Mini 799 - One Flew Over A Cuckoo's Nest, Abandoned for Real

[Crazy]

/confirm

[Crazy]

I know Crazy from elsewhere. Good to be in a game with you too, but don't get your hopes up about me.

I also thought someone said I was bad or something when you mentioned me.

Hi there.

One Flew over the Cuckoo’s Nest

C'mon. Who's more likely to be scum than the quiet crazy guy babbling away in the corner... with a knife, and a quiet cunning?[/quote]
Quiet... and babbling? Nice contradiction already.

Vote: molestargazer

[Crazy]

I'm just used to the way we play on View Askew which is where we try to come to an agreement as a group about the Day 1 lynch rather than pop off a bunch of random votes.

Well, what do you really have to go on at the start of the game? If you've got something, tell us.

Random votes lead to random wagons which lead to reactions which lead to more reactions which lead to cases which lead to serious wagons which lead to lynching.

[Crazy]

So what are we looking at here; 2 or 3 mafia? I can already see the teamwork amongst a few of you.

12-player games almost always have 3 mafia. I'd expect 3.

[Crazy]

I had to read that whole Kise/KKN thing again.

I'll admit, Kise, that KKN's alliterative comment was a little overboard. Still, I don't see it as anything more than an attempt to start discussion. Do you think he's scum, Kise, or were you just trying to add to the discussion?

[Crazy]

I think I'm understanding Kise now.

2. Was the contradiction much of a scum-slip at all?

If you're town, why should you be making contradictions at all?

[Crazy]

Crazy, what is your understanding of Kise?

KKN made a contradiction in his post. Contradictions are scummy. Kise attacked him for it. The contradiction might have been a small deal, but when we're barely out of the random stage, ignoring anything just cuts out a topic of discussion.

So yeah, now I understand his reactions to KKN's comment. I'm fine with that.

Other than that, he's acting kind of weird, which is really hard to read.

Josh, I don't understand your vote. But then again, I don't understand what Kise's purpose for asking that question was, anyway. "For reactions" is too vague; what sort of reactions were you searching for, Kise? And what is your analysis of VP's response?

And Josh, please clarify what you mean by "see if someone's lying about town or not." I don't know what that means.

[Crazy]

Supposing a person was scum, and asked this question. It might lead to a Townie tripping themselves up upon answering it, and trying to not tell the truth in order to answer a supposed hypothetical. Since scum knows who's town and who isn't, if the Townie being questioned claimed scum* it would show that Townie as lying. As I said, not much usefulness, but some slight usefulness; which is why I just don't see the point of the question in the first place (which is what I said initially).

*blink*

How can you lie about who you would want to be scum with?

[Crazy]

Why would a townie claim scum as a result of Kise's question?

(Also, I don't have a post restriction, and I haven't read the book/seen the movie either, so I have no knowledge of the flavor at all.)

[Crazy]

Why would a Townie claim scum at all, ever? I don't know, but I've seen it happen.

Any more questions? Keep 'em coming.

Well, uhh, you voted Kise for asking that question because you thought it might lead to a townie claiming scum...?????

Is this a hard and fast rule for you?

Essentially, yes. There may be a few exceptions, but I have no objection to Kise's line of questioning about it.

[Crazy]

Eh, this is too much to read for right now. I'll post here either tonight or tomorrow.

[Crazy]

And it will be tonight...

First of all, "lurking" like Taranski is not scummy. He likely forgot the thread or disappeared off site or something. Real lurkers do post

some

.

Kise's vote on Taranski after camn mentioned it is bad... but camn only voting Taranski after Kise did (despite wanting to) is very scummy.

Unvote
Vote camn

As for the Josh wagon, well, yeah, his logic sucks. He's certainly another one of my suspects, though I'm sure you all knew that already.

[Crazy]

What is so scummy about it?

I have a MONSTER meta-base of hating all lurkers. If I see a lurkerwagon... I jump on!

That's fine... but you didn't vote Taranski until Kise did...

[Crazy]

To be honest, I'm going back and forth on this "rolefishing" thing.

@Kise: If scum suspected you were the cop, why wouldn't they just not mention it and kill you tonight? Then they wouldn't look like they had anything to do with it.

@Molestargazer/VPB: What is scummy about saying there is likely a cop in this setup, even if that is what Kise did?

[Crazy]

I don't agree with Starbuck/VPB, mainly with Starbuck since a Mafia Godfather is actually a role. Starbuck thinks Kise is scum because he mentioned the possibility of a lie detector. Well, how would scum know a lie detector was in the setup? Wouldn't that make him more likely to be a

lie detector

rather than be scum?

[Crazy]

It's what I insinuated in my post. I just didn't spell it out for everyone.

So you

did

think he was a lie detector? Then why point that out?

[Crazy]

I was just wondering how you can do a lie detector test on mentally insane people.

And you think Kise is scum because he "knows" that there is a lie detector in the setup when you really don't think that's likely? What?

Unvote, Vote Starbuck

[Crazy]

You have been coming to Kise's defense for quite sometime now.

It's my style. I like to attack people when they make bad cases on other people. Kise may be scum, but I think your case on him stinks.

[Crazy]

Where's Josh? And the post he promised?

Yeah, he definitely needs to post.

[Crazy]

He hasn't posted on the forums since 2 days ago, in this thread. What did he promise to comment on?

Nothing in particular, but he promised to comment.

[Crazy]

Josh has 6 votes against him (L-1)

I think it's only fair if we give him until tomorrow. Agreed? (I wouldn't mind hammering him based on how he's played, but I'll be a gentlemen)

I didn't realize he was at L-1.

His tangled logic is bad, but I think Starbuck's is just as bad if not worse. Josh wouldn't be a horrible lynch, but we got a lot more time... so I'm sure that lynching now would be a bad idea.

[Crazy]

I am retroactively saying that I will be V/LA starting yesterday and continuing for the next few days.

[Crazy]

Woah, this is too much to read right now. I'm here for a second, but I don't have time to read through all I missed.

[Crazy]

Wow, that was a really lucky lynch guys... not to say that Josh Lyman's logic wasn't horrible (really, I'm the one that called him out), but if I wasn't V/LA... there's no doubt that I would have fought against the wagon. What do I know, I guess... *shrug*

It also sounds to me that skitzer killed himself... but then I'm not familiar with this flavor at all. If he did, that's one of the strangest moves ever.

I think I'll end up voting Starbuck again, but I want to read again and make sure there aren't some people that I haven't noticed that are scummy.

[Crazy]

Wow... oh well, I guess. This seemed like a good game with a good group of players.