Mini 863 - Space Station Mafia: GAME OVER - EVERYONE'S DEAD

[Messiah]

EBWODP:

@Empking: Why weren't you voting D1?

[charlatan]

On page 14: Very little scumhunting.

[lobstermania]

Day Two Vote Count #1

- as of post 351

Messiah (2):

milkshake, Empking

AlmasterGM (1):

charlatan

Empking (1):

Hoopla

Hoopla (1):

NewAgeWarrior

Not Voting (6):

AlmasterGM, Coco, CooLDoG, Messiah, Peabody, Sposh

Reminder:

With eleven alive it takes six votes to lynch.

[NewAgeWarrior]

@Empking: Why weren't you voting D1?

Did he even really do anything D-1?

[milkshake]

Proactive towns need to worry about more than just lynching scum - keeping people active and ensuring we're not left in lylo or later game scenarios with multiple lurkers (or even people incapable of analysing things).

We lynched scum D1, so we're ahead and can afford to do some tidying up. I think Empking is quite an excellent choice in my opinion - he was not on hiphop's lynch which is a good place to start. Coupled with his lack of content, I won't settle for much less.

I think NAW's reaction to this was a big overreaction (with the vote, almost a scummy overreaction). I don't agree with this statement of Hoopla's very much either, though. I wish that not contributing was a scum tell, but unfortunately I don't think it is... not voting when we were lynching scum is a bit scummy, though, so I could see why Empking might be an acceptable lynch.

And I do agree that it is better to lose someone who doesn't contribute than someone who does. But that's a reason to decide between two equally scummy people, not a reason to lynch a player of otherwise uncertain alignment. So can't we do better? Wouldn't it be great if we chain-lynched scum like hiphop instead of hopping to a lurker...? Enter my Messiah vote...

P.S. We

still

haven't heard from CoCo, and he didn't vote yesterday either...

[charlatan]

Empking, you reckon I could get you to give us a little info on where your suspicions lie? I get Messiah for the hiphop connection. Who else do you have your eye on?

Just give us more to work with than a sentence here or there.

[Messiah]

I'm not voting?

vote: AlmasterGM

---

@NAW: No.

@milkshake: I asked you a question.

[milkshake]

@milkshake: I asked you a question.

(Warning: snarky comment incoming:) Good for you.

@milkshake: What do you think of the possibility that hiphop was simply trying to play to his town meta(as he mentions in post 219), perhaps going a bit overboard in the process? Why wasn't this included in your possible scenarios in post 292?

Messiah... obviously

you

would take issue with my calling the hiphop-scum/you-town scenario very unlikely in post 292. But I don't know what you're saying in your second question about it "not being included." As for your first question, it isn't clear to me what you are saying... in post 219 hiphop says that "town must derail all bad wagons!" (a substanceless statement)... so you seem to be trying to disagree with my explanation of the hiphop-scum/you-town scenario by suggesting that he was trying to act town by defending a wagon that he knew to be on a town player. The problem:

town

doesn't know who's town, unless they're lynched, and as I said, it was a low-risk wagon, and one that was unlikely to come to fruition at the time...

[Peabody]

I'm not voting?

vote: AlmasterGM

---

@NAW: No.

@milkshake: I asked you a question.

Messiah..

You haven't said a word about Almaster on this day. Why do you think he's mafia?

[Empking]

EBWODP:

@Empking: Why weren't you voting

at the end of

D1?

Fixed.

I didn't find anyone overly scummy.

[AlmasterGM]

Post 3: Self-proclaimed non-random vote on Peabody because he "annoys you."
Post 4: An affirmation that you are voting him for personal reasons.
Post 5: Saying you'd kill Peabody with DK powers for mispelling your name if you could.
Post 6: Saying you "don't like" Peabody and CoCo. Because we hadn't figured that out.
Post 8: Jumping on the Messiah bandwagon and prematurely asking for a claim, though reiterating once again that you don't like them.

Up until that point, your attacks on them were 100% personal in nature. You'd established from the get-go that you want them dead.

So what? I'm failing to see the scumtell here. Being jumpy and personal in the beginning of the game doesn't mean anything. Moreover, if you look at the context surrounding my posts, it isn't much better - Hoopla is changing her vote every other post, hiphop is posting random nonsense, and everyone else is either RVSing or hasn't said anything. I fail to see how my behavior is unique in any way, shape, or form. The only post that is possibly out of place is #6, but given that I clarify what that means when asked in #9 with what I believe to be perfectly acceptable justifications, that shouldn't be a strike against me.

