Newbie 1452: You Only Van Twice (Over!)

[AbboTT]

Greetings, friends.

VOTE: TAM

All aboard the IC wagon!

[AbboTT]

@Brufe throw out a vote, buddy. Let's get this party started.

Also. Just as a side note. Quicklynch is a danger in games this small. Look to TAM for better guidance, but in general I'd say we shouldn't really go past L-2 or maybe even 3 until things have gotten rolling.

A townie lynch followed by a successful NK puts us in a baaad situation. Especially if it's early in D1 and we don't learn anything from it.

[AbboTT]

RVS is a vehicle to break the ice and move us into the game. Personally, I like to move on to the hunt as quickly as possible. We only have so much daylight.

That being said, I also try to give everybody a chance to at least get an RVS vote out before I start digging.

[AbboTT]

I'm not familiar with that theory, but I am against policy lynching in general. Especially in a game with so little room for error.

I would, however, like to establish an early read on you since you obviously have us at an experience disadvantage.

[AbboTT]

I didn't overlook it. It wasn't a question.

You seem a little nervous about being lynched.

[AbboTT]

I hate with a passion page one wagons or RVS wagons.

Eep. I'll make a mental note of that one. That seems to go against site meta a bit doesn't it? I didn't intend to draw out hate, only scum.


For the record, I don't think anybody has done anything especially scummy yet apart from Brufe's partial TAM buddy and vote withholding.
@Brufe: TAM finds my not playing along "highly odd and slightly suspicious." What do you think?

[AbboTT]

Is there a reason for not answering them?

Yes!

[AbboTT]

I think it's more likely to come from scum not wanting to give away anything that can be used against them

What exactly could one give up?

GMT-6? That's such a scummy timezone!

You are reaching.

Why are you reluctant to explain why you aren't answering them?

I'm not reluctant, I'm generating content.

I promise that I'm as Town as you can get, this time!

That's a pretty early claim.

[AbboTT]

I wasn't aware that everyone has to randomly vote.

You don't! It's your vote, you can do whatever you want with it. Here's the reason why I try to get people voting, though; scum is not in a hurry. Scum wants to wait and skate through the deadline. It's the town's job to proactively sniff out scum. We have two primary tools we can use to accomplish this: our words, and our votes. I just hate to see people sitting on votes when they could be using them. That's all.

I think this is town wanting you to give them a read

I think that's a reasonable assumption. I like jon's reasoning as well.

Hi

@Mala

. Which is your preference; RVS or RQS?

[AbboTT]

What content are you generating

I don't know about you, but the resulting drama helped me read a few people.

Scum often hide behind vague accusations like this

It's not really a vague claim. Yes, I'm saying it's scummy to say you are a townie. It's a difference of opinion. I think it's a tell, you don't. That's okay. We can disagree.

[AbboTT]

I see what you are getting @ Lootifier, with the twisty POV in Jon's post.
I don't think there's anything there, though. Seems like kind of a stretch.

[AbboTT]

I don't really see how whether or not something is a "claim" is dependent on proof. But you guys would know more about that than me.
It just seems a little weird coming out of the gate wearing a Don't Lynch Me Bro t-shirt.

[AbboTT]

Before I get into a detailed response to TAM, I want to explain 50. It makes sense to me, but I think I left out a few words.

It was a response to Mala's 43 and SHY's 44. Mala said:

... [Jon's post 26 was] not really a claim. We don't really know if its true or not. It's his word against no facts. He has to earn the right to see if it holds water.

My response was:

I don't really see how whether or not something is a "claim" is dependent on proof. But you guys would know more about that than me

because you have a better grasp on the vernacular than I do

.
It just seems a little weird coming out of the gate wearing a Don't Lynch Me Bro t-shirt.

I added some more words in bold for clarity. I was saying that Mala's response didn't make much sense to me. Why does there have to be proof for jon's post to be considered a claim? I should have quoted her in my post. I was implying that maybe "claim" in the mafia context meant more than I thought it did.

Does that make more sense?

[AbboTT]

Post 50 makes me think he's softclaiming town without actually claiming town.

Nope. I wasn't talking about myself at all. Sorry for the confusion. See 59.

[AbboTT]

AbboTT (An apparent n00b) has to date refused to explain why he did not do the RQS or why he has, when asked about it, deliberately avoided commenting on it as a whole. Stating neither why he didn't do it or why he was avoiding it other than to say "It's generating content."

It's also making you look like scum.

Why? Because you are being deliberately uncooperative with even explaining why you aren't doing RQS. (Also why did you explain RVS when it had been explained earlier?)

I'm not nearly as worried about me looking like scum as you seem to think I should be. I'm hunting, my man. I'm also an open book. You keep saying I'm being uncooprative, but I haven't avoided a single direct question. Why are you so eager to paint me in a negative light?

As much as

I appreciate you encouraging people to vote AbboTT

, I do find it odd that you are encouraging RVS and completely ignoring RQS still. Please explain how RVS promotes the use of town's most powerful weapon besides their voice?

