Mini 586 - Blood Red Mafia - Game Over!

[Shepherd_of_Wolves]

Further, I did not realize while writing my post Darla removed her vote, so I did not calculate her vote removal.

Amor I want to address what you said

Shepherd_of_Wolves is pushing the caf/Coheed connection hard. caf has a point in that he doesn't control who he votes for, but

in Shepherd's reply to him he doesn't really respond to that

and instead goes off on something completely different. In any case, I don't think scum would openly defend each other so early.

If you read post 59 you will see that I did reply to him as such:

Caf

, I understand that you cannot control who votes are cast on you.

.

Let me say, he is right that he has no control. But, scum have an image to play. They know each other and definitely influence the voting of fellow scum. No, he cannot control the vote, but

if

he is scum, he has influence.

I want to emphasize the "if", because it looks like some people overlook important words when reviewing the script. I hold that I am not yet convinced either way on anyone person yet.[/u]

[populartajo]

Populartajo, why is it you dont think reactions can be used to find scum? I dont think that they should be the sole reasoning for scum accusations, but I do think they can be helpful.

I already said that there's no way Macavenger could be 100% sure that his "test" could catch scum, since eager townie can also answer that provocation. About reactions, it seems to me that everyone can react differently, they're helpful, I know, but they dont prove anything.
I didnt like his last response, BTW.

Vote : Macavenger.

Also, there's something that bothers me about Shepherd, he feels like he's hunting too much for my taste. Idk, yet.
And can anyone tell me whats the problem with caf?

[DarlaBlueEyes]

I also think Shepherd is trying a bit too hard, but is yet to slip up in any scumtells.

I am gonna go with my gut here and

vote:amor

I find you the most suspicious of the posters thus far, your defense of caf was never answered for and was ill timed.

[malthusis]

By the way, Rosso hasn't posted in a while so

mod, prod Rosso

[Travis]

I'm reading this thread and while I haven't come to any great conclusion at this point populartajo doesn't seem scummy to me so I'm going to remove my vote.

Unvote : Populartajo

[Amor]

If you read post 59 you will see that I did reply to him as such:

Caf, I understand that you cannot control who votes are cast on you.

Let me say, he is right that he has no control. But, scum have an image to play. They know each other and definitely influence the voting of fellow scum. No, he cannot control the vote, but if he is scum, he has influence.

Here was your original response:

Caf

, I understand that you cannot control who votes are cast on you. With Coheed saying:

Caf does have a point, It's not like he has some super ability to control who people vote for, he only controls his vote.

I am starting to see some mutual effort between the two of you to lean towards each other. He is sticking up for you by that comment. You previously tried to relieve the vote count from him by accusing his voters of teaming up when you said:

What's up with this teaming-up of Rosso and Darla?

Unvote; vote: Rosso Carne

obv

.

Yeah, you say that you understand it, but you really don't rebut the point. Instead you attack Coheed for agreeing with Caf without supporting your original assertion. If your first attack was wrong, then I really don't see how someone can be at fault for arguing against it. That was what I found weird about your post. However, you've explained above why you still think caf is scummy, so I guess it's alright. You're still very agressive on this though.

I also think Shepherd is trying a bit too hard, but is yet to slip up in any scumtells.

I am gonna go with my gut here and vote:amor I find you the most suspicious of the posters thus far, your defense of caf was never answered for and was ill timed.

What do I have to answer for? I disagreed with the logic used to attack caf, so I said so. Would you rather I sat back and let the town go after someone with bad reasoning? Have I done anything else to make you suspicious?

[Macavenger]

I gave an FoS because I thought that a vote on someone would sound more scummy right now then a FoS.

Interesting choice of words. Why are you so concerned with what might sound scummy?

About reactions, it seems to me that everyone can react differently, they're helpful, I know, but they dont prove anything.

When did I ever say I thought it proved anything? The only real proof in mafia comes with death.

I didnt like his last response, BTW.

What didn't you like about it?

[Shepherd_of_Wolves]

Okay, so I have come off a little aggressive. Partly, this has to do with the fact that I have only attempted one other game before; which I did not have time to finish. I never made it past day 1 (due to RL, I was replaced). So, my sense of what phases occur at what times in the game is sketchy. Further, I am discovering what is appropriate for each phase. In full, I am still just making game strategy as I go along.

Before everyone assumes that I have gone off the deep end in accusations, let me remind you that I did state that I do not think that my approach elicits the most convincing evidence when I said:

I am not fully convinced that you are not one or both scum. But, I too realize that the small link I suggested is not compelling evidence either. At this point, it is difficult to see who really is scum. I am not convinced that anyone looks innocent. However, I know that most of us are and only a few are scum.

Moving on, I have two items to address. And, they may be aggressive, but I want to say them nonetheless. First, I second Macavenger in requesting an explanation from malthusis, why are you worried about sounding "more scummy right now". Did you want it to wait until later?

FoS:Malthusis

Attention, I am not changing my vote yet. (I think that I do not need to change my vote with every suspicious behavior.

NOTICE

, I do inquire into each suspicion that I preceive.)

With that explained I ask,

Travis

, what are your thoughts about the developments at this point. Beyond just saying you "haven't come to any great conclusion", what are you thinking is happening? We do not need to have our

conclusions

totally figured out. Those come after thinking, discussing, and considering together as a village.

