Newbie 398 - Jack lynched, game over!

[Jack]

confirm

[Jack]

hmm well, usually in newbie games the mafia are allowed to discuss in the pregame period. So I will

Vote:hyphen-ated

for being last to confirm.

[Jack]

I'm sorry, that post is just too damn scummy.

unvote,vote:Eyceking

[Jack]

What do you think is scummy?

[Jack]

Does anyone else see it?

[Jack]

I didn't see anything suspicious, I simply meant it as a discussion starter.

English might not even be my first language. It is - but it might not have been.

lol.

[Jack]

I agree with sir tornado.

[Jack]

ok.

Eyceking, hyphenated, and tornado all seem to be pro town to me. They make reasoned points and don't exhibit any scum tells.

I'm thinking the 2 scum are among conartist, lola, and LML. LML lola gives me the feel of scum distancing. Other option could be conartist and lml ganging up on lola. Don't really get a scumpartner vibe between conartist and lola but conartist hasn't posted much.

conartists reasons for voting lola don't seem particularly genuine.

I don't have anything in lml's posts to use against him but that's to be expected. Succesfully distancing/bussing your partner is a very sound newbie game strategy though. Lola has acted more suspicious however so I'm not keen on voting lml.

Lola's post in response to my asking people what they found suspicious seems like he invented it on the spot and doesn't believe any of it, eg:

Maybe Jack just likes to point his finger and then quickly change his mind to divert attention away from him. Or maybe I'm wrong.

then this:

Excuse me for pointing out things that

could

be suspicious. Isn't that the role of a good townie?

2nd sentence indicates he is thinking about how a townie would act, townies don't have to think about that they just have to act natural.

[Jack]

I'm not going to put him at -1 on page 3.

[Jack]

hmm I"ll go with a

vote:loudmouthlee

[Jack]

wow, this game is short on posting. I'm going to go with my lml/lola theory and

vote:lola

[Jack]

Well that's a goofy rule. Why did you put lola at -1 Sir Tornado? Don't you think it's risky if you put someone you don't think is scum at -1?

[Jack]

I think lola is scum.

Your action seems like you could care less if lola is hammered by someone. -1 is not a valid tactic for generating discussion.

[Jack]

I have a good idea of who her scum partner is...don't try and evade my point.

[Jack]

Your operating off of the assumption that lola is innocent, yet yesterday you put her at -1...not to mention I don't see how you can assume she's innocent anyway, given her posting so far and the fact that townies don't know who is innocent.

[Jack]

No...hammering someone you think is scum is way better than putting someone you think is town at -1.

[Jack]

conartist is my main suspicion at the moment.

[Jack]

LML kill could also point to hyphenated, and I'm somewhat suspicious of Sir Tornado for putting lola at -1 and then unvoting.

[Jack]

LML's case is not all that convincing, especially since the parroting argument is weak. She barely parroted at all.

Attacking me for my "defense" of Eyceking as she held a similar position is worse, but not sufficient for me to vote for her. I don't have a better target, though.

Also: unvote.

Here hyphenated defends lola. Also, lml said he was going to vote hyphenated today and lml got killed.

[Jack]

I don't think LML's case against Lola is serious enough for me to vote for it yet. However, it is a good way to start discussions.

Ok then, let us analyse Lola's actions so far:

1) Random vote on Eyceking

2) Suspects Eyceking, because he says the game is moving too slow.
Suspects Hyphen-ated for defending Eyceking
Suspects Jack
Suspects LML for lurking. (All four reasons are, I think quite silly, but understandable in first game)

3) Suspects LML because of his "Best Mafia Performance"

4) Defends parroting

All the above posts (especially suspecting everyone for the most trivial reasons) looks more like inexperience rather than scummy. I feel that if a newbie is a scum, they may prefer lurking rather than trying to post a lot like Lola is doing.

He defended lola quite vigorously and denied doing so:

How does that, any stretch of imagination, qualify for defending Lola?

The question for you sir tornado is why did you not want to be seen as defending lola?

I am putting Lola at -1 by Vote Lola for the sole purpose of getting the general discussion up. Will remove the vote very soon.

Now this whole exchange is very strange as well, I think I went over why earlier.


Sir tornado is my main suspect.