You want to support people who vote for me, but you aren't using your vote: your self-proclaimed second most powerful weapon. Isn't that generally considered a scumtell? Doublespeak.

There are many on the site who HATE RVS because it does little to get the game going.

The whole RQS v RVS discussion is bordering off-topic at this point in my opinion. I think they're both garbage, but it's a necessary evil.

So AbboTT, how did it help the rest of town? Better still, How does it make your actions PRO TOWN for all WE know, you were looking for lynch bait and Power Roles from how we reacted.

I already answered this. It's generating content. Most of your post is about my failure to comply. I don't need my actions to look exceedingly pro-town. I need to see if your reactions look pro-town. I respect that you can't be sure of my intentions right now. Then again, nobody can be sure of anybody's intentions at this stage of the game. I prefer a pro-active approach. I find it's more productive to "do" pro-town things than it is to worry about convincing people you are pro-town. I'm comfortable taking risks like this right now because I'm confident the town's read on me will adjust over time as my contributions increase in number and quality.

Lootifer's bringing up of the self vote: Excuse me, when did ANYONE bring up the self vote? You do seem kind of weird for twisting the response to you around as well.

You did, sir. Post 4. I took it to mean that he was using that as an example of something only a suicidal scumbag would do to illustrate his point.

On jon's early town claim... I have found that more often than not (such as in the case of jon) such statements are made when bantering about previous games with people you have played with in earlier games and have no bearing on alignment.

Good to know. I'll tuck that away in my noob notebook.

What the hell with AbboTT's last post?

Did my 59 clear this one up to your satisfaction?

I EXTREMELY dislike AbboTT's play

I get that, I'm sorry. As I've said elsewhere. I'm not here to make friends. I'm here to murder liars.

and am slightly suspicious of him being an alt... Which makes me even more curious for his answers to the RQS because as some of you may have noted... I did ask how many games have been played and it would be intriguing to learn if he had played any offsite.

First of all, thank you. I'm not an alt though and I've never played offsite nor IRL. I have a grand total of 237 posts to my name. I want this to be a fun game and I'm looking forward to improving my play.

Because right now, he's acting too much like an IC or an SE and I know who the SE's are and I'm the IC so the fact he's had some moments where he has repeated things that have been said or tried to teach really puts me off.

Crap. I'm not trying to step on your shoes. By repitition I think you're talking about my take on RVS? That was an answer to the question posed directly before it. See post 13. You also answered that question. If instead you are talking about the quicklynch advice, that was a courtesy reminder because I put you at L-3. One more vote on you would have put you into range of a quickhammer and I don't want that to happen. I'd hope you'd give a similar warning for me if our roles had been reversed.

I want a reason that is good.

RQS served its purpose. It got us here. I'm starting to wonder why you're clinging on so desparately to page one. Are you stalling or do you really just have that much love for RQS? I didn't answer because it was more valuable to not answer. Did you learn anything from anybody's answers? If so, please share. All I saw was a survey that people treated as a fill-in-the-blank. No conversation or meaningful content.

My refusal to answer, though has somehow fired you up. I am acting in accordance to my post 16. I want an early read on you because of your superior experience. It's nothing personal.

[AbboTT]

Swallow the wiki and the theory topics in Mafia Discussion whole?

Yes I did.

Though for the record. I was NO WHERE near quick lynch yet

Yes you were. Like we have both said, you were L-3. That's one vote away from being quick-hammer able in a game with two scumballs. Isn't quicklynch generally considered a safe scum tactic in the newbie format? Like I said in my original post, a quick hammer, one nightkill, and a mislynch would put us in LYLO. Right?

Saying that L-3 is "NO WHERE near" a quicklynch that can happen at L-2 makes no sense to me.

Nobody here is debating theory but you. I'm expressing my opinion and

I feel like

you are telling me I shouldn't be allowed to have one. Or that it is scummy that I have one. Or something.

How would you feel about lynching Rach Marie?

Not enough data. I would like to see more input from her though.

UNVOTE: TAM
VOTE: Rach

[AbboTT]

For the record, that statement should ACTUALLY read "As much as I appreciate you encouraging people to vote, AbboTT..."

Haha. Well damn. Sorry about that. I totally misunderstood that bit then. I'm a really literal reader sometimes and it seemed like something you might say. I guess I just jumped the gun.

[AbboTT]

You just answered one of the RQS questions!

I've actually answered 2, almost 3 of them at this point--none of them in a little list format.

[AbboTT]

Touche on the literal read issue.

Also, I will compile that for you. Typing my response to jon at the moment.

[AbboTT]

Spoiler: responses to jon

It just seems a little weird coming out of the gate wearing a Don't Lynch Me Bro t-shirt.

At the time the comment was made, it was directed toward Rach, who I've shared a few games with (@ ATM The game you're referring to is Open 487 and Rach and Maia were both in it). It was just banter at the start of the game. It wasn't a Formal claim, like for the hammer claim. Besides if I could find a "Don't Lynch Me" T-shirt, I would definitely wear it!! All the Time!

