Mini 578 - Mistery at Montescuro - Game Over!
-
-
Dasquian Mafia Scum
- Mafia Scum
- Mafia Scum
- Posts: 1430
- Joined: November 3, 2003
- Location: Guildford, UK
-
-
Dasquian Mafia Scum
- Mafia Scum
- Mafia Scum
- Posts: 1430
- Joined: November 3, 2003
- Location: Guildford, UK
Morning, everyone.
I don't know most of you guys so hopefully this is for no one in particular, but: I hate lurking, and find it scummy if done deliberately. I'm going to be doing my best to hunt scum, but I won't be letting any lurkers go unnoticed or unpressured. Do us all a favour and don't make that the topic of conversation
Vote: Near[size=84]QUACK[/size]-
-
Dasquian Mafia Scum
- Mafia Scum
- Mafia Scum
- Posts: 1430
- Joined: November 3, 2003
- Location: Guildford, UK
My experience is that anyone dropping third votes this soon isn't doing it to lynch, they're doing it to get discussion going and so is probably a pro-town tell. Conversely, I'll buy into the theory that people near the end of the voting order were doing less-than-random-random-votes to avoid standing out, which is a very mild scum-tell.
Mild or not, it's a good place to start:unvote Near, vote VampanezeHunter. Particularly since the above nearly completely contradicts his last post[size=84]QUACK[/size]-
-
Dasquian Mafia Scum
- Mafia Scum
- Mafia Scum
- Posts: 1430
- Joined: November 3, 2003
- Location: Guildford, UK
There's not much in it, but VH was the last person to place a vote on one of the few people left with no votes. When JamesthePhox' wagon got to 3 votes, he was then first to remove his vote. So that's twice he's tried to avoid being on a bandwagon compared to JtP's once, and I got slightly scummy vibes from his post 47.
Lots of questions at this stage is good. Any scum suspects from the answers you're getting?[size=84]QUACK[/size]-
-
Dasquian Mafia Scum
- Mafia Scum
- Mafia Scum
- Posts: 1430
- Joined: November 3, 2003
- Location: Guildford, UK
Well VH, you said...
...and I said...VampanezeHunter wrote:Also same question as everyone else. Why feel that because someone has 2 votes you need to have 3? Could it be scum following the more experienced member? Is this idea farfetched? Should I stop asking questions? lol?
I know it takes many votes but this could be a subtle scumtell. Scum getting on a Wagon ASAP to avoid suspicion.
...so your position, being at odds with mine, raised you ever-so-slightly in the suspicion stakes.Dasquian wrote:My experience is that anyone dropping third votes this soon isn't doing it to lynch, they're doing it to get discussion going and so is probably a pro-town tell.
Is Near the only person yet to post in this game?[size=84]QUACK[/size]-
-
Dasquian Mafia Scum
- Mafia Scum
- Mafia Scum
- Posts: 1430
- Joined: November 3, 2003
- Location: Guildford, UK
Wow, this game is going at quite a pace.
Near's FOS on VampanezeHunter for not OMGUSing me is weird and I don't agree with it. Other people have said this, and now I'm saying it too. I also don't like Near saying "it was a joke" - didn't seem like a joke at the time.
I totally agree with Guardian's stance on day length. 2 pages is clearly too short, but over about 10 we're heading into diminishing returns land. If we can hit a lynch by around page 8 or 9, I think we'll have done a good job. I also agree with Yos2 that he's more likely to be sparking discussion than attempting to manipulate us; but I see this as more as a null-tell than anything. He could be scum, but his questioning isn't a case.
I'm not unvoting VH on principle (he hasn't posted since acquiring his votes), butFOS: Nearfor his weird OMGUS-fos and backpeddling. Not buying the Guardian case.[size=84]QUACK[/size]-
-
Dasquian Mafia Scum
- Mafia Scum
- Mafia Scum
- Posts: 1430
- Joined: November 3, 2003
- Location: Guildford, UK
-
-
Dasquian Mafia Scum
- Mafia Scum
- Mafia Scum
- Posts: 1430
- Joined: November 3, 2003
- Location: Guildford, UK
I would agree with that. The case against VH is a weak early game case, I know, but it's still valid and he's yet to respond to it. The case against Phox is similar, but I prefer VH's and I don't really understand why Guardian favours it.
Near's case is a good one too, and one I may lend my support to after deciding what I'm doing with my VH vote.
I think the logical extension of concluding that they're scum together is possible, but assumes too much for this stage of the game.[size=84]QUACK[/size]-
-
Dasquian Mafia Scum
- Mafia Scum
- Mafia Scum
- Posts: 1430
- Joined: November 3, 2003
- Location: Guildford, UK
-
-
Dasquian Mafia Scum
- Mafia Scum
- Mafia Scum
- Posts: 1430
- Joined: November 3, 2003
- Location: Guildford, UK
Just checking in - I'm in a holding pattern, refusing to unvote VH until he posts. Silence is not a defence. I still think Near is a likely candidate for scum too, and support his L-2 status - he should know that I am liable to put him at L-1 or hammer him if VH makes himself a less appealing target.[size=84]QUACK[/size]-
-
Dasquian Mafia Scum
- Mafia Scum
- Mafia Scum
- Posts: 1430
- Joined: November 3, 2003
- Location: Guildford, UK
Good call. VH, I meant what I said in my first post. Don't make this about you lurking: if you'd posted earlier my vote would probably be on Near by now.