I'm not sure what I saw in conartist other than lurking.

[Jack]

Whoever it was, waited for a long time to submit their night choices, so long that the mod had to issue a deadline for them. We should check out the activities of user to see if they have been on the site recently (before Sunday and after the lynch)

Also, this looks like an attempted frame. It's easy for mafia to send the kill late and then try to blame it on an absent player.

[Jack]

I did not say I did not want to be seen defending Lola. I said I was not defending her. I was saying what I thought about her play thus far (that is, at that instant in time)

I know you didn't say that. But you were defending lola, and you did deny it, so the logical conclusion is that you didn't want to be seen as defending lola.

[Jack]

I did not say I did not want to be seen defending Lola. I said I was not defending her. I was saying what I thought about her play thus far (that is, at that instant in time)

I know you didn't say that. But you were defending lola, and you did deny it, so the logical conclusion is that you didn't want to be seen as defending lola.

Not quite.

I was saying I did not agree with LML's conclusions on her. My interpretation on her play was different than LML's.

All the above posts (especially suspecting everyone for the most trivial reasons) looks more like inexperience rather than scummy. I feel that if a newbie is a scum, they may prefer lurking rather than trying to post a lot like Lola is doing.

So LML said lola was scum, and you said lola was innocent. This is defending lola. You can't spin it another way.

[Jack]

That's blatantly false. How is "just gave my interpretation" different from a defense?

[Jack]

I'm not sure I could see someone putting their partner at L-1. Too much risk of a hammer coming from somewhere. I mean, he knew I wanted to vote Lola (I had put her at L-1 previously) and you yourself, Jack, had said that you would vote Lola following more discussion.

I feel that this is wifom.


I also find it suspicious that after I hammered lola Sir Tornados first thought was to go through the rules to try and find a way to make it not count.

[Jack]

Secondly, I was not perfectly convinced of her being 100% scum,

Why would you use this wording for someone you think is town?

[Jack]

Defence is giving out evidence to deflect the accusation against someone.

This is what you tried to do...lml said her actions were scummy and you tried to make them seem townie. What do you think scum do to defend their partners?

[Jack]

Tornado is just squirming.

Waiting for Billy to post.

[Jack]

Why did you drop the hammer then?

That was at the top of page 2, before the bulk of the evidence...

@Billy: My style is different every game. To answer some of your suspicions, I thought lola look really scummy, but wanted to explore what I thought was an lml/lola connection. This wasn't going anywhere so I got frustrated with this game and hammered.

I'll reread eyceking.


@Sir Tornado: What would you say if I said I hammered lola to stir up some discussion day 2, hoping it would provoke people? Would this be a pro town action?

[Jack]

I said I though lola and lml were distancing scum. I was more sure of lola than I was of lml. The evidence I posted was in post 63.

Making ridiculous arguments doesn't help you.


In my opinion if you are so sure someone is scum as to put them at -1, you should:

1. Let her do more mistakes
2. Note down those mistakes
3. Attack her. Question her for a prolonged period of time. Put your views in front of the entire town.
4. See if anyone defends her resolutely.
5. See on whom she deflects her suspicion on.


I thought lml was scum with her for sure...was surprised and a bit pissed when he came up dead and I had nothing to go on.

[Jack]

Yes i have...impatience isn't protown action, but it's not a scumtell.

[Jack]

It's an anti-town way.

[Jack]

I don't like how quiet eyceking is being.

[Jack]

Sir Tornado hasn't made an slip ups in his defense that I can see, I want to investigate a different player now.

Hmm, the parroting in itself was a worrying trait, but the comment from Lola to LML about whether it worries him is the more damning evidence. Why would you admit to parroting? That just doesn't make sense.

I'd like to wait and see what other people think of Lola's comments before I cast a vote, though.

First paragraph: could be construed as chiding lola for admitting to parroting. After this lola retracted her admission...

2nd paragraph: sounds like he only wants to vote lola if other people do and her lynch is inevitable.

eycekings next few posts are also like coaching lola and trying to see if the other people want to vote lola.

He says he very willing to hammer her but he is also quick to unvote.

I like the sound of hyphenated being more guilty. It would be a classic newbie move to defend their partner on thread and kill the person who suspects them the most, IMO.

