rereading page 8 I get major scum alarms going off. Mr. Mean - I doubt you don't know that lurking is bad - don't give me the "I am a n00b" excuse because you joined before me, and that has to be one of the first things you learn. Big time FOS here. Also - no explanation (as of yet) to your vote that seems to be bandwagonning with skitz.

Skitz I stated before why I think he is scum.

Max's breadcrumbs things made no sense to me until I tried looking at it from the point of view that he is scum. If he was scum then this post would be protecting skitz by aluding that he has a power role. Therefore that he was town. In addition he makes the statement that he is suspicious of skitz, thus trying to distance himself from skitz, but not voting so as to not endanger skitz. If he were town this makes no sense as I do not see how skitz's comment before that is breadcrumbing at all. Maybe I am missing something here (in that case please spell it out for me) but I am pretty sure these are our 3 scum at this point.

unvote
vote: skitzer
FOS: Mr. Mean, Max

[competentpsycho]

It is not OMGUS - I don't mind votes on me with valid reasons. Twisting my words around and then being a hypocrite and not giving a reason are different stories. The former is VERY scummy and the latter is completely useless to the town, and likely scummy. Combined with no vote in the middle these seem linked and therefore even scummier. If they did this to someone else I would feel the same way. I don't OMGUS after random voting stage - it just takes away from the search for scum by wasting a vote on someone that doesn't necessarily deserve it and is a problem for giving scum a chance to get a townie lynched. I am quite serious about this vote and statement as to who is scum.

[competentpsycho]

This is the reason desisted seemed scummy to me earlier. His posts are extremely short and usually with little explanation. I am now thinking it is just his playstyle, though. I would still like to see explanations on anyone's suspicions, though so please expand on this.

People I want explanations from:
Mr Mean - vote on me
desisted - statement that Neraren is the lynch for today
skitz - a

good

reason on vote for me
Max - your statement about skitz's post that I mentioned earlier

People I want to talk more:
Neraren
Zeppo - you're only post was a combo of stating the obvious and misinterpreting
Boing
killerbob

[competentpsycho]

You kidding?!? - you never shut up!

[competentpsycho]

Holy shit do you not read the posts at all. I guess this is just to try to save face since I pointed out that this could be a bandwagon on me because you are scum, which just supports my argument. You are just using the same argument skitz posted after your explaination-less vote on me, therefore bandwagonning yourself.

What I am actually saying is don't bandwagon. If I wanted to start a bandwagon I would have voted and stated a case against someone. I didn't. Even now, I am the only vote on skitz (no bandwagon there). My comment was to

not

bandwagon because the only way we are going to get a scum lynch today is to get MOST (read 6/7) of the townies to vote for a scum. Therefore do NOT bandwagon since if you are just joining a mafia's vote you are fucking us over. My comment is to think carefully about everyone's arguments and make you're own decision as to who is scum. DO NOT just take everyone's argument as truth, because three of the 10 people alive are mafia and will be lying and be underhanded. To reiterate... BE CAREFUL, BE SUSPICIOUS OF EVERYONE, MAKE YOUR OWN DECISION

[competentpsycho]

please explain desisted... Again!

[competentpsycho]

I can only assume you are talking about the bussing thing - so I didn't know a term. I am not voting someone here because I didn't read the entire thread, which is what I was saying. I really don't care if everyone read everything on the wiki, as experience playing seems the best way to learn. If I assumed wrong please tell me what you are talking about. Also, can you explain your case against Neraren finally?

[competentpsycho]

Right now I'm quite suspicious of Neraren. He slipped by Day 1 without voting at all. Not only that, but he has failed to name any susicions. Looks to me like he's trying to keep an extremely low profile, and I'm not liking the looks of that.

Vote: Neraren

This??!??! This is the only argument you are going to put forth and then conlcluding saying he is the lynch for the day. This comment shows that maybe he is busy, lurking townie (which is bad - if this is you stop NOW), or mafia, but this as conclusive evidence that he is mafia is completely ignorant, especially if we can make a better case on someone else. Therefore, which is what I was looking for, show me some more evidence than that if you have any. You were silent when white and I asked for explanation before, posting other things but not even commenting on that. This is very anti-town. My suspicion has returned to you yet again. Congrats.

FOS: Mr. Mean (if I could cast 2 votes I would vote him too)
Max (just by association with skitz with the breadcrumb thing)
d3sisted (for being anti-town)

Right now I am fairly sure that Mean and skitz are mafia - the only question I have is who their partner is. I was thinking Max but my decision for that is based on little evidence that he has yet to dispute. Looks like d3sisted may be the partner also. Anybody else got input defending these guys or perhaps implicating others?

[competentpsycho]

I was silent before because your questions were already answered. You just failed to read the thread, and that's not my problem.

This is anti-town.

I also find it funny how you say you can make a better case on someone else, when the entirety of your case on skitzer is based on theory and inapplicable to the reality of the game, as I will proceed to explain. Just keep in mind that because this deals with scum and such, it is entirely wifom and I am aware of that.

There are 3 scum left and only 7 townies. 6 votes to lynch. Therefore, if you start a bandwagon then the mafia can finish it with only 3 votes from actual townies.

NEVER will all members of a scum team so blatantly pile on for the quicklynch. In theory they could do that, but in reality it just doesn't happen. Scum are not stupid, they play smart.

I didn't say they would quick lynch - I was saying they could start a bandwagon and lead us toward lynching a townie. Mafia could do this, with a suspicious looking townie.

Make sure to make your own decision. Again, DO NOT BANDWAGON. It is true we need 6 of 7 townies to vote for scum, but if we start a bandwagon on

someone random

it is a 70 % chance it is a townie.

Percentages rarely apply in these situations.

The only time it does is when the target was picked by random.

When you factor in the presence of alliances, external influences, informed judgements, etc, it could range from something like 20% - 99%.

The fact that you just went with a bandwagon on me from Mean's no explanation vote (YOU STILL NEED TO EXPLAIN MR MEAN) makes me think you and mean are scum.

Bandwagons do not mean scum team.

True. But the reason they used on me was they said I was saying to bandwagon, and concluded with what my point actually was, NOT to bandwagon. Then they bandwagonned me for this. This does seem scummy.

Additionally, be careful with your votes until you are sure that person is scum, as half the votes needed to lynch can come from scum. Use FOS's.

Negative. Votes apply pressure. FoS's do not.

I said be careful with your votes, not to not use them.

