Mini 482: Shrek Mafia - Game Over

[Haschel Cedricson]

Hello. I'm here.

Mirth's same logic applies to Inhimshallibe, so

IGMEOY, inHim.

Sorry for taking so long to get here.

[Grek]

If you're voting Nox for putting a third vote on Jex, why did you just put a fifth vote on Nox? Please explain yourself.

If the scum quicklynch, we find 2 scum for 1 townie. If they don't, we lose nothing.

[Adam The Amazing]

Well, mistaking gender is a big deal. It's a lynchable offense, apparently.

[Mirth]

If you're voting Nox for putting a third vote on Jex, why did you just put a fifth vote on Nox? Please explain yourself.

If the scum quicklynch, we find 2 scum for 1 townie. If they don't, we lose nothing.

Uh huh. How do you know Nox is a townie?

This also sounds like you're trying to push a lynch on Nox. We're now on page 2. Nox hasn't done anything lynch worthy at this point in time. Why are you being so hasty? Additionally, assuming that two other people vote Nox, how do you know that they'll both be scum? Could be that the scum either already voted Nox or just don't want to give themselves away by doing so now?

[Pug89]

If you're voting Nox for putting a third vote on Jex, why did you just put a fifth vote on Nox? Please explain yourself.

If the scum quicklynch, we find 2 scum for 1 townie. If they don't, we lose nothing.

Uh huh. How do you know Nox is a townie?

This also sounds like you're trying to push a lynch on Nox. We're now on page 2. Nox hasn't done anything lynch worthy at this point in time. Why are you being so hasty? Additionally, assuming that two other people vote Nox, how do you know that they'll both be scum? Could be that the scum either already voted Nox or just don't want to give themselves away by doing so now?

I agree with Mirth. The assumption that the last two to vote for Nox are scum is a poor one; it's likely at least one of the votes on her is scum and if Nox turns up as town the last two to vote her would gain the most suspicion from the town the next day. Also This is only the second page of the thread and Nox has only made two posts both of which contained nothing that would indicate her as scum.

Vote:Grek

for putting someone that close to lynch this early in the game.

[Jex]

unvote

Wow...votes on Nox skyrocketed incredibly fast.

FOS inhim and grek

for jumping on the bandwagon so quickly.

[Grek]

Uh huh. How do you know Nox is a townie?

I don't know, but her alignment doesn't matter. If she is scum and get's lynched, that's good. If she's scum and isn't, we lose nothing. If she is town and nobody quicklynchs, she is safe. If she is town and gets quicklynched we found some scummy people.

This also sounds like you're trying to push a lynch on Nox. We're now on page 2. Nox hasn't done anything lynch worthy at this point in time. Why are you being so hasty?

The only way she is going to get lynched is if 2 more people voted before anyone can unvote. Which would be realy scummy. I was offering the scum enough rope to hang themselves, both figuratively and literaly. Seeing as they did not take the bait, I

Unvote.

Additionally, assuming that two other people vote Nox, how do you know that they'll both be scum? Could be that the scum either already voted Nox or just don't want to give themselves away by doing so now?

If two other people

quicklynch

Nox, they are scum. As in voting for her before anyone can unvote. If they have already voted, they can't vote again and nothing bad will happen. If the scum don't want to give themselves way, they don't vote and we can try some other way to find them.

[camisade]

Ew

unvote

quicklynches are bad k?

Uh huh. How do you know Nox is a townie?

I don't know, but her alignment doesn't matter. If she is scum and get's lynched, that's good. If she's scum and isn't, we lose nothing. If she is town and nobody quicklynchs, she is safe. If she is town and gets quicklynched we found some scummy people.

This also sounds like you're trying to push a lynch on Nox. We're now on page 2. Nox hasn't done anything lynch worthy at this point in time. Why are you being so hasty?

The only way she is going to get lynched is if 2 more people voted before anyone can unvote. Which would be realy scummy. I was offering the scum enough rope to hang themselves, both figuratively and literaly. Seeing as they did not take the bait, I

Unvote.

Additionally, assuming that two other people vote Nox, how do you know that they'll both be scum? Could be that the scum either already voted Nox or just don't want to give themselves away by doing so now?

If two other people

quicklynch

Nox, they are scum. As in voting for her before anyone can unvote. If they have already voted, they can't vote again and nothing bad will happen. If the scum don't want to give themselves way, they don't vote and we can try some other way to find them.