Post 9 is bigger. The whole of your CoCo case in this post is that he's lurking and that he did something in a previous game that "annoyed you." If you want to lynch him because he's lurking, okay, that has its merits and is not a problem. Pretending that there's more to your case than that, however, is nonsense.

Would you rather me tunnel with some BS? I said I don't like him because of previous play and his lurking. There's no fabrication whatsoever - if anything, I'm being more straightforward than most people are with their suspicions.

Ironically, CoCo has

still said nothing,

so I'm totally clueless as to why you are arguing in favor of him and against me.

From minute 1 you were gunning at these guys, though you took a break to jump on the Messiah bandwagon when it started picking up steam (with no explanation except that you believed Hoopla) and again on the tail end of the hiphop bandwagon after a lengthy theory debate.

Given Hoopla's strong encouragement and softclaim, I saw no reason not to throw her the bone. If she's right, we win, if she's not, she'll have lots of explaining to do. Also, given that my dislike of CoCo and Peabody wasn't going anywhere, it was clearly time to move on to new possibilities.

Keep in mind, I think a lurker lynch is a viable option for us. Pushing a lurker lynch is not scummy. Pushing a lurker lynch and pretending it's something else, however, is.

Once again, when I have ever pretended my votes were more than they were? I've made it very clear up front what my intentions are.

In case you're wondering why I'm bothering to spend so many words on this, I think your voting history is suspect given the day's flip. Messiah became a very convenient vote when Hoopla gambited, and you followed the leader without even bothering to give any reasons of your own. When hiphop started to come under fire, you gave a vague "liking hiphop less and less by the post" (perhaps laying the groundwork for a later accusation without actually explaining anything?) then eventually argued with him about theory for a bit before hammering. A hammer does not impress me. It was obvious where the bandwagon was headed, and for someone who will vote based on so little and claim it's a solid case, I found it odd that you would scuffle with hiphop so much (easily the most active period of Day 1 for you) without casting a vote until the last possible minute.

So don't give me any town cred for the hammer. Where's the scumtell? If it's that there was "no case," how is that unique to me in any way? Doesn't it also apply to every single person on the hiphop wagon?

I'm not voting?

vote: AlmasterGM .

Funny.

[charlatan]

The whole of my response to your response can be summed up with a response to one question:

Once again, when I have ever pretended my votes were more than they were? I've made it very clear up front what my intentions are.

You've pretended that you actually considered the game and made a case on them, but there's everything to suggest you haven't. For instance, you've explicitly stated that CoCo is scum. You're really, seriously, 100% sure a person is scum because they pissed you off in another game and are lurking? Does this happen to you every game? Next game, will you vote for me this one?

The problem is, all you're doing is dragging some childish, petty grudge from previous games into this one. You're not scumhunting. You're trying to settle a score.

Now, the hilarity of this is that

your attacks on CoCo and Peabody have almost nothing to do with why I think you're scummy

. I think it's early for a lurker lynch, but who knows, hitting scum there is possible. I think your behavior towards them is anti-town and obnoxious, but not necessarily a scumtell. The bigger issue for me is your voting record, which you did not have much of an answer to. To recap, you jumped on the very convenient Messiah wagon despite being oh-so-sure that CoCo was scum and then, the big one, you refused to vote hiphop until the last possible second despite the fact that, in every other case so far, it has taken virtually (or literally) nothing to for you to vote someone.

Oh, also, you only post more than a sentence when someone's on your case. If nobody accused you of anything, you'd probably lurk along with the rest of them.

[Peabody]

Moreover, if you look at the context surrounding my posts, it isn't much better - Hoopla is changing her vote every other post, hiphop is posting random nonsense, and everyone else is either RVSing or hasn't said anything. I fail to see how my behavior is unique in any way, shape, or form.

This is justifying scumminess by pointing fingers everywhere else.

Given Hoopla's strong encouragement and softclaim, I saw no reason not to throw her the bone. If she's right, we win, if she's not, she'll have lots of explaining to do.

Also, given that my dislike of CoCo and Peabody wasn't going anywhere, it was clearly time to move on to new possibilities.

Wait, what? You just gave up on who you thought was mafia? Just because a vote isn't popular doesn't mean you shouldn't push a case against them. Your wording: new possibilities... it looks like you are discounting your former suspicions. Are you?

So don't give me any town cred for the hammer. Where's the scumtell?

If Almaster is scum, his hammer is quite odd. I will not discount that it was merely a stunt to get the trust of the town.

