Newbie 617 (Over!)

[Darox]

I can see two possible reasons why you would be defending Mike.

However, neither of them make sense this early or in this game setup. The only way you would have a definite read on what mike is right now is if he is your scum buddy.

I think I know what you are doing, but I'm still curious as to why you are so certain of mike.

Votecount:

Brandi [1] (clammy)
Clammy [1] (Angelmouse)
Qman [1] (caf19)
Bazza [1] (Mike-zim)

Not Voting [5] (Darox, Bazza-Scumfinder, Qman)

If anyone needs a prod, feel free to ask.

[caf19]

I fail to see the reason for defending Mike that armlx is hinting at so I'm just gonna have to treat him like everybody else. Mike, it's a tad late to be randomly voting, have you got any suspicions at all right now?

Moving on, Bazza's last couple of posts seem scummy to me.

@ Mike-zim, random votes have their purpose...but yours was almost totally pointless.

The main reson being, you stated that it was a random-vote.....why would a player feel the need to defend themselves if you admit that there is absoloutely no logic behind your vote.

Besides, if you do choose to place a random vote it should be on the lurkers who are not contributing. Not contributing= non pro-townie. placing a vote on them may encourage a response.

And did you just choose to miss out the "finder" in my name....scumfinder would imply i was town NOT Scum.


I liked the previous argument stated about Mike being a fence-sitter, he hasn't attempted to place any reasonable logic behind a vote or FOS.

HOS Mike-Zim

This is a pretty big over-reaction to a random vote. An HOS on page 3? That's rather dramatic - looks more like he's just trying to scare people off voting for him. Would Bazza's reaction be so strong if the vote was for someone other than him? I'm not convinced it would.

Also, the "you should be voting for a lurker" line is dodgy. Bazza says it as if it's inarguable fact, when it is in fact a matter of opinion whether or not you should vote for lurkers. Directing others' votes away from him?

To answer Caf19, i have stated in previous a post that i find Brandi's rebutals and responses solid and flawless. However, i have a feeling about her.

If your case isn't built upon any logical grounds and is based only upon "a feeling", I don't really think it's a case at all. I guess others might disagree, but that's my opinion.

Any response?

[armlx]

An HOS on page 3 isn't that big of a deal. The rest of your points are valid though.

[Bazza-Scumfinder]

Moving on, Bazza's last couple of posts seem scummy to me.

@ Mike-zim, random votes have their purpose...but yours was almost totally pointless.

The main reson being, you stated that it was a random-vote.....why would a player feel the need to defend themselves if you admit that there is absoloutely no logic behind your vote.

Besides, if you do choose to place a random vote it should be on the lurkers who are not contributing. Not contributing= non pro-townie. placing a vote on them may encourage a response.

And did you just choose to miss out the "finder" in my name....scumfinder would imply i was town NOT Scum.


I liked the previous argument stated about Mike being a fence-sitter, he hasn't attempted to place any reasonable logic behind a vote or FOS.

HOS Mike-Zim

This is a pretty big over-reaction to a random vote. An HOS on page 3? That's rather dramatic - looks more like he's just trying to scare people off voting for him. Would Bazza's reaction be so strong if the vote was for someone other than him? I'm not convinced it would.

Also, the "you should be voting for a lurker" line is dodgy. Bazza says it as if it's inarguable fact, when it is in fact a matter of opinion whether or not you should vote for lurkers. Directing others' votes away from him?

To answer Caf19, i have stated in previous a post that i find Brandi's rebutals and responses solid and flawless. However, i have a feeling about her.

If your case isn't built upon any logical grounds and is based only upon "a feeling", I don't really think it's a case at all. I guess others might disagree, but that's my opinion.

Any response?

It wasn't an over-reaction at all, i agree with the argument that he is a fence-sitter, which is NOT pro-townie. His vote on me is irrelevant, as he failed to place any logic behind it. I am not in the habit of placing OMGUS accusations or votes (and this was not one) My main reason for the HOS is because he has sat on the fence and when he finally does decide to vote it is random. I never placed a vote because i feel we have plenty of time to deduce who is scum and who is townie, and i felt a HOS would be enough to provoke a reaction from Mike, so that i could guage his reaction.


As for the "vote for lurkers" argument against him. My main point was, why random vote for an active player to get a response, when they are already posting. When you can vote for someone who isn't posting and hopefully encourage a defence.

And the Brandi FOS, I never ever claimed for it to be based on logic (infact i never even claimed to have a case against her). Through experience in other games i believe that a "feeling" is worth mentioning. I haven't voted for her, and don't intend to do so without evidence.

i think you are dramatising my words Caf, i haven't placed a vote and am in no rush to proceed without evidence. I haven't attacked those who i have found to be suspicious and have given them a fair chance to defend themselves. My arguments on Mike are purely based on logic, hence the HOS on him rather the FOS i have on Brandi.