Fair enough. Your defense makes sense to me, it was just an observation.

What content are you generating

I don't know about you, but the resulting drama helped me read a few people.

I'm interested in any reads you'd be willing to share. Something a little more than " I found so and so scummy" would help me form my read on you. TIA

For sure.

earlier in this post I caught TAM's missed comma. To me it was obvious what he meant.

Yeah, I think I was just being thick-skulled. Smelled blood.

I already answered this. It's generating content. Most of your post is about my failure to comply. I don't need my actions to look exceedingly pro-town. I need to see if your reactions look pro-town. I respect that you can't be sure of my intentions right now. Then again, nobody can be sure of anybody's intentions at this stage of the game. I prefer a pro-active approach. I find it's more productive to "do" pro-town things than it is to worry about convincing people you are pro-town. I'm comfortable taking risks like this right now because I'm confident the town's read on me will adjust over time as my contributions increase in number and quality.

Taking risks is great, but if you want them to be pro-Town, you need to be able to show Town what you've gained by them.

Aside from the arguments over RQS, what have you gleaned from refusing to answer? Are you willing to share your reads yet?

Agreed. Yes, coming right up.

I'm not nearly as worried about me looking like scum as you seem to think I should be.

I'm hunting, my man. I'm also an open book.

You keep saying I'm being uncooprative, but I haven't avoided a single direct question.

I'm asking some direct questions, and even if you dismiss them, they'll determine my read on you.

As they should.

First of all, thank you. I'm not an alt though and I've never played offsite nor IRL. I have a gyourand total of 237 posts to my name. I want this to be a fun game and I'm looking forward to improving my play.

Hopefully you'll enjoy your stay, and hang around for years to come!

Thanks! I just bought the t-shirt last week. Pumped for it to come in. Though I do wish it said, "Don't Lynch Me" on the front. Last time I left it was a ragequit/frustration dealio. Not planning on doing that again. I was also a lot younger at the time.

RQS served its purpose. It got us here. I'm starting to wonder why you're clinging on so desparately to page one. Are you stalling or do you really just have that much love for RQS? I didn't answer because it was more valuable to not answer. Did you learn anything from anybody's answers? If so, please share. All I saw was a survey that people treated as a fill-in-the-blank. No conversation or meaningful content.

My refusal to answer, though has somehow fired you up. I am acting in accordance to my post 16. I want an early read on you because of your superior experience. It's nothing personal.

Earlier you said your refusal generated content, and helped you read a few people. Since it was your refusal that started this ball rolling, I think you should first describe what you gained before asking if we gained anything.

Roger that.

Reads

• My overall read on jon right now is townish. He seems to be actively pursuing the hunt.
  
• My overall read on TAM: Null to ever-so-slightly scummy.
  
  Spoiler: Here comes the 'science'

  I'm primarily concerned about why it was so easy to get under his skin--a goal I wasn't even trying to achieve. He doesn't like that I didn't play along with his RQS. Okay, that's a human reaction. Also, conformity is a town trait. I get it.
  
  I don't like that I feel like he is frantically trying to establish control or dominance. Scum play the role of the puppetmaster in this game. They have to carefully craft their image. They lash out when their image is challenged.
  
  I feel like his disbelief in my noobliness is bordering paranoid. In a vacuum, I'd have to say that's a town tell to me. Being a member of the faction with the least amount of information at the start of the game is a little spooky. At the same time, I think it contributes to my gut feels about his need for control.
  
  That being said, he's doing a fine job of raking me across the coals: townish.
  
  
• As I mentioned before, I want more content from Rach. I'd also like to hear more from alongtimeago and Mala. @you three amigos: Who is your strongest town read right now and why?
  
• Something isn't sitting right with me about Loots and Brufe both, but I need to ISO to figure those out.
  
• SYH is a mystery to me right now. I think I'm going to stick him in a townish pile for now, but he's another I need to ISO.

[AbboTT]

Spoiler: in which I do TAM's scumhunting for him

In post 30, jon_h61 wrote:
I think it's more likely to come from scum not wanting to give away anything that can be used against them

What exactly could one give up? GMT-6? That's such a scummy timezone! You are reaching.

Though phrased flippantly, this is accurate.

TAM wrote:
and am slightly suspicious of him being an alt... Which makes me even more curious for his answers to the RQS because as some of you may have noted... I did ask how many games have been played and it would be intriguing to learn if he had played any offsite.

First of all, thank you. I'm not an alt though and I've never played offsite nor IRL. I have a grand total of 237 posts to my name. I want this to be a fun game and I'm looking forward to improving my play.

This essentially answers your # of games played question. I honestly have no idea. I'd have to look at my post history just the same as you would. Probably 4 (including 2 currently).

TAM wrote:
I EXTREMELY dislike AbboTT's play

I get that, I'm sorry. As I've said elsewhere. I'm not here to make friends. I'm here to murder liars.