As for Near: Sorry Near, but if your FOSes were jokes, they simply didn't come across as such, and I'm going to continue to count them against you. Chalk it up to experience. However, rest of post did look like genuine scum-hunting and I'm leaning back to neutral on him atm.
I would say VH tops my scum-list (obviously) but actually nearly everyone else I have a neutral or neutral-leaning-town stance on. Not very helpful right now, so I'll do some rereading.[size=84]QUACK[/size]-
-
Dasquian Mafia Scum
- Mafia Scum
- Mafia Scum
- Posts: 1430
- Joined: November 3, 2003
- Location: Guildford, UK
-
-
Dasquian Mafia Scum
- Mafia Scum
- Mafia Scum
- Posts: 1430
- Joined: November 3, 2003
- Location: Guildford, UK
Hi Coron - what did you think of the case I had against VH, such as it was?
Joudas - yeah, I have a low post-count atm. That's largely due to me picking my target to be someone who then flaked on us I would've been much happier arguing with VH than waiting for him to get replaced. I stayed out of the Phox/you/Guardian mess because I couldn't make much of it, and I didn't want to take the spotlight off of VH.
Going to reread.[size=84]QUACK[/size]-
-
Dasquian Mafia Scum
- Mafia Scum
- Mafia Scum
- Posts: 1430
- Joined: November 3, 2003
- Location: Guildford, UK
Target to pressure, and potentially see lynched.
My case was that he was one of the last voters in a "random" voting stage that left us with 1 vote apiece. He was also then very quick to remove said vote once it became part of a larger bandwagon, showing a peculiar aversion to contributing towards a bandwagon.[size=84]QUACK[/size]-
-
Dasquian Mafia Scum
- Mafia Scum
- Mafia Scum
- Posts: 1430
- Joined: November 3, 2003
- Location: Guildford, UK
-
-
Dasquian Mafia Scum
- Mafia Scum
- Mafia Scum
- Posts: 1430
- Joined: November 3, 2003
- Location: Guildford, UK
OK, I gone an' dun a reread.
Top suspects, in no particular order: Near, JamesThePhox, Pyrodwarf, EvilGorillaz, Guardian
Near is going to get my vote.Vote Near. To be honest the bulk of the weight of this vote is his style, which seems to me to be a strange combination of nonchalance and forced concern. Pretty much everything he's done this game has been scummy though, from his first post, his extended periods of lurking as the spotlight moves off of him, and his vote on Phox (this one more about the lack of accompanying justification, rather than the target itself).
His only "townie" post was his big defence in post 142, when he first came under fire, and that's notable for him providing two suspects but not actually dropping an accompanying vote (he kept his on Yosarian2).
JamesThePhox - This one's a circumstantial note, really. In post 122 Yos2 noted something that rang true, when he FOSed Near but didn't vote him in a very wishy-washy post that both attacked Near but gave him lots of doubt.
Pyrodwarf - The thing that stands out most about Pyrodwarf for me is that, more than once, he responds to accusation by insisting on knowing what the case against him is. This isn't a clear scum-tell by any means, but in my limited experience, I think scum are more prone to wanting to know why a townie has tagged them, due to a fear that they've given themselves away somewhere.
EvilGorillaz - I've had no beef with his suspicions and stances (since they've coincided with mine at times), but people have pointed out that he's been quite quiet, and he has.
Guardian - The least of my suspicions, really, but I still wanted to note it. I generally approve of the strategy of kickstarting discussion with spurious accusations and direct questions, but it got to the point where he carried on asking them and delivering little of his own thoughts. I also couldn't agree with his focus on JamesThePhox at the time (or at the time, on the reread) over VampanezeHunter, even though I would rank Phox over Coron right now.
I certainly wouldn't support a Guardian bandwagon, but I didn't like his play around pages 4-6ish.
Right now I think our plan should be this: get Near to L-2, L-1 if necessary, because he needs the kick up the jacksy to do anything, hear his claim, and make a call.[size=84]QUACK[/size]-
-
Dasquian Mafia Scum
- Mafia Scum
- Mafia Scum
- Posts: 1430
- Joined: November 3, 2003
- Location: Guildford, UK
-
-
Dasquian Mafia Scum
- Mafia Scum
- Mafia Scum
- Posts: 1430
- Joined: November 3, 2003
- Location: Guildford, UK
-
-
Dasquian Mafia Scum
- Mafia Scum
- Mafia Scum
- Posts: 1430
- Joined: November 3, 2003
- Location: Guildford, UK
I see no reason to take my vote off of Near.
Near, we're going to lynch someone today. Currently it looks like you. If you're pro-town, letting this happen will do the town a disservice, so why shouldn't we lynch you?
