Mini 945: Mafia in Bawlmer - GAME OVER

[xvart]

/confirm. Happy hunting.

xvart.

[xvart]

Well, the cop knows who not to investigate xD That's not a free pass, however—in fact, it's an easy scum claim, so be extra careful, dramonic.

Vote: dramonic

not for that, but for being the nightmarish nekomata from my game.

Hmmmm... survey says...

Vote: StrangerCoug

xvart.

[xvart]

Wow, quote pyramids and quote walls on page two? Does anyone know of other mini's that have had a miller?

Hi. Just stopping by before I go to sleep, to tell you: Your username is already attached to every post you make. Yeah, right there on the leftside of it. It says vartx. You don't need to add your name to your post, we know who you are. Just saying. Incase you didn't notice or something, wouldn't want you to look silly.

Hi Sidekick. Nice to meet you. Thanks for letting me know; my computer monitor does not show the left two inches of anything displayed, so maybe not seeing anyone's name is why I have struggled so much keeping people straight in mafia games.

xvart.

[xvart]

The vote for dramonic was a random vote because I did not, and still do not, feel it justified to vote dramonic just for claiming miller.

Uh... Excuse me? That is a load of crap. Your "random vote" coincidentally fell on the same person you were discussing, who also just happens to have some degree of scumminess? How exactly did you decide on dramonic for your random vote?

And, a random vote after quote walls and quote pyramids of dialogue? Not buying that for a second. I almost said something the first time you made that claim but I decided to see if you would try and justify it later.

There is nothing about the vote that was random and everyone knows it.

xvart.

[xvart]

And, a random vote after quote walls and quote pyramids of dialogue? Not buying that for a second. I almost said something the first time you made that claim but I decided to see if you would try and justify it later.

What random vote are you talking about here?

Whoops. Sorry, strike that part. I got the whole thread jumbled in my head. I feel really stupid.

xvart.

[xvart]

The vote for dramonic was a random vote because I did not, and still do not, feel it justified to vote dramonic just for claiming miller.

Uh... Excuse me? That is a load of crap.

Your "random vote" coincidentally fell on the same person you were discussing, who also just happens to have some degree of scumminess?

How exactly did you decide on dramonic for your random vote?

And, a random vote after quote walls and quote pyramids of dialogue? Not buying that for a second. I almost said something the first time you made that claim but I decided to see if you would try and justify it later.

There is nothing about the vote that was random and everyone knows it.

Okay, my apologies StrangerCoug. I jumped the gun a little and my tone was a little too strong. I still find it coincidental that your vote was random, but not to the degree of my original a-hole post.

xvart.

[xvart]

SC - what is there to be careful about? The cat is already out of the bag and nothing can change that. Be careful about being investigated anyway? Be careful about all the heat that is going to come?

Disagree, it's not OK. Mixing up a thread after less than two pages bespeaks skimming.

I agree that it is not okay; that is why I felt like such a jackass; especially considering it was only page 2. I should have waited a couple hours before posting this morning. I understand and accept any suspicion that may be thrown my way for alleged skimming/misrepresenting.

xvart.

[xvart]

Unvote
Vote: Sidekick

This wagon is a little too out of control, especially considering there has been no real response by Diamond. Is putting someone at L-1 on the third RL day necessary just to repeat what has already been said several times over?

xvart.

[xvart]

Oops. I probably should explain this. Sidekick voted and put DC at L-1, so xvart unvoted just to get him off L-1. So I figured it was sort of L-one-and-a-half.

I was never voting for Diamond Crush; but cyberbob did unvote several posts later.

xvart.

[xvart]

Sorry for the absence, didn't have this game on my watch list. I'll get caught up and post more later tonight/tomorrow morning.

xvart.

[xvart]

Do you think that the DiamondCrash thing is failtown or scum?
Can you list the two players you're most suspicious of and why?
How would you describe your mafia playstyle?

