Mini 499: Just Your typical Mafia Game GAME OVER!!!!!!!!

[Gorgon]

Vote: Gorgon

I don't like the sound of your name.

What's wrong with it?

OMGUS

Vote: orlowski

[Gorgon]

I have a buddy named Jimmy Grogan and he was the butt of all our jokes, so your name gorgon reminded me of him.

unvote:Gorgon

vote: Cicero

Where the hell is he/she?

Fair enough. I'm keeping my vote on you for now though, although I am also concerned about Cicero's absence. Hopefully he'll show up or be replaced soon; otherwise, I will definitely join you.

I find it interesting that theopor_COD put a third vote on AlyG, but I don't find it scummy. An early bandwagon is just what we need to shake things up.

[Gorgon]

Unvote: orlowski

Vote: cheeky-little-asian

Way too terse for my taste. You need to explain your actions better, bud.

[Gorgon]

Happy birthday to pwayne66!

This is the third time in a short while that I've been in a game with someone who had a birthday.

Anyway, I am satisfied with cheeky-little-asian's explanations. Right now I am much more concerned about the AlyG bandwagon now. I think that if AlyG is town, it's quite likely that at least one scum got on his bandwagon out of opportunism.

I am also concerned about the following people who have not contributed enough for my taste:

Borchmore
daedalus

I don't think it's time to change my vote yet, though.

[Gorgon]

Now it's cheeky-little-asian who's under fire. Allow me to elaborate on my previous words.

I said I was satisfied with his explanation for his actions. The reason is that his logic is just a little too whacky to be something he made up to cover his a**, in my opinion. Crap logic does not unequivocally equate scum, although I guess there may be a certain correlation there. I could therefore easily be wrong here. It should be very interesting to hear cheeky-little-asian's thoughts on the current situation. A bandwagon is justified, although I am, again, concerned with its rapid momentum at this early stage in the game.

Regarding cicero ... no, I don't think he's necessarily implicated by association, just because cheeky-little-asian used his crappy logic on his absence and eventual emergence into the game.

I think I'll continue to list inactive players, as it's good to note who may be trying to lurk in order to fly under the scumdar:

Borchmore (has posted only once, absent for about 5 days now)
somestrangeflea (hasn't posted here since the 5th, but was active elsewhere on the site yesterday)

[Gorgon]

Borchmore (has posted only once, absent for about 5 days now)
somestrangeflea (hasn't posted here since the 5th, but was active elsewhere on the site yesterday)

With all due respect, if you think 2 days of inactivity is lurking, I'm fairly sure that you're not going to enjoy your time here...

Meh. I mostly added you because I didn't want to pick on just one guy, and there was a lot of discussion going on yesterday, so inactivity on that day was kind of noticable, especially since you were active elsewhere on the site on the same day. It's no biggie. I am fully aware of the general pace of the games here.

[Gorgon]

Gorgon: It really scum of you to justify for CLA but then go back ang forth between your reason to make you look like a good guy and in the end still keep a vote for him.

FOS:Gorgon

Go back and forth? I'm not sure I understand what you mean. I originally voted for CLA because I didn't like how he provided no reasons for his actions, and wanted to hear more from him. He then provided some explanations, which I said I was satisfied with. Later, I felt that this was perhaps not clear enough, and elaborated upon it, and to make it clear that I don't agree with his logic even though I can see how it could make sense to him. I also wanted to warn people that bad logic does not necessarily equate scum.

And I am sticking with my vote because I want to keep the pressure on CLA ... depending on what he says when he shows up, I may or may not withdraw my vote. There's no point in doing it now, and I see no other particular clear candidate for my vote. The perils of the 'bad logic = scum' fallacy notwithstanding, bad logic still is something to go on, at least in the early stages of a game.

So yeah, basically I just agree 100% with cicero's stance here (post 74):

Anyway in the interests of making him speak in posts longer than a sentence and in making him appreciate the importance of good logic rather than weird magic logic that only he understands,

Unvote. Vote Cheeky Little Asian

[Gorgon]

Welcome to the game, BM. Glad to see someone I know is very likely to stick with it to the end.

Anyway, to business ...

I must say that I find cicero's defense very eloquent. I certainly do like his style, regardless of what his role in this game turns out to be. He makes a lot of good points too.

The only characters in the game who are going to cherish their own life over anyone elses, are the scum.