Max's breadcrumbs things made no sense to me until I tried looking at it from the point of view that he is scum. If he was scum then this post would be protecting skitz by aluding that he has a power role. Therefore that he was town.

Sorry, but I'm not seeing it. Can you please point out how Max is breadcrumbing?

Read the fucking thread. Max made a comment about skitz breadcrumbing (which I do not see skitz doing) - that is what I was talking about. I do not understand how what skitz did was breadcrumbing, which means there must be a reason Max did this other than that. This does not benefit town in any way so... Here I am not sure so if anyone has an explanation of to how skitz was breadcrumbing that would be most appreciated

In addition he makes the statement that he is suspicious of skitz, thus trying to distance himself from skitz, but not voting so as to not endanger skitz.

Just a post ago, you were telling people not to vote and use FoS instead. This is the epitome of hypocrisy, and it tempts me to

FoS

you.

As I said before - I just said be careful with your vote, not to not vote.

Maybe I am missing something here (in that case please spell it out for me) but I am pretty sure these are our 3 scum at this point.

So rather than attack the 3 that you are pretty sure are our 3 scum, you choose to attack me. Hum.

I am very sure on skitz and Mean. Max is debatable at the moment. Then you go and do shit that I find anti-town. What am I supposed to do?

[competentpsycho]

See, to me this does sound like you're encouraging bandwagoning. By FoS'ing White but not voting for him you could be trying to start a bandwagon on White without looking too suspicious by casting the first vote.

Notice that this post came before Max's one where he mentioned bread crumbing. What was it at this stage that made you suspicious of him? Because it seems to me like you might just be trying to push for a lynch on Max and using the bread crumbs post he made as an excuse.

In fact this whole paragraph is full of accusations without any justifications (against myself, against desisted, against Max, against skitzer and somewhat against Mr Mean). What had I done that you considered suspicious exactly?

The only accusation that was backed up was against Neraren because he was lurking. Boing and killerbob are lurking too but why do they seem town to you while Neranen ends up at the top of your list?

Asides from yourself there were 9 other players in the game at the point you made this post and you say are suspicious of

seven

other players (including Mr Mean). Seven out of nine! This really doesn't look right to me this looks very scummy.

Vote: competentpsycho

No, I wasn't trying to bandwagon on white - I was trying to get other people's opinions on him as he is hard to read and at the same time maybe get a reaction out of him. He doesn't seem as scummy today, maybe it is just his playstyle, but no one else has real suspicions about him. I have concluded that my efforts are better spent scumhunting elsewhere.

I only said Neraren was up on my scum list, not at the top - just from the lurking (at this point I had only little suspicions on people - mostly lurking). Desisted (who was at the top with white at that moment) seems like his actions were anti-town, and still are - possibly a playstyle but seems fishy. Everyone else was mostly for lurking and Max and skitzer just seemed fishy when I reread the thread at the start of day 2, along with the lurking. yours was for lurking so much, along with Mr Mean. Boing plays like a newbie but hasn't made any big mistakes that I have seen - just lurks. Same with killerbob. I would like to see them post more though.

And I didn't say that I thought those 7 were scum - I was just putting my opinions on everyone out there.

Maybe I am missing something here (in that case please spell it out for me) but I am pretty sure these are our 3 scum at this point.

So rather than attack the 3 that you are pretty sure are our 3 scum, you choose to attack me. Hum.

I am very sure on skitz and Mean. Max is debatable at the moment. Then you go and do shit that I find anti-town. What am I supposed to do?

Hmm,

MAYBE YOU SHOULD VOTE FOR ONE OF THE PEOPLE YOUR SO SURE OF!

If you are pro- town, then vote for someone that would benifet the town! Instead of doing that, you vote for someone that is voting for you. Didn't you say it was important to vote for scum at this point? But instead of that you decide to linch scum next round for your own needs.

What the hell are you talking about - I did vote the person I am most sure of (skitz and if I could you). I never changed my vote to d3sisted or said that I was sure he is scum - I just said his actions seem anti-town at the moment. That was my reason for him questioning why I FOS'd him and pointed out his scummy actions. The thing I said earlier is that the scum would try to get a bandwagon going on a townie, and not to go along with bandwagons, then you come along and vote with no reason, skitz follows suit trying to say that I was saying TO bandwagon, then you come back with a "I agree - thats the reason I voted him" on top of that. You did exactly what I was expecting scum to do today. Thats why I am sure you and skitz are scum. From the looks of it you may be succeeding. Everyone else, if I do get lynched look back at what I have been saying - Mean and skitz are trying to bandwagon on a townie with bullshit for reasoning.

White you are good at putting your opinion out there and reasons why. Can you PLEASE post on me since I can't seem to get a straight reason from anyone else. Is it all just these misinterpretations of my posts and twisting of my words?

[competentpsycho]

Hmmm... that know who our 3 scum post was multipurpose and not true. I am very sure of skitz and Mr Mean. Max was a way to get people to talk. First it was to get max to talk about the breadcrumb comment since it made no sense to me and out of the 3 (my top 3) he seemed least suspicious. He's not out from under the microscope yet but I do not have enough to vote him for it, especially since desisted is being so anti-town. The second to try to get those who have been quiet to come out and call me on it, possibly providing defenses (though unlikely) for skitz and Mr Mean, just in case I am wrong. As of yet I have seen nothing defending them, only attacking me for pointing out what they have done.

Mr Mean seems to not read the posts very well and not provide his own reasoning for what he does. Very suspicious. I believe he is scum at this point and would be willing to vote him. Then he went and said 'Oh, sorry I misread what was fairly obvious' (I am paraphrasing of course - see his last post for what exactly he said). This seems like a shitty attempt at recovering from a bad mistake of completely making shit up to get more people to bandwagon me. It is possible he was mistaken, but with the other things he has done today, it adds up to scum. At the very least these are actions that in no way benefit town, as we need to pay attention to everything to catch the scum. On the other hand a mafia member has to use deception, trying to turn the town on the good guys. I did this last game with white, leading the town around by its nose against Albert (Newbie 463 - link in earlier post). Mafia will use arguments full of holes.

skitz already has my vote for turning what I said around to be completely opposite and then being blatantly hypocritical about his argument (which was my statement turned around on me) by bandwagonning me.

My suspicions (only suspicions) for the partner at this point are desisted and max for reasons I have stated before, and neraren for lurking and not defending himself (this could be cleared up though when he posts). I am also not ruling out the possibility that the others who post very little are scum, just don't have much evidence - you guys need to voice your opinions. White so far seems somewhat unreadable, but for now I am thinking a townie.