1. Failtown; scum would have no reason to out who they think is the cop. They can take care of that with a NK.
2. Sidekick and dramatic. I recognize that being a miller is pretty much a death sentence, whether or not you claim or investigated, so if I was the miller I would try and draw the NK.
3. I typically focus on one scummy person at a time and keep going with it until I am convinced otherwise, lynch occurs, or someone becomes more scummy. Although lurkers are so annoying, I don't usually advocate policy lynches of lurkers; but can be talked into their lynch (especially with a looming deadline.

Who said the cat was definitively out of the bag?

I did, meaning he can't go back and not claim miller.

Don't have too much else to say at this point except that Sidekick needs more votes.

I couldn't agree more (about more votes).

xvart.

[xvart]

I'm not buying this. You can hammer anytime Neto

I don't buy it either. The whole "I claim..." is highly suspicious. Is anyone against me hammering? I can do so later tonight unless we want more discussion?

xvart.

[xvart]

I'll hammer around midnight tonight (central time) unless I hear otherwise.

xvart.

[xvart]

Got distracted doing the dishes.

Unvote
Vote: DiamondCrash

xvart.

[xvart]

Hey folks, glad to finally be able to confirm.

Welcome. Happy hunting. How do you pronounce your name? Yee-than?

Oh, and I'd suspect Sidekick, but I want to see what Ythan does with the player slot first.

I've cooled on Sidekick because as I see it most of the suspicion on him was based on putting DC at L-1 so fast and I don't see scum doing that to a partner all things considering. Is there something else on the Sidekick case that I forgot about?

xvart.

[xvart]

Regarding xvart, is iso3 your explanation for the vote in iso1? Also a tip, bold the part of a post you want to talk about rather than striking everything else out. Iso7 is trying to stall a wagon with no good reason why it shouldn't go through. Iso10 is part defending scum and part accusations sans case.

I hope this helps clarify; let me know if you want more information. At the time of my ISO3 I was terribly mistaken about the order of events. I won't explain why my recollection was so bad because, well, as the say excuses are like assholes... When I first read this post it peaked my interest because it seemed to be a vote for reason but a stated "random" reason. Then, when I sat down the morning of my ISO3 I thought that post had occurred after the massive quote walls/pyramids about dramatic making me think a case had been built, but he was still voting because of a random reason.

I first quoted myself and scratched it out because someone pointed it out that I was wrong. Then I realized my whole post was totally wrong and uncalled for, which is why the updated scratch out of everything except the coincidence part that I mentioned earlier.

re: my ISO10 - I was obviously wrong about the failtown/scum call, and I would've stuck by that until the lynch was done had the claim not been so fishy.

xvart.

[xvart]

xvart - Did you vote DC solely for his terrible claim?

I didn't vote solely for his name claim; but I doubt I would have voted for him (unless a deadline forced me to) if it weren't for "claiming" a town roleblocker role.

xvart.

[xvart]

Hello, I think xvart is scum because of his flip on DC between iso10 and iso11.

Vote: xvart

Are you saddened that nobody jumped on your fishing for votes/testing the waters for my lynch?

Now that we have a DiamondCrash flip, Cyberbob is very suspicious for his interactions with him. I'd like to hear his thoughts.

There's no way I can answer that without having to totally rely on people simply believing what I say. It's just as "loaded" (going by your logic) as the question I asked of Ythill.

re: Macavity Lock and Cyberbob - if someone suggested that this was not town on town violence I would be leaning for Macavity being the scum. He seems to be pushing something that isn't there.

Vote: dramonic

xvart.

[xvart]

For the flip, yes. For the damatic, partially. I thought we were all pretty much in agreement that a miller needs to die before endgame so I'm ready to string him up now.

Do you think dramatic's miller claim is more plausible with a DC scum flip? Less plausible?

xvart.

[xvart]

What idea? Where I changed my mind?

Nevermind about the question; I was thinking they were somehow (slightly) related back in the early pages but I just looked over them.

xvart.

[xvart]

The support of not keeping claimed miller around:

We do not feel that millers should be left alive to later cause distraction.

I would not support letting him live until the endgame however.

However that doesn't rule out the possibility of scum fake claiming so:

I would not support letting him live until the endgame however.

As for the connection: I thought DC (not SC) said the following:

Well, the cop knows who not to investigate xD That's not a free pass, however—in fact, it's an easy scum claim, so be extra careful, dramonic.

xvart.

