Open 315 - Quack Mafia (Game Over)

[Sathoris]

We're clearly out of the RVS and Izak's vote was clearly inside the RVS.

Did you realyl just vote for Don because he randomly targeted someone to protect? Why not vote for Iceguy? Do I detect double standards?

[Empking]

We're clearly out of the RVS and Izak's vote was clearly inside the RVS.

Wrong. Izak is still voting Pain ergo his vote is outside the RVS.

Did you realyl just vote for Don because he randomly targeted someone to protect?

FoS: Sathoris

- Presuming Don is town.

I voted Don because scum are more likely to not put thought in who they'd like to protect.

[Sathoris]

I voted Don because scum are more likely to not put thought in who they'd like to protect.

If you'd said that the first time I'd be okay with it, but still. Why don over iceguy? Both seem to randomly chose someone to protect.

And keeping your RVS vote on someone doesn't automaticly make it a real vote if the person in question made no case or had any interaction with that guy.

Where do you see me presuming don is town? That sentence had the emphasis on your reasoning for a vote instead of Don's innocence in receiving a vote.

[izakthegoomba]

That post (PEdit: Emp's post) is awful. First off, my vote was placed inside RVS. There's no particular reason for me to take it off - in fact, since Uncle Pain has neglected to show his face, I would be rather uninclined to move my vote if it wasn't for you.

Then, why the heck would you FoS Sathoris over that? He wasn't even really presuming Don is town, he was just making a comment about your vote.

Lastly, you make great use of CrapLogic™ with the third comment. Scum are just as able to come up with a decent fake as town are to decide who to protect.

This whole post is a testament to idiocy.

UNVOTE: Uncle Pain

VOTE: Empking

Ironically, you kind of get your way about my vote.

PEdit: Sath said some of that in the above

[Empking]

I voted Don because scum are more likely to not put thought in who they'd like to protect.

If you'd said that the first time I'd be okay with it, but still. Why don over iceguy? Both seem to randomly chose someone to protect.

1. Don did it second
2. Ice is generally useful

Where do you see me presuming don is town? That sentence had the emphasis on your reasoning for a vote instead of Don's innocence in receiving a vote.

You presumed Don had the ability to protect.

[izakthegoomba]

The first bit is meaningless, since it's a crap reason for voting anyway.

The second bit is just plain wrong. We need everyone to claim their protect (cough, cough) so that we can try to figure out who the scum are. Of course, the scum will fake something, but just because someone makes a slight assumption in order to ask a question or figure something out, it doesn't mean they are convinced that their assumption is accurate. In fact, in this case, I highly doubt Sath suspects Don any less than the rest of us.

[DonJosh]

I voted Don because scum are more likely to not put thought in who they'd like to protect.

If you'd said that the first time I'd be okay with it, but still. Why don over iceguy? Both seem to randomly chose someone to protect.

1.

Don did it second

2. Ice is generally useful

Where do you see me presuming don is town? That sentence had the emphasis on your reasoning for a vote instead of Don's innocence in receiving a vote.

You presumed Don had the ability to protect.

Don did it second? Really? We both protected at the same time, we just claimed at different times. Bull reasoning

This is not an OMGUS vote, it's a genuine "I think your scum" vote... VOTE: Empking

[Empking]

The first bit is meaningless, since it's a crap reason for voting anyway.

The second bit is just plain wrong. We need everyone to claim their protect (cough, cough) so that we can try to figure out who the scum are. Of course, the scum will fake something, but just because someone makes a slight assumption in order to ask a question or figure something out, it doesn't mean they are convinced that their assumption is accurate.

No because why would I vote someone for protecting randomly? That makes no sense. Any reasonable person would know that I thought Don didn't protect at all.

Don: Why do you think I'm genuinely scum?

[glowball]

"Question to all who

randomly

chose who to protect"

I don't think people who chose with a reason would feel this question was directed at them. Aside from that the question is pretty pointless, what were you hoping to achieve from it?

It wasn't directed at people who chose with reason. If you have a reason and you stated why then I don't care right now.

I wanted to know why those who chose "randomly" chose, because there is no RVS for scum and they don't get protection power...so my form of questioning would be to deduce some sort of response that might allow them to slip up---however, taking the time to explain all of my questioning practices has made the question null and invalid.

however, I would still like you to answer why you chose who you chose instead of arguing the point down and around it-- it's a simple request and I hope you oblige.

I chose Izak because his name was above mine on the player list. Already mentioned this. Only your question was if the people who chose randomly were worried about being a quack. Not why they chose randomly. Also you said you protected jilynne after someone else already said he'd protected jilynne. Safe choice for scum to pick. And you completely changed your mind about the question after I bring it up.