This is why weshouldlynch you: you are non-committal to the point of insult, which is a scum-tell, as trying to get someone you know to be innocent lynched as scum is pretty scary. Also, you're prone to extreme lurking while being active on the site, giving excuses about the game not having enough going on - sorry, but you getting bandwagonned is something you can definitely comment about sooner than L-2.
You say that "not posting a lot" isn't a very good case. You're right, it's not, but when you're avoiding the spotlight like you have been, you're avoiding the opportunity to give the town a better case, which is beneficial to scum and hence is anti-town.[size=84]QUACK[/size]-
-
Dasquian Mafia Scum
- Mafia Scum
- Mafia Scum
- Posts: 1430
- Joined: November 3, 2003
- Location: Guildford, UK
"To the point of insult" might have been a little excessive on the reread, so my apologies for that. But, you know, you're pretty non-committal!
As for making stuff up... the only people who have to make cases up are scum. The rest of the townknowthere are bad guys out there, it's just a case of allocating the two/three-person's worth of blame that's sloshing around[size=84]QUACK[/size]-
-
Dasquian Mafia Scum
- Mafia Scum
- Mafia Scum
- Posts: 1430
- Joined: November 3, 2003
- Location: Guildford, UK
Uck, this sounds like a weak attempt to get Near out of the noose.
If we think he's scummy, he should be lynched. Finding links is something that can be done in retrospect and unless they're glaringly obvious to the point of creating an unarguable dependency chain ("if A is scum, so is B..."), I find it suspect when people try to make or break lynches on theoretical links.
Put another way... if candidate A is scummy and has no links, and candidate B is scummyish but less so, but has had some clashes with a number of other players, the right lynch IMO is still candidate A.
Of course, if someone makes themselves scummy by apparently buddying or distancing themselves, that's another matter; that's scummy behaviourbeforeyou consider the validity of that implied link.[size=84]QUACK[/size]-
-
Dasquian Mafia Scum
- Mafia Scum
- Mafia Scum
- Posts: 1430
- Joined: November 3, 2003
- Location: Guildford, UK
Sure, they were probably bussing youNear wrote:Also keep in mind how easy people got me to L-2. In two different occasions because I wasn't participating enough in this game. While I do agree that it is fair to vote against me because I wasn't contributing enough, I still find it interesting how easy and without opposition I was put at L-2. From my perspective, I am inclined to think that most of the scums were/are on my bandwagon both times.[size=84]QUACK[/size]-
-
Dasquian Mafia Scum
- Mafia Scum
- Mafia Scum
- Posts: 1430
- Joined: November 3, 2003
- Location: Guildford, UK
Pfft. I am more than happy with today's play having been pressuring VH and Near. Both were scummy, both deserve attention. And anyway...
Er, no? In a recent post (227), I actually called out 5 people (including yourself, coincidentally), and said why I found them questionable and/or scummy. So, what? Should I be flailing in three or four directions trying to get a number of people lynched? That would have given you a different angle to attack me with, I guess.Guardian wrote:His attention to them and no others, and his willingness to carry that to a lynch, is what makes him suspicious.
Also, if you argument is going for the "big" wagons and my "attention to them and no others", then, what about Near? He's been pushed to L-2 twice now and all he can do is cite vague suspicion of JamesThePhox, and corollary suspicion of Coron.
I actually don't understand at what point picking your two scummiest players and trying to get them lynched became scummy play.
Anyway:
Well, there's nearly everything he said:Joudas wrote:So what makes Near scummier then other people? Aside from his lack of posting, of course.
1) Crazy FOS which got back-peddled as being a joke.
2) Painfully non-committal attempts at scum-hunting.
3) The *timing* of his lurking (when the pressure is off)
4) More non-committal posting where he downplays his suspicions.
The biggie is his lurking, I'll grant you. It's a biggie because it's the cop-out from doing anything suspicious. Guardian's attack is off the mark, but at least it's there because I put stuff out there to get attacked over. Near hasn't done that unless forced and what hehassaid has seemed, to me at least, to be an attempt not to get anyone's backs up, lose the votes, and go back to lurking.
And I think the "I got to L-2 twice so I must be innocent with scum forcing my wagon through" argument stinks.[size=84]QUACK[/size]-
-
Dasquian Mafia Scum
- Mafia Scum
- Mafia Scum
- Posts: 1430
- Joined: November 3, 2003
- Location: Guildford, UK
-
-
Dasquian Mafia Scum
- Mafia Scum
- Mafia Scum
- Posts: 1430
- Joined: November 3, 2003
- Location: Guildford, UK
Near, care to elaborate? I am less than impressed with Guardian's recent posts (particularly the bravo-confidence he's using to try and push people into voting me), but on my last reread I got a town vibe more than anything. Is there a case there I missed?