[xvart]

This is a bit problematic for me, mostly because it has been proven to not necessarily be true—DiamondCrash flipped scum and I am still alive. Perhaps scum has somebody else on their side as their roleblocker, but what makes somewhat more sense to me as to why I'm breathing is that DiamondCrash made me too obvious of a protection target and opted to get rid of someone else.

There could be countless reasons why you are not dead: maybe the scum don't think you are actually a cop; maybe they were worried about a doctor protection; maybe they wanted to cast suspicion on me and/or you; maybe any other reason.

Are you saddened that nobody jumped on your fishing for votes/testing the waters for my lynch?

I'm confused. Are you referring to the vote before your post? Because that's only three hours, and I don't jump that fast.

I find it suspicious when someone posts something that looks like gauging the waters on a possible wagon when followed up almost immediately with a vote. Why didn't Drizzle just vote the first time around? Nothing changed in the two posts sandwiched between his two.

re: dramonic lynch today - it was basically decided that he would have to die sooner or later so why keep pushing off as we may get closer and closer to LYLO? And, it is still highly suspicious of a miller claim and could possibly be scum. Does no one else think that running a wagon on dramonic could be a bad thing right now?

xvart.

[xvart]

You might have a point here if a wagon formed in between my posts but no such wagon appeared. I was the first vote on xvart and he's pretty much avoided all other suspicion until SC's recent FoS.

So what changed in between your two posts that solidified the vote? Why didn't you just vote in the first place?

xvart.

[xvart]

More ammo for me. You implied that, after I supposedly slipped, DiamondCrash-scum would have better reason to kill me than to publicly guess at my role. Why are the other options only occurring to you now, after the fact?

I am having trouble following the purpose behind your line of questioning so if this isn't clear I'll do my best to rectify. First, are you asking me to justify or explain the scum NK? At the time, my justification for DC being a stupid town was because I wouldn't think that a scum would draw attention to someone that could have slipped and cop announced themselves.

Or, are you asking me to explain why I didn't hypothesize out why you might be alive in advance, should DC flip scum and you still be alive today? First, at the time of the comment I didn't expect DC to flip scum (hence the reason I said failtown) and had no reason to suspect you actually being in danger. The reason the other options are just now occurring to me is because they didn't become relevant (and aren't really anyway IMO) until now.

Mod: I will have limited access until Sunday. I will have access and try and post a little.

xvart.

[xvart]

I'll be back tonight and post then.

xvart.

[xvart]

Sorry, forgot to read over this game when I got back.

In fact, now that I think about it, why didn't you ask the same question to Cyberbob and/or Dizzle? Both of them checked in right after me, gave their approval for the lynch, but didn't hammer.

This is a good observation. Cyberbob, why didn't you hammer if you "definitely did not object"? Regarding Dizzle in the same circumstances: I think the waiting for a replacement is a convienent thing to wait for given the circumstances, but I'm willing to believe it at this point (which the same can be said of Macavity).

Unvote
Vote: Cyberbob

xvart.

[xvart]

Hello everyone,

Welcome. Looking forward to your observations.

But xvart wasn't the only one to do this. At least one other person did in Cyberbob. (See his iso 10 & 12 vs iso 14.) One could make the case that you did too.

Fair enough, xvart's just stood out to me because of how immediate the flip was.

And all, I think, Ythan is saying is that he is criticizing xvart for agreeing with you, who he finds scummy.

The thing about it was I didn't even read it as a critical post, more of an observation or restatement of what I said (although it seems like a passive aggressive linking between Macavity and I).

I didn't catch it at the time but I find it suspicious when someone says they agree with the wagon, wouldn't support the hammer, but won't actually hammer himself. Is there something townish about that statement that I am missing?

xvart.

[xvart]

So xvart votes bob in agreement with scummy Lock regarding not hammering a wagon he didn't have a problem with.

I said this questioning xvart for voting bob based on something you had said.

Is this out of the ordinary? Macavity said something about someone else that I reviewed and found suspicious enough to warrant a vote? It wasn't even a question...

xvart.