The question is based on the fact that the picks were random-- so the question that I asked is

only

relevant to those who chose

random

protection...

Most of the people that picked for a reason explained their reasoning...and if they didn't the question was directed at them

also

...

And back again.

I wanted to know why those who chose "randomly" chose

Why do you flip flop between your intentiones?

VOTE: Glowball

K...either I am not being clear or you are intentionally misrepping me....

I asked, if those who chose to RANDOMLY protect were at all worried about being quacks and why they picked who they picked- 2 separate questions, why is that hard for you? I didn't change my mind after talking to you, I made an addition... NO flip-flop. I just don't care about those who didn't choose randomly because right now that isn't important to me. I wanted to know why someone would pick to protect randomly knowing that theier pick could be killed and I feel like it's easy for scum to throw out a name for no reason-- townies should be worried about who they picked because it could have changed the game drastically if they picked someone and they died. It's important to think through all of your decisions in this set up...we aren't just townies-- what we do at night has an effect.

I chose Izak because his name was above mine on the player list.

Already mentioned this.

Only your question was if the people who chose randomly were worried about being a quack. Not why they chose randomly. Also you said you protected jilynne after someone else already said he'd protected jilynne. Safe choice for scum to pick. And you completely changed your mind about the question after I bring it up.

You still have yet to answer if you were at all worried about being a quack when choosing....As far as protection claims go- your "read" is null. If I had gotten to the thread first then I would have been the first person to say that I protected jilynne1991 and someone else would be second "scum". It is in no way a tell of my alignment because I protected the same person as someone else and the fact that you are grasping is a tad bit unsettling.

You are twisting my words
Misrepping
Evading questions
Grasping at null scumtells

You could ask for clarification but attacking my protection choice? It's definitely not a "safe" choice to pick someone who's already been picked- it draws attention to yourself,and town may sacrifice you because you are still a possible quack. However thinking purely numbers wise it is stupid to relate my protection with scumtell because chances are...this happened with someone too because

only 2 people died out of a possible 4

meaning that either someone didn't use their protection and they are a quack or they used it as a quack but protected someone that a non-quack protected also...That being said the only thing I got from your issues with me was the fact that I wasn't clear and I realize how unnerving that can be and right now I honestly think your intentions are good.

VOTE: Izakthegoomba

Sheep sheep sheep-- attaching yourself to Sathoris? and an OMGUS vote on his behalf? I've never seen the defense of another player in this light...I mean we are 3 pages into day 1 and you seem to be standing very secure behind Sathoris, possibly because you know he's town.

[popsofctown]

I protected the person below me on the player list, which would be Empking if I'm not mistaken. You guys all fail for not doing the same, we were supposed to all realize in parallel that double protects provide less information, and then use a method that would disperse our protects evenly, which most intuitively would be based on the english convention of reading left to right, top to bottom.

ragerage.


I agree with Empking that the random people are more suspicious. When I read the setup, I figure random was probably a reasonable N0 action. After I got my doctor pm and thought about it I realized there's many better alternatives.

[Sathoris]

I am not intentionally misrepping. I very much hate people doing that and if you feel I'm misrepping you it's a mistake. But that being said I don't think I misrepped anything.

I asked, if those who chose to RANDOMLY protect were at all worried about being quacks and why they picked who they picked- 2 separate questions, why is that hard for you? I didn't change my mind after talking to you, I made an addition... NO flip-flop.

Your original question was this:

Question to all who randomly chose who to protect: Sathoris, IceGuy,DonJosh, were you at all worried about possibly being a "quack"?

Your only question was whether we were worried about being a quack. I see no mentioned of why we picked randomly. Not untill post #37 did you first bring up why we chose who we chose. This was already after you changed the question to people who picked with a reason but didn't yet give a reason in post [http://mafiascum.net/forum/viewtopic.ph ... 3#p3160633]#34[/url] and after post [http://mafiascum.net/forum/viewtopic.ph ... 3#p3160803]#37[/url] in which you change and say it wasn't directed at people who chose with a reason. So yes it was an addition, but after you flip flopped.

You still have yet to answer if you were at all worried about being a quack when choosing....As far as protection claims go- your "read" is null. If I had gotten to the thread first then I would have been the first person to say that I protected jilynne1991 and someone else would be second "scum". It is in no way a tell of my alignment because I protected the same person as someone else and the fact that you are grasping is a tad bit unsettling.

I didn't answer because I thought the question to be useless, of course I was worried about being a quack. I should still protect because that's the only way to find out.