Again, not another bulleted response, but it gets to the spirit of your lynch all liars question. Townies rarely have reason to lie. Should that be an instalynch? No. I generally disapprove of all policy lynches. See my post 16 where you and I discussed this on page one.

---

I'd like to take this opportunity to remind readers that there is no rule that says that all players must answer any "supposedly random but apparently really for srs important" question TAM feels like dreaming up for us. That is all.

[AbboTT]

Please stop using spoilers for everything when it's a short post like your last one. (btw thanks, will make my life easier in the long run and your first answer was one of those that I questioned.)

Will do. Don't mention it.

Also, since I couldn't believe your count, I went and made myself a little meta sig.

• 3 completed games. I replaced into one of those three, and out of the other two.
  
• Two active games including this one.
  
• The other game you are seeing is not mafia.

[AbboTT]

@Loots: Would you like to join me on my Rach Marie pressure train?

[AbboTT]

I can get behind a Mala vote. I am curious though. Any particular reason why you like that vote better than Rach?

Personally I could go either way.

UNVOTE: Rach
VOTE: Mala

[AbboTT]

Why did you refer to the answers of your RQS as scumhunting?

The word "scumhunting" in this context could be swapped out for "homework" or "job."

I assume that's why he wants the information, to hunt scum. I compiled the information for him.

[AbboTT]

You know. While on the topic of SHY...

@Lootifer
Your speech does sound reasonable, doesn't it?

@Lootifer
Your speech does sound reasonable, doesn't it?

I don't understand what you are asking here. Can you clarify?

ebwop

What I mean is I understand your question, but not sure what you are getting at. Simple answer is yes, I think I am a reasonable person, and there is no reason why this doesnt apply to what I have written in this thread. Other people may beg to differ of course

Just wanted to point it out, Loot

This exchange kind of baffled me. I dismissed it as people being awkward on the internet at first, but I can see how it could be a SHY buddy attempt. I know it's WIFOM, but it just seems so obviously scummy that it couldn't be scummy.

As far as I can tell,

nobody

claimed Lewtz

didn't

make sense in the first place. Loot's reaction seems geniune. At least, it was essentially the same thing I said in my head when I read SHY's post.

@SHY: Can you tell me what you meant by your post. Explain it to me like I am three years old if you would.

[AbboTT]

In an aside, I've made walls of evidence just to find out how wrong I was later. I'm far from a scumhunting god, but I have fun trying.

This didn't faze me at first, but upon a re-read it looks like something you might say to lay the groundwork for a post mislynch defense i.e.,

"Oh crap, he flipped town? Well. I told you I wasn't all that good at this."

Like I've said before (my 79), though, I'm reading jon as generally town at this point. It could just as easily be someone uncomfortable about putting their opinions 'out there' without a disclaimer.

[AbboTT]

Interesting. Time only has two more posts than Mala. I still have her in the lurk pile in my head, but not him. That prompted me to start digging a bit.

Two quick ISO's helped me understand why I felt this way. Mala is playing defensively. Three of her posts have included discussion about her activity level. This comment in her 98 bugs me a little too:

Nor do I get how people are scum reading Rach or I for very little posts.

Isn't lurking a generally accepted scumtell? Even if it's not a scumtell, it needs to be punished. Inversely, I don't see how anybody could argue that low post count/content could be considered pro-town.

Mala is sinking into the background to me. I don't know if she's doing that on purpose or not. Either way, I'm happy leaving my vote here for now.

Time's posts have been more focused on the current hunt topic. He seems to be asking the right questions (86, 52, 41), but he's not sharing the conclusions he is drawing from those questions. At least, he's not telling us how the answers he gets is moving him towards his conclusions. @Time: What did you think of my answer to the question you posed in 86?

In the end, my #79 reads stand on all three of them. I want more.

• More posts from Rach
  
• More effort from Mala
  
• More sharing from Time

[AbboTT]

No, I wasn't being sarcastic or anything like that. A little but smart-assed, though. I was compiling some information for him so he didn't have to track it down himself.

I assumed the reason he wanted the information was to aid his read on me i.e., to aid his scumhunting endeavors.

I think you're just reading into it too closely. I actually thought to myself as I typed it, "Somebody won't like this. Not sure who, but somebody won't." Lol

[AbboTT]

bit*

[AbboTT]

Isn't lurking a generally accepted scumtell? Even if it's not a scumtell, it needs to be punished. Inversely, I don't see how anybody could argue that low post count/content could be considered pro-town.

Mala is sinking into the background to me. I don't know if she's doing that on purpose or not. Either way, I'm happy leaving my vote here for now.

In the case of Rach, no it's not a scum tell. She is known to be very very lurky as either alignment. I mean she does super lurk as scum, but her posts are different when she does it when she's town.

You're trying to throw a policy lynch and gues what the only policy lynch I'm okay with is when someone lies about their role in order to get someone else directly lynched.

A policy lynch on lurkers is goin to do jack shit. It won't give you information, it won't give you associative tells and it sure as hell is considered an easy lynch.

