Mini 1161 - Neruzian Era Mafia (Over!)

[charter]

Don't care about nights one way or the other.

confirm

[charter]

K, I vote yes.

Vote Empking

We're going to figure out if you're town on page one.

[charter]

Charter, what are your thoughts on RVS wagons?

The bigger, the better.

[charter]

Vote: Sloth

- He looks like scum pretending to be useful.

So you already think Sloth is scum?

Right now I could pick any of Looker, TS, or Pappums as people that need to get more pressure. So I pick

Vote Looker

. Why does Empking look like scum?
Pappums, why are you voting Sloth?
TS, you've yet to say anything at all, but you seem like you're posting.

To be honest, I haven't seen anything yet that makes me think someone is scum (shocking) but am surprised others have.

[charter]

Sloth, have your questions provided any useful information to you? (just looking for a "yes" or "no")

[charter]

@Vi: I picked out hiplop because of what he's done so far, which is only sheeping on a point already made by Empking (about the length/quality of Looker's post) and then throwing down a random vote. He just doesn't seem do be doing anything good ATM.

Why does Hiplop deserve your attention for not doing anything good at the minute, but Looker does not?

Pappums is shaping up.

I wasn't buying in to the Quilford case, but 93 is megascummy. He's trying to shift the attention off himself, but not doing a very townish job of it.

"The bigger the better" - what you said about wagons. But you've only voted on Empking in RVS - a wagon that maxed out at 3 when you changed to Looker (a player with no votes on him at all). Does this tie in with your wagons theory?, because you missed a few including myself. Do you still think your vote on Looker is still the best place for it? If so, what's your opinion on the Quilford wagon?

By the time I voted Looker, I'd say the RVS was long over. I had hoped a Looker wagon would take off, but that was wishful thinking with my inability to post often, so no, it isn't the best place for my vote. However, as long as he doesn't have any votes, he is free to lurk his scummy pants off. On the other hand, I think Quilford is about to crack.

Have another vote, Quilford.

Unvote, vote Quilford

[charter]

Oh, Vi's vote on Scott was terribad as well.

[charter]

Wow, Vi's hiplop vote was bad too, this is a disturbing pattern.

[charter]

He's trying to shift the attention off himself, but not doing a very townish job of it.

Hmm? How did I try to do that in my post, in your opinion?

Voting Scott for "not saying something over the course of three days". There are people that are actively scummy, and yet you try and start a weak lurker hunt. And, instead of trying to scumhunt, you vote a lurker. It's really just a cop out. If you were town, that would have been a prime opportunity to show the people suspicious of you they are wrong with some scumhunting, but you just tried to shift blame onto a lurker.

Would you like to discuss the merits of those votes? I'm sure I'll come out on top.

You copy Quilford's Scott vote. His Scott vote was bad for the reasons I just mentioned. Two bad votes don't make a good vote. And now I'll get in to the timing of your vote. In the post before you vote Scott, you vote for Quilford because it's a good vote. Then when Sloth votes Quilford, you immediately unvote and vote for Scott. I know Quilford's one post in between your posts didn't convince you he wasn't a good vote, because that post did nothing for anybody. It's like you were afraid that a Quilford lynch would materialize out of this wagon and you wanted to slow it down, because voting Scott for no posting much (even though he's not the biggest lurker) is a horrible reason to stop the pressure on Quilford.

You vote Hiplop because he wants to make sure he doesn't hammer. That's not scummy at all. I get the impression Hiplop is pretty new, and asking like that seems like he's cautious not to do something stupid, not because he's looking to pull a fast one. Regardless, that's not a reason to vote someone of any experience level over.

Charter: Who is more suspicious: Vi or Looker?

Right now I'm leaning Vi because she after he voted Quilford, she's been looking for excuses not to revote him. Looks like they are buddybuddy to me. Looker's only post was scummy, but there's no connections like there is with Vi and Quilford.

I keep seeing a lot of noise about Quilford being at L-1, but he's nowhere close. More people need to vote Quilford (cough Hiplop).

Hope everything is ok Juls.

[charter]

FOS Scott.

[charter]

I don't like the Quilford wagon as I thought the flip comment was quite townie, and his defensive comments don't seem too off to me either.

What do you think he would say if he is scum?

[charter]

Charter’s #124: Why do you have a problem with Vi’s hiplop vote? Reading through, I thought the Quil wagon was pretty obviously built on a foundation of Faraday being Faraday. Softly threatening to hammer a wagon like that is scummy. Vi’s vote seems justified.

How did hiplop softly threaten a hammer? He was clearly making sure he wasn't going to be in danger of hammering. How did you get he intended to hammer from what he said?

Can someone explain to me in, like, a paragraph, why Quil is at L-1?

He's scum. Hey look, I did it in two words.

How do you have nothing else to say about Looker than what you said?