But you didn't gotten to the thread first, so that's all pointless. And that 2nd person wouldn' be called scum by me unless he posted exactly like you did. The protection target alone doesn't make me put my vote on you. It's just something that I found that scum would do.

You could ask for clarification but attacking my protection choice? It's definitely not a "safe" choice to pick someone who's already been picked- it draws attention to yourself,and town may sacrifice you because you are still a possible quack. However thinking purely numbers wise it is stupid to relate my protection with scumtell because chances are...this happened with someone too because

only 2 people died out of a possible 4

meaning that either someone didn't use their protection and they are a quack or they used it as a quack but protected someone that a non-quack protected also...That being said the only thing I got from your issues with me was the fact that I wasn't clear and I realize how unnerving that can be and right now I honestly think your intentions are good. .

Town won't sacrifice you for being a quack. A quack is like a cop in this setup. I would claim to protect someone who's already been protected if I were scum for some detailled reasons that I won't all type here. I'm not saying your confirmed scum and the protection target is far from damning. I just noted it and posted it.

However I think this discussion should be dropped for now so it won't dominate discussion untill we have all the protect targets. And my suspicion eased off a bit.

[Sathoris]

EBWOP: disregard to overlapping 'glowball quote'. It's actually my text in there.

[izakthegoomba]

glowball, I don't have any read on Sathoris. It's quite possible that he is scum - it's just as likely as anyone else being scum. But he argument against him is truly awful. Its perfectly fine to protect him when he's done nothing wrong.

And it's not an "OMGUS vote on his behalf" - I believe that Empking is the scummiest player here. Do you deny that his reasoning behind the vote is total crap?

[Empking]

Izak: Do you deny that town will have thought more about who to protect? Do you deny that claiming a random pick shows less thought?

[izakthegoomba]

Scum will have thought about what their fake will be just as much as docs will have thought about who to protect. So yes, I suppose I do. Claiming a random pick does indeed show less thought, but it doesn't really mean anything. Going into it any further results in WIFOM.

[Empking]

Scum will have thought about what their fake will be just as much as docs will have thought about who to protect.

See this is complete lying nonsense.

[IceGuy]

DonJosh:
- Why did you post whom you protected, but not your justification?
- Why do you think Empking is scum?

Sathoris:
- Why this post? You didn't choose your target randomly.
- Why did you defend DonJosh against Empking's attacks?

Anyway, VOTE: Sathoris mostly because of gut feeling, and

FoS: DonJosh

.

[Sathoris]

I targeted a specific slot yes, but the person occupying that slot was random. If you were above me I would've targeted you.

Pops is right, I should've targeted the person below me but I went for the player above me.

[izakthegoomba]

How is it lying nonsense? Scum could easily have taken some time to deliberate over their fake protect-claim. Emp, you look scummier with every post.

[Empking]

How is it lying nonsense? Scum could easily have taken some time to deliberate over their fake protect-claim.

Wow, so its gone from "will" to "could". Somebody's scum aren't they?

Emp, you look scummier with every post.

Weak scum OMGUS rhetoric.

[izakthegoomba]

A slight change in wording makes me scum? WTF? You are saying that a change of ONE WORD makes me scum? This is unbelievable.

And again, WTF? I literally mean pretty much every post of yours makes you look scummier.

[Empking]

A slight change in wording makes me scum? WTF? You are saying that a change of ONE WORD makes me scum? This is unbelievable.

Yes. Well that and you changing what you were saying completely but not admitting it. Anything "could" happen. You can't base a vote on what "could" happen.

And again, WTF? I literally mean pretty much every post of yours makes you look scummier.

Does anyone else hear an echo? Almost as if Izak was scum with nothing substantial to say?

[DonJosh]

DonJosh:
- Why did you post whom you protected, but not your justification?
- Why do you think Empking is scum?

Sathoris:
- Why this post? You didn't choose your target randomly.
- Why did you defend DonJosh against Empking's attacks?

Anyway, VOTE: Sathoris mostly because of gut feeling, and

FoS: DonJosh

.

I did post my justification. It was random protection, same as yours. Personally, I don't see how posting a reason two posts later makes me scummy...

I think Empking is scum because of his excessive attacks with BS reasoning. For example:

How is it lying nonsense? Scum could easily have taken some time to deliberate over their fake protect-claim.

Wow, so its gone from "will" to "could". Somebody's scum aren't they?

[DonJosh]

Another example...

I protected popsofctown

Why?

Same as IceGuy, just random

Vote: Don

No reasoning at all, I told him I randomly protected, and he voted me. Wtf. Again, not OMGUS on my part.

[DonJosh]

Also, I just realized that Empking and I both protected the same person.