This is firstly an oversimplification of the issue, and also not altogether true, IMHO. This was never a question of cicero wanting CLA dead and his own skin saved. He simply resented the fact that shaka!! was suggesting that CLA was 'covering for cicero'; an interpretation that I personally disagree with. Also, on more general terms, a townie would of course cherish his life most dearly over someone else's, right? I mean, a town player

knows

that he is town. He doesn't know anything about anyone else (unless he's a mason, of course). So a 100% chance of losing a town player vs. an uncertain chance of losing either a town or scum player is pretty much a no-brainer in my book ... unless we're talking a confirmed powerrole or something, which is certainly not an issue here. But like I said, it's not even an issue here, since all cicero said was that he didn't have problems with people

suspecting

CLA, not lynching him.

Sorry, my bad for not being clear. What i meant was u said his crappy logic doesn't spell scum but then there is a small correlation and yet you could be wrong. Then you said bandwagon is justified but u concern with its voting rate yet you keeping ur vote on him.

Honestly, with or without ur vote, i think he have much pressure already.

Okay, I get your point now ... I can only say that of course I'm not certain of CLA's motives ... but I tend to look at all sides of every issue and give people the benefit of the doubt. Maybe that's the wrong way to go about things; I'm still learning. If this makes it like I'm trying to look like a good guy, well, maybe that's because I am a good guy. Do I find it hypocritical to be a good guy while still keeping my vote? No. I do not want CLA to be lynched at this point (nor anyone else), and I will look at anyone who puts further votes on him with extreme suspicion, and I

will

withdraw my vote if CLA goes up to L-1. Anyway, what about the other people who keep their vote, while not expressing doubt over CLA's guilt? Are they less worthy of scrutiny than I am? Having doubts at this stage is normal. In fact, having doubts is always normal, I think. Is it so bad to state this doubt out loud? Maybe it is ... but it would go against my nature to not make people aware of different possible interpretations of things.

Anyway, ChocolateAttack, you didn't respond to pwayne66's query above. Maybe you missed it. I'll repeat it here for your benefit:

Regarding the orlowski wagon. Sure, Orlowski's actions were odd as hell and do deserve scrutiny. If it wasn't a mistake, then what are you claiming it was? A scum attempt at a quicklynch? I doubt it. I am satisfied with his explanation. If you aren't why not ask him some pointed questions about it and build a case. Saying that you are sticking with a vote does not make that vote more legitimate.

[Gorgon]

EBWOP:

I really should have read that one over. Allow me to rephrase a part that I botched completely:

So a 100% chance of losing a town player vs. an uncertain chance of losing either a town or scum player is pretty much a no-brainer in my book ... unless we're talking a confirmed powerrole or something, which is certainly not the case here. But like I said, life or death is not even an issue here, since all cicero said was that he didn't have problems with people

suspecting

CLA, not lynching him.

[Gorgon]

b) What would have been a more appropriate "townie" response.

I'm fascinated to hear this.

How does this look like he is trying to cover up for me?

What makes you think he is trying to cover up for me?

I could list thousands, but these are the best fitting.

Hmm ... you have a point. A simple question usually sounds less scummy than a defensive attitude. Perhaps this is what Battle Mage is really getting at.

[Gorgon]

Unvote: cheeky-little-asian

, as promised.

Not happy with putting an absent guy at L-1 at all, however deserving he may be of a vote.

You do realise this is what your vote accomplished, daedalus, right? Why did you find it necessary to do that?

FoS: daedalus

Btw, hi Aimee.

Can we get a votecount please, ms. mod

?

[Gorgon]

Okay, so CLA has been prodded, but we have more absentees:

AlyG
orlowski
somestrangeflea

Also, AlyG and somestrangeflea have both been active in other games since they've posted here. In the case of AlyG, this is particularily suspicious, since he was under some scrutiny as a recall. And yeah, I know this poking around will probably bug you, SSF, but I would like to hear from you regarding recent developments, if only it's something like Theo said; that you're waiting on CLA or someone else before commenting futher.

[Gorgon]

Welcome, Prof. Guppy.

I must say I find it mighty 'convenient' how you cover both your own a** and that of BM in one go. Perhaps there is a trend of pro-town players being more likely to drop out, but I still think it's more down to external circumstances. You can't clear someone just because they replaced in; I could point to many examples where I've seen replacements being scum.

[Gorgon]

Wow.

Prof. Guppy, I'm sorry to say this, but you're looking worse and worse with every post. You have offered little insight, little analysis ... mostly just defensive rhetoric and some dubious theories. Oh, I forgot ... you've claimed both BM and pwayne66 look town. Now, I know you say it's more constructive to say that someone's townish rather than saying they're scummy, but you

need

to catch scum as well as eliminate suspects. That's the only way to win. You can't pull a Sherlock Holmes, eliminating suspects until only the scum remain ... certainly not in a game this size. The point is, you don't know anything about anyone for certain. Paranoia is the name of the game.