[xvart]

I just thought of something—most of MacavityLock's actions are explainable in my mind. Sidekick was explained away, and while I still don't think Chevre's scum, MacavityLock's thought processes on her make sense. My vote really isn't justified anymore.

So if the actions are explainable why the atypical behavior that you just noted?

Still like that MacavityLock vote on mine. The way he's acting isn't typical of him.

xvart.

[xvart]

Is this referring to myself, Macavity, or Cyberbob? Or all of us? For me, once DC claimed, it seemed inevitable that he would be the D1 lynch and nothing was going to change that.

Mostly Cyberbob, he was the only one who didn't give any reason for not casting the vote on the lynch he was perfectly comfortable with.

Looking at Chevre's posts, he went after DC a bit early on and it looks like he was advocating a dramonic lynch earlier rather than later. More recently he's been very wishy-washy about the argument between Macavity and I - until he wasn't and voted Macavity because he's his "biggest suspect at the moment". Now he's backed off Macavity and is claiming that his vote was just a pressure vote? Er...

Vote: Chevre

xvart.

[xvart]

A very intriguing NK... why kill the claimed miller? Possibly the only really neutral person in terms of relationships... I'm guessing someone(s) may have been on the right track yesterday. Time to go back and look at some FoS's.

xvart.

[xvart]

Minus the WIFOMy kill speculation, I think this is the best way to go right now. We don't have evidence of a vig or SK (only one kill a night so far), but a Mafia kill on dramonic without a good reason would not have been very strategic.

re: Minus the WIFOM part... I agree. I generally make it a habit to not comment on NK when I'm town for that very reason; but I couldn't for the life of me figure out why scum would kill the claimed miller; unless we have a vig and the scum failed to submit a kill or there was a save or double target (but that again goes back to wtf).

xvart.

[xvart]

No, it is WIFOM. You can say that it's not anti-town if you want but it is WIFOM.

Yes, I realize that. Poor wording or whatever on my part. I meant "re: Minus the WIFOM part" as the reference point to what you said.

xvart.

[xvart]

I can see why scum would kill a claimed miller...

Why? Especially considering there was already a general consensus that the claimed miller must die at some point.

xvart.

[xvart]

Claim, lukepuke. I am on standby to hammer post claim as needed.

xvart.

[xvart]

Vote: lukepuke

xvart.

[xvart]

I'm thinking one scum faction, probably three players in a game this size. Yes no?

One scum faction. Three players: DC, Dizzle, and someone else.

Why jail SC last night?

Yes, why did you choose SC?

Ythan - did you consciously not jailkeep N1 or did you miss it?

Hold up guys, can we get back to that terrible lynch? Why on earth was luke lynched so quickly?

Can we not talk about both?

Dizzle = scum: First RVS vote on DC, note that RVS vote was still on DC. Asks everyone to chill out on the DC wagon, quick wagon slip, calling how "off" the luke lynch felt, and then wanting to focus on the terrible lynch instead of the jailkeep thing (or both).

That's solid enough for me.

Vote: Dizzle

xvart.

[xvart]

First RVS vote on DC, note that RVS vote was still on DC.

What is this even referring to? I never voted for DC and DC eventually removed his RVS vote on me.

I typed it backwards, your scum buddy RVS'ed you and then made a point to note he had not removed his vote yet.

xvart.

[xvart]

Sorry, I messed up my abbreviations. Either way, I wasn't part of either the DC or ML wagons.

I'm less concerned with the abbreviation than the actual "quick wagon" comment. Only scum "quick wagon" to my knowledge. And as you noted, you were not a part of it.

calling how "off" the luke lynch felt

The problem is you so glaringly called it an obvious mislynch, and then immediately want to focus on how terrible it was at the start of next day. You are trying to make everyone realize how you were against the wagon.

We are in great position now. When we lynch Dizzlescum then we either win or can be in a better position to prove/analyze the jailkeep situation.

xvart.

[xvart]

Not you, but your ability to jailkeep. If we lynch scum today and we go into night, you jailkeep SC again tomorrow and if there is no kill then most likely SC is the last scum (unless there are four scum); or he could no kill...