I'd like for Mike and Brandi to give their opinions on each other please.

[caf19]

I can accept most of your argument (from your post, it appears that differences in our playstyles probably had a hand in making me suspicious of you) but there's one point that stands out. That is, you seem to be reserved about voting but liberal with throwing around FoS/HoS. Why the difference in attitude between the two? At this stage, I'd say they are roughly equal in level of aggression, as putting on a vote isn't going to lead to a lynch.

[Darox]

For now, I am fine with Mike and armlx both staying alive today, but if I don't hear what armlx has to say on the matter day 2 then I think we should lynch both of them, starting with armlx.

Reason being, theres two likely reasons why he is doing this, and one of them involves them both being scum.

I would like to hear more from Angelmouse and Qman.

As for Bazza vs Caf, it does look like Bazza could be keeping his options open on both the popular targets, so that if anyone calls him out for jumping on someone at -1 or -2 he can claim he always suspected them.

I don't think Bazza is overtly scummy though. Yet.

It seems in this game that voting isn't as popular as throwing around FoS, and I guess you could claim later (Say, after a mislynch) that you didn't really think the person was that scummy.

But,

At this stage, I'd say they are roughly equal in level of aggression

If thats your believe, why are you calling him out on it?

[caf19]

For now, I am fine with Mike and armlx both staying alive today, but if I do

At this stage, I'd say they are roughly equal in level of aggression

If thats your believe, why are you calling him out on it?

Because, if two actions are roughly equal in terms of aggression, it doesn't make a whole lot of sense to use one only sparingly while being rather quick to use the other.

[Bazza-Scumfinder]

The connotations of a vote are more severe, they may not be important at this point in the game, but it suggests that you VERY strongly suspect the person in question (unless it's a random vote)

Therefore, i don't want, or feel the need to commit to a vote at this point as i don't find either of my two suspects have enough evidence against them to merit a vote this early on.

As for Darox's argument, i would need more evidence before i lynched any of the 2 who i suspect...hence, why i've not placed a vote on them. If i place a vote on someone it will be because of my own suspicions of them being Scum, and NOT as part of a bandwagon.

[Qman]

I'm reading the thread over the course of tonight, I'll post either tonight or tomorrow morning with my thoughts. (tue-sat are my work days, so expect most of my posts to be sun/mon.

[armlx]

Darox, revealing my reasons on D2 is just as harmful.

[mike-zim]

Wow didn't realize i was acting so suspiciousely.

@ Clammy, my response was not deffensive it was truely looking for advice. I am playing another game and have been accused of "Lurking" then in this game i am trying to look active. Maybe i need to get the balance right.

@Bazza, i didn't realize random voting had ended but it seemed everyone was doing it so i followed the rest, oh the shame.

As for my oppinion on Brandi i truely do not have one. i will have to look back and see.

@caf, really the only suspicion i have is for Bazza but i think that is just because he is asking me to give my thoughts on Brandi. Maybe trying to pick out something i would say that would incriminate us both and leave him in the clear.

Although there is a certain amount of logic behind it. Maybe it is just an OMGUS thing, unintentionally.

so for now

UNVOTE

[Darox]

I'm rather annoyed.
You completely ignored me.


And Armlx, thats not really good enough.
I want some indication at least, and there is still no logical way that you could be certain of mike on day one and be pro town.

[armlx]

Mike-Zim has given off a very role specific town tell. Is that good enough?

Obviously theres only a certain extent to which I trust this read, but its good enough for D1.

[Brandi]

Making a post soon~

[Brandi]

Ok so, I did a quick re-read of everything posted up until now, and I still haven't gathered any major suspicions yet. I'm also a bit weary to read too deeply into everyone else's posts when 2 people haven't done any serious posting at all.

I do want to address the armlx-Mike-Zim thing.

Armlx, I know what you're insinuating, and I have to say that while I think that you MAY be correct in your assumption, I don't think you should have put even that thought out there. Because by insinuating such you are doing the very thing that you don't want to do:

There are, and most of them have to do with giving out information that would

help the scum

direct their kills correctly.

It wasn't until that post that I realized what you meant. I'd like to point out that also, just because you have a hunch about someone, doesn't necessarily mean you are correct. Not everyone is going to want to follow your hunches either, and you are in no way confirmed town as of yet. For now I have a strong feeling that you are town, but I'm still leaving my mind open to the possibility that you could be scum.

Also, I'd like to point out I agree with the way Caf is thinking here:

I fail to see the reason for defending Mike that armlx is hinting at so I'm just gonna have to treat him like everybody else.