[Cogito Ergo Scum]

Prodding Rosso Carne

[DarlaBlueEyes]

hmmmm

unvote Amor; Vote: Macavenger

You seem to be very mysterious in this one, and I think Amor answered well enough.

Your responses lend nothing that helpful thus far, a possible scum tell. All you have done is implicate Math, instead of looking at others as well, One liner responses are far from helpful for the town.

[Riceballtail]

UNVOTE

VOTE:Macavenger

Giving the gift of pressure. Question is, will you buckle or stand strong?

[CoheedCambria09]

What are we trying to get out of Mac from putting him under pressure, and I am also still waiting to hear what malthusis says about his wording sentence

[DarlaBlueEyes]

What are we trying to get out of Mac from putting him under pressure, and I am also still waiting to hear what malthusis says about his wording sentence

I think that what he was trying to do is use the same tactic Mac claimed to be using to test Math earlier. I find him suspicious personally, My vote would stand pressure or not.

Do you not want us to pressure Mac, Coheed?

*makes note*

[populartajo]

About reactions, it seems to me that everyone can react differently, they're helpful, I know, but they dont prove anything.

When did I ever say I thought it proved anything? The only real proof in mafia comes with death.

Ok, lets do this together.

I was testing a theory that you seemed a bit jumpy in your responses to stuff flying around in the random voting stage.
You just flunked the test. Badly. And get to keep the vote as a result.

Why did he flunk the test? For being jumpy? What does his reaction prove?

I didnt like his last response, BTW.

What didn't you like about it?

Everything.

A) Possibly. But it's far more likely to catch scum.

Why? Because eager townies are scum too?

B) Reactions are what this game is all about. Scum are more likely to overreact because they have more to lose by dying than a townie does.

No, scum can simply ignore you and a townie can overreact to an acussation because duh, you're accusing of something he or she is not.. My point is that although reactions are helpful, your "test" doesnt prove who's scum or who's not.

[Cogito Ergo Scum]

Votecount
With 12 alive, it's 7 to lynch!

Macavenger (3) - populartajo, DarlaBlueEyes, Riceballtail

CoheedCambria09 (2) - goborage, malthusis
malthusis (2) - CoheedCambria09, Macavenger
goborage (1) - caf19
Travis (1) - Shepherd_of_Wolves

Not voting: Amor, Travis, Greasy Spot

As of this post, goborage is replacing Rosso Carne, who failed to pick up his prod.

[CoheedCambria09]

@ Darla, ok, and no, pressure away, I'm not stopping you ( and I'll be watching Mac to see what he does under pressure)

[malthusis]

first, unvote.

malthusis wrote:
I gave an FoS because I thought that a vote on someone would sound more scummy right now then a FoS.

Interesting choice of words. Why are you so concerned with what might sound scummy?

I was so worried about looking scummy because at the time (bottom of pg.2) no one else had really done any scummy things. I realize now it might not have been the best move (hey, I'm no expert) but that was the best move in my mind at the time.


Vote: Macavenger pressure time![/b]

[Greasy Spot]

I will have very little access till Wednesday April 30th.

[goborage]

I'm here. I'll read the thread then make a more meaningful post.

[DarlaBlueEyes]

With Malt's vote, thats 4 on Mac.

I am still waiting to hear something from him that would change my mind.

[caf19]

Riceballtail: you jumped on Mac's wagon without providing any real reasoning. Do you actually find him scummy?

[Riceballtail]

Riceballtail: you jumped on Mac's wagon without providing any real reasoning. Do you actually find him scummy?

Everyone is scummy until proven otherwise. A good method is to apply some pressure and see if they provide any/more scum tells or not.

[goborage]

Sorry, I don't really have anything substantial to add. I applaud Shepherd_of_Wolves's aggressive scum-hunting. I don't think there's such a thing as too aggressive in mafia and I find it Shepherd_of_Wolves' style refreshing after playing games with passive people.

I do agree that the caf/Coheed connection is weak but kudos for pointing it out (now watch someone point out a goborage/Shepherd_of_Wolves connection).

[Amor]

Riceballtail: you jumped on Mac's wagon without providing any real reasoning. Do you actually find him scummy?

Everyone is scummy until proven otherwise. A good method is to apply some pressure and see if they provide any/more scum tells or not.

I'm not sure I like this idea. Since there are more town then scum, it would seem wiser to assume people are town unless there's compelling evidence either way. And as for applying pressure, it might be useful if people didn't say they were applying pressure when they vote, which alerts the scum (if they are scum) that we're expecting a freakout. Thus we really lose most of the value of a pressure wagon.

I'm not sure about Macavenger as scum right now. His scumhunting methods are suspect, but there haven't been a lot of genuine scumtells. On the other hand, I did find this point worth noting:

About reactions, it seems to me that everyone can react differently, they're helpful, I know, but they dont prove anything.

When did I ever say I thought it proved anything? The only real proof in mafia comes with death.

This is dodging the question. Tajo questioned whether this method would lead us to scum and Mac dodged with semantics. Obviously you thought it was valuable or you wouldn't have voted based on it. Also, the last sentance seems to be setting up for a "Oops, he was town" post later. This makes me more than a little suspicious, but probably not enough to hop on the bandwagon.

[Amor]

EBWOP: "compelling evidence either way" should probably be "compelling evidence that they are scum"