-----

I'm liking charlatan's case. It looks promising so far.

[Messiah]

Messiah..

You haven't said a word about Almaster on this day. Why do you think he's mafia?

I don't really understand what you're getting at. Is the case I made in post 273 somehow invalid now? I'll make a bullet point list/analysis of the main reasons I think he's scum once I have access to a computer.(Been posting from my phone for about a week now.)

The problem: town doesn't know who's town, unless they're lynched, and as I said, it was a low-risk wagon, and one that was unlikely to come to fruition at the time...

Which is where the "playing to his town meta" part comes in.

[Peabody]

I don't really understand what you're getting at. Is the case I made in post 273 somehow invalid now? I'll make a bullet point list/analysis of the main reasons I think he's scum once I have access to a computer.(Been posting from my phone for about a week now.)

Sorry, I must have missed post 273. Because you voted on day 1, I'm assuming you still believe he is mafia. Has your case evolved or detracted at all?

[milkshake]

Which is where the "playing to his town meta" part comes in.

Which is where what I said comes in... again... 0.o

[milkshake]

So in other words...

you seem to be trying to disagree with my explanation of the hiphop-scum/you-town scenario by suggesting that he was trying to act town by defending a wagon that he knew to be on a town player. The problem:

town

doesn't know who's town, unless they're lynched, and as I said, it was a low-risk wagon, and one that was unlikely to come to fruition at the time...

Yes, he could have been doing this, maybe even thinking he was "playing to his town meta," whatever that means, but it would have been extremely stupid. Stupider than hiphop is/was. He would have had to someone not realize that even though as scum, he knows who is town, the town doesn't know who's town. And I don't think there are many people that dumb!

[milkshake]

"have had to someone not realize" should be "have had to somehow not realize."

I should proofread!

[Sposh]

Sorry for not posting a whole lot guys. Currently, I think the charlatan and alamaster back and forth is intriguing, and based on yesterday's wagon, I would think that either Alamaster or milkshake is scum because they were the last ones on the bandwagon!

[Hoopla]

Sorry for not posting a whole lot guys. Currently, I think the charlatan and alamaster back and forth is intriguing, and based on yesterday's wagon, I would think that either Alamaster or milkshake is scum because they were the last ones on the bandwagon!

Bussing seems to be the scumtell of the month. Why do people not look at those NOT on the wagon after a scum lynch?

[Empking]

Sorry for not posting a whole lot guys. Currently, I think the charlatan and alamaster back and forth is intriguing, and based on yesterday's wagon, I would think that either Alamaster or milkshake is scum because they were the last ones on the bandwagon!

Bussing seems to be the scumtell of the month. Why do people not look at those NOT on the wagon after a scum lynch?

Because they do?
Because then you're looking at almost half the town?

[AlmasterGM]

You've pretended that you actually considered the game and made a case on them

When have I ever pretended anything? I've been 100% clear about my biases.

For instance, you've explicitly stated that CoCo is scum. You're really, seriously, 100% sure a person is scum because they pissed you off in another game and are lurking?

I've already answered this.

Does this happen to you every game? Next game, will you vote for me this one?

I'll do it every game. You aren't on the list of people I don't like, so no, I won't vote for you.

The problem is, all you're doing is dragging some childish, petty grudge from previous games into this one. You're not scumhunting. You're trying to settle a score.

Yeah, because there was SO MUCH scumhunting going on in the first four pages.

Now, the hilarity of this is that your attacks on CoCo and Peabody have almost nothing to do with why I think you're scummy. I think it's early for a lurker lynch, but who knows, hitting scum there is possible. I think your behavior towards them is anti-town and obnoxious, but not necessarily a scumtell. The bigger issue for me is your voting record, which you did not have much of an answer to. To recap, you jumped on the very convenient Messiah wagon despite being oh-so-sure that CoCo was scum and then, the big one, you refused to vote hiphop until the last possible second despite the fact that, in every other case so far, it has taken virtually (or literally) nothing to for you to vote someone.

I've already stated that I was never ACTUALLY 100% sure CoCo was scum and gave a reason for acting that way. If you plan to take that statement seriously, go ahead, but it's not going to help you make any progress. I've explained my Messiah vote. The only thing left you can harp on is my hiphop vote, which basically means you're saying "hammering scum is a scumtell." This makes no sense whatsoever. If you don't give me town points, that's fine, but I don't see how it should take them away.

This is justifying scumminess by pointing fingers everywhere else.

False - I'm not trying to cross-apply the argument, I'm trying to discredit it.