Anyone

could be scum, no matter how town they look. What we must do is be on a constant lookout for anything that could indicate that someone is scum. Slipups, inconsistencies, weird logic, defensiveness, lurking ... these are just some of the possible indicators. Also, gut feeling plays a big part, and it's an active hunt as well. When you notice something, you point it out; poke around, ask for explanations. The explanations will also give you information.

Right now, what's bugging me the most about you is this blatant inconsistency:

It has

been my experience

that players who drop out of games and need to be replaced are usually pro-town. I'm not ready to vote yet, but I am going to vouch for BattleMage.

vs.

3. Who said anything about a track record? Okay, the truth is I've only repleaced into one other game. It did not go well. And this is not going well for me either, so I figure this must be a pattern

You see my problem?

[Gorgon]

Oh man ...

You mustn't take things this personally, Guppy!

Now, I read through your earlier newbie game. I'm not allowed to comment on it in detail, since it's still ongoing, but I must say you did better than you seem to think you did in that one.

Right now, based on your behavior in that game, I'm thinking you're just way too high-strung, as cicero says. If you really are scum, I congratulate you on your audacious gambit ... but I'm thinking you're town, for what it's worth. You're just not very helpful to the town.

In a game of Mafia, you should expect to come under fire. Like I said

anyone

could be scum, and anything people might say is liable to make them suspicious. The correct way to deal with this is to answer all questions directly, without getting emotional or taking things personally. There are some very simple unwritten rules of behaviour here, and I suggest you plow through old games to try and pick them up if you're still unclear about them. Also, assuming that you've already lost the debate is, well, futile. Did you even stop to consider that some of the people attacking you might be scum who are picking on an obvious target? Don't just go ahead and assume that you lost;

defend yourself

!

Chill, read the game through ... try to find scum, and try to learn from the reactions you've gotten so far ... it should tell you what's 'safe' to say, and what's not.

And if you can't handle this game, I suggest you get yourself re-replaced. I'm not too keen on playing with someone who gives up this easily.

And please withdraw your self-vote. It's silly and detrimental to the game. It's not just about you. If someone comes in and hammers now, and you turn out town, it screws the town over in a seriously bad way. Please stop and think about that.

[Gorgon]

BM, dude! I think you just messed up big time!

Unless I miscounted, that was a f*cking hammer. 4 votes of the Prof. already, then shaka!!, then, the self-vote, your vote ... that certainly adds up to 7 in my book.

Worst day ever.

P.S. BM is now my top suspect. That could easily have been a deliberate 'mistake' on his part.

[Gorgon]

Phew. You're right. L-1 now.

You really should have explained that shaka!! was already voting for the Prof when you voted.

Don't ever do that again, BM. You scared the sh*t out of me.

[Gorgon]

Phew. You're right. L-1 now.

You really should have explained that shaka!! was already voting for the Prof when you voted.

Don't ever do that again, BM. You scared the sh*t out of me.

ok, so you obviously have strong reason to believe Guppy is town right?
in which case, would you be so good as to explain your view, rather than let him die?

I don't have a strong reason per se ... as you can see in my previous post, it's based on how he was playing in the earlier game; much the same as this one, where he turned out town. Also, I don't think he's faking his apparent despair over being unfairly attacked. All in all, I think it's more likely than not that he's town, scummy as he

looks

. Besides, I think he deserves further chances to redeem himself. I've seen far too many games where someone who messes up like this is quicklynched and turns up town.

Anyway, my main concern is, of course, that regardless of PG's alignment, hammering would have ended the day on page 7, which is way too premature, IMO.

P.S. Prof. - I join BM in requesting a claim.

[Gorgon]

I don't know. This was the first thought I had when you reacted the way you did. It just seems that you had to be pretty damn certain that Guppy is town to respond that way. I having a feeling that the gupster is town, but I don't know if I am anywhere near that certain.

Hmm ...

If you're referring to my statement that BM was my top suspect, the reaction was mostly emotional. The prospect of ending the day prematurely like that shocked me no end, and I didn't even consider the possibility that PG would turn out scum when I posted that - my mind was filled with worst-case scenarios of doom and gloom. Anyway, ending the day early is always A Bad Thing ... regardless of whether scum or town gets lynched. Don't know what else I can say about that. Guess I'm not calm all the time.

[Gorgon]

Oh, dang. Now I'm confirmed innocent. Now I'm due to get NKed. Oh, well, it was fun while it lasted. I really need to learn how to be ambiguous. How do you spell that?