Phox is a reasonable bandwagon target, I guess, but my vote stays on your for the moment.[size=84]QUACK[/size]-
-
Dasquian Mafia Scum
- Mafia Scum
- Mafia Scum
- Posts: 1430
- Joined: November 3, 2003
- Location: Guildford, UK
Actual post content:Dear Diary,
I haven't posted since the last page, and even though I don't have much to say, I don't want to get accused of coasting again. I bet that big poopyhead Guardian would say that, he's such a mean jerk. I heard he told Debbie and Hannah that I called Stacey a bitch which is TOTALLY NOT TRUE (even though she is a bit of a bitch).
Also, Debbie told me that Hank said that Kurt was going to ask me to the dance! He is such a hottie!!!
xxx
- Near isn't posting much again. I would bet that if the pressure doesn't stay on, he'll go back to lurking. Near, feel free to prove me wrong.
- I do need to reread the JtP case, since he's the other vote leader. I'd also like to hear his thoughts for how we should proceed too.
- I'm relieved that I'm not the only one calling Guardian's tactics out for what they are. In particular I stewed a bit more on him calling out 234, which I didn't rebut in my last volley of posts.
Here's the exchange:Guardian wrote:Coron, what info have you gathered?
I think Pyro is a good lynch, that's what I'm getting.
Now, I asked that because Near was, in my mind, the current "hot topic". Since Guardian was a big fan of doling out the questions, I thought I'd reciprocate the favour and put him on the spot about why he was looking past Near and focussing on Pyro, and what made Pyro more worthy of comment than Near. His response seemed pretty reasonable to me (that he saw the case on Near, but preferred it to have more guts than a lurker hunt, but would agree to a policy lynch if necessary).Dasquian wrote:Do you think he is a better lynch than Near? If so, why?
Now, he's called out 234 as me setting him up for a trap with a supposed scum-buddy, but it occurs to me that that accusation is a total two-way street. If Guardian is scum and knows one of them to be his buddy, by making that very accusation he's settingmeup to take a fall if the scum-buddy gets lynched - "Hey guys, I told you earlier! He was setting me up when he asked me that question!"
This is getting pretty contrived, since it's assuming one of Pyro/Near to be scumwithGuardian-scum, so I'm going to leave it there. As a direct rebuttal to the accusation though, since Guardian was so assertive about it "REEK"ing of scum, I wanted to know why he overlooked Near to talk about Pyro. That's all.[size=84]QUACK[/size]-
-
Dasquian Mafia Scum
- Mafia Scum
- Mafia Scum
- Posts: 1430
- Joined: November 3, 2003
- Location: Guildford, UK
Easy != wrong.Guardian wrote:Dasquian's play this game is not consistent with pro-town motivations. He hasn't tried to scum hunt hard targets, or look into players who don't seem that suspicious to see what their motives might be. He's only focused on the easy, gimme, low-lying fruit suspicions -- suspicions that many (first me, then Coron, then others) have agreed are "easy" lynches.
Sorry, but your case boils down to two assumptions:
1) Near and VH are both innocent.
2) Given that they're both innocent, I am scummy for pressing them for their scummy behaviour.
Now, (1) is a big ol' assumption we won't have for sure until they're both dead, or investigated, or have otherwise cleared themselves. Sure, feel free to suspect they are, and back it up with reasoning, that's all part of the game. But you're using that as a given and moving on to...
(2) is already shaky because of its reliance on (1). If VH or Near are scum, I'd like to think that that counts in my favour quite well. Sure enough, I could be bussing a scum-mate, but nevertheless, I'd like to cash in on the pro-towniness of pressuring a scum, please. If they're scum.
If they ARE both innocent though... now this is where your case can actually begin, and you could then validly criticise my stance on them as bandwagon targets. I'd still defend that I have done nothing scummy in attacking them, as I believe both of them deserved the pressure I gave them. I would also attack your continued assertion that I've focussed on no one else; as I keep saying, I listed out other suspicions on a previous page, I just didn't commit to any to the point of supporting a bandwagon.
Executive summary: your entire case assumes Near's and Coron's innocence, and your scumdar is off anyway.[size=84]QUACK[/size]-
-
Dasquian Mafia Scum
- Mafia Scum
- Mafia Scum
- Posts: 1430
- Joined: November 3, 2003
- Location: Guildford, UK
Is this two questions directed at me, one question directed at me and Coron, or one question directed at Coron? 263 has my most recent summary though.Guardian wrote:In the meanwhile, can you summarize, or link me to an appropriate summary, of all the reasons you find Near suspicious? Coron?[size=84]QUACK[/size]-
-
Dasquian Mafia Scum
- Mafia Scum
- Mafia Scum
- Posts: 1430
- Joined: November 3, 2003
- Location: Guildford, UK
My current stance on Coron is pretty much neutral. I found VH suspicious because of his early-game voting. I carried that (admittedly weak) reason forward up until the point he got replaced, and basically dropped it as soon as Coron replaced in and didn't set off my scumdar.