Are you going to argue someone posting something every hour as pro town and having double or more posts than the second highest poster. No it depends on the content ON that low number of the post count.

Yeah, you're just trying to make up reasons to make sure your vote on me is valid. I already explained why my posts are low and I said it twice yet you aren't even recognizing it.

So defensive again.

For the record, I am generally against any and all Policy Lynching. I believe I mentioned that in passing on page one. I'm not sure how I gave you the impression that I am driving for a lynch here. I was pretty open about labeling my vote as a pressure builder.

You are absolutely correct about post content > post count. No argument from my corner.

I'm not trying to make up reasons to justify a vote. I did read your excuses. I didn't mean to deny you that. As somebody already pointed out though (I think it was Lootifier, sorry, on my phone) you are basically just saying you are prioritizing other games above this one. Bonus points for honesty. However... if you are town, we need your help.

Thanks for the meta insight on Rach.

I wish she would defend herself, though.

[AbboTT]

@Abott;

Why isn't brufe in your lurk pile. She has less posts than me.

Good question. Not sure. Let me get back to you on that one

[AbboTT]

Direct question @Rach: Do you agree that you are generally prone to lurking? If so, is it a deliberate choice?

[AbboTT]

My only agenda is hunting scum. What's yours?

[AbboTT]

I'm not trying to make a case against you based on the time management choices you make in your life. That would be ridiculous, rude, and unproductive. I understand being busy and I understand commitments.

We are all here playing a game because we think it's fun. It's a hobby.

I didn't mean anything by "excuses." I know that word sometimes carries a negative connotation, but I wasn't using it to make a judgement. In this case it was a synonym for "reasons" which is the word you've used.

So what do you think my agenda is? Was that just a knee-jerk way to try to push me off your case?

[AbboTT]

@SHY: So am I understanding correctly that you are saying that you were feeling a scum vibe from Loot when you called his speech reasonable?

Just trying to make sure I understand.

When you get a chance could you point me to the post you were referring to? Lootifier's, I mean.

[AbboTT]

Loot's 125 and 126 feel exceptionally town to me.

Not only did he write the right words, but he actually managed to make me change my tack. @Lootifier: you're right. Even if I don't like Mala's answers, my questions aren't really bearing much fruit.

@TAM: I owe you a response. I didn't forget. Headed out to dinner and I need to sit down and make sure I understand the question.
@Mala: I still owe you my Brufe read, which I haven't formulated yet.
^ I'll be back with you guys soon. Did I miss anybody?

UNVOTE: Mala

I don't really believe in holding on to votes, but I need to reevaluate. SHY is pinging me, but I want to give him a chance to respond.

[AbboTT]

@TAM: Sorry for the slow response. My other game has picked up speed, holiday prep, etc.

I didn't mean anything by "excuses." I know that word sometimes carries a negative connotation, but I wasn't using it to make a judgement. In this case it was a synonym for "reasons" which is the word you've used.

...How is mala NOT supposed to believe that you are calling her valid reasons excuses and thus not good reasons?

You're right. That's why I responded with a clarification and not with some sort of indignance.

I think Rach has something similar going on but I'd have to double check.

"Something similar" as in some real life barrier to play?

So now, tell me until the quoted post, HOW was mala supposed to believe you weren't doing exactly what you just claimed you were not?

I guess she wasn't. I wasn't fishing for a reaction or anything if that's what you're driving at. It was an oversight.

[AbboTT]

@Abott;
Why isn't brufe in your lurk pile.

I think it was because what posts Brufe did make were more meaningful to me than the material coming from you and Rach. That being said, Brufe belongs in the lurk pile for sure.

Jon and TAM are solidly in my townlist. They are paying more attention to this game than anybody else is demonstrating at the moment and they are methodically hunting. I'm not too fond that TAM's hunting is still focused on me, but I get it.

My scum guess at the moment is SHY. I feel like he is playing the "mysterious" card too much. Either that or I'm just not following him.

VOTE: SHY

Mala, Rach, and Brufe are question marks for me at the moment.

[AbboTT]

Clearly you are lying about your level of experience.
You must be an alt. You shouldn't even be in this game.

/sarcasm

So it's not just me who is seeing these control issues from TAM.

[AbboTT]

Welcome Hermy. Do you know Hermie the elf? He doesn't like to make toys. Glad to have you aboard.

The fact that I'M involved in this scenario, GUARENTEES that there is at least ONE townsperson between AbboTT and I.

Can you break this part down for me? I'm just not following how you got to this conclusion. Can you prove this, or are you using "guarantee" in a loose sense?

[AbboTT]

@Mala: Why do you like Rach over SHY?

[AbboTT]

Roger that.

[AbboTT]

That's what I thought you meant. So IF we trust in your meta consistency AND assume you are not scum, then it's guaranteed that I am either scum or town. But everybody already knows I am one of those two alignments.

Lol.

Do you see why I am confused or am I being really thick-skulled?

Are you just reiterating that you don't believe in bussing?

[AbboTT]

That's L-1

[AbboTT]

Yes I did. L-2.