If the third scum tried to kill SC last night then SC would be jailkept again and someone else would be targeted and then SC would be nearly confirmed town.

I guess it really isn't as solid as I first thought, with tons of WIFOM in either scenario. Although, something to be discussed.

xvart.

[xvart]

Also, for a Dizzle lynch to win right now, there can't be an SK and he has to be the one that tried to kill me. Whether he was the attempted killer last night is irrelevant right now, but I have serious doubts about 10:2. Assuming that all the power roles in the game are the ones we know about, two goons vs. a watcher, a jailkeeper, and eight vanillas is horrendously imbalanced toward town.

I also can't think of how a Dizzle lynch will help Ythan out.

The only reason I suggested the Dizzle lynch securing the win immediately was because there was some discussion about a two man mafia team. I'm guessing with a three person team there are two goons and a roleblocker (based on the PRs seen).

My point was we kill Dizzlescum and then that leaves only one scum to conduct the NK. I've never played JK but I would think that if I were I would JK the same person as the previous night and see if there was another no kill night. I brought up WIFOM because of course this wouldn't prove beyond a doubt that SC was the remaining scum since scum could just no kill and cast suspicion on SC.

...but xvart was calling DC failtown until he switched his vote near the end.

How long are you going to keep harping on this? If you keep repeating it do you think it more people will think it is a valid case?

Neto - if you believe you have identified the two remaining scum, why do you want to lynch ML first? Why not Dizzle?

xvart.

[xvart]

EBWOP: Forgot to paste this into my other post:

Only scum "quick wagon" to my knowledge. And as you noted, you were not a part of it.

Even if it were true that only scum quick wagon, how is this even a point against me? By your logic, if I were scum, wouldn't I likely have joined 1 of those quick wagons?

Point taken and withdrawn. I must be mixing something up... Ythan, why did you think it was a slip to refer to it as a quickwagon?

xvart.

-Fixed URL tags
-The Amish one

[xvart]

That's largely irrelevant. For all we know, you could be lurking scum in those games too.

That's quite a stretch, don't you think?

Feel like he wanted something more to supplement it with, which makes me think he doesn't think it's much of a case.

I completely agree.

I'm pretty down with a Dizzle lynch, though I'm wary of a possible bus from xvart (only because the waters are muddied enough such that bussing isn't a particularly dangerous option).

Vote: Dizzle

That would be a hell of a bus; especially since I have no plans of getting off the Dizzle lynch unless something crazy happens or someone comes out and claims scum.

Was the word "claim" enough to get you to hammer? SC brought this up too, but I don't see it. Scumbuddy finally giving up and trying to manufacture a reason to bus? There are much worse things about that claim, and it's weird that you focused on the word "claim".

Yes. Typically townies wouldn't say "my claim is this..." or "I'm claiming this..." They say "I am..."

xvart.

[xvart]

Going to see Iron Man 2. I'll post when I return.

xvart.

[xvart]

Was he trying to set up some sort of mislynch via an unlikely dram-miller kill?

Who is the "he" that is trying to setup some sort of mislynch? Me? A mafia member?

Was it really needed so soon?

Yes, as I assumed you agreed with since you were voting for a lack of content, and his next post provided no content.

Additionally, xvart's Chevre vote was L-1 and a direct follow of Cyberbob, and didn't even point out L-1-ness or request a claim.

I can't respond to this because I can't remember; whenever I put someone at L-1 I always tell them to claim. I can't remember ever voting to L-1 without asking so maybe I didn't realize it was L-1. But I'm typically fairly careful about voting so I just don't know.

xvart.

[xvart]

Now, I wanted him lynched too; he was clearly scummy. But I don't see why you were in such a rush to hammer.

I didn't see a reason to wait since I agreed, you agreed, and a majority of the town had agreed.

Your vote was the L-1 on Chevre, and it did not include a request to claim. See posts 371 and 383 to check.

No kidding? Isn't that exactly what I just explained? Or is this one of those times that by keep asking the same questions makes the person look scummier?

xvart.

[xvart]

Don't worry; Neto will be one of the people in the hot seat tomorrow once you flip scum.

xvart.