You spelled that correctly ... but I fail to see how you're 'confirmed innocent'.

[Gorgon]

Oh, so I'm not confirmed, but you guys are "pretty sure" I'm town? Okay, I can live with that

What do you want? A signed verdict from all of us saying that you're not scum? It doesn't work that way. Point is, we don't

know

. It's not a case of either we're 100% sure someone is scum, or we're 100% sure they're town. I find it hard to understand why you don't realise this. Can you yourself place other people in the categories 'confirmed scum', and 'confirmed town'? The only people who can do this are scum ... therefore, a viewpoint like your is, by definition, scummy. Townies have doubt, scum don't (not really, but of course they fake it). Therefore, you, just like everyone else, can only expect to be under further scrutiny, and that any suspicious activity on your part will be questioned. That's the way it works, and it's just something you're going to have to get used to ... and live with.

We're all on the same boat here. No one gets a free pass.

[Gorgon]

I still want to hear from shaka!! He seems to think that because I want to look innocent, I must be not innocent. Well, don't we all want to look innocent? Aren't townies entitled to be a little concerned about their image?

You're absolutely right on this. Like I said earlier, there are certain 'rules' that apply, even for townies. Given that saying certain things is more likely to make one look guilty than others, of course avoiding saying these things applies to townies as well as scum.

However, the phrasing 'make me look innocent' happens to be one of those things. It suggests that you really are guilty, but want to

look

innocent, so I fully understand that shaka!! called you out on this. Also, yet again there are some things you don't seem to realise. Scum, who you're trying to catch (supposing that you are town), don't 'think' anything about who's innocent or guilty. They

know

. So, voting shaka!! because he 'thinks you're guilty', is illogical. You might mean that he's pretending to think that, which would be scummy. However, I myself see little reason to assume this, as I believe that his point is valid enough that a townie might easily have made it. You see the difference? It's little details like these that matter. What you should be looking for when finding scum are signs that someone is faking things, being inconsistent, etc.

(Man, if you

are

scum, I'm going to be kicking myself for coaching you like this. I just have a soft spot for newbies, being one myself )

[Gorgon]

lol BM, the only person I've seen using crap logic on you in this game is PG, and that was to paint you as town, not scum. Feel free to correct me if I'm wrong on this.

Plus, you've not even come close to being bandwagoned ...

[Gorgon]

SSF managed to sneak in while cicero was writing, but what he (SSF) has to say in no way invalidates his (cicero's) points. I've poked SSF two times now for being inactive in the game, and he shows little signs of improvement.

SSF, the rest of us find it easy to keep up. Give us

something

. I hope to hear from you soon about

anything

that has at least a little bearing on this game. If you're not going to be active in this game, you may as well get yourself replaced. It's as simple as that.

Vote: somestrangeflea

, for additional lurker-busting pressure.

[Gorgon]

Well, extremely weird as GP's play may be, he does have an interesting point. Why did Theo point to ChocolateAttack and daedalus, saying they were 'missing even more'?

Note the difference between 'missing' and 'lurking'. Missing is less scummy than lurking, in my book - especially actively lurking, which is what SSF was definitely doing (by his own admittence, even). There could be any number of external factors that lead to people being missing from a game.

daedalus not posted since the 10th on this forum, at all.

CA is admittedly slightly more suspicious though, as he posted here on the 10th, and in another game on the 12th.

I'm not sure how relevant this is, but it is interesting to note. Theo's reply these ponderings will be interesting to see.

Also, I like SSF's post above. Looks like he's finally getting into this game again. He picked up on something that I missed; cicero's accusation that SSF was pushing for an AlyG bandwagon. Well, I did notice it, but didn't think much of it. Now that I actually went back to check on what he's talking about, I see it as a somewhat unjustified attack. SSF even stated himself that the AlyG bandwagon wasn't really that strong, in post 37. In that post, he's saying "All the other votes except mine are random" - therefore

lifting

pressure off of AlyG, if anything. I certainly don't see anything that indicates that he's trying to get more people to vote for AlyG, or encouraging people to keep their votes on him. Now, say what you will about the merits of SSF voting for AlyG, and the strength of his stated reason, but I just don't see it as pushing for a bandwagon. I came to this conclusion before I read cicero's post 216, where he elaborates on this attack, so it just didn't read right to me.

I'd love to hear how cicero responds to that. He doesn't address this aspect of his accusation in his last post.

However, his elaboration on SSF's lurkiness is something that I agree with 100%. The same applies to his tendency to OMGUS.

