Mini 60--GAME OVER

[MeMe]

vote: Saigon

Welcome to mafiascum!

[MeMe]

Welcome to mafiascum!

Picking

on you, Saigon? I'm just trying to

integrate

you!

[MeMe]

~totally understand's Saigon's eagerness and wishes that everyone would catch it~

unvote: Saigon

vote: Saigon

. For placing the second vote on MeMe. And for being third on the shelper-bandwagon, although I don't really believe in that theory.

vote: Kerplunk

. For placing the second vote on Saigon. And for giving third-on-a-bandwagon as a reason, even as you say you don't believe the theory. Oh, the irony....

[MeMe]

Hmmm? What was scummy? Kerplunk's post? I agree.

[MeMe]

Kerplunk + mathcam sittin' in a tree...

[MeMe]

Well, it seemed funny

before

it was on the screen...

[MeMe]

Why Kerplunk's posts look scummy...an explanation.

vote: shelper

. My new policy on day one. Vote for the guy who places the second vote on someone.

Makes up a "new policy" for his vote. As early day one votes don't require any explanation, it raised my eyebrows as a possible instance of covering his butt for later. Suspicious when taken alone? Not really...but it

isn't

alone!

I accept shelper's explanation. He was not

really

the second to vote for someone. He didn't even saw the vote for mathcam.

unvote: shelper

.

vote: Saigon

. For placing the second vote on MeMe. And for being third on the shelper-bandwagon, although I don't really believe in that theory.

Once again, makes sure we hear reasons...1)for unvoting ("I believe him! It wasn't a second vote at all!") and 2)for his new vote...the funny thing is that the new vote reasons are that Saigon placed a second vote (and by placing his new vote on Saigon,

Kerplunk

places a second vote) and earlier placing a third vote (which he claims not to truly consider as a factor -- so to give it as a reason is weird, like "vote MeMe because she's so ugly, except I think she's pretty").

I'm just being consistent. I voted for shelper because he voted secondly for someone. But in fact he didn't know mathcam was already voted. So I changed my vote to Saigon, who did knowingly secondly voted for someone. Thus my vote

should

have gone to Saigon. I made a correction to my earlier vote.

And, again, makes sure we're clear on the "reasons."

Retrospectively, Kerplunk's first vote (against shelper) could have been to attack a person voting for you...and now you look like you may be coming to Kerplunk's defense, 'cam. Hmmm.

[MeMe]

unvote: Kerplunk

Just a little breathing room. That leaves four votes on him -- I'll rejoin if I don't hear a good reason not to.

[MeMe]

But the attack on Kerplunk is ludicrous. He's being attacked because he keeps explaining himself, which is happening because he keeps being attacked.

Take a look, mathcam. The first two explanations he posted came before any "attack."

It sounds to me like you're strecthing, MeMe. Would Kerplunk really vote for shelper as retribution for him randomly voting me? And then turn around and undo it?

Well, I don't know if he would or not -- but I find his actions more suspicious than anyone else's thus far. What do you want besides a "stretch" on day one? Hard evidence is difficult to come by this early in the game.

[MeMe]

a very small FOS at meme, call it a hunch.

Nah -- let's just call it what it is: wrong. Okey doke?

CoolBot -- is there any reason you keep misspelling Kerplunk's name? I don't think I've ever seen you get a name wrong before and I'm starting to wonder if there's something more to it.

[MeMe]

Confirming a vote? Usually I reserve that for when I want to say "I'm so dang sure this person is guilty that I'm gonna make sure everyone sees me voting for them...

again

." Is that what you're trying to say DS?

[MeMe]

CoolBot -- is there any reason you keep misspelling Kerplunk's name? I don't think I've ever seen you get a name wrong before and I'm starting to wonder if there's something more to it.

This is what kicked off the wagon on CoolBot. I didn't accuse him, I didn't even consider it suspicious -- it was others who ran with it. I just wanted an explanation from him. Frankly, I was wondering if it was a role requirement of some sort, e.g. he found out Kerplunk was guilty, but he's not allowed to

say

it straight out, or something along those lines. I have enjoyed the various responses to my query, however. I always think it's interesting when people fill in the blanks rather than waiting for the person to whom the question was posed to give a definitive answer.