Desisted - I am not saying your judgement is clouded, just that you seem very anti-town from your actions. Could be your playstyle is just to be an asshole to people. You seem hard to read because of this. Either way your actions do not benefit the town when you act like this.

[competentpsycho]

Hmmm, well I'm not really looking at desisted as scum - just anti-town as I have said a million times before because of his actions today, not D1 (just seemed connected to Corn then) - which could be scum, but may also be a playstyle. Mean on the other hand I was on the fence on because he wasn't participating much. Now that hes talking, he seems scum. This seems like the classic reason scum would lurk - to not make mistakes like Mean seems to have (assuming I am right and he is scum).

[competentpsycho]

skitz, zeppo, neraren, max - Say something - you are not participating much at all - one post every now and then just tells us that you didn't die IRL. Please contribute more as lurking like this is anti-town since you are not helping. Boing, and Mean - you are close to this category as you were lurking earlier - stay in participation.

[competentpsycho]

Ok, so I looked up some previous games of d3sisted's. Found a game thats over (newbie 443) where d3sisted was not nearly as much of an ass and was town. Though he still did shit to hurt the town (fake claiming cop as a townie). Furthermore, I reread all of Mean and skitz's posts and Mean and skitz don't really say anything about his blantant anti-town asshole attitude, or vote him. Skitz says one thing about him early on with what seems like a strange tone and giving him a FOS. This doesn't necessarilly mean anything as they both lurked like crazy D1 and said very little. Why the change from lurking though - maybe a more experienced scum partner told them to stop? Don't know. I don't like this as it seems like a possible connection with d3sisted. I will reread all of d3sisted's posts soon and state what I find. Again - this is based on the assumption that I am right about skitz and Mean, so if anyone has input supporting their innocence speak before I make more of an idiot of myself.

[competentpsycho]

Thinking about this again - d3sisted is very unreadable and I cannot base a connection on the fact that the two lurkers didn't implicate him, as they really have only implicated me the whole game other than one jumping on the Corn BW. I am still going to re-read his posts later to try to get a read on him though.

[competentpsycho]

skitz,

zeppo

, neraren, max - Say something - you are not participating much at all - one post every now and then just tells us that you didn't die IRL. Please contribute more as lurking like this is anti-town since you are not helping. Boing, and Mean - you are close to this category as you were lurking earlier - stay in participation.

Day 2 started just before middnight on the 10th of this month. Since then I have posted
Twice on the 11th
Once on the 12th
Twice on the 14th

"One post every now and then"? I'm posting on average more than once a day and seriously could not participate in this game any more than I am, I have uni to study for, a girlfriend and a fencing team to captain. Frankly, I think you already guessed I am doing as much as I can and thought this would discredit me to the other players. Starting a smear campaign based not at all on my game play is the final straw for me. I had suspicions before but now you just stink of rattled scum. If you genuinely wanted to hear from me you would have said what it was you wanted me to tell you not just told me to post more.

Wow, over-reaction? I included your name in a list of people I said I wanted to talk more. The every now and then wasn't really pointed at you, but I would like to see you talk more. I am not saying that these people must be scum since they are lurking - that could fuck us over as this isn't always the case. Rather I would just like to hear your guys' opinions/thoughts on who could be scum.

You are being very defensive given the circumstances. It seems like you think I am attacking you since you voted me. This isn't the case, and I said I would like to hear from

6

people more. If I thought you were for sure scum I would single you out and say so. Since you still have a vote on me, though, and I don't think you are necessarilly scum at this point, do you still think I am trying to bandwagon someone? If so, why - was my clarification after your vote last time confusing, not convincing, etc.?

[competentpsycho]

Ok PBPA of d3sisted done. He doesn't seem to have been such an anti-town asshole D1 as he is today, but since he didn't act like the asshole D1 or the other game I looked at I can only assume it is not a playstyle. Don't know what the hell is going on there. In addition, nothing conclusive jumps out at me as nailing him as scum. Something else is going on here, maybe he is just getting tired of the game not going anywhere. At this point I don't have enough evidence to suggest that he is scum.

[competentpsycho]

Is that supposed to be a half-assed attempt at getting out of my suspicion?

[competentpsycho]

So, you finally see it too, eh.

Hmmm... d3sisted, I am wondering if you are right about Neraren and skitz is trying to protect Neraren from his (and Mean's) mistakes.

Neraren speak up. You said your last midterm was already due (yesterday) - why are you lurking so much, what is your opinion on everyone so far, do you like long walks on the beach, etc... (the last one was a joke - I only really care about the others).

[competentpsycho]

Neraren, whenever you are finished with your reread I would love to hear what you think.

White, where did you go man?

Max, any input?

Zeppo's overreaction is a bit suspicious but I haven't seen much else to suggest he is scum. Any other reasons he is in your top 3, killerbob?

[competentpsycho]

We aren't going to lynch because you don't do what we say - we will lynch for being scummy/anti-town and doing what we would expect scum to do, not townies. Make up your own decision, don't trust anybody, and don't just bandwagon someone (especially on shitty reasoning). This is what I was saying in the post that you tried to get me lynched from, and the reason I said it was that trying to get a bandwagon going/joining it with shitty reasons is EXACTLY what I expected scum to do today (It is what I would do if I were scum). Basically think carefully and vote only when you are fairly certain that person is scum, or at least being very anti-town. If you vote on a big misinterpretation like you did it looks VERY scummy. I am pretty sure you are scum in this game and you fucked yourself with that. But you can learn from your mistakes for future games.

[competentpsycho]

different play styles - I'm just a bit cautious about this especially since we are already down two townies. Votes do help to pressure though.

[competentpsycho]

What does everyone think of this:

Mr. Mean- first posts are short and mainly votes, but begins to explain more as game progresses. A bunch of it is good points, most likely Pro-town.

Neraren- explains a lot. Nothing about Neraren stands out, which is maybe a slght case of pseudolurking…not suspicious.

I especially don't agree on Mr. Mean's analysis.

[competentpsycho]

d3sisted, you could be right about Neraren and skitz is trying to protect his scum buddies here. On the other hand, he knows we are on to him and Mean, so he could be saying that to throw us off of his last scum partner. I suppose cop investigations could show who the third one is by the time we reach that, but it looks like we have two scum lynches lined up before that.