Also, there is this:

So an early bandwagon that could reasonably have been about Theo turned into a pursuit of the more reasonably acting AlyG.

So, cicero, are you suggesting that SSF might have been trying to deflect attention from Theo? Interesting ...

[Gorgon]

Well, extremely weird as GP's play may be, he does have an interesting point. Why did Theo point to ChocolateAttack and daedalus, saying they were 'missing even more'?

Erm because they were . . Daedalus has posted what three times. Flea gave a reason for his lurking, i.e the speed of the game i don't think it's a tell against him.

Okay, so there's obviously a difference of opinion. Cicero and I are in agreement that SSF actively lurking was suspicious, but it seems we're in the minority here. We are, of course, both fairly new to Mafiascum, and have been eagerly posting and keeping up with things, so naturally we would both be suspicious against someone who chooses to remain in the background while there's active discussion going on. That's the way I saw it, anwyay. I also readily admit that this game has been moving very quickly, which is probably pretty unusual for a Mafia game on this forum, even though it may not seem so to newbies. You don't really get a feeling for the pace of the games while reading over finished games.

I'm therefore letting SSF off the hook, especially as there doesn't seem to be anything else to go on.

PG is, sad to say, digging himself into a deep dark hole yet again. There's not much more I can say about that, as others have already picked his words to pieces.

shaka!!'s points against BM seem to be mostly just critisism of BM for being BM (I can say this with conviction, as I've metagamed him extensively, being in two games with him now) ... but the fact that BM is no longer attacking cicero is interesting.

BM, how do you feel about cicero right now? Still convinced he's scum?

Oh, and

Unvote

, for now.

[Gorgon]

...

[Gorgon]

Welcome to the game, Erotomachia. Stick around, ok?

Yet again (shock!) I agree with cicero. I don't think Erotomachia is the priority today. He starts off pretty well, and his predecessors were just a little too easy targets, IMO. We should definitely not overlook other possibilites. If Erotomachia ends up being revealed as town, I will be suspicious of the people who went after CLA and (especially) PG the hardest.

I like the fact that Erotomachia agrees with cicero and I in that SSF's active lurking was suspicious. Mind you, it could just be buddying up, seeing that cicero and I were the ones who defended PG, his predecessor.

Regarding cicero in general, I'm agreeing with him a lot (as you've no doubt noticed), and quite honestly find him mostly protown at the moment. I will be very annoyed should he turn out to be scum!

Right now, daedalus is my number one concern. Looking over the thread, I see that his last action was to put CLA at L-1, an action that I had specifically warned people about not doing. I hope he turns up soon, or gets replaced.

Also the following people need to express themselves:

AlyG - promised he'd post something later; hasn't followed up on that.
Battle Mage - I know he's on a path of self-exploration now, but he still needs to post something.
Honary Hitchiker - very much AWOL for way too long now. He replaced an AWOL player, and then goes AWOL himself, without posting anything at all! I (yet again) agree with cicero that the constant replacements and inactivity are annoying, and that people really should try to commit to the games they sign up for.

Vote: daedalus

, for pressure.

[Gorgon]

Double-post ftw.

It's actually quite tempting to vote AlyG instead of daedalus, as he has posted very little in this game, and has been active in his other games since he promised to post something here. As I've made clear before, I don't like this sort of behaviour very much.

So, I'll just

FoS: AlyG

[Gorgon]

Erm yes, cicero's zealous anti-lurker stance seems rather over the top. For once, I do not agree with him. Voting lurkers to pressure them is one thing, but lynching them on general principle is quite another ... as much as I do dislike lurking, I cannot condone that.

I'm baffled why Cicero and Gorgon are giving Eroto a free pass.

Well, for my part, I'm just a sucker for bumbling newbies I guess - and it would seem so unfair to go after Eroto just because his predecessors messed up. I will keep an eye on him just like the rest of you - and I certainly don't see you guys jumping all over his first post, like you did with PG. Wonder why that is ... my guess is that because he (shock) actually expresses himself well and makes some good points. I'm willing to give him the benefit of the doubt, on his own terms. That's certainly not the same as giving him a free pass, so I feel you're slightly misrepresenting things here.

Well, I'm a little surprised that they put me down as town so quickly.

Again, not accurate, at least not where I'm concerned - as per what I have to say above. Find a quote where I put you down as definite town, please.