Why would scum be so stupid to hammer like that? And that won't work if Nox is scum too.

[Mirth]

I don't know, but her alignment doesn't matter. If she is scum and get's lynched, that's good. If she's scum and isn't, we lose nothing. If she is town and nobody quicklynchs, she is safe. If she is town and gets quicklynched we found some scummy people.

Wrong. At this point in time, we lose a whole day of potential information.

The only way she is going to get lynched is if 2 more people voted before anyone can unvote. Which would be realy scummy. I was offering the scum enough rope to hang themselves, both figuratively and literaly. Seeing as they did not take the bait, I

Unvote.

Again, the theory of two scum just jumping right on is flawed. It also looks even more suspicious that you're unvoting right now, especially after we called you out on the initial vote.

If two other people

quicklynch

Nox, they are scum. As in voting for her before anyone can unvote. If they have already voted, they can't vote again and nothing bad will happen.

Not necessarily. Trigger happy townies exist too. Could have been perfectly possible for two townies to pile right on. Also your lines of reasoning here don't really reconcile, like it doesn't matter if we get a myslynch or not.

[quote="Grek]
If the scum don't want to give themselves way, they don't vote and we can try some other way to find them.[/quote]

"If the scum don't want to give themselbes away"? What kind of statement is that? Why would the scum want to give themselves away? Sure, they might decide to sacrifice one or two of themselves at some point in a game, but right now its not particularly advantageous. This group of players has barely had time to get acquainted with each other. If a scum player were to sacrifice himself now, it doesn't do anything for the scum. They just lose a member. Scum sacrifice is, if played well, about redirecting suspicion. Deciding to get yourself lynched this early on day one, with most of the players not even contributing yet, doesn't do anything of this sort. You don't throw suspicion on or off anybody, because right now, most players have barely had time to greet each other, let alone do something either pro or antitown.

Also, we don't know how many scum there are (and also whether or not we have a Serial Killer). So even if one or two scum decides to sacrifice himself, the town still might not be in a particularly good situation, as the chance to gather information is lost.


On a totally unrelated note: Adam, I'm assuming your location is a reference to Atlas Shrugged?

[Mirth]

EBWOP

: Darn it. Tags didn't work. Let's hope this works now.

I don't know, but her alignment doesn't matter. If she is scum and get's lynched, that's good. If she's scum and isn't, we lose nothing. If she is town and nobody quicklynchs, she is safe. If she is town and gets quicklynched we found some scummy people.

Wrong. At this point in time, we lose a whole day of potential information.

The only way she is going to get lynched is if 2 more people voted before anyone can unvote. Which would be realy scummy. I was offering the scum enough rope to hang themselves, both figuratively and literaly. Seeing as they did not take the bait, I

Unvote.

Again, the theory of two scum just jumping right on is flawed. It also looks even more suspicious that you're unvoting right now, especially after we called you out on the initial vote.

If two other people

quicklynch

Nox, they are scum. As in voting for her before anyone can unvote. If they have already voted, they can't vote again and nothing bad will happen.

Not necessarily. Trigger happy townies exist too. Could have been perfectly possible for two townies to pile right on. Also your lines of reasoning here don't really reconcile, like it doesn't matter if we get a myslynch or not.

If the scum don't want to give themselves way, they don't vote and we can try some other way to find them.

"If the scum don't want to give themselbes away"? What kind of statement is that? Why would the scum want to give themselves away? Sure, they might decide to sacrifice one or two of themselves at some point in a game, but right now its not particularly advantageous. This group of players has barely had time to get acquainted with each other. If a scum player were to sacrifice himself now, it doesn't do anything for the scum. They just lose a member. Scum sacrifice is, if played well, about redirecting suspicion. Deciding to get yourself lynched this early on day one, with most of the players not even contributing yet, doesn't do anything of this sort. You don't throw suspicion on or off anybody, because right now, most players have barely had time to greet each other, let alone do something either pro or antitown.

Also, we don't know how many scum there are (and also whether or not we have a Serial Killer). So even if one or two scum decides to sacrifice himself, the town still might not be in a particularly good situation, as the chance to gather information is lost.


On a totally unrelated note: Adam, I'm assuming your location is a reference to Atlas Shrugged?

[Adam The Amazing]

Yes, it most certainly is. I do love me some John Galt.

As to the being put at L-2 and subsequent torrent of discussion, I don't have much to contribute. I don't see it as particularly scummy, because quicklynching on day one is shaky at best for scum in an C9 game, and in any other it'd just be stupid.