Essentially it was a weak page 2 case that lasted longer than it should've done due to VH's absence.[size=84]QUACK[/size]-
-
Dasquian Mafia Scum
- Mafia Scum
- Mafia Scum
- Posts: 1430
- Joined: November 3, 2003
- Location: Guildford, UK
-
-
Dasquian Mafia Scum
- Mafia Scum
- Mafia Scum
- Posts: 1430
- Joined: November 3, 2003
- Location: Guildford, UK
Joudas wrote:
I don't like this. This almost has a hint of "Vote Near first, because then you'll see he's town and since you think I'm bussing him, you'll (incorrectly) assume you were wrong and won't jump to the conclusion that I'm town, too."Dasquian wrote:So you're going to vote Near then, right? Given you think that there's a 68.3% chance I'm bussing him, it follows that you think we're both scum. Near has the bigger bandwagon.
The real reason is that I wanted to point out Guardian's inconsistency in continuing to vote me while saying that he thinks both IGuardian wrote:Hm. I read it that Dasquian is desperately trying to cut Near off before he makes things even harder for Dasquian, but Joudas's reasoning is viable as well.andNear are scum. If he thinks we're both scum, it follows that he should put his vote on the one more likely to be lynched, and revisit his case on me tomorrow.
I highlighted this because I think there is a non-zero chance that Guardian is dancing a merry dance with scumbuddy Near, and I wanted to see how this particular invitation to bus his own partner would go down. It's something for later, if my hunch turns out to be anywhere close to on target.[size=84]QUACK[/size]-
-
Dasquian Mafia Scum
- Mafia Scum
- Mafia Scum
- Posts: 1430
- Joined: November 3, 2003
- Location: Guildford, UK
-
-
Dasquian Mafia Scum
- Mafia Scum
- Mafia Scum
- Posts: 1430
- Joined: November 3, 2003
- Location: Guildford, UK
Welcome, MBF. I appreciate the support, though the harsh reality is that my immediate reaction was "what, is he trying to buddy up to me?" Also I hate to break it to you and Guardian but I am not, in fact, actually a duck IRL. Bad times.
To business: I don't think I support a Guardian lynch today. I really didn't appreciate his attack on me and his style of "shut up and just listen to me, I'm really really insistent you know" was weak sauce. OTOH he's very active and gutsy and generally makes a poor D1 lynch for a number of reasons, not least that he could well be town.
JamesthePhox really needs to post something of substance before we do much else.
Near basically has given me no reason to back off. There's a niggling doubt that he is just a townie with an odd turn of phrase, but his sole line of defence appears to be to cite some textbook WIFOM, even when he should just be letting things slide (eg the N0 cop comment). I would like to hear a claim from him.[size=84]QUACK[/size]-
-
Dasquian Mafia Scum
- Mafia Scum
- Mafia Scum
- Posts: 1430
- Joined: November 3, 2003
- Location: Guildford, UK
Hi DarlaBlueEyesWhiteDragon! I'll second Joudas question - I'm interested to hear why I get your sole FOS. Also, like others have said, your vote on Near for "self-preservation" doesn't inspire confidence.
On the last page, Near asked me to lay out my case against him. I thought I'd already done this, but:
1) Active lurking.
2) Non-committal scum-hunting, going through the motions but not rocking anyone's boat.
3) Over-reliance on classic WIFOM defence - he's done this three distinct times now. Firstly his "joke" FOS, then the fact he got pushed to L-2 twice (on the basis that this wouldn't have happened unless scum were pushing his wagon), and now his reaction to the potential cop investigation.
All of these are individually scummy, and Near's doing them all and giving me scummy vibes while he's doing it. Hence why I currently am looking for a claim.[size=84]QUACK[/size]-
-
Dasquian Mafia Scum
- Mafia Scum
- Mafia Scum
- Posts: 1430
- Joined: November 3, 2003
- Location: Guildford, UK
-
-
Dasquian Mafia Scum
- Mafia Scum
- Mafia Scum
- Posts: 1430
- Joined: November 3, 2003
- Location: Guildford, UK
DBE... are you saying that the people who haven't accrued votes are your top suspects precisely because they've avoided negative attention, and therefore are master scum?
Is it not possible that they're simply just not suspicious enough to warrant votes at this stage? Your logic seems to be that they're suspicious by virtue of not being suspicious.[size=84]QUACK[/size]-
-
Dasquian Mafia Scum
- Mafia Scum
- Mafia Scum
- Posts: 1430
- Joined: November 3, 2003
- Location: Guildford, UK
I agree with you on some very broad principles, that it benefits scum to lay low more than it benefits town. However I think the rest of your thinking is severely, severely flawed.DarlaBlueEyes wrote:ahha, but in reality, a scum knows not to attract attention to themselves, and thus would inhibit less votes for themselves, and thereby winning the game.
on the off chance you get a reckless scum, who gets himself lynched quickly, you can only assume the townspeople are playing it safe in order to not be lynched.
A good townsperson wants the mafia gone, and would be searching for them, therefore the most logical reasoning would be that those laying low are either Scum or a Non-Townie.
Firstly, you are assuming that the scum in this game are good players. This may be true. It's not a safe assumption, though. The last minigame I played we had some impossibly scummy newbie spend days under debate because his actions were so textbook scum. He was scum. Scum make mistakes too.