[competentpsycho]

I'd have to agree on the overeager analysis of d3sisted's post, but at this point he could just be tired of the game dragging on. This line of good participation by all just started after him. I think he may have just been using it as a tool to put pressure on Neraren/mean and to get people talking. On the other hand, I am going to keep my eye on him as I have been.

[competentpsycho]

No, I am not cop and I wouldn't say so much upset as intrigued.

[competentpsycho]

Hmmm, did Neraren disappear? Supposedly he has more free time now and was going to reread - seems to still be busy though, or lurking. Did you finish rereading Neraren?

[competentpsycho]

I would like someone to make a list of my scumy actions so I can debunk them.

Voting without listing reasons, lurking, just agreeing with others and not really making much of an opinion of your own, trying to get a bandwagon going early D2, then doing a 180 when we call you out on shit. And d3sisted already listed phishing for roles. These are all somewhat scum tells by themselves, but you seem to have performed all of them. Now either you are trying to get yourself lynched (no jester in this game though so that'd be retarded) or you are very scummy. Hence my claiming you and skitz are scum. Neraren may be the third partner, I am not sure yet. Could be anyone at this point.

[competentpsycho]

O.K., when I didn't give a reason for a vote I quickly suplied one, I only lurked for a little bit, and I belive that you share opinions with other people too.

Like I said, each of these is only somewhat a scum tell, nothing conclusive by themselves. The only difference I seen in you here is that other people share opinions but no one else has made an action and waited until someone else supplied a reason for that action to agree with it. You may have just been screwed by skitz doing the same thing for the same reason, but I doubt it considering both of your logic was flawed.

[competentpsycho]

I think Skitzer is probably town, because his quick analysis would have probably pointed a few more fingers if it was scum. See killerbob's analysis on page 11 as an example.

What are you basing this off of. If it is a previous game you played, link it here. Otherwise, considering your join date I don't think you have enough general experience to draw this conclusion. Also, I don't personally think scum would have pointed more fingers. Can we get some more explanation on this statement please?

[competentpsycho]

Otherwise, considering your join date I don't think you have enough general experience to draw this conclusion.

Just because I'm new here doesn't mean Im new to the game. I don't appreciate being completely dismissed with what is basically "STFU Noob". You're welcome to disagree with me, but that sort of thing is uncalled for.

That said, skitzer voted mostly through elimination. He was stating why he thought everyone else was town and/or had no read on them. I would think scum would me more of a "a few of you are suspicious, but XXX is the most scummy" seeing as they are eventually going to vote for all those people for a lynch assuming things go in their favor. I'm not saying Skitzer is completely off my suspicion list, just that he's not near the top.

I guess I should have said judging by. Sorry, I wasn't meaning to be derogatory, since as d3sisted pointed out I am a n00b at this. I was just prodding for explanation, which yours seems good enough except that scum isn't really limited to a certain behavior and they will usually avoid behavior that "only scum would do". But then they would avoid doing that, and so on.... vicious vicious circle is confusing as hell.

so I'm okay with poking both of them with sticks until one of them cracks.

Sticks and stones may break my bones bu... wait, broken bones - you asshole.

[competentpsycho]

Wow skitz, when are you gonna learn, we're not getting mad at you. I actually like when you do shit like that because it shows more and more that my pick of you as scum is right. Didn't make us mad - made us think scum. And it wasn't the fact that you were voting on Neraren, it was that you had just tried to bandwagon me for shit reasons and then when we called you on it you went and voted for someone else (with little reason, which you still have little reason listed). It is almost like changing the subject of a conversation all of a sudden when people start thinking you're a creep... just sets off scum alarms to me is all. Anyways, the big think I want to hammer into your head is that you need to post reasons behind votes. We are well, WELL out of random voting stage so get your reasons in with your votes.

[competentpsycho]

EBWOP think = thing

cant seem to type today

[competentpsycho]

for that:

Confirm vote: skitzer

[competentpsycho]

You could try - we are basing the fact that you are scum on your actions looking scummy so you go and vote without listing reasons. Then when asked for them you "can't put them in words". This falls in the category of "women's intuition", but by your little symbol you are a guy, so this definitely doesn't apply to you, and even if it did, hunches are not evidence enough for votes at this point. Remember when I said be careful with your votes? That means don't vote unless you have good reasons - hunches aren't good reasons. Therefore put it in words, or I see a d2 skitz lynch coming.

[competentpsycho]

LOL skitz there is nothing to voting - vote and put why you think that person is scum. Not hard. You will get the hang of it. I don't care how you explain the vote as long as it seems reasonably true. Therefore if all you have is hunches use FOS instead. I think you could benefit from reading through a few games that are over to learn some stuff.

[competentpsycho]

I guess just stick with it and gain experience by learning from your mistakes. I guess the most important suggestion I have would be when you are mafia (like now) think like a townie. I look at the posts and find the scummiest person in there and then if they are town I vote them and post my reasons. If not I go to the next person. If there are no really scummy town, I use FOS's with what little reasoning that I can find. I guess most important of all is do not choose who to try to get lynched when mafia - go with the flow of the town, while putting in your own unique input. Hmm, the reason I got into mafia is because of a friend of mine that plays on the SA forums. He's really good at it and explained the game to me pretty well before I even started. I guess I started at a slight advantage compared to most newbies because of that. Anyways just stick with it - everybody learns and improves, just some slower than others.

PS I still think you are scum so if this is some pathetic ploy at gaining a little bit of leeway it won't work.

[competentpsycho]

Ok, looking at your profile, another possible reason for not being so good is that this game takes critical thinking - analyzing stuff closely for bullshit. I have been friends with my fair share of pathological liars, and this comes fairly easy to me. In addition, I have taken college courses on logic. This REALLY helps and considering you are only 15 you may be lacking in some RL experience that would help here. (mostly making well thought out, logical arguments - seems like you are starting at a fairly young age for this)

[competentpsycho]

back on topic - after a quick reread, I think the scum trio is:

skitz
Mr Mean
Neraren

At this point I have heard and stated lots of arguments why these people are scum, but very little (actually none really) why they aren't. I would like to hear cases against any one else now (not these three). Even me if you got it but this game is getting kind of repetitive and slow at this point, so I want to read about the people that aren't in my scum list. I am very certain about these but if you have something that may change my mind, bring it forward. I am

NOT

talking about cop claim - you keep quiet, you are useless to us dead.