That phrase, "If the scum don't want to give themselves away" does seem a bit quirky to me, but it's not anything substantial, nothing I'd want to run with.

Be aware of the pirate.

[Grek]

Wrong. At this point in time, we lose a whole day of potential information.

I think that finding 2 scum day one is better than having alot of discussion day one. We can discuss the next day as well. The only special thing that happens day one is the random voting, and we are done with that part.

Again, the theory of two scum just jumping right on is flawed. It also looks even more suspicious that you're unvoting right now, especially after we called you out on the initial vote.

I am unvoting because the scum didn't try to lynch Nox. Leaving my vote on her would be useless.

Not necessarily. Trigger happy townies exist too. Could have been perfectly possible for two townies to pile right on. Also your lines of reasoning here don't really reconcile, like it doesn't matter if we get a myslynch or not.

I honestly doubt that there are 2 townies that would be dumb enough to vote for her. It would be two scum acting like 2 dumb townies in an attempt to get rid of a townie without geting lynched. I said that if she gets lynched the people that did it are most almost sure to be scum and only the scum would hammer her. Someone would unvote if she got to lynch-1 and the two voting didn't work together.

"If the scum don't want to give themselbes away"? What kind of statement is that? Why would the scum want to give themselves away? Sure, they might decide to sacrifice one or two of themselves at some point in a game, but right now its not particularly advantageous. This group of players has barely had time to get acquainted with each other. If a scum player were to sacrifice himself now, it doesn't do anything for the scum. They just lose a member. Scum sacrifice is, if played well, about redirecting suspicion. Deciding to get yourself lynched this early on day one, with most of the players not even contributing yet, doesn't do anything of this sort. You don't throw suspicion on or off anybody, because right now, most players have barely had time to greet each other, let alone do something either pro or antitown.

It is a figure of speech. Another way of saying "If the scum aren't going to try to lynch Nox and inadvertently make the town think they are scum." Not actualy deciding to give themselves away.

Also, we don't know how many scum there are (and also whether or not we have a Serial Killer). So even if one or two scum decides to sacrifice himself, the town still might not be in a particularly good situation, as the chance to gather information is lost.

In what situation would losing 2 scum be a bad thing for the town?

[benhalkum]

Wrong. At this point in time, we lose a whole day of potential information.

I think that finding 2 scum day one is better than having alot of discussion day one. We can discuss the next day as well. The only special thing that happens day one is the random voting, and we are done with that part.

Again, the theory of two scum just jumping right on is flawed. It also looks even more suspicious that you're unvoting right now, especially after we called you out on the initial vote.

I am unvoting because the scum didn't try to lynch Nox. Leaving my vote on her would be useless.

Not necessarily. Trigger happy townies exist too. Could have been perfectly possible for two townies to pile right on. Also your lines of reasoning here don't really reconcile, like it doesn't matter if we get a myslynch or not.

I honestly doubt that there are 2 townies that would be dumb enough to vote for her. It would be two scum acting like 2 dumb townies in an attempt to get rid of a townie without geting lynched. I said that if she gets lynched the people that did it are most almost sure to be scum and only the scum would hammer her. Someone would unvote if she got to lynch-1 and the two voting didn't work together.

"If the scum don't want to give themselbes away"? What kind of statement is that? Why would the scum want to give themselves away? Sure, they might decide to sacrifice one or two of themselves at some point in a game, but right now its not particularly advantageous. This group of players has barely had time to get acquainted with each other. If a scum player were to sacrifice himself now, it doesn't do anything for the scum. They just lose a member. Scum sacrifice is, if played well, about redirecting suspicion. Deciding to get yourself lynched this early on day one, with most of the players not even contributing yet, doesn't do anything of this sort. You don't throw suspicion on or off anybody, because right now, most players have barely had time to greet each other, let alone do something either pro or antitown.

It is a figure of speech. Another way of saying "If the scum aren't going to try to lynch Nox and inadvertently make the town think they are scum." Not actualy deciding to give themselves away.

Also, we don't know how many scum there are (and also whether or not we have a Serial Killer). So even if one or two scum decides to sacrifice himself, the town still might not be in a particularly good situation, as the chance to gather information is lost.

In what situation would losing 2 scum be a bad thing for the town?

GOOD points.

VOTE: Mirth

[Mirth]

Wrong. At this point in time, we lose a whole day of potential information.