[MeMe]

And I've told you that you're wrong. If CoolBot had logged on and answered earlier this wouldn't even be an issue. It'd be more profitable for us to look at the people who took my comments and made them into bandwagon fodder -- those are the ones possibly setting someone up for blame (namely me) if an innocent is lynched. What's usually the case? That the one whose comments

instigate

a bandwagon is guilty or that the ones going trying to look like followers on that bandwagon are guilty?

[MeMe]

Well, my goodness. I don't care much about having myself covered if CoolBot is innocent as I wasn't trying to start a bandwagon in the first place.

[MeMe]

1. MeMe has been acting slightly suspicious, maybe not enough for a lynch but it's not like we've seen anything more suspicious. I also realise from other ames I've been following that MeMe always seems to act like this, but like I said we don't really have a clear alternative.

Ugh. Not enough for a lynch...but enough for a fourth vote? No clear alternative? Pick any other player -- and it's probably a better alternative that ridding the town of me. I have been instigating discussion, which is only good for us.

2. I really don't want this to end up as the never ending day 1s I keep reading about.

We're hardly in danger of that as it's only the 5th rl day of play (not long at all) and we've got a deadline in place.

I also realise it's considered quite scummy to try to end day 1 as quickly as possible

This is the second time you've labeled your own behavior as something people associate with scum (see where you place the third vote on Kerplunk while mentioning the third-vote-on-a-bandwagon theory).

I'd even prefer me getting bandwagoned, but that wouldn't be very helpful for the town so no! That isn't a suggestion

I'll bet that it's more helpful for you to get bandwagoned than for me to.

[MeMe]

Are you guys insane? The votes/suspicion on me come from me pointing out that Kerplunk is explanation happy and CoolBot's misspelling Kerplunk's name?

As we're having dinner guests tonight, I'm going to be unable to post for several hours. Because of that, I'm roleclaiming now before you all lynch me for being talkative.

I'm able to listen in on one person nightly. Last night, I listened in on on a person and heard him choose CurtainDog -- but it didn't sound like a discussion, but as though he was alone, talking to himself. So, even though CD wound up dead this morning, I don't believe this guy is mafia. He could be a doc, cop, or SK.

[MeMe]

MeMe, why wouldn't hte imediate conclusion be that this guy's the serial killer?

Because Gaspode posted just "CD's dead." He promised more info later, but never gave it, which made me think it was a standard mafia death rather than an SK death or a mafia AND SK death. I'd rather be careful than to sacrifice what could be our cop.

[MeMe]

To clarify -- mods seem to go out of their way to distinguish between SK/mafia deaths. If it was overkill, I'd expect Gaspode to make note of that as well.

[MeMe]

Second that request

.

Now I really should go stir my pasta.

[MeMe]

Plus, note that it's not risking the lynching of a doc, since if he was a doc and targeted CuratinDog, CD wouldn't have ended up dead (probably).

I can agree with the "probably" -- but we do know that there are eventualities that still make it possible that he's a doc (CD was double targeted and the doc protect was only good for one...or the doc isn't 100% effective).

There are two possibilities. Either that player killed CurtainDog, or that player happened to randomly target the guy that got killed last night. The latter option is significantly more unlikely (say 1 in 11 or so). Thus, there's a very good chance this player killed Curtain Dog.

Odds are better than 1/11 here -- what do you do when you're handed a night choice role? Target a newer player? Nope. You

know

that killers generally won't go after them, so why protect them? Do killers go after the highest player in a game? Usually not, because they assume they'll have protection...so CurtainDog was a nice middle-of-the-road choice -- for killing, protecting, OR investigating. And, as for your "happened to randomly target the guy that got killed..." comment -- there's rarely anything "random" about who gets targeted. After all, if you truly think my guy is the SK, then some doc had to "randomly target" the mafia target (or the mafia chose not to kill, right?). It's not that far-fetched.

The problem is that it doesn't necessarily mean that MeMe is scum if the person she listened to turns out to be a townie with a night ability

Well, duh. Why would this even be considered a possibility?