Wait, what? You just gave up on who you thought was mafia? Just because a vote isn't popular doesn't mean you shouldn't push a case against them. Your wording: new possibilities... it looks like you are discounting your former suspicions. Are you?

Not at all. CoCo

hasn't posted since October 12th

- I'm not happy with him at all. However, It's actually more replacement time at this point than it is lynch point. All I'm saying is that a singular vote doesn't do anything - if nobody else agrees with me on CoCo, I'm going to stop yelling into the wind about it and talk about some other things.

Sorry for not posting a whole lot guys. Currently, I think the charlatan and alamaster back and forth is intriguing, and based on yesterday's wagon, I would think that either Alamaster or milkshake is scum because they were the last ones on the bandwagon!

I don't like this post at all.

Unvote: Vote: Sposh.

[charlatan]

Bussing seems to be the scumtell of the month. Why do people not look at those NOT on the wagon after a scum lynch?

I'm fine with that. However, I'd like to see an actual case be made on one of those people as opposed to "policy lynch!" Go for it. I believe you've got it in you.

-----

When have I ever pretended anything? I've been 100% clear about my biases.

Mostly when you say things like:

I don't see how you can criticize me not liking Peabody and CoCo given that I've made legitimate arguments against them and they are both scummy.

My point is that you had not made legitimate arguments and you had not shown them to be scummy. If you want us to go along with you, prove your points instead of repeating ad nauseum that you don't like them.

Yeah, because there was SO MUCH scumhunting going on in the first four pages.

We're now on page 15, so you're welcome to start.

The only thing left you can harp on is my hiphop vote, which basically means you're saying "hammering scum is a scumtell." This makes no sense whatsoever.

No, hammering scum is a nulltell. A scumtell would be voting for weak, weak reasons repeatedly, then holding off on the one vote that matters until the very last possible second. It just looks like scum was backed into a corner and decided you'd cut your losses.

I don't like this post at all.

Unvote: Vote: Sposh.

I guess you're just trying to keep up your streak of not explaining anything? What don't you like about the post, aside from the fact that he points to you in it?

------

Sposh: Were you going to vote?

You didn't have my eye Day 1, but reading you in isolation Day 2 is rather damning. Your first post was celebrating the lynch flip and then saying we've either got a town RB or a doc (conveniently ignoring the possibility of scum no-lynching to draw out a claim or setting up a fakeclaim, or of someone being a commuter or something, however unlikely that may be), and then fishing for a power role claim after that.

[CooLDoG]

(for prod, with content... sorry moving day and internet glych...)

EBWODP:

@Empking: Why weren't you voting

at the end of

D1?

Fixed.

I didn't find anyone overly scummy.

Ok so empking, you apparently then wanted a no-lynch on d-1. Do you know how bad a no lynch on d-1 is? I just want to know why you did not vote on d-1 because you didn't find any one person to be overly scummy. This must mean that you did find some people "scummy" but not "overly", who falls into the first, and what does "overly" mean?

[CooLDoG]

while I am at it I shall post about sposh, my second (not in an order) on my scummy list.

Whoooo yeah we got that scum! *dances*

The no kill is incredibly odd. Either we've got a town RB or a town Doc, I think. Question: would it be advisable for them to claim with their night action so we can automatically get rid of another scum?

*tsk* *tsk* *tsk* not very good this one be sposhey me boy, not very good. Now exactly how does this let us catch a scum? claim by night actions huh, how would you know who blocked? I mean the scum would just not kill so that there would be no "claim". I just want to know also why you dance at a d-1 lynch of scum, a n00b could have told us hip-hop was scummy. Not very much liking it, but I already talked about this, and so did char... now lets see what el sposho has to say:

I don't see why my idea was so bad! I mean, sure, we'd have a townie roleblocker or doctor out in the open, but we'd also be down one more scum. Surely that's worth something, right?

In ANY case, I'm looking at the votes from yesterday:

hiphop (7): Sposh, Peabody, Hoopla, CooLDoG, charlatan, milkshake, AlmasterGM

AlmasterGM (2): NewAgeWarrior, Messiah
Peabody (1): hiphop

Not Voting (2): Coco, Empking

I'm thinking there's one scum on the hiphop wagon as a bussing attempt, and one scum out of CoCo/Emp/NAW/Messiah. I need to do a re-read. When I have time!

This says nothing, more like OMG I GOTTA RE_READ! So why is having a night claim not "too bad of an idea", well you tell me, we may or (most likly) not get a scum.[/quote]