I think that finding 2 scum day one is better than having alot of discussion day one. We can discuss the next day as well. The only special thing that happens day one is the random voting, and we are done with that part.

Okay, you lynch them, what next? Whom do you associate them with? If you lynch them right away, where exactly do you go from there? Sure, you can discuss day 2, pre lynching one of the people who dropped the last votes, but as this is early day one right now, a quicklynch would not give you any hints as to player interaction, so when you start day two, you start completely blind, with probably at least one more dead townie body. The only lead you have is the hammerer, and if it were a scum player dumb enough to hammer this early, well, the other scum would have any easy target to reflect blame onto. A scum sacrifice would make the others look more innocent. Again, I say quicklynch = bad. Why lynch randomly (we don't know Nox's alignment) when we could spend a few pages talking and make an educated guess.

I am unvoting because the scum didn't try to lynch Nox. Leaving my vote on her would be useless.

So what exactly is the point of taking your vote off?

I honestly doubt that there are 2 townies that would be dumb enough to vote for her. It would be two scum acting like 2 dumb townies in an attempt to get rid of a townie without geting lynched. I said that if she gets lynched the people that did it are most almost sure to be scum and only the scum would hammer her. Someone would unvote if she got to lynch-1 and the two voting didn't work together.

And yet you think two scum are dumb enough to quicklynch page 1? I call crap!logic on this. Also you are again talking like you are sure Nox is a townie. Why?

It is a figure of speech. Another way of saying "If the scum aren't going to try to lynch Nox and inadvertently make the town think they are scum." Not actualy deciding to give themselves away.

Crap!logic again. That is exactly what they would be doing with a quicklynch. You said that you don't think two townies are stupid enough to quicklynch, so why exactly do you think two scum are?

Also, we don't know how many scum there are (and also whether or not we have a Serial Killer). So even if one or two scum decides to sacrifice himself, the town still might not be in a particularly good situation, as the chance to gather information is lost.

In what situation would losing 2 scum be a bad thing for the town?

Read my actual comment more closely, please. I'm not saying scum dying is a bad thing. I'm saying that jumping right in to a lynch blindly is a bad thing. And that a waste of day 1 just makes it harder for the town later on, especially if the scum use one of their own as a scapegoat and successfully distance themselves from their less than bright partners.

Your whole argument is based on the mistaken, crap!logical assumption that L-2 = automatic quicklych by two less scum a few books short of a library. Furthermore, you seem convinced that Nox is town. Again, I ask why.

[Pug89]

I don't know, but her alignment doesn't matter. If she is scum and get's lynched, that's good. If she's scum and isn't, we lose nothing. If she is town and nobody quicklynchs, she is safe. If she is town and gets quicklynched we found some scummy people.

Of course it matters what her alignment is. If she is town the last two to vote for her could just as easily be overzealous townies. You can't just choose to sacrifice a player this early in the game and assume that it will yeild at least one scum. It's an utterly ridiculous plan that could easily backfire.

I think that finding 2 scum day one is better than having alot of discussion day one. We can discuss the next day as well. The only special thing that happens day one is the random voting, and we are done with that part.

While finding two scum could be more helpful than a lot of discussion day 1 it doesn't seem likely that your plan would result in such. This is why I think you are scum who came up with your plan only after being questioned about your vote to cover your behavior.

benhalkum: Why exactly are you voting for Mirth?

[Grek]

So what exactly is the point of taking your vote off?

To get you to stop complaining about it?

Crap!logic again. That is exactly what they would be doing with a quicklynch. You said that you don't think two townies are stupid enough to quicklynch, so why exactly do you think two scum are?

First, saying my logic is crap!logic without anything to back it up would be an ad hominem attack, which as you hopfuly know is a logical fallacy. It will only make your agrument weaker.

Second, the scum have an incentive to lynch Nox if she is a townie because they know her alignment. The town does not know her alignment and it is in there best intrest not to vote for her. If she is scum, both the town and the scum have reason not to vote for her and we can move on to something else.

Your whole argument is based on the mistaken, crap!logical assumption that L-2 = automatic quicklych by two less scum a few books short of a library. Furthermore, you seem convinced that Nox is town. Again, I ask why.

I realize that this is unlikly to work, but it isn't going to hurt us either so it's worth a shot. I don't know if Nox is scum, but if she is than the scum are unlikly to vote for her and we can use some other way of finding scum. You suggest something.