[AbboTT]

I know NL D1 is bad in newbie games, but I was under the impression that it was the right play in some formats on the site. Is that incorrect?

Sorry. Not trying to drag us off topic. I too will be reading again tonight. I'm ready for this game to pick up a bit.

[AbboTT]

Speaking of which, AbboTT: Why is 163 relevant to the conversation at hand? AT all? Also did you ever respond to 137? Or give any kind of reaction?

Whoops. I missed this one, caught it during ISOs.

163 is very relevant in my opinion. Perhaps not to the conversation at hand, but it is an interesting observation about the way your actions are being perceived by at least two people. Allow me to add some context for everybody else and break it down.

In chronological order

• You grill me extensively and claim I am avoiding things I am not avoiding.
  
• I respond to what I perceive to be a manipulative attitude:

  I don't like that I feel like he [TAM] is frantically trying to establish control or dominance. Scum play the role of the puppetmaster in this game. They have to carefully craft their image. They lash out when their image is challenged.

• You move on to Lootifier with similar tactics you employed against me.
  
• Lootifier calls you out on it, the same way I did (see point 2 above):

  I wonder what TAMs reaction to me would be like if instead of playing the game as I have been, I toe'd the line like some good little n00b dilligently giving away predefined (defined by him of course) tells and slips that fitted his perfect model for how Mafia should be played?

• I (obnoxiously) make note of history repeating itself:

  Clearly you [Lootifier] are lying about your level of experience.
  You must be an alt. You shouldn't even be in this game.
  
  /sarcasm
  
  So it's not just me who is seeing these control issues from TAM.

I even attempted to clarify my intent by adding a "sarcasm" tag

and

tacking on a clarifying sentence at the end. I was once again, stating an observation. I have already talked about how I feel about this. The fact that it's coming up again is noteworthy to me.

***

did you ever respond to 137? Or give any kind of reaction?

No I did not. Are you going to realize at some point that I don't 'take kindly' to leading like this? If you want information from me, ask me what you want to know. I'm not going to jump at your command and try to guess what you want to hear. Let's just say I have a problem with authority. If you would kindly read your own intro post, you didn't even ask us to answer your RQS questions in the first place!

Okay a few General Housekeeping questions I like to ask...

My honest-to-goodness immediate reaction to that sentence in my head was, "Okay bro. Knock yourself out. I'll be here if you decide to actually ask me a question." You took the time to post RQS questions but you couldn't be bothered to directly ask us to answer them. You would call to lynch me in a heartbeat if I just wrote a list of questions and said "here are some questions I like to ask" and then tried to call people scummy when they didn't answer. Pet peeve. I stuck to it once I saw it was generating a reaction. Why? See the entire first half of this post. An observation that I wouldn't have been able to make had I just sucked it up and played along.

I'm very much about content and accountability. If I say something that doesn't make sense with something I said earlier. I expect you to call me on it and demand a response or explanation. Just keep in mind that I will do the same to you as I need.

Good! I'm ready, expecting, and appreciate your criticism. Anything less would be begging to be lynched.

[AbboTT]

After a thorough re-read, I am comfortable lynching SHY today. I plan to lock my vote where it sits unless somebody has some sort of groundbreaking epiphany to share.

The tells from him have been rolling in all game and he hasn't done a good job of addressing any of them, really. My case still rests largely on the fact that he appears to be purposfully concealing information.

"But wait, abbott, YOU conceal information!."

I still maintain that RQS was bologna and I answered every direct question I was asked. If I missed any, it was an honest mistake and I will address happily. I really don't think I did, but clearly it happens (see my previous post).

I'll reiterate from my post a few pages back. What advantage would there have been for a scum abbott to conceal his freaking timezone? It doesn't make any sense.

In fact. I'm going to drop a straight up

FoS: TAM

for that crap reasoning and the scumfeels I mentioned in 205.

[AbboTT]

EBWODP: the

implied

scumtells I mentioned in 205*

[AbboTT]

It's L-1 if my quick count is correct.

[AbboTT]

Probably town. No counter wagon and unless his parter is bussing SHY is town.

So the fact that there is no counter wagon is indicative of a scum-led wagon?

Is that a generally-accepted belief?

Just curious. It's too late to do much about it at this point.

[AbboTT]

Drum roll, please....

[AbboTT]

It's a little early to make that call. Let's see what happens after the flip.

[AbboTT]

Oh. I see what you are saying.

I was kind of bummed you hammered when you did. I wanted to see if Tam or Mala would come through or if they'd try to skate by through the deadline. They were playing with fire, waiting so long.

I'm glad we got it done though.

[AbboTT]

I mean they did both miss their own self-imposed hammer times. TAM more so than Mala.

[AbboTT]

@TAM: Would you please comment on my 230?

@Mala: I gave you time you asked for. Talk to me about Rach. Gut?

[AbboTT]

@Mala: So I just ISO'd jon and Rach to see if I could see how the NK lead you to Rach. Here is a recap of their interactions.