[competentpsycho]

... and finally the mafia turn on one another.

skitz I am actually on my way out so when I get back and have time I will put together a list of what convinced me of your scumminess.

[competentpsycho]

@ Mr Mean - first you voted with no reason (on me). Then you just agreed with skitz's (admittedly wrong) reason as your reason for voting me. This set off some scum alarms in my head. Along with the evidence for skitz and Neraren, you three seemed to be defending each other as pro town for some obviously scummy actions. Seemed like a connection to me. So far to me you three seem like the scum. I am not trying to get a bandwagon on you, because I want a skitz lynch. I would probably vote on you if it came down to it, or Neraren, but right now I would like to pursue my biggest suspicion.

@ skitz - looks like you have your major mistakes that can be fixed and summed up easily listed there, and in order of importance none the less. Especially #1. Not reading stuff that has nothing to do with you is anti-town and when you don't know of that stuff it is a BIG scum tell. The only reason to only worry about posts pertaining to you is if you are mafia.

For what you don't have, flip-flopping on shit is bad. Don't be so movable in your convictions. If you vote for someone, a 1 or 2 sentence vote shouldn't be all it takes to sway your vote away, unless the vote was only to put pressure on that person to talk. Otherwise you shouldn't have voted for them in the first place. Also, overusing this "I am new/ I suck at this game" excuse is just that - an excuse, and a bad one at that. Don't do it anymore. People can tell by the way you play, bringing attention to it, unless it is your first game, is completely pointless. Finally, don't "do what people want". People may not like who you vote for but it is your vote, not theirs. Therefore don't unvote because they don't see why you did. Instead explain. Then they will explain why they don't think so or agree, at which time you can adjust your vote if you think they are right. Remember, there are always liars among us (if you are mafia you know who they are, but remember - they don't know that you know), so be wary of what people "want you to do".

PS - Saying your scum buddies seem pro-town and aren't suspicious when they obviously have been scummy is bad - if your idiot mafia brothers made a mistake that is definitely scummy, factor that into your analysis of everyone, don't completely write them off as town, but don't put them at the top of your list either unless they are sure to be lynched.

PSS - When I said make you own opinion and put forth your own unique reasons for votes, I didn't mean completely ignore everyone else's opinions. If you agree with them on something mention that but if you agree with everything, it looks a little fishy. If that something is completely obvious to everyone its not so bad but when its a stretch and you do it (like Mr Mean) it looks really bad.

Ok with skitz' tutoring session over, White is lurking again, which is unusual from what I have seen from him before. Last game I played he was mafia with me and very talkative, sort of like d1 here. Now he seems to have minimized his posts. Could be busy, but seems a little weird.

FOS white

.

Max, Zeppo, Neraren aren't talking much either, but they have been that way the whole game. The only person here I get big scum vibes from for this is Neraren since he said before that he was busy with school and that his tests are finished now, yet still posts only to defend himself. I have a noose with your name on it man. I also have a sharpie to rename it if you decide to start helping out here. Skitz's noose has his name woven into the rope, so there's almost no way of redeeming himself.

Boing and killerbob - where the hell are you? you guys are the textbook definition of LURKER right now.

Damn this got long - time to eat dinner.

[competentpsycho]

The only person here I get big scum vibes from for this is Neraren since he said before that he was busy with school and that his tests are finished now, yet still posts only to defend himself.

16 min later...

Competentpsycho: I assume you are still going on Mr Mean/Skitzer because of way back on page 9:

The fact that you (skitz} just went with a bandwagon on me from Mean's no explanation vote (YOU STILL NEED TO EXPLAIN MR MEAN) makes me think you and mean are scum.

You called them as a scumpair for the sole reason that they and only they were voting against you. You go on to wedge Max in there to complete the trifecta, but later backtrack and say it's just to get people talking. Being suspicious is one thing, but by page 10 you'd submitted no more evidence against them and said:

I am very sure of skitz and Mr Mean.

I really want to see you make a case here. Especially why you're putting me in a trio with them. You went out of your way to NOT make a case with:

At this point I have heard and stated lots of arguments why these people are scum, but very little (actually none really) why they aren't.

I haven't seen the case that you're referring to besides you personally saying "That's totally what scum would do." The biggest point used against me is not being around. Now that I'm here, do you have anything more damning?

And just for d3sisted, who wants me to make my opinions clearer: I think my top suspects might have switched to CP and killerbob, CP because of above and killer for my last post in addition to voting exactly like CP with what I believe is a weak case.

Notice all the separate quotes from previous pages - this post took some time... probably about 16 minutes.

You are lurking - why? Oh and hence my reasoning and further suspicion. Give me a reason for the obvious lurking and little scumhunting and for little suspicions other than me and d3sisted for stating suspicion on you. Townies would defend themselves and instead you attack the person who suspects you. Scummy move. If Mr Mean or skitz wants a reason for my suspicions on them I can go back and make a comprehensive list, but I have already pretty much beat that dead horse and frankly don't have time right now so it'll have to wait.

[competentpsycho]

@Neraren - I guess what I want is content posts without asking for them. You rarely post without either us asking or us saying you are scummy or suspicious. You are basically a lurker and linked to my skitz/Mean suspicion defending each other. I am not completely convinced on you yet. You don't have to be so defensive, I am not voting for you right now.

@Mean - So you voted on me with no reason and your argument was that I was being defensive? Saying that I am being defensive is no argument for you innocence Mr Mean. Thats just a way to try to sweep the issue under the rug. yet again a scummy move. Then for going along with skitz's flawed logic you say again that I was being defensive posting this. I am pointing out scummy actions, it may be defensive, but this is still protown and I would have done the same if you tried these no reason/shit reason arguments against someone else. The defending each other part was a connection based on Neraren and skitz. They both seem to ignore these scumtells that I have pointed out on you in their analysis, and considering my suspicion on them, it furthered my suspicion on you. You never outright defended them. But you did have a half assed attempt at getting rid of the connection here:

I have the reasons in my head, I just can't put them into words.

(I guess I'm just complicated like that...)

unvote; vote skitzer

Yea, you kind of need some reasons. [/spoiler][/area]

but then your next three posts implicate me again.

Then as to your bandwagon comment:

I never said that you were trying to bandwagon on me, only that you were trying to bandwagon on someone.

Well, I have used flawed logic once and with a mater unrelated to a vote. But competentpsycho says that a have flawed logic.

It is almost like he is trying to start a bandwagon vote on me

. Go figure.