[Mirth]

To get you to stop complaining about it?

Sorry, but I'm like a dog. Once I get my teeth into something, I don't let go of it.

First, saying my logic is crap!logic without anything to back it up would be an ad hominem attack, which as you hopfuly know is a logical fallacy. It will only make your agrument weaker.

Second, the scum have an incentive to lynch Nox if she is a townie because they know her alignment. The town does not know her alignment and it is in there best intrest not to vote for her. If she is scum, both the town and the scum have reason not to vote for her and we can move on to something else.

It's not ad hominem, because it is in fact crap!logic by your own reasoning of it and I am not attacking you as a person. You said that two townies would not be stupid enough to hammer for a quicklynch, yet think that two scum would. The theoretical stupidity of the two scum in your example has no logical basis. Therefore your argument is crap!logic.

Why should we move on to something else? Your argument is clearly not satisfactory to at least a few other people besides myself.

If Nox is scum, then other scum could just as soon vote for her, as a means of distancing. And the town doesn't "know" anybody's alignment. Why would the town have no reason to vote for her is she is scum, exactly? I don't understand what you mean by this.

Also, by your own argument of two scum hammering, Nox could very well be scum since nobody hammered. Why not include that as a possibility if you're going to actually try to set a scum trap? (I don't think the lack of hammer proves anything though, since, as I've said, I don't think two scum are equally stupid enough to hammer a quicklynch.)

I realize that this is unlikly to work, but it isn't going to hurt us either so it's worth a shot. I don't know if Nox is scum, but if she is than the scum are unlikly to vote for her and we can use some other way of finding scum. You suggest something.

And yet you completely overlook this possiblity when you first claim your vote is a scum trap. Why? (I don't think it's a good test of anything, only disproving that scum aren't stupid enough to hammer, but it makes your argument less credible that you excluded it in the first place, since now it just looks like you're trying to come up with an explanation after the fact).

My suggestion of finding scum? Discussion. Like I'd like to know what everyone else thinks of this situation, since, so far, not very many people have been active.

[Grek]

It's not ad hominem, because it is in fact crap!logic by your own reasoning of it and I am not attacking you as a person. You said that two townies would not be stupid enough to hammer for a quicklynch, yet think that two scum would. The theoretical stupidity of the two scum in your example has no logical basis. Therefore your argument is crap!logic.

The scum might have a good reason to vote for Nox, the town doesn't. That's why the scum might have voted for her when she is at lynch-2. It only makes sense to vote for her if the person voting is scum.

Why should we move on to something else? Your argument is clearly not satisfactory to at least a few other people besides myself.

Move on to some other way of finding scum besides using Nox as bait. Don't play dumb.

If Nox is scum, then other scum could just as soon vote for her, as a means of distancing. And the town doesn't "know" anybody's alignment. Why would the town have no reason to vote for her is she is scum, exactly? I don't understand what you mean by this.

We don't know if she is scum. The scum do. They might decide to go after her. The town does not know her alignment. We, the town, don't have a reason to go after her because we don't know if she is scum. I was hoping the scum would not realize that and vote for her, revealing themselves to us.

Also, by your own argument of two scum hammering, Nox could very well be scum since nobody hammered. Why not include that as a possibility if you're going to actually try to set a scum trap? (I don't think the lack of hammer proves anything though, since, as I've said, I don't think two scum are equally stupid enough to hammer a quicklynch.)

I considered that posibility. If she is scum, the only way for her to be used for distancing is if she gets lynched. The only way she is going to get lynched is if the scum quicklynch before the town can respond. If they quicklynch, the fact that they are using the lynch for distancing become aparrent.

And yet you completely overlook this possiblity when you first claim your vote is a scum trap. Why? (I don't think it's a good test of anything, only disproving that scum aren't stupid enough to hammer, but it makes your argument less credible that you excluded it in the first place, since now it just looks like you're trying to come up with an explanation after the fact).

Again, I considered it but didn't bother to type out what would happen in that situation because I thought it would be clear from what was already there.

[Mirth]

It's not ad hominem, because it is in fact crap!logic by your own reasoning of it and I am not attacking you as a person. You said that two townies would not be stupid enough to hammer for a quicklynch, yet think that two scum would. The theoretical stupidity of the two scum in your example has no logical basis. Therefore your argument is crap!logic.

The scum might have a good reason to vote for Nox, the town doesn't. That's why the scum might have voted for her when she is at lynch-2. It only makes sense to vote for her if the person voting is scum.