[Gorgon]

In any event, there are more than one scum in this game. Fine you have Eroto flagged. That's done. Now go look harder. I don't think lynching the obvious psycho newb on day one is good play for the town. I think it plays into scum hands. Hell I think maybe (and I stress maybe) it plays into scum hands even if he IS scum. I don't really know what info I would glean on day 2 from his lynch either way. So I'd rather turn our attention to other targets before deciding on such a route. Basically, my opinion is to ignore eroto for a while even if he IS scum. Which I honestly don't much think he is at this point. Though my mind could change mighty quick.

Now this I agree with. Call us both clueless newbies if you want to - but I just agree.

Can you really say that what cicero is advocating here is an unwise course of action?

Heck, even if I knew cicero to be confirmed scum I'd still agree with this.

[Gorgon]

shaka!!, you have a good point, and also what you're doing seems townish to me. I think that scum would be more likely to not go against the flow like this, although I guess this argument could be construed as WIFOM.

Too bad BM is having himself replaced - but it will be very interesting to see what his replacement has to say.

[Gorgon]

Indeed. Guess we're waiting on replacements ...

[Gorgon]

Yeah, I'm still here I guess.

[Gorgon]

Welcome to the game White. I remember you replaced into my only completed game and did a fine job as scum, even though you lost. It seems you were just what was needed to kickstart this game again.

Yes, I know I have a problem with long posts and (especially) lack of commitment at times. I will review this game later, when I have more time, and try and list some suspects.

[Gorgon]

Orlowski

Honary Hitchiker

White

Orlowski didn't post much. Not much to go on. HH posted nothing at all! White has looked good so far; he certainly seems more interested in this game than most people have been these past days. *Cough* Thinking town.

shaka!!

Aggressive and opinionated. Has focused a lot on BM, as has been pointed out. Still waiting for his opinions on someone else. Liked his poking of Kakeng though. Thinking town.

somestrangeflea

Haven't liked his lurking in this game. He's certainly not been the most helpful player here, but he has looked confident. Thinking possible scum though.

theopor_COD

He's hard to read. I liked his post 17 a lot, where he gunned for lots of players at once in a no-nonsense fashion. Thinking town.

cheeky-little-asian

Prof. Guppy

Erotomachia

Ugh. CLA was weird. PG was weirder. Eroto hasn't posted for a while ... so thinking possible scum now. This player slot certainly has a very annoying tendency to bail.

AlyG

The scum candidate de jour, and rightly so. He's lurked throughout the entire game and has been very unhelpful. Thinking scum.

ChocolateAttack

Another inactive. I'll reserve judgement until he starts posting more or gets replaced.

Borchmore

Battle Mage

Kakeng

Nothing of note from Borchmore. BM started out very aggressively against cicero, but that is his style. He does tend to have very solid convictions and sticks to his guns, but it can be faked as scum, of course. Don't like Kakeng much so far. Thinking possible scum.

cicero

A very verbal and opinionated newbie; likes to discuss the game of Mafia in a larger sense, trying to see the big picture. I like his style, and I think he's a little too confident and eager to be scum. Reminds me of town-Guardian in his early days.

pwayne66

Aggressive and toungue-in-cheek. Looks confident. Thinking town.

daedalus

Jalyn

Not much from daedalus. Didn't like his putting CLA at L-1 though. Still waiting for Jalyn to post something useful. Neutral on her ATM.

[Gorgon]

But then again, even if we do lose a protown power role, what good is a backup that isn't following the game?

Ummmm .... he will always be useful at night (assuming that is the nature of his role), but you do have a point in that he would be less likely than a more active player to make good night choices. I don't like the advocating lynching a possible powerrole because he's less than active, though.

About the claim, it could go either way. I think it won't be a deciding factor in whether AlyG gets lynched or not ... but it does make me a little wary of lynching him, truth to tell.

[Gorgon]

I'm a back-up up fort anu pro-town role.

Fort? Wow, that must be a great role.

Nah, I get you. You're a backup for any pro-town role.

I'm inclined to believe this. White has a good point when he says that AlyG is unlikely to make something like this up, given his lack of interest in the game ... although this could be a ruse, of course. I tend to think not, though.

Anyway, AlyG, do you have some thoughts on the game so far? You're not just going to sit there uselessly throughout the game, are you?

[Gorgon]

CA, I disagree that posting scumdars is bad. Sure, it has some advantages for the scum (they can base NKs on it), but the advantages for the town are greater ... everyone knows where everyone else stands, and if people get killed, the rest of the town know what they were thinking. In general, it's best for townies to post as much as they can about what they are thinking, IMO ... should we get killed, all that's left of us is our previous words.

Also, a disadvantage of killing a townie from the point of view of the scum is that the townie is revealed as town, and therefore the rest of the town knows that they can trust the words that said townie leaves behind him ... so killing someone who is onto the scum can have dire consequences for the scum if the living townies start poring over the deceased's posts.