And even then, if scum don't make mistakes, it's a huge jump to assume they are excellent puppetmasters who can avoid votes all game. Sure, they're better informed and have some buds who are on-side, but it takes mad skills to avoid focus all game.
Thirdly, not getting voted is not a scum-tell even though it benefits scum more directly to not be lynched (ie, town can afford more casualties by game design, scum need to stay not lynched). A good player avoids suspicion whatever his alignment because (Jester roles notwithstanding) italwaysbenefits your win condition not to get lynched. A good scum won't get lynched. Neither will a good townie or SK. If someone isn't getting votes, they could be any of those things. Or...
Finally - it's Day 1. We can only cope with so many people getting talked about in detail at a time - chances are that the less scummy half of the town will get through D1 without too much bother. Yos2 and Singing Librarian aren't getting much focus atm, for example - do I think they should? No. Because there are better people to look at and focus needs precisely that - focus. The fact some people have no votes is indicative of little more than the fact other people have been caught in the spotlight more.[size=84]QUACK[/size]-
-
Dasquian Mafia Scum
- Mafia Scum
- Mafia Scum
- Posts: 1430
- Joined: November 3, 2003
- Location: Guildford, UK
-
-
Dasquian Mafia Scum
- Mafia Scum
- Mafia Scum
- Posts: 1430
- Joined: November 3, 2003
- Location: Guildford, UK
This is ridiculous. 4 days from deadline and we have the votes split 4 ways, 3/3/3/2. We don't want to lynch blind. We don't want to miss a lynch. Ergo we need to jump on someonefastand get a claim. This game is turning into another Lost Boys as far as lynch-shyness goes.
Obviously my first choice is Near. He's dragged this day out and really should've been forced to claim far earlier than now. My second choice is Guardian, though I think he's a bad lynch right now. My third choice is DBE, who I agree seems more newbie than scummy. My last choice is Macavenger, who has set off no scum alarms at all and has newbie, maybe-scum and scum on his bandwagon.
FOS mbffor putting us in this situation with not so much as a word of explanation. Everyone needs to chip in now as to who they're prepared to bandwagon, and whoever that person is needs to get a super-fast turnaround on a claim so we can react.
May I once again posit that Near is the only truly sensible bandwagon right now and that if two people join his bandwagon we can just about avoid a rushlynch.[size=84]QUACK[/size]-
-
Dasquian Mafia Scum
- Mafia Scum
- Mafia Scum
- Posts: 1430
- Joined: November 3, 2003
- Location: Guildford, UK
Near - you're at L-2 now.Pleaseconsider not stalling this game into deadline.
I'm watching the Guardian/Coron SK thing play out with interest. Right now, I'd side with Guardian that you just can't accuse someone of being a SK and it's actually a really cheap tactic, even before we check what those tells are. If Coron can make good on them, good for him, I doubt he can. Counting against Guardian though, I think it's a mild scum-tell that he's getting so annoyed at being accused of being a specific flavour of scum; one of the most annoying things that can happen to scum is when a townie does the right thing for entirely the wrong reasons.
Bottom line: I'll worry about a SK when I have to worry about a SK.[size=84]QUACK[/size]-
-
Dasquian Mafia Scum
- Mafia Scum
- Mafia Scum
- Posts: 1430
- Joined: November 3, 2003
- Location: Guildford, UK
What? We lynch the claim tracker (as ridiculous as the timing of his claim is, AND IT IS) instead of Mr Scummy Near who has lurked all day and is not posting through L-2 and L-1 now? I say "not posting" rather than lurking now since it's the weekend and anyone gets a break for that in my book.
As much as I dislike Coron's play here, jumping on him for it and attempting to get him lynched when he's actually claimed an information role is not a sound idea and is exactly the kind of rush-lynch that sucks for the town.[size=84]QUACK[/size]-
-
Dasquian Mafia Scum
- Mafia Scum
- Mafia Scum
- Posts: 1430
- Joined: November 3, 2003
- Location: Guildford, UK
-
-
Dasquian Mafia Scum
- Mafia Scum
- Mafia Scum
- Posts: 1430
- Joined: November 3, 2003
- Location: Guildford, UK
-
-
Dasquian Mafia Scum
- Mafia Scum
- Mafia Scum
- Posts: 1430
- Joined: November 3, 2003
- Location: Guildford, UK
OK. I can get behind that. I was feeling somewhat trapped by my previous conviction on Near and our proximity to the deadline, but in truth I'm going off it a bit.
Unvote, vote DarlaBlueEyes
I did a quick skim of her posts - things that stand out are:
- Continual scumbuddy hunting/logic. She doesn't seem to hunt individual scum so much as look for the pair, and accuse pairs. I'm not sure if this is a scum-tell, but it is pretty weird. It would be a behaviour scum might fall into more readily, given their own constant awareness of scum-mates.
- "A good townsperson wants the mafia gone, and would be searching for them, therefore the most logical reasoning would be that those laying low are either Scum or a Non-Townie. " is something to come back on if DBE shows up scum, given it suggests her scum-mates would have been active at the time.