I don't think it would be out of the question for MeMe to reveal who she investigated. Especially since the deadline is coming up. In fact, since MeMe didn't reveal when she claimed, she may leave us pretty close to the deadline before; we may not have time to use the information.

fos: MeMe

If MeMe doesn't explain tomorrow, this will move up to a vote.

Only an irresponsible cop-like role would reveal an investigation target when they're not convinced of the target's guilt. And to imply that I'd ever leave things until deadline is nothing short of ridiculous -- deadline is more than a day away and I post several times daily. I'm a sure thing when it comes to attentiveness. And your ultimatum does nothing but piss me off -- if the effect you were hoping for was "oh no, Bot! Please don't upgrade to a vote...I'll obey!" you're out of luck, m'boy. I've explained more than I should have had to already.

Summary -- there's no evidence that a serial killer even

exists

in this game! We only had one kill last night and Gaspode's death description sounded pretty run-of-the-mill. I'm not going to reveal unless a majority specifically asks me to -- I'm frankly against it and I'm sure not going to reveal on the advice of three or four, because then it would be quite possible that I'm allowing scum to call the shots. At the moment I have definitive requests from mathcam & Dragon Slayer (although I know that CoolBot and Saigon have expressed interest, but please formalize that as a request for disclosure if that's what you want). I just ask everyone to truly weigh the consequences before just demanding the information. As I said, I'm probably the

least

likely player to disappear for any amount of time and I will notice if four more of you make the request. Four more requests & I'll disclose. But I'm pretty irritated with you all.

[MeMe]

It's hard for me to take this claim seriously because MeMe's taking little risk with it.

Take note, all other innocents who are pressured: make your roles sound extra-risky or CoolBot will accuse you of not being on the level.

So yeah, MeMe, consider this a request for disclosure.

So noted. Two more.

[MeMe]

Thanks for the disclosure count, Gaspode.

I'm not sure what to think here -- I'm actually starting to think it might be best to reveal, and here's why...

Because of all this discussion, there should be no way that the person on whom I eavesdropped isn't aware that he was my choice. I think that it should

also

be clear that I am protecting him. If I were in his situation and I were innocent, I think I would have chimed in with support along the lines of "I don't think it's a good idea for MeMe to reveal" -- I mean, I did all the hard work explaining why I was keeping it quiet -- all that would have been necessary is a "yeah." Because there has been no post of this type I'm starting to wonder if I'm wrong about his motives and he's just hoping to kill me off before I can give out his name. Of course, a cop or a doc might just be hoping I can push my way out of this on my own, but why not ease my mind with a quick "I'm with MeMe on this"? What do the rest of you think? And I don't want any cute answers about what think of me personally...I mean what do you think of my thought process?

[MeMe]

And two more things

1) I've seen my target online since all this started
2) Because Gaspode posted the disclosure count, it almost looks to me as though he wants me to disclose...which makes me worry that it's the wrong thing to do.

I don't know if the rest of you who have modded feel this way, but I just can't help but root for the evil elements when I'm modding....so would revealing help them more than us?

Oh - and a third thing:

3) I analyze things to death. It's a disease.

[MeMe]

Analysis of Plan

:
Possible scenarios (Let's call Player X the person MeMe knows about):
- One player, Player X, confesses to targeting CurtainDog. As they were the only player to do so, they probably killed him. Kill Player X.

This makes no sense to me....because if player X is good and confesses to targeting CurtainDog, there's no way in hell mafia would admit to it as well because the plan dictates that we kill Player X without any fuss.

[MeMe]

Now that's not a bad plan. I'll go first...and how about the person who just went naming the person to go next? This would prevent a baddie waiting until he thinks it's safer...

I did

not

target CurtainDog.

Saigon, you're next.

[MeMe]

I know Dragon Slayer was on earlier. Stalling? Or did he just not check the thread?

[MeMe]

The plan problem: the rest of us twiddle while waiting for one person to complete their "turn." Is there anything else we could be talking about?

[MeMe]

According to the plan, you were supposed to pick the next player to answer...but we got tired of waiting, so we went on without you.

...Prizm?