So yes you did say I was trying to get a bandwagon on you. In addition, I wouldn't call what I am doing against skitz trying to get a bandwagon - I am not telling people to vote for him. For one, I am the first vote on him. Two, I am telling people what scummy actions he has done and voting for him myself. They can make their own decisions based on the evidence.

[competentpsycho]

I honestly don't see how Mr. Mean and Neraren got into this. I said bad things about may 4 or 5 people left, which means there should be others! And why am I being criticized on my analysis. I'm sure Boing's analysis had some people he didn't seem bad...

You are not being criticized - it helps us find scum. Mean got into it because he had obvious scumtells too, but you didnt seem to find it. Looked a little like a connection with the flawed analysis of my post before but here it looked like a stronger connection. Boing didn't say anyone I was suspicious of looked not suspicious and probably town. Go look at it. Also, I wasn't already suspicious of Boing like I was you. He did leave out lurkers, but this is understandable as lurkers are hard to get a read on. Speaking of which:

Boing - do you have an opinion on anyone you left out of your analysis in post 234?

[competentpsycho]

I can see what you're trying to do there, but this could be a way to give an excuse to a not-so-subtle tutoring of a scumbuddy.

I have to comment on this cuz it made me laugh. I wouldn't be tutoring my scumbuddy and trying to get him lynched at the same time, and at this point skitz has fucked up beyond saving, which is why I am not against giving him advice for later games now. I definitely wouldn't be that blatant as scum, either. Also, if you look back at all the mistakes I have pointed out (as well as others), an intelligent person could extrapolate this advice from those mistakes. To save time for him I just summed it up all in one post, seeing as he doesn't like to read all the posts in the thread anyway.

[competentpsycho]

the reason I got into mafia is because of a friend of mine that plays on the SA forums.

What's his name on there?

Dragnix I believe, but I am not on the SA forums so I cannot check for sure until I see him again. You play on the SA forums?

Oh for goodness sake! I got this on another game I'm playing as well. I've been posting pretty much everyday, yesterday was an exception because I was in bed all day. Gimme a break

This is just compared to everyone else - I wouldn't worry about it that much.

Skitz has really damned himself in my eyes- he's cracked. I'm convinced Neraren is mafia also for lurking then popping up occasionally to try and prop up skitzer. Mr Mean I'm pretty on the fence about. I'm certainly not confident he's scum.

I'd rather

Vote: Neraren

than skitzer actually. I want skitzer about tomorrow and hope that he slips up again and reveals his final scum buddy.

Maybe. I would be willing to vote for him if it got to the point where I was needed for the lynch, but I don't think skitz is gonna be much help anymore, considering he knows we know he is mafia. You need to remember though that if we lynch skitz and Neraren we will have 2 more nights for cop investigations, which could help with the other partner, too.

[competentpsycho]

Wow, I am voting for skitz. Yet instead of voting for zeppo who did vote for you, you again choose me. It's like the scum got together last night and decided I was the one to be lynched today. Strange. Anyway - I believe skitz is a better choice and that he probably won't give us much more info, so I wouldn't mind lynching him today, hence my continued vote on him. You on the other hand, along with Mr Mean, are also under my suspicion though. I would rather have a cop investigation done on you two to make sure, as I am positive skitz is scum.

You keep going after me, even though zeppo is the only one that has voted you besides d3sisted, just like the other two I suspect as scum did. What I don't get is why you don't vote for the person with the best case against them, in my opinion skitz, as that would be the pro-town thing to do. Instead you vote for me. Your "case" is that I am trying to get you lynched, but I have said I want skitz lynched, since I am sure he is scum. Looks like you are being anti-town which fits very well with my suspicion. You keep making me suspect you more and more. Please put forth some more shitty arguments against me so I can again prove you wrong and show you for the scum you are. Or try to help the town. Your choice.

[competentpsycho]

What I don't get is why you don't vote for the person with the best case against them,

in my opinion

skitz, as that would be the pro-town thing to do.

This right here is EXACTLY what I'm talking about it. "If you aren't voting for who I'm voting for, you are not pro-town." Seriously, what the hell? ... more ranting

Note the bolded words "in my opinion". I don't care if you vote for skitz, as long as you vote for someone you have a solid case on - as you tried to say to me, but you voted for me on the reason I am not voting for the person I am sure about but instead trying to lynch you. I have been voting for skitz, and never switched to you - Zeppo did. Therefore your case that I am anti-town because I am not voting for the person I have the best case on is complete BULLSHIT. Thats why I said that to you - vote for someone you actually have a case on. I find it hard to believe that your BS argument against me that is completely based on something I did not do is the best case you have, so if the best one is on me, please, PLEASE present it instead of cases full of holes and shit like the one you just made.

[competentpsycho]

Oh yeah and

I don't think you're ignorant.

Thanks,... I guess.

[competentpsycho]

d3sisted - 3 days
white, max - almost 5 days since last post

You guys still here?

[competentpsycho]

Thanks Ergo

[competentpsycho]

No, but his case was that we were trying to get him lynched without evidence. That could be a case (though a shitty one) for Zeppo, but like I said he voted for me. Again trying to turn statements around on people, another reason to group Neraren with Mean and skitz. Like I said - I would rather him vote for the person he thinks he has the best case against. An OMGUS vote at this stage is useless if not detrimental to the town. Basically I was just pointing out another inconsistency in his argument. Still waiting for him to try again so I can shoot him down again. They love attacking me for some reason, yet I see no evidence against me that is true and not a twisting of my words.

[competentpsycho]

I would be willing to vote for him (Neraren) if it got to the point where I was needed for the lynch

"Hey, this skitz train has kinda slowed down. Not nearly enough people are voting for him as I need. Hey guys, what about Neraren? I'll vote for Neraren too if you all wanna get him instead. Guys?"

Rather than letting a deadline expire with a no lynch - yeah I would vote for you. Sorry I guess I should have made that more clear but I thought it was implied. Next time I'll use small words and explain REALLY well. The lynch = the lynch. The lynch does not equal lynching you necessarilly. I meant that if my vote was the decision between a no lynch and you and there was no other choice, I would vote for you. A no lynch just helps scum.

[competentpsycho]

I'm sure I posted earlier

Wed. 7:28 AM post 277 was earlier, which was over 5 days from this last post of yours. Looks like you got a lot of games going on at the same time as this one, so I don't want to overload you but could you please stay in the conversation from now on at least a little?