- Stuff about Coron's claim you've already covered, and I agree with. Seems like it's a cheap shot at Coron to set him up for tomorrow, because you know he's a tracker.
I'll put my vote back on Near to make sure we getalynch if it goes that way, but this feels better. Near, please stay active and comment on as much as you can, you can always be revoted.[size=84]QUACK[/size]-
-
Dasquian Mafia Scum
- Mafia Scum
- Mafia Scum
- Posts: 1430
- Joined: November 3, 2003
- Location: Guildford, UK
-
-
Dasquian Mafia Scum
- Mafia Scum
- Mafia Scum
- Posts: 1430
- Joined: November 3, 2003
- Location: Guildford, UK
Sorry, at this point, we have to ensure a lynch. Pressuring anyone else risks them claiming a power-role with too little time to get a turnaround. This means we basically have to stay the course and lynch Near.
Guardian is a good player, heknowsthis, and his attack on Yos2 was exactly the same one as the one I got from him earlier. He's on tomorrow's list, I can assure you.
Not sure why mike is going for the tracker, either.[size=84]QUACK[/size]-
-
Dasquian Mafia Scum
- Mafia Scum
- Mafia Scum
- Posts: 1430
- Joined: November 3, 2003
- Location: Guildford, UK
Oops, missed a page and a half of posting. This would've cemented my opinion though:
Screw you! ;p This is terrible, terrible play. This is theNear wrote:We should lynch Dasquian. We have 4 now. Which is enough to lynch him if we were to all vote against him.very definition of a rushlynchthat I've been working to avoid. You don't have a case, you wouldn't give me time to respond, and you'd be risking losing a power-role (or not! This isn't a claim).
Poor show.[size=84]QUACK[/size]-
-
Dasquian Mafia Scum
- Mafia Scum
- Mafia Scum
- Posts: 1430
- Joined: November 3, 2003
- Location: Guildford, UK
wtf? I was out all last evening and I woke up half an hour ago, at 8:25am gmt. Then I had a shower, and checked mafiascum.Near wrote:as we would have suspected, dasquian comes back RIGHT BEFORE TE Deadline. he also has been reading 3+ pages of post. lurking anyone?
i will prob die. lynch dasquian and macvenger.
I guess I am one of those pasty british scums ;p[size=84]QUACK[/size]-
-
Dasquian Mafia Scum
- Mafia Scum
- Mafia Scum
- Posts: 1430
- Joined: November 3, 2003
- Location: Guildford, UK
Wow, I sure did. It's all irrelevant anyway; we've passed the deadline and so night could fall at any moment. There's no time to do a rushlynch, there wasn't really last night either, and in any case it would've been a terrible idea.Macavenger wrote:
Uh, you missed a lot more than that, Das.Dasquian wrote:Oops, missed a page and a half of posting.
Unvote, vote Nearjust to seal the deal, if it wasn't already sealed.[size=84]QUACK[/size]-
-
Dasquian Mafia Scum
- Mafia Scum
- Mafia Scum
- Posts: 1430
- Joined: November 3, 2003
- Location: Guildford, UK
-
-
Dasquian Mafia Scum
- Mafia Scum
- Mafia Scum
- Posts: 1430
- Joined: November 3, 2003
- Location: Guildford, UK
-
-
Dasquian Mafia Scum
- Mafia Scum
- Mafia Scum
- Posts: 1430
- Joined: November 3, 2003
- Location: Guildford, UK
-
-
Dasquian Mafia Scum
- Mafia Scum
- Mafia Scum
- Posts: 1430
- Joined: November 3, 2003
- Location: Guildford, UK
OK, I read up.
Those last 6-7 pages of fervent discussion? Excellent, excellent stuff. It's a real shame only about four of you were there to have it. Here's what I think:
Near is probably town; the level of genuine self-sacrifice when put on the spot makes it highly unlikely he's not, unless, as others have said, he's scumwithCoron (which we'll have evidence/counter-evidence of very shortly).
Guardian is either an idiot who'll lead us all to our graves, a master scum-hunter who'll lead us to a glorious victory, or scum playing the fiddle like a pro. Having been the recipient of one of his "ya gotta TRUST me" bandwagons, and seen another on Yosarian just before the end-of-day madness, in which he startedanotheron Coron, I'm not feeling good about the second. This guy needs watching or preferably lynching.
Mac I like because he stopped me being on the menu for an absentee rushlynch. Thanks dude. Beyond that, no real read on yesterday's madness.
DBE could be scum as much as she ever was, needs revisiting.
mbf... I dunno. I get a bad vibe, he managed to effectively instigate the Coron lynch without fighting for it, but that probably was genuine coincidence given the speed it all went through.
Basically I think Near is off of the menu and, depending on how the lynch goes, Guardian, DBE and others are back on it.[size=84]QUACK[/size]-
-
Dasquian Mafia Scum
- Mafia Scum
- Mafia Scum
- Posts: 1430
- Joined: November 3, 2003
- Location: Guildford, UK
I still don't know what possessed you guys to do such a quick turnaround. It's scummy, you don't get to shrug this off and say "sorry". Fact is at one part of yesterday's last minute rush, I was being touted as the possible lynch, and you would've done that without even knowing what my role-claim would've been. The only reason you didn't was because you couldn't get enough votes with the few people you had.