Btw, I'm keeping my vote as I don't like Jalyn's continued absence at all.

[Gorgon]

Wow, drama.

cicero, your case against ssf isn't that strong, really. I agree with White; ssf is not scummy enough to get lynched today. Not from what we've seen so far, anyway. Yes, he wasn't contributing to the game, but he explained his reasons, which I believe to be fairly straightforward and credible. No, he hasn't been that active in scumhunting, but he might come through. It feels like this bickering between the two of you is really distracting the pair of you from looking elsewhere (assuming you're both town, that is; this is of course not guaranteed). There's a lesson in humility here, cicero. If the rest of the players aren't getting behind your proposed lynch, there is a point where you need to give it a rest ... at least temporarily. The guy's been placed under a

lot

of pressure now, and how he reacts to it will decide what comes next.

shaka, I'm still waiting to hear more from Kakeng before deciding on him. BM's overzealous attack on cicero is also not strong enough, in itself, to lynch his successor over. Is it?

As White notes, we still have lots of inactives. Even though we are up to 18 pages, I don't feel there is a strong enough reason to lynch anyone just yet. Not without greater concensus, anyway. We need to hear from more players about their suspicions/thoughts/whatever.

Gorgon have you picked up any new reads?

Unfortunately, no. No scum reads, anyway. The bickering over the past few pages isn't a lot to go on. I must, however, say that cicero and ssf fighting looks, to my gut, more like town fighting town than anything else ... they both seem genuine enough in their mutual annoyance towards each other. If both are in fact town, this fight is pretty pointless, which is why I say they should give it a rest.

If it helps, I can say that I believe from these past few pages pretty strongly that cicero, White, and shaka!! are town ... and as I've indicated, ssf has been looking more townish than before over these pages.

Mind you, I probably need a big reread when I have the time ... tomorrow probably.

And with that, I believe I will retire for the night.

[Gorgon]

pwayne, BM is a guy. He's female now because he's female in the Lost Boys Mafia game - or so I think he said. Not that this is the main issue here.

Still waiting on certain people to speak up ...

[Gorgon]

Heh, I need to do that long-delayed reread anyway, so I'll just match skitzer's analysis with the posts as I go ...

[Gorgon]

Okay, I've done a reread, finally. Nothing jumps out that I didn't notice before, really ... but I have one question about a post of mine that skitzer commented on.

Post 334: Things weren’t looking to good…I wonder what happened?

334 a post where I commented on all the players. I don't understand this question, skitzer. Could you clarify?

I'm also waiting on Skruffs to expand on his thoughts regarding the posts on page 4, since this seems to concern me ... something to do with what I was saying about CLA? I can't answer until I know what's supposedly suspicious about it.

At this point, I'm going to

Vote: Kakeng

. He still hasn't posted much, and I think he's our best shot right now. The day has to end eventually.

[Gorgon]

bah, nevermind, checked the voet count and CLA was only at three, not 5 like he had been the previous page. DAedalus was also already voting him.
Nevermind. >.<

No, Jordan updated that count as the votes changed, instead of posting a new count, which was confusing not just for you. The vote count at the top of page 5 does

not

reflect the votes as they were at that point in the game. Your first impression, that daedalus put CLA at L-1, is therefore correct.

Mod Edit

Vote Count

Kakeng- 3 (Gorgon, shaka!!, White)

somestrangeflea- 2 (cicero, Jester)
cicero- 1 (somestrangeflea)
shaka!!-1 (Skitzer)
Skruffs- 1 (Theopor_COD)

Not voting (4): Chocolate Attack, Kakeng, pwayne66, Skruffs

7 to lynch

18 days till deadline

[Gorgon]

Well ... there is truth in both viewpoints. Lynching someone who behaves stupidly and is a liability for the town is as likely to yield a mislynch as a correct lynch, IMO, but Skruffs has a point when he says that it's better to get rid of those people before they become a liability in the endgame.

With regards to the supposed chumminess between me and pwayne, he just hasn't said anything that I disagree with or find suspicious. The same goes, e.g., for cicero ... I'm certainly not going to attack people whom I agree with just for the sake of some principle that I should find everyone suspicious, or whatever. I think pwayne and cicero are both quite likely to be town, and I make no apologies about this.

Right now, I could go for either a Kakeng or ssf lynch, although skitzer is giving me some pretty bad vibes.

[Gorgon]

So I ask the Kakeng wagon: Are you lynching Kakeng to avoid replacement, or are there other factors? Shaka! and Cicero seem to have indicated they aim to avoid replacement.