[competentpsycho]

ok reply with the post number cuz apparently I am blind or dumb (probably the latter).

[competentpsycho]

Note the bolded words "in my opinion". I don't care if you vote for skitz, as long as you vote for someone you have a solid case on - as you tried to say to me, but you voted for me on the reason I am not voting for the person I am sure about but instead trying to lynch you. I have been voting for skitz, and never switched to you - Zeppo did. Therefore your case that I am anti-town because I am not voting for the person I have the best case on is complete BULLSHIT. Thats why I said that to you - vote for someone you actually have a case on. I find it hard to believe that your BS argument against me that is completely based on something I did not do is the best case you have, so if the best one is on me, please, PLEASE present it instead of cases full of holes and shit like the one you just made.

Do you not understand what I am saying here Mr Mean? Thats what the in my opinion was about - vote for the guy with the best case against him (which as all of you know

in my opinion

is skitz so I will vote for skitz and you can vote for whoever),

I don't give a shit who you vote for as long as you have some sort of logical case against them

. Don't vote for shit ass reasons like turning my words around like Neraren just tried. I'm NOT saying that I will think you are scum for not voting for who I think you should - I am saying vote for a person you actually have a case against (i.e. I want Neraren to make a case against me rather than trying to twist what I say into the opposite as the three I have suspected as scum keep doing). You really need to read these posts better - you even quoted my explanation and still take Neraren's skewed view.



Also, quick lesson on putting in quotes:

Either 1: hit the quote button in the upper right corner of the post you want to quote (you can then delete the unwanted parts of that post)

or 2: type tags like the following:

Code: Select all

[quote="nameinquotes"]text you are quoting[/quote]

which will appear like this:

text you are quoting

[competentpsycho]

No I posted last page just after your post near the begining

Then you said this... are you playing as an alt in this game also or something?

[competentpsycho]

I believe I have a better case on skitz... convince me otherwise, Zeppo.

[competentpsycho]

1) I don't think we will get much more info
2) I am quite sure that Mean is the partner - more so than Neraren so if you want a vote on Neraren make a good case against him

[competentpsycho]

Here is a post by post of my case against Mr Mean - I corrected some quote tag problems because they are annoying and hard to read the way he posted them, but I left the mountain of spelling errors there to embarass him.

O.K., I have a few things to say. Some people say that I have been lurking alot so I must be scum. I am lurking because it is my first game and I don't know why lurking would make me a scum. Secondly, I voted for white day one. I don't think that he is scum. I think he was just a litlle to vocal for my taste and scared me off a bit. Finally, I would like to share my vote.

vote: competentpsycho

I realy don't have any other suspitions but him right now.

voting with no reason

Since we need 6 votes to lynch and there is only 7 townies left... that means we basically need 6 of 7 townies to vote on a scum, since I doubt any scum will vote for their scumbuddies, unless they are going to sacrifice one, but we would have to have a bandwagon on one to get them to do that anyway. We NEED to make sure we have the right guy this time.

Are you pushing for a bandwagon? That's not very good-looking. We should sniff em out before we immediately go bandwagoning.

Vote: competentpsycho

I guess this would be part of my reasoning, he might think that if he can start a bangwagon vote he can influence it, and direct suspiction away from him.

taking skitz's shitty twisting my words reason after the fact as his own

It just seems to me that you are trying to get a bandwagon vote going for somone right at the begining of the round. I don't know, seems sort of scumy to me...

still using that shitty reason

Maybe I am missing something here (in that case please spell it out for me) but I am pretty sure these are our 3 scum at this point.

So rather than attack the 3 that you are pretty sure are our 3 scum, you choose to attack me. Hum.

I am very sure on skitz and Mean. Max is debatable at the moment. Then you go and do shit that I find anti-town. What am I supposed to do?

Hmm,

MAYBE YOU SHOULD VOTE FOR ONE OF THE PEOPLE YOUR SO SURE OF!

If you are pro- town, then vote for someone that would benifet the town! Instead of doing that, you vote for someone that is voting for you. Didn't you say it was important to vote for scum at this point? But instead of that you decide to linch scum next round for your own needs.

What the hell are you talking about - I did vote the person I am most sure of (skitz and if I could you).

Oh, sorry. I missread and thought you were voting for someone else.

not reading posts carefully - why in the world would a townie not read posts carefully - scum might - they already know who is scum and who is town.

d3sisted, you could be right about Neraren and skitz is trying to protect his scum buddies here. On the other hand, he knows we are on to him and Mean, so he could be saying that to throw us off of his last scum partner. I suppose cop investigations could show who the third one is by the time we reach that, but it looks like we have two scum lynches lined up before that.

Are you the cop?

Wow, why would a townie ask this? Would a townie want to expose the cop's identity to the scum? No, but a scum would want to know that info.

I have the reasons in my head, I just can't put them into words.

(I guess I'm just complicated like that...)

unvote; vote skitzer

Yea, you kind of need some reasons. [/spoiler][/area]

lame attempt at bussing - next posts go against me again

Mr Mean

Well, I have used flawed logic once and with a mater unrelated to a vote. But competentpsycho says that a have flawed logic. It is almost like he is trying to start a bandwagon vote on me. Go figure.

his flawed logic was with the original vote on me where he agreed with skitz after the vote with no reason. again trying to blame me for bandwagon voting him - didnt vote for him but I guess this is the only way he can defend himself - trying to put suspicion on me instead

Mr Mean - first you voted with no reason (on me).
I siad that you were being to defencive.
Then you just agreed with skitz's (admittedly wrong) reason as your reason for voting me.
That was only one reason. Like I said before, you were to defencive.
Along with the evidence for skitz and Neraren, you three seemed to be defending each other as pro town for some obviously scummy actions. Seemed like a connection to me.
I never defended them. Show us all a quote to prove it.
So far to me you three seem like the scum. I am not trying to get a bandwagon on you, because I want a skitz lynch.
I never said that you were trying to bandwagon on me, only that you were trying to bandwagon on someone.

I have done nothing wrong. You say that I am using false reasoning, yet I have disproven everything that you have said about me.

LOL that was pathetic. A vote with no reason and I am being too defensive - taking skitz's shit reason and I am being too defensive (apparently there are other reasons which he doesn't mention - oh wait - do he have them in your head like skitz?) They defended him, still groups them together. He did say i was trying to bandwagon him (see previous quote than this one I am discussing). With all that he disproved NOTHING - seriously, ROFL.