Vote: Guardian
You're scum and your tactic is to tell people what to do, preying on the indecisiveness of others in the hope that your apparent certainty is mistaken for a genuine case. You were wrong about me, you were wrong about Coron and you know what? I reckon you were wrong about Yos2 too.[size=84]QUACK[/size]-
-
Dasquian Mafia Scum
- Mafia Scum
- Mafia Scum
- Posts: 1430
- Joined: November 3, 2003
- Location: Guildford, UK
Because a large part of your convincing isn't logic, it's showboating.Guardian wrote:Dasquian -- since when does me convincing other people with logic I am convinced by become an indication of me being scum?
You attempt to convince other people by being so insistent that other people assume the logic is there; you run your cases like a political campaign, putting in cheap shots (like when you red-bolded my name) and calling for people to join you over and over so that people assume you must have a case because youappearso fervent, rather than actually concentrating on the case itself.[size=84]QUACK[/size]-
-
Dasquian Mafia Scum
- Mafia Scum
- Mafia Scum
- Posts: 1430
- Joined: November 3, 2003
- Location: Guildford, UK
-
-
Dasquian Mafia Scum
- Mafia Scum
- Mafia Scum
- Posts: 1430
- Joined: November 3, 2003
- Location: Guildford, UK
-
-
Dasquian Mafia Scum
- Mafia Scum
- Mafia Scum
- Posts: 1430
- Joined: November 3, 2003
- Location: Guildford, UK
You're doing a remarkable job of trying to excuse your part in deadline-lynching a power-role. Blah blah, best guess, blah blah. You shouldn't have been doing any "best guesses" when...
It was eight hours to lynch.
Most people weren't there.
He claimed tracker.
You got him strung up. I should've hammered Near when I had the chance; it would at least have been a true majority of the town.[size=84]QUACK[/size]-
-
Dasquian Mafia Scum
- Mafia Scum
- Mafia Scum
- Posts: 1430
- Joined: November 3, 2003
- Location: Guildford, UK
It's true that Near's sacrificial votes yesterday seemed like something no scum would do for a power-role if there was a real chance of it turning into a genuine sacrifice. However, I'm uncomfortable totally accepting that as fact. Particularly as even in his last post he seems to be cashing in on it
In response to Guardian:
- Yes, it's "trivially obvious" Near is town (but see above), but I still think he was a better lynch.
- DBE was a worse lynch than Coron, but that didn't make Coron a good lynch.
- I agree that Near, Coron and DBE were the only viable deadline lynch candidates, however, see what court you've put this into?
It's not good town play to be doing deadline lynches!
The quick turnaround and last minute games means what happened didn't reflect on everyone in the town. We had a near-majority lynch of Near, and it would've told us a lot more about more people than your deadline lynch of Coron, and at worst, we would've lost a townie.
Did I mention you deadline-lynched a claimed power-role, btw?
In response to mbf: The benefit of lynching Coron over Near/DBE is that we lynched a tracker. Perhaps he felt that DBE was too much of an unknown quantity to push for a lynch and get away with, but Coron had been under enough fire that he could retroactively justify his lynch and get rid of a potentially ruinous power-role.
I don't see the case on MacAvenger. tbh most of his posts have seemed pretty townie and sensible to me, and in line with my own thoughts. His part in the deadline lynch is scummy but he did at least hold out on the complete idiocy of lynching me, when I reckon DBE, Near and Guardian would all have gone for that. The reason I say idiocy isn't egoism about myself; just my status as an unclaimed player.[size=84]QUACK[/size]-
-
Dasquian Mafia Scum
- Mafia Scum
- Mafia Scum
- Posts: 1430
- Joined: November 3, 2003
- Location: Guildford, UK
-
-
Dasquian Mafia Scum
- Mafia Scum
- Mafia Scum
- Posts: 1430
- Joined: November 3, 2003
- Location: Guildford, UK
Well...
I think DBE is probably town. Watcher/tracker combo makes sense, and I just get townish vibes more than anything.
Yos2's case against mbf is interesting. I don't get a scum-vibe from mbf and haven't really at any point, but his part in the Coron wagon is undeniable; whether he intended to lynch him or not he put the bandwagon into motion and could've voted elsewhere (or nowhere, if he really wanted a no lynch!). In fact, why vote Coron if you wanted a no lynch? Was the purpose to get a no lynch without looking like you supported it?
Ergh. mbf is a good vote, I reckon. What's the vote-count?
I still think Guardian is scummy. If mbf can be accused of manipulating the deadline lynch in a scummy fashion, Guardian can certainly be accused of hammering it into shape.[size=84]QUACK[/size]-
-
Dasquian Mafia Scum
- Mafia Scum
- Mafia Scum
- Posts: 1430
- Joined: November 3, 2003
- Location: Guildford, UK