Kakeng has been very unhelpful, and I believe his asking for replacement is likely to be scum folding under pressure. I wasn't completely sold on the case against BM, but those two factors together, BM's overzealous attack on cicero, and Kakeng's unhelpfulness, are compelling evidence IMO. I think we can do a lot worse than lynch Kakeng at this point. I also readily admit that one of the factors is impatience and annoyance over the constant replacements in this game, though ... but that doesn't mean I don't find Kakeng scummy.

[Gorgon]

Okay, I can wait a few more days until Kakeng gets replaced, I guess.

Unvote

It's just that as has been pointed out numerous times, this game appears cursed. Day 1 has been going on for a month and a half now, and we've gone through a ridiculous number of replacements. I'm all for being careful, but the truth is that I grow weary of this long day. Every time someone gets replaced, we have to wait still further. It's a viscious cycle. But since we don't have a concensus for ending the day yet, I guess I'll have to step down. Just don't come complaining to me one month, 10 replacements, and 30 pages from now.

And yes, just to be absolutely clear, this is only part of the reason why I want to lynch Kakeng. The other part is that I believe him to be this scummiest player in this game at the moment ... but of course, if he gets replaced, this is quite likely to change, and I'll have to pick yet another target. *Sigh*

[Gorgon]

Sorry for not posting ... the simple truth is that the replacements in this game have, quite simply, taken the wind out of my sails. Now we're obviously waiting on a replacement for Kakeng, which doesn't seem to be happening ...

Let me just try to back into the game, though.

Right now Skruffs is attacking cicero for, among other things, "Lynching 'competent players' for acting townie while not wanting to lynch teh same role because there was a newb role acting scummy". As cicero explains, I don't feel that this is what he was saying at all. He certainly wasn't saying that compentent players who act townie should be lynched ... he was saying that competent players acting scummy should preferrably be lynched over newbie players who act scummy, especially on day one, where lynching dumb newbies isn't such a good strategy, at least not too quickly ... I this is what I've gathered from reading many games here.

I do, however, agree with Skruff's line of thought. This quote pretty much sums it up:

I will have no problem lynching anyone if they are beign detrimental to teh game. Sorry if that seems offensive, but not lynching someone cuz their new is the equivalent of not lynching someone cuz they're experienced.

This is a perfectly valid viewpoint. So long as this means that players like this shouldn't be lynched

straight away

; I think I can agree with this fully.

In PG's case, lynching him on page 7 would have been pretty damn uncool, had he turned out town. That's my opinion, and I'm sticking with it. I also truly believe that PG's 'unique' playstyle is no good proof that he was scum in this game. That's not giving newbies a free pass; it's simply taking the guy's character and previous record into account. Accusing people who don't jump on PG and automatically assume he must be scum because he doesn't conform to the Mafia norms of being "scum trying to look wise and reputable" is unfair, IMO ... and not just because I'm being included in this category, for having defended PG and tried to get him to play better.

[Gorgon]

I'm increasingly of the opinion that Kakeng is town.

Why?

[Gorgon]

What Kakeng states as his reasons for quitting in another thread doesn't prove anything. It's just as public as this thread, and should be treated as such.

I feel that a skitzer lynch is way too risky on day one; he's the only claimed powerrole and therefore a very logical target for the scum. I think he should live through this day.

That said, I hate the idea of lynching absent Kakeng. Surely someone can replace him (yeah, more replacements, OMG)?

[Gorgon]

Well, yours is extensive to the limit. Overly extensive. And when you're not asking questions, you're making long posts to explain...I don't like it.

And this behaviour is scummy ... why?

[Gorgon]

Okay, I'm convinced. Let's do this.

Vote: skitzer

[Gorgon]

Holy crap skitzer.

8: Never quote anything that I PM to you.

Guess you're modkilled unless you're lying.

[Gorgon]

Curses!

Criswell predicts that town loses!

[Gorgon]

Bah, what a wipeout. We never had much of a chance, did we? Well, maybe if CA hadn't killed TheHermit ... but still, I think his chances would have been slim.

cicero - I really do enjoy your style, and I think this game was a great learning experience for you - watching from the sidelines I feel I observed great improvements in your play.

Skruffs is definitely the man of the game. After all, he got me and was largely responsible for pwayne's lynch, so that's something just on his own. His observational and deduction skills are scary at times.

Props to TheHermit for replacing into a scum role and doing pretty well with it.

Finally, kudos to Jordan for keeping this Frankensteinian monster of a game patched up. It turned out well in the end, even though my team lost miserably.