[charter]

That post screamed "I'm teeing up a hammer but don't want it to look as scummy."

Explain to me how you came up with that, because I came up with the opposite.

Talk about dodging the question. More evidence of a Quilford/Vi connection.

I vote replace Looker.

[charter]

aside from his #151, has actually contributed relatively little and made a couple questionable comments.

Just noticed I got your name wrong in my last post, whoops. What questionable comments have I made? What was questionable about them?

[charter]

Faraday asked what you thought of Vi and you just said 'sheeping' which tells us nothing about what you think of her. You can sheep as scum, town, sk, or some kind of halfsie.

[charter]

I wouldn't claim yet, as far as I can tell no one is threatening a hammer, so claiming isn't necessary yet.

[charter]

Well, now you'll be hammered for sure.

[charter]

It's way too early for today to end. But you've cracked so hard under virtually no pressure it's extremely unsettling.

[charter]

As you've been saying, people haven't been giving good reasons that you're scum but voting you nonetheless. That's virtually no pressure, those votes won't hold up all the way through a lynch. When they all give compelling reasons for voting, that's when you're in hot water. I would be willing to bet that all but two or so of the people voting you would unvote at the first sign of scumhunting, but that never came. Now that you've claimed vanilla, there's no reason to lynch someone besides you.

pedit, how many games have you played on MS, Quilford?

Gonna

Unvote

Since I in no way want the day to end right now.

[charter]

You were at L-1 so we can try and figure out your alignment.

[charter]

Empking, how certain are you Quilford is scum?

[charter]

You were at L-1 so we can try and figure out your alignment.

And would you say my alignment has been deduced?

I'm not sure, I can see reasons for you being scum and town. I do want to look over Empking, because his reasons he's been giving recently seem suspect at first glance.

[charter]

Lynching claimed vanillas is good town strategy. What are you going to wait for, someone to claim a powerrole and lynch them?

@Emp, looking back, there isn't much to it, but 228 is a pretty poor reason to vote Quilford.

[charter]

Or would you rather we run up someone to a claim, they throw a fit, and everyone can declare them town, and then repeat it four more times?

[charter]

You say that the Scott vote was a deflection from people who are "actively scummy"... like whom, at that time?

Sloth and Quilford had serious votes. Looker was/is scummy.

When someone I actually wanted to vote popped up, I moved my vote to him. This recent post from Scott B. pretty much demonstrates why again.

Doesn't make sense at all. Scott wasn't the biggest lurker then or now.

charter, cont.; hiplop

- I'm sure I explained the hiplop vote somewhere and it looks very different from how you pictured it... Oh, it's right here in my last post.

Elephant in room: The reasons for voting Qwilfish don't exist, at least not from anyone voting him sans charter.
If hiplop can tell me how and when he started finding Quilford suspicious enough to jump on a wagon he thought was high enough to be around L-1, I will buy a hat so I can eat it.

And it still doesn't exist.

Hiplop did say why he thought Quilford was suspect.

Found Sloth 248. This is :goodposting: and charter's rebuttal in 249 is awful - it's not that you want to lynch claimed power roles, but that you specifically force yourself into lynching the first sap who claims. This is, again, something charter should know better than to do.

Ok, lets just massclaim then. Then we can lynch whoever. But YOU know that running up three people to claim day one is a terrible, terrible idea.

[charter]

Trying to explain to me how Scott B. isn't scummy and Looker is should be amusing; please try.

At that point, Looker was much scummier. Now I'd say Scott is scummier with how he can't find more than one scummy thing in the thread.

And if I was voting people for lurking that would be a problem.

I assumed since the only thing you mentioned about Scott was activity, that was why you voted him. If that's not the case, let me know.

You can show examples of where the person who was run up day one was town and the person egging it on was scum, but I am pretty sure (pretty sure) that there are plenty of examples of the other case.

All this aside, I'm not sold on Quilford being scum.
Scott, who else besides Quilford do you think is scum? Faraday, who do you think is scum?

[charter]

I think he's scummy, and at worst he's a vanilla townie. I can tell that you all won't have the balls to lynch someone who claims a power role today, so getting more people to claim is a bad idea.

[charter]

Unvote

thought I did that already. Reading now.

[charter]

I'm leaning towards DarthYoshi being scum. Empking is suspect, but last game I remember being in with him, I had him nailed to the cross as a scumread, and I'm not getting that here.

[charter]

And Scott is pretty scummy too.

[charter]

@Charter: Why are you leaning to me = scum? Also, why unvote without revoting?

Was waiting until I had time to explain why I think you're suspect, which I have now.