This would be one of the reasons mafia killed lml, to frame hyphenated. Why didn't eyceking suggest this in his first post? Seems like he was waiting for someone else to suggest it first.

I think billy is on the right track here, eyceking seems the scummiest.

[Jack]

It's an anti-town way.

I specifically stated that I was voting solely to get the discussion going and will take the vote off soon. How is that anti-town?

Let's just stop this and talk about eyceking.

[Jack]

About Jack:

His "evidence" for hammering Lola and suspecting LML, which he gave in post 63 and which I have quoted in post 136 is fully of holes, which I have pointed out in my post 136. He made absolutely no attempt to answer me and promptly changed his target from me to Eyceking. I don't know whether it is his natural play style, but I have to ask him each question in each separate post to get him answer them. If I ask more than one in a single post, he answers the easiest and just ignores the rest. He has also attempted to evade my questions by counter questioning me several times in the game before answering them. It seems scummy to me.

FOS: Jack

I don't answer questions where I think the answer is obvious or the question has no point unless specifically asked. I thought your actions at the end of day one were rather scummy so I came after you in a big way day two, I'm fairly satisfied that you are pro town now though.

Also ST, I operate to a large degree of of gut feeling.

To me "2nd sentence indicates he is thinking about how a townie would act, townies don't have to think about that they just have to act natural." combined with the vibe I got from lola's posting means a lot to me.

I started this game coming off of newbie 358 where I had an easy scum victory by attacking my partner all day 1, so perhaps I was overly sensitive to that possibility. There wasn't anything specific in lml's post, but looking at the big picture, asking the question "what would lml do if he were scum with lola" his actions fit the bill really well.

If you don't think there was enough evidence to hammer lola on page 4 that's fine, but note that both of the IC's did, and LML is proven innocent so you can trust his judgement. LML didn't hammer lola but he was willing to.

I've been a little lax in defending myself clearly, I was more interested in testing you out.

[Jack]

I looked through newbie 324 where eyceking was a townie and his behavior is markedly different. He looked for scum in that game he hasn't in this game. This is one of the biggest scum tells.

Vote:eyceking

[Jack]

bump

[Jack]

Sir tornado who do you suspect?

[Jack]

Well, I'm not voting anyone but eyceking

[Jack]

I reas through the thread, and picked out a few posts which were, IMO, scum-lights.

That's nice, Sir Tornado. What do you think about LML's accusations towards Lola? Do you see any grounding in them or do you feel they are part of a stretched case against another player?

Loaded question.

Jack's page 4 not-quite-hammer seems incredibly scummmy to me.

It was a hammer. What did you think was scummy about it?

Sir Tornado hasn't made an slip ups in his defense that I can see, I want to investigate a different player now.

What is this? You attack Sir Tornado heavily, then suddenly stop. Methinks you picked a bad target to attempt to incriminate, realised this, and dropped it.

FoS: Eyceking
AoS: Jack

What's the difference between that and investigated someone you think is scum and deciding they are probably town?

[Jack]

So, eyceking removed his vote on ssf and voted me after ssf said I was his biggest suspect.

[Jack]

uff I've been playing this game like crap...too many rushed choices.

I think nightkill points to billy. ssf said he thinks I'm scum, billy would want him alive. Sir tornado was more suspect than billy so ssf would probably have killed billy.

[Jack]

it appears I was right...billy are you trying to claim cop without saying so?

[Jack]

no it's not nuff said...you still have to convince ssf that I'm scum. What reason are you giving for investigating me?

[Jack]

also

vote:billy twilight

[Jack]

Billy played an excellent game I must say.

[Jack]

Billy played an excellent game I must say.

As Town or Scum?

AS TOWN OR SCUM!

One or the other

I made poor choices this game...

[Jack]

Town OR Scum?

Yes.

[Jack]

There's no point in counterclaiming someone who has a guilty on you in lylo...

Really, I suck at being cop in newbie. All three investigations I've done have gotten killed.

Thought con and lola were scummy day one but got sidetracked by eyceking and sir tornado day 2...eyceking was genuinely scummy I think.

[Jack]

I think I should apologise for this game. I was playing in too many games+too little time to give them justice. I should have made better choices during the night and during the day periods.