1. Rach RVS'd Jon
2. He OMGUS'd her

VOTE: Rach Marie
A little OMGUS goes a long way!

3. Jon tells Brufe he doesn't want to lynch Rach

@ Brufe I'm not up for a Rach lynch today. If you feel you have more evidence in the future, we can revisit the idea then.

4. Rach put Jon on her townlist
5. Jon pressured her for lurking

Eeek busy weekend

Will post more tomorrow

I hope to hear from you today. I'm really interested in any insights you may have gleaned from the thread.

6. Jon pressures her for lurking again and votes Rach

OK, Rach come out and play or face the consequences!

VOTE: Rach Marie

So far this game you've ignored us while hanging around in other places on Mafiascum. You can't say that you haven't had a chance to look over the thread. This is

not

pro-Town behavior and shouldn't be rewarded by allowing it to continue.

I may have gotten parts of that timeline a little flipped around. I wish you could ISO two people at once and interleave them. But it's pretty close. Please re-read for yourself if you're very concerned with the specific order.

@Mala: So are you saying that Jon was calling her out for lurking so she killed him?

[AbboTT]

@Mala: I know what you mean about 237. It was a little too emotional.

@Rach: Sorry to hear about your knee. Did you get trampled by angry shoppers?

[AbboTT]

[quote=""abbott"]
I mean they did both miss their own self-imposed hammer times. TAM more so than Mala.

I was actually writing up a Hammer post before leaving for a class... Then because of a preview edit decided to see what Lootifer would do to keep up his end of the bargain.[/quote]
That makes sense.

I feel like you went a little quiet in the second half of D1. Are you sitting on any juicy reads for us? I know you said they didn't change much overnight, but that indicates they may have changed a little perhaps.

[AbboTT]

Waaaait a tick. Loot's post (and therefore the p-edit situation you describe) was 14 minutes

after

you said you would hammer. You were very specific about picking a time. Why clearly state your target time like that if you weren't going to hit it?

[AbboTT]

That's L-1

[AbboTT]

Jinx

[AbboTT]

Yes, that vote count did rack up pretty quickly, didn't it?

[AbboTT]

Mala and Along time ago are suspect...

Why isn't Lootifer on that list? Because of the unvote?

[AbboTT]

Loot's pressure on Hermy feels town to me, by the way.

[AbboTT]

I never said Hermy was the hammerer

This.

@Rach did you misread or am I missing something?

[AbboTT]

VOTE: Malakittens

[AbboTT]

It was phrased as a question! Well. A request anyway.

On page one I think you would have said something more like, "I wish we knew why Abbott just voted for Mala..."

Give me a few hours. I've gotta get some work done. I'll get back to you though. Long story short, she's scum.

[AbboTT]

That is L-1, Hermy

It must just be too early for my brain to work. I was sitting here trying to figure out how Hermy could possibly be at L-1.

If anybody else is feeling dense this morning, Mala is L-1. Hermy is L-2.

[AbboTT]

Interesting note, that's the second time Hermy has casually thrown down a critical vote.

VOTE: SHY. Is that L-1 or a hammer or something? I think so.

Mala is just... flailing about suddenly. Not a fan of it. Will explain more later. VOTE: Mala

[AbboTT]

Oh. Great. The site decided to come back to life finally.

Grumble. I still owe Mala discussion.

I'm not totally against a Hermy lynch, but I'm more interested in Mala still.

[AbboTT]

I'm still confident in my Mala feels but I'm not sure I understand Loot's TAM FOS.

But... TAM voting me right out the gate? Let's think about that for a second. He already reminded us we are in MYLO. 3 to lynch. There are probably 2 scum alive right now.

It's a risky freaking move to put a vote down without gathering some solid consent here. He's too experienced to be fumbling into this mistake as a townie. He's either making some sort of super star play right now or he knows something we don't.

My gut tells me it's #2 and that leads me to a solid-as-steel scumfeel on Mr. TAM.

<vote>TAM</vote>

[AbboTT]

Ugh. XML on my brains. That was supposed to be,
VOTE: TAM

[AbboTT]

@TAM: Your proposed scenario "a veterans gambit" is what I meant by "superstar play." I knew you'd go there. I know that's not what happened. I know my alignment. You're trying to ride this to a quick "there's no way he'd be that aggressive in this situation" scumwin.

@Mala: I write code regularly. Angle brackets are used in the whole DOM world. XML, XHTML, HTML, etc. It was a typo. I play nowhere else.

@Mala: I can't believe TAM didn't check Rach's D2 reads immediately after she flipped. I mean to say, I will not believe it. I believe he did check and he saw my pseudo-confirmation and knew it was either me or him (a scenario he ironically established for himself earlier in the game)... so he pounced on me. Like a scared, scummy dog.

He's my lynch.

[AbboTT]

Right. Also the other 99% of the internet.

[AbboTT]

Yes, forums do. Code does not. On every single example you mentioned, those square brackets are being stripped out and replaced with the appropriate HTML tags that generate the display on the page.