I thought Juls's one real post was pretty suspect. Lots of questions worded so as to draw out a suspicious response. They looked like they were asked so she could later say "aha!" rather than discern anyone's alignment. I thought this was scummy of her, but was waiting until I saw if that's what she did or what.
Don't like your comment on Looker's post, not anything close to what I was thinking about it.
Don't like how you said you think Neuky's flip would help us figure out Quil's alignment, especially since you didn't say 'if Neuky flips xxxx, I think that says xxxx about Quil'. Nothing to back that up. Not much of anything to back up your Neuky read.
Don't like your stance on me, though that doesn't mean much.
Don't think you're scumhunting.

charter

222 You unvote Quil when he was at L-1 Yet in 249 you claim that it is good town strategy to lynch all vanilla claims. Why the inconsistency? The VC in 265 is incorrect, you had unvoted.

The next six words right after I unvote explain why I unvoted.

Scott, who else do you think is scum?

[charter]

His statement really has nothing to do with meta.

[charter]

1. Not going to try to explain the thought processes of my predecessor. I think if you were waiting on a scummy action from her and it never came, and you're weighing that on me, that's pretty lame.

I still think her post was suspect, even without responses to it.

2. I still don't get this one. Especially since Looker flaked.

I think it's odd how you come up with some random response to Looker's post that is nothing like what I thought of it.

3. Zdenek asked me about this as well, so I'll clarify now--it was Neuky's "random" vote of Quil, combined with him defending Quil to varying degrees in ISO posts 4, 8, and 10 that raised my eyebrows. If we were to have lynched Quil and he flipped scum, that would have solidified my scumread on Neuky.

Your reason for suspecting Neuky was questionable in the first place and this is pretty weak too. There has been lots of people defending people, why aren't you finding that scummy?

4. Why?

Because.

Right now, I still think we should be lynching Quil, but I can see that isn't going to happen, so next up is Scott, followed by DY,followed by Empking. I'll be around on the weekend to change my vote if necessary, but I still think there is enough time to wagon Scott.

Vote Scott

[charter]

Lol

Unvote, vote Empking

[charter]

But voting him this early wouldn't be a good move either. Better to build pressure on both Spoon and Charter.

Aka, better make sure I have my distancing in when TS inevitably gets lynched, but I'm going to try my damnedest to get Charter lynched first.

Rereading DY, I'm not thinking he's as scummy as I did before. I'm leaning towards Scott, TS, and Sloth.

TS's jumping on Faraday's "guilty" on Hiplop gives TS loads of scumpoints. That's where my vote would be going, but if TS gets to L-1, his buddies will quicklynch him.

Sloth, what specifically about TS do you find the scummiest?
Scott, who do you think is my scumbuddy and why?

[charter]

And what do you find scummiest specifically about me, Sloth?

[charter]

charter - Why no vote?

TS's jumping on Faraday's "guilty" on Hiplop gives TS loads of scumpoints.

That's where my vote would be going, but if TS gets to L-1, his buddies will quicklynch him.

Charter, I think your actions after the Quilford claim and the subsequent Empking wagon-flip were both scummy.

This is about as unspecific as possible, and is the opposite of what I was asking you. Please answer.

If this is true, then why don't you vote for him so that we can find out who his buddies are?

I can see the merit of this, but I think it will be more beneficial in the long run to not put him at L-1 so quickly into the day.

[charter]

I can see the merit of this, but I think it will be more beneficial in the long run to not put him at L-1 so quickly into the day.

This is about as unspecific as possible.

Was someone asking me to be more specific? No, didn't think so.

Sloth's inability to name anything specifically scummy about me makes me think he doesn't want to name anything (because he knows I'm not scum). TS's buddy.

Not to plow a dead horse but you're saying Twistedspoon is definitely getting lynched Today, correct?

It looks like this will be the case, but unfortunately I don't get all the say in who gets lynched, just a small part.

UNVOTE:
Don't want a hammer.

Ironic, seeing as how you call me scummy for not putting him at L-1 because I didn't want a hammer. It's like you said the exact same thing I did... Yes, you did. So why am I scummy for not wanting him at L-1 Quilford, but you don't want him at L-1 and that's ok?

[charter]

Sloth's reasons for suspecting me are still crap. They boil down to good town strategy of lynching claimed vanillas.

There's a difference. I'm taking someone off L-1 whereas you would've put someone on L-1.

Also, a hammer would be bad considering how far away from deadline we are.

These two situations are the exact same. Neither of us wanted him at L-1.

Your reason for not wanting him at L-1 IS THE EXACT SAME AS MINE WAS. So you look like a big hypocrite. Scummy.

TS is crying about being suspected, not looking for scum. Even scummier of him. TS, what do you think of Scott and Sloth?

[charter]

Nice, good job town, especially Faraday. This did seem pretty heavily balanced towards town in my opinion, but none of us did anything with our roles.

[charter]

It's also a small moral consolation that I was killed by scum and not by town, though I was thinking it was the other way around...