Sigh. My point is that quicklynching Nox, regardless of whether or not she is scum or town, is bad, even for scum. The scum have no good reason to quicklynch her even if she is town, because it would give them away. Thus there is no good reason to quicklynch Nox for the scum. The end.

Move on to some other way of finding scum besides using Nox as bait. Don't play dumb.

I'm not playing dumb. Your statement was unclear and seemed to refer to laying off the whole discussion, thus I took it as such.

We don't know if she is scum. The scum do. They might decide to go after her. The town does not know her alignment. We, the town, don't have a reason to go after her because we don't know if she is scum. I was hoping the scum would not realize that and vote for her, revealing themselves to us.

Again, you are assuming that the scum decide that giving themselves away DAY ONE to quicklynch a townie is a likely move. Again, I say this is a fallacy.

I considered that posibility. If she is scum, the only way for her to be used for distancing is if she gets lynched. The only way she is going to get lynched is if the scum quicklynch before the town can respond. If they quicklynch, the fact that they are using the lynch for distancing become aparrent.

Actually, if they quicklynch, there is no distancing. It is a stupid movie to quicklynch your own partner. (Scum will turn on their own if there is sufficient evidence from which to distance themselves, but if it is a random quicklynch, that's giving themselves and their partner away. Again, REALLY stupid move.) Also, if Nox is scum, your quicklynch scenerio fails to account for the possibility of a Cop. It is possible that Cop investigated Nox night one, decides to hammer her on impulse (if Cop did this, it wouldn't be a particularly smart move), and goes to get himself killed. But again, Scum would not distance off a random quicklynch if they are the last two votes.

Again, I considered it but didn't bother to type out what would happen in that situation because I thought it would be clear from what was already there.

This is not an answer.

I'm not going to argue this point any further, because you fail to understand the possibility that a quicklynch is not beneficial to the mafia if they are the ones dropping the hammer. Mafia dropping quicklynch hammer = giving themselves away = increasing their probability of losing = bad for mafia= unlikely to happen.

I would like to hear what everyone else has to say on this subject. Until then, Grek, I'm done arguing this point with you.

[Haschel Cedricson]

I believe Grek could have been putting out a trap for scum, albeit not necessarily the most well-thought-out trap.

I'm going to

vote: inHimshallibe

for placing the fourth vote on the bandwagon, effectively turning it from a pile of random votes to a bandwagon. I'm not sure what he meant by "Third vote = good enough". This could be a preemptive abdication of responsibility, i.e. "everyone else was voting for her; all I did was trust the town."

[Jex]

I find it more likely for scum to put the 4th or 5th vote on a bandwagon then for them to hammer at the end. The hammer vote is almost always over zealous townies or incredibly stupid scum. The scum tend to hide in the middle of a bandwagon and hope that the town will finish it off. These two posts bug me a lot:

unvote
vote: Nox

Third vote = good enough!

First off...inhim was the fourth vote on Nox, not the third. However in my first count I thought I was the second, so I can see how this was overlooked. I still don't see a need for a third vote either seeing as how there really wasn't anything to go off of. My vote had been a joke and the two before that were claimed to be random.

Unvote; Vote: Nox

This quote from Grek came right after making him the 5th vote on Nox. He had no given reasoning until someone called him out on the 5th vote.

In my previous post I FOSed both of these people and still think they are highly suspicious. I'd like to hear the reasoning behind inhim's fourth vote so for now I'm going to

unvote, vote inhimshallbe

[Jex]

lol...didn't refresh the screen and see Haschel's post before I posted mine. Oh well.

[benhalkum]

I find it more likely for scum to put the 4th or 5th vote on a bandwagon then for them to hammer at the end. The hammer vote is almost always over zealous townies or incredibly stupid scum.

I tend to fall into the overzelous townie part there myself.

[Grek]

This quote from Grek came right after making him the 5th vote on Nox. He had no given reasoning until someone called him out on the 5th vote.

If I posted that I was voting to try to trap the scum, it wouldn't be a very good trap, would it?

[Pug89]

I'm not sure what he meant by "Third vote = good enough". This could be a preemptive abdication of responsibility, i.e. "everyone else was voting for her; all I did was trust the town."

I believe he was referring to the fact that Nox had placed the third vote on Jex and that that was a good enough reason to vote for her. I would also like to hear more Inhim's motivations for voting Nox .