Right-click this page. View the source. You'll see a whole lot of angle brackets. Nearly zero square brackets.

Wouldn't it be MORE suspicious if I say, suddenly voted A long time ago? or Lootifer?

It was scummy that you decided it was your decision to put someone in a quickhammer-we-lose position without discussion. The fact that it was me, is just icing.

[AbboTT]

Okay. The ridiculousness of this argument is astounding. Why would I even be voting in a QT thread? I don't even understand the premise.

AYT, Loot: Am I the only one seeing the scumslime drip off mala and tam?

[AbboTT]

Because, If AbboTT isn't scum virtue of Cop-Clear (and I will check that. And be pissed if I can't find anything that would lead to me believing she crumbed her clear.)
And I'm not scum, Then logically scum is in [Mala, Lootifer, Alongtimeago]

This literally makes 0 sense to me. If both you and Abbott are town, then why wouldn't the two remaining scum players have just quick-hammered one of you?

Also, It doesn't benefit scum to act this risky and it DEFINITELY doesn't make sense what AbboTT is claiming.

Right now, I am still unconvinced that opening us up to losing the game on the spot not once but twice is a clear sign that you are working with the town's best interest in mind.

Please. Everybody read both of these quotes carefully. I agree with AYT wholeheartedly here. The second point is more important. That's what started this. TAM decided to put the entire game at risk by throwing out a vote that could have gotten a townie instagibbed. Annnnnd then he does it again.

Also AbboTT, please do me a favor and decide if you are a n00b or are experienced. Because you've been trying to have it both ways this entire game and it's pissing me off now.

Dude. The horse is dead. The horse is so dead it's practically a wallet at this point. I'm a decent player who happens to be pretty stankin' new. Get. Over. It. I'm not trying to have it both ways. Your black and white definition of noob vs vet is the issue.

Thirdly I want to hear your case on Mal, Abbott. You were adamant that she was scum, I want to know why.

You're right. I've been sitting on it. Writing that post up right after I get this out.

Finally Abbott: Have you ever worked in sales?

This question made me smile. The short answer is yes. I talk a lot. It's kind of a thing.

Finally I am fully aware I have been buddying Abbott most of the game (and him me) but thats hardly a solid piece of evidence, certainly not worth risking the game with. I dont like your playstyle/approach -> you attack Abbott -> I think your attacks on Abbott are a bit iffy -> natural consequence is I [inadvertently] buddy Abbott.

Here's the thing. I don't feel like I've been acting with any bias towards anybody except TAM in this game. I kicked him in the mouth right out of the gate because he was the proverbial 'biggest guy in the room.' It turns out that it just so happened that my read developed from that point on. If you look at the way I've addressed everybody throughout this game, I think you'll see that Loot and maybe AYT are the only players I didn't really attempt to pressure. What you call buddying I call focusing my efforts on the scummiest players.

[AbboTT]

Who the hell is AYT. God. Put a martini in me and I start talking nonsense. ALT / ALTA / whatever you wanna call the guy. Is there a shortened name you prefer

@alongtimeago

?

[AbboTT]

Saturday night defeated mafia this evening. I have a draft but it's incomprehensible at the moment. Most of my case revolves around how Mala and Rach interacted. More soon.

@TAM, your first line kind of sounds like a threat to take me out behind the woodshed or take me on a long drive down a dusty country road.

lol @ beating

with

the horse. That's a novel approach.

[AbboTT]

Or are you trying to hide behind the fact that You've done jackshit in this game and have been called out for being scum twice now.

Oh. Snap.

[AbboTT]

After all, you and AbboTT have been afraid of me since I called you out Day One.

Lol. Can we end this already?

[AbboTT]

No reason to claim. There are no more power roles. He would claim VT. Now for Ms. Kittens.

[AbboTT]

<3

[AbboTT]

Don't say that D:

[AbboTT]

GG fellas

[AbboTT]

Yeah. ALTA's lurkskill was really damn impressive.

[AbboTT]

I wanted so badly to QL you, Loot. I was driving home from work, frantically refreshing... waiting for ALTA to post so I could vote. He posted! Then I noticed TAM was still active and I got cold feet. Figured it would be safer to wait it out.

[AbboTT]

Yeah, no. We made good kills I think but our daytime predictions were pretty far off the mark.

[AbboTT]

It didn't, really.

But yeah. That vote tag thing was not a slip. I didn't even know you _could_ add formatting to QT posts.

[AbboTT]

@TAM: I guess it doesn't really matter at this point. I wasn't playing dumb. I really have only played a handful of games and all but two of those were years ago. This is the first one I've finished since I've been back. I'm not sure what your hint meant.

@Mala: I don't know what incentive you think I'd have to lie to you. The game is over.

[AbboTT]

Deliberate. For the reasons stated already in the thread.

[AbboTT]

Rach, it was just process of elimination. I think the QT explains it.

[AbboTT]

Again. Dear friend. Please reference the QT.

[AbboTT]

Haha. Sorry Rach.