Oh, I forgot this in my last post.

unvote; vote competentpscho

gotta have this here - cuz he disproved everything right?

Note the bolded words "in my opinion". I don't care if you vote for skitz, as long as you vote for someone you have a solid case on - as you tried to say to me, but you voted for me on the reason I am not voting for the person I am sure about but instead trying to lynch you. I have been voting for skitz, and never switched to you - Zeppo did. Therefore your case that I am anti-town because I am not voting for the person I have the best case on is complete BULLSHIT. Thats why I said that to you - vote for someone you actually have a case on. I find it hard to believe that your BS argument against me that is completely based on something I did not do is the best case you have, so if the best one is on me, please, PLEASE present it instead of cases full of holes and shit like the one you just made.

His case is that you say that everyone that dosn't vote for the guy that you want is anti-town. I am glad that some other people are starting to see that your reasoning is

BULLSHIT!

he quotes my explanation then takes Neraren's twisted view of the post this was explaining for Neraren... seriously, I know he doesn't read all the posts apparently, but does he read what he quotes even?

[competentpsycho]

I wasn't questioning his vote on skitzer at all, just saying that he needed to narrow down his scope rather than point fingers everywhere. He's obviously done so now, even if it is wrong on at least one count. Apparently he took my advice to heart.

No, when I did that it was toward the beginning of day 2 - had little to go on so casting my net of suspicion wide shouldn't have been a problem, since you say yourself you should be suspicious of everyone later in this post - I will bold this for you. I have narrowed because of more evidence, not your advice.

Just as you said, "I would never go as far as to say I was 100% sure about someone without being a cop who has investigated."

Being suspicious of everyone is kind of he idea

. I thought summing up my opinions of everyone would be a way to help me get back involved in the discussion after I'd been gone.

Voting for me because I disagree with you is, quite frankly, an anti-town move.

He is convinced that skitz is scum, and therefore his case makes sense to him. I am not convinced on you enough to vote you, even though I am convinced on skitz, but he has presented a case and can vote how he wishes - thats the idea of the game. I don't believe voting someone for not agreeing with what they believe is necessarily anti-town. This depends on the case and here I believe it is neutral. He doesn't have enough evidence to convince me and has said that he believes skitz is scum, so my guess is others are going to vote for skitz and not you. The only way this hurts the town is if we depend on Zeppo's vote to lynch skitz and a deadline is coming up, in which case he can change his vote and it no longer hurts the town. I am not saying that his vote on you is justified, just that in his mind it is so it's not necessarilly a scum move.

Zeppo - you need more evidence than just that to get anyone else to vote for him, me included. I have more evidence than that on Mean and still don't think skitz is gonna give up any more than he has. At this point skitz's mind is on damage control.

[competentpsycho]

Oh, and my earlier case only included stuff from day 2 - day 1 Mean was a lurker BIG time - 3 total posts:

first: random vote pg 1 like everyone always does
second: random? vote on white pg 4 for being defensive
third:

The thread's 4 1/2 pages, man. Go look.

Yes...you do not like him, do you... how about you vote to linch him? USE YOUR ANGER!

I still don't get this one - seems like hes extra chummy with Neraren considering hes posted twice before this in the whole thread, and making a completely worthless post. Another possible connection to Neraren if Mean turns out to be scum.

[competentpsycho]

Can I just get a quick rundown of who thinks skitz is actually town?

[competentpsycho]

Well, me, but I KNOW I'm town.

LOL - skitz I kinda figured that... now for everyone else... . . .

I am totally fine with you being suspicious of me. Like you said, you have to be suspicious of everyone. My problem lies with you not only taking skitz's status as a given, but then voting for me because I don't think your case is as bulletproof as you do. I'm not even saying don't vote for him! I've as much as said that theres a circumstantial case against him. I've only said why its not enough for me to vote for him, and yet that's enough to have you vote, not for the person you most believe is scum, but the person that hasn't come to the same conclusions as you. I don't see how in your mind that could serve the town's best interests.

Neraren puts forth a pretty good point here. I think hes scum still, but that's just a hunch so I say let's leave him for today and get the sure lynch on skitz, unless you got more of a case on him. We'll get Neraren eventually if he really is scum.

[competentpsycho]

I'm sure its much of what we have already covered. Still acting like you are town... just confess already.

and DS - would you happen to be from Farmington, IL?

[competentpsycho]

LOL skitz... you made it too easy to find you. Go back and read the thread with an open mind, acting like skitzer was someone else, and you will think skitzer is scummy too.

[competentpsycho]

He said ALL - he wants a general defense as skitz is L-1.

[competentpsycho]

That looks like a lynch - in case I get NKed (Mean already asked if I was cop so I am assuming they think I am) Mean is my next suspicion if skitz turns out to be scum. And keep pressure on Neraren, hes my choice for the 3rd, though not too strong.

[competentpsycho]

Wow, cop really screwed this one up. Mean - once you softclaimed like that everyone, especially mafia, knew what you were hinting at. The difference is mafia knew you weren't scum and town didn't. Therefore if you weren't getting lynched you would have been NKed - you were dead either way. The best thing to do there is just come out and claim cop with your investigations. Even if you got 3 innocents, two were still alive, which means that guarantees that people know 2 innocents and they know you didn't get guilty on d3. You're playing scummy was a great way to not get NKed but you may have taken it a bit too far. Also, investigating me N2 after I handed the town skitz - there could have been better choices there. Oh, well - learning from your mistakes is the best way.

For the town after I died, just because I was right on one person doesn't make me right on the others. You shouldn't have lynched him so quick, especially with him hinting at cop. I didn't help much I guess but I was only hinting cop to get NKed to get the cop one more day of investigation, which didn't work out very well. I knew it was either d3 or Mean, but mean seemed really scummy so I figured it was d3, especially with him going after Neraren consistently D2, thought he had a guilty, hence my suspicion of Neraren.

Overall good game for scum, but you got lucky cop acted like he did.

Good game all.

[competentpsycho]

Oh, blame it on me. All of my searches were on townies, so what was I suposed to do!?!

It wasn't all your fault and hey, you'll learn with experience. A good thing for you would probably be to read through a few of the newbie games and maybe play one.

[competentpsycho]

CP definitely had me worried for some moments there.

Really? Eh, I suspected you a little but you were definitely not on the top of my list. I was really hoping cop would have survived longer and given results of his investigation, as that would have most likely screwed scum just as much as a couple guilties, but for the most part you flew under the radar pretty well.