[MeMe]

And could you name the next player to respond, Prizm?

[MeMe]

~giggles uncontrollably~

Saigon - you're either a guy after my own easily-irritated heart or lashing out at the world the way most guys saddled with a girl's name do (e.g. Francis, Tracy).

[MeMe]

I did

not

target CurtainDog.

Saigon, you're next.

Pot calling the kettle black there?

[MeMe]

I feel as though everyone else is in a more confusing game than I am.

The sequence of events concerned in this tiff as I know them:

• I chose Saigon to go second.
  
• Saigon said he didn't target CurtainDog.
  
• Saigon got pissed that subsequent players have neglected to read the thread...otherwise they'd know that they're to answer the question AND choose the person to answer next
  
• mlaker said Saigon must not want to answer the question himself
  
• Saigon got even madder because he
  did
  answer the question
  
• Demeech laid into mlaker saying that Saigon hadn't been chosen to go yet
  
• I pointed out that he
  had
  been chosen to go and that Demeech is guilty of not thoroughly reading the thread, which is what he accused mlaker of doing
  
• mlaker says something I don't get
  at all
  .

Alright...to make things easier: massive, mlaker & shelper have yet to answer the question.

[MeMe]

Well, the idea was that everyone who targeted him would

have

to admit it, because no one knows who I checked last night. If they said "no," it's possible I could denounce them as a liar...it's still feasible that someone could lie, but it's also risky. As it went, though, only massive admitted to it

I'll go: I targeted CurtainDog last night. That leaves mlaker and shelper.

And he's who I listened in on.

vote: massive

[MeMe]

Four quick votes -- let's hear from massive before we go any further.

[MeMe]

Saigon - what exactly does your role do?

Last night I eavesdropped on what sounded like a townie.

[MeMe]

Sorry, earlier I said I heard a "townie" - I need to clear that up lest anyone assume that I have an extra innocent tucked away for later. Kerplunk was my target & I heard solitary complaining about just sitting around doing nothing.

I'm ready to go for mlaker too -- and I can't imagine he'll say anything that will make me think it's a better idea to keep him alive. Demeech is

not

paranoid or he would have found scum last night, too.

vote: mlaker

[MeMe]

In my opinion, you should choose privately. That way, maybe we'll get lucky and the scum will go for the same one you do.

[MeMe]

I lean toward Demeech revealing who was checked Night 1 (if it was me, I certainly waive my right to privacy). If mlaker's guilty, then we've got rid of two mafia already and we'll be well on our way to winning. We've already got myself, Kerplunk, and Demeech (Saigon to a lesser degree, in my estimation) as pretty surely innocent -- because of this another revealed innocent won't necessarily become the mafia target (and I assume Demeech would have already given us a name if Night 1's target was guilty). Anyway...those are my thoughts.

vote: reveal

[MeMe]

Massive wouldn't have been lynched if it wasn't for me.

That's interestingly revisionist. He most surely would have been lynched without you -- your claim was quite unnecessary to get him lynched. He already had four votes and you could have kept quiet about your role and just put a fifth vote on.

I

do

believe you to be innocent and mlaker turning up guilty will only go toward making me more sure about it. But if you're relying on CoolBot's corroboration that he was blocked by you...well, sorry. CoolBot's a big question-mark in my mind, so he's not the best alibi, in my opinion.

As for this:

By the way, why can't we just have everyone roleclaim by now? It's not like the mafia is going to learn anything useful anymore, and we would see who the most suspicious people are.

I'm in favor of it.

[MeMe]

Uh...you're so

fast

, 'Bot!

[MeMe]

Sorry, but I think you're a little liar...

[MeMe]

Paranoid gets everyone as guilty, so you're definitely not that. The only other possibility besides sane at this point is random (or reverse, which I know the rest of you would have to consider -- but I've ruled it out because I'm the only one who absolutely knows I'm innocent).

[MeMe]

Hey - wha - WOO!

[MeMe]

Not all godfathers show up innocent...sometimes "godfather" just means "you're in charge." Or they're immune to night kills or something like that. Can some mafia member fill us in so that we don't have to wait for Gaspode to tell us?

[MeMe]

Now closed