I believe it is too early to be giving anyone in this game special attention, As I mentioned before there are 2 people who haven't posted any major content and the town currently has 0 solid, confirmed, information.

I'd like for Mike and Brandi to give their opinions on each other please.

At first I thought that Mike was just being overly enthusiastic. (not a tell) Now I think he is enthusiastic but a bit overly submissive and cautious at the same time. He doesn't want to say or do the wrong thing. However, I think he is doing it in the sense that he just doesn't want to hurt the town. In some cases being overly cautious would be scummy, but in this case, it seems leaning towards town. Not that I condone being overly cautious, I would prefer if Mike would try to think for himself rather than just follow along with what everyone else is suggesting.

One more thing:

I would like to hear more from Angelmouse and Qman.

Q-man has posted more than Angelmouse, but Q-mans posts are of much less value than Angelmouses thus far, which isn't saying much.

Q-man confirms, says he he'll post more when hes functional, tells Darox that he did make a post, states that no one else has posted much content, then says he'll be making a post 'tomorrow.' (which is now today) Hopefully we will see something from him soon, I'd like to hear him actually give us some opinions to work with.

AngelMouse has made 3 posts outside of confirming, and her last post was 3 days ago. She gives input twice, and once she was basically repeating something that I had already said to mike.

@mike - I don't think we are at a point at all that we can be making concrete desions on who is who. If you are completely new to the site, may i sugesst reading the wiki and possibly some other newbie games to get a flavour of what happens.

^Essentially the same thing I said to Mike here in post subject #46:

Maybe you should look at the mafia wiki to get a better general knowledge on how to hunt scum? I think there are some pretty helpful articles out there...

This makes me wonder if shes just saying it for the sake of being redundant or rather she just didn't bother reading what I said at all.

Anyway, I can't say that I am suspicious of neither Qman nor Angelmouse, but their lack of input isn't doing much good for the town. Perhaps Q-man will be giving us content today, but I'm completely unsure with Angelmouse. If she doesn't say anything by tomorrow perhaps we should ask for a prod.

[armlx]

Umm, sorry mod, I meant to post that in my newbie game, please delete. Done.

Also, Brandi, I have insinuated exactly enough that only those who already got it do.

[Brandi]

armlx... wrong game. lol.

[Brandi]

Yes but scum probably have picked up on it as well. =/ Thats my point. Unless the scum are just really stupid, which would be wishful thinking I suppose.

[armlx]

Yeah, too many windows could be bad. At least it wasn't the role PM I just sent out to that replacement.

[armlx]

Yes but scum probably have picked up on it as well. =/ Thats my point. Unless the scum are just really stupid, which would be wishful thinking I suppose.

Scum would have picked up on it anyways if they get it by now.

[Darox]

Well, I had already guessed that armlx, but it'll do for today.

Brandis hit onto the point I was aiming at.

If thats your suspicion, why defend him so much when he was not under any immediate threat and so early in the game? Calling attention to him and defending him right from the start of the game based on his confirmation post is not what I would expect if you are trying to keep a protown role undercover.

@Brandi, armlx, Qman and Bazza:
Who do you think is most scummy and why?

Who do you think is least scummy and why?

[armlx]

Most scummy (tie):
Brandi- She said she got it, yet she still voted him for it in her first post....
Bazza- The "flippant" remark sounds a lot like trying to push a wagon without actually making sense.

Least:
Mike-Zim as per the reason.

[Bazza-Scumfinder]

as i have said before i am a pretty experienced player at this and i have looked over the posts of Mike-Zim before Amrix became certain of his innocence....There is absoloutely nothing to suggest that Mike is definitely Townie.

If Armrix is referring to his confirmation, then that is nothing to go on, because everyone who has a role can act accordingly whether it is a vanilla, a power or scum....Words do not PROVE anyones innocence unless it's a role-claim which hasn't been counter-claimed.

There are three possible scenarios as to why Armix is saying this:

1. Mike is his scum buddy.

2.Armix is scum and Mike is Town. Armix is using his scum information hoping that when Mike dies it will make him look innocent as he has supported Mike.

3. Armix is a confused townie.



As for Armix's argument against me.....i did not attempt to start a bandwagon at all and you saying that i did makes me even more heavily suspicious of you.


Atm i find Darox the least suspicious.

And find the two most suspicious to be: Armix and Mike.

If Mike genuinely did believe that he felt Mike was a power-role there was no need to mention it so early in the game when there was little pressure on Mike.

[Bazza-Scumfinder]

if Armix believed ^^^

[armlx]

Mike Zim, however, is not an experienced player, and his statement is very easy to read.