Mafia 103 - Ktown Mafia (Game Over)

[Wickedestjr]

Sorry guys. I don't have much time to post today. I spent my only time catching up in my other game. This should be my first priority tomorrow though.

[CrueKnight]

I should be able to post something substantial later today once I get back to PA. One thing that makes me curious is why is furry so strongly defending ck as if he knows he's town... this was going on yesterday as well. I can understand saying that there isn't enough evidence to support ck being scum, but I certainly wouldn't call him town enough to avidly defend against his lynch. This sorta reeks of hypo-scum furry wanting to get town cred for trying to prevent a townie mislynch.

vote: furry

Goodposting.

I also agree with this. Furry is hugging me a little too tightly.

While I agree with Furry that the arguments against me are not strong at all, I disagree that I played perfect and am definite town.
And according to my role, there is nothing in it that hints at another townie knowing my role either.

This makes me question Furry's alignment....

[Kdub]

Vote Count

CrueKnight (0)

-

Furry (2)

- Wickedestjr, Rhinox

cruelty (0)

-

Sir Chris (0)

-

Rhinox (0)

-

Wickedestjr (0)

-

malpascp (1)

- cruelty

Faraday (0)

-

SolemnJ (0)

-

Torqez (1)

- Faraday

foilist13 (0)

-

Katniss (0)

-

No Lynch (0)

-

Not Voting (8)

- Katniss, CrueKnight, Torqez, SolemnJ, Furry, foilist13, Sir Chris, malpascp

12 players alive, 7 votes needed to lynch.

Deadline is December 19, ~11:00 am MST

[Sir Chris]

Also I like how I get a roll of the eyes about SK even though I am probably correct, good job wicked!

Also because I don't know what games you have been in. One of the hazard of being unfamiliar to this site, Wicked, is I am unsure where everything is. I am used to a big list I can easily scroll through.

Also poor guy, he was obvious town too, I really liked his cut throat playstyle.

[Furry]

Crueknight has only spammed

and defended himself. And was kinda dumb about it, too.

His voting pattern consists of his random vote, and then his self vote.

He fits my mold of scum/badtown.

-Spamming (which almost everyone was doing)

-Defending himself "dumbly" (what exactly is 'dumbly' and why is it a tell?)

-Random/selfvote (why is this a tell?)

SJ is already saying that he could easily be newb town though, still keeping the groundwork for a jump if its needed.

This is misrepresenting SolemnJ. You are starting to look scummier. Also, the SolemnJ case isn't good.

???

So which of my colorful lines is wrong then?

Back to SJ case in a little

The orange and purple lines were misrepresentations.

1: Purple I can see you argue, 2: but orange I dont see as a misrep in the least bit.

1: So it

was

misrepresenting?

2: I'll explain this one when SolemnJ returns.

Purple can be interpreted different ways (voting pattern/general uselessness) so if you see it different there can be debate. Orange I still wait for how im in the least bit wrong.

3: Sort of. You contradicted yourself, and now you are trying to pretend to have this strange opinion on the subject in order to defend yourself. I can not see how you wouldn't understand this.

I see no contridiction with what im saying. My playstyle, especially surrounding votes, is different then most, a vote means a whole lot and should be taken seriously. But this even stemmed from something that is already resolved (vote on haylen when she was viewed as neutral as opposed to town). Just try and quote the two contridicting lines and I will explain whatever is going on there.

So your reasons for suspecting me are basically because I supported the Haylen lynch and also suspected a person you believe to be town? Also, what about SolemnJ?

Yes, you supported the mislynch while not being on the wagon. At the same time you were sitting on a wagon of another person who I think is a mislynch. Because of the second wagon you were not a part of the mislynch wagon.

I shouldnt of brought up fuzzy handcuffs at all really, but this is fun now. Houseguests of mine are in good paws, I would prefer not to play doctor with someone I think is a bad person, they arent as fun. But I take it you dont like fuzzy handcuffs?

Vote SJ

I can quote what I said yesterday or people can go look back a few pages, their call

[SolemnJ]

hey peoples.

mafiascum.net was added to my school's blocklist, so I've been inactive for a bit. So sorry for that.

Furry, quote what you said yesterday.

[Torqez]

Okay, did a brief re-read. Nothing strikes out too much that could be pinned one way or the other. I'm a firm belief that in the beginning anything someone could say could be stretched far to prove to be 'scummy'.

So with not having much to go on....

I should be able to post something substantial later today once I get back to PA. One thing that makes me curious is why is furry so strongly defending ck as if he knows he's town... this was going on yesterday as well. I can understand saying that there isn't enough evidence to support ck being scum, but I certainly wouldn't call him town enough to avidly defend against his lynch. This sorta reeks of hypo-scum furry wanting to get town cred for trying to prevent a townie mislynch.

vote: furry

Goodposting.

I also agree with this. Furry is hugging me a little too tightly.

While I agree with Furry that the arguments against me are not strong at all, I disagree that I played perfect and am definite town.
And according to my role, there is nothing in it that hints at another townie knowing my role either.

This makes me question Furry's alignment....

"And according to my role, there is nothing in it that hints at another townie knowing my role either. " ??

Way to softclaim without achieving anything but ambiguity. Or is this just a red herring?

No its not damning, but its all I got atm.

Vote: CrueKnight

[foilist13]

That stands out at me as well Torqez, but it's not a huge scum tell. I've seen a lot of townie's who think like scum trying not to get lynched, simply because they don't want to be lynched.

@Katniss - Where are you? Are you still in the game?

[Faraday]

l/a the next few days, sorry have an essay to do that's worth 25% of my final grade, so i'll have to do that. this game will be my priority when i come back.

V/LA is noted.

[Kdub]

malpascp has been prodded. Katniss has informed me that he has been unable to post and may need to be replaced. I will give him a few days to sort things out before looking for a replacement.

[Wickedestjr]

You voted for CK.. fine. After that you never even mentioned the Haylen wagon. I find this highly contradictory to your playstyle throughout the game - you've been quoting and replying to basically everything, so how come you had nothing to say about a wagon building on someone who wasn't in your

top 4 suspects

?

I didn't make any posts between the time that she claimed and the time she got lynched. I didn't have time to. I recall making a post one night, and then logging on the next night to find that Haylen had been lynched. Before then, there were two bandwagons formed. The bandwagon on CK and the one on Haylen. I joined the bandwagon on CK, however, I had expressed earlier suspicion of Haylen, so I thought that I had made my feelings clear. Even though I would have been okay with the Haylen lynch, I still preferred the CK lynch.

Not only that, but you're content with voting for your 4th placed suspect purely because it's a bandwagon. I really, really don't like this.

I gave reasons for my suspicions of my top 3. They were completely ignored. Is that my fault? Also, we were close to deadline, and I didn't want to waste time trying to persuade players to jump on one of my top three bandwagons, because, I doubted my capability of being able to do so in such short time, and if I wasted time doing that, we would have even less time to switch to another bandwagon if somebody claimed a PR.

This sort of apathy towards who gets lynched reeks of scum for me. I think I would be a lot less suspicious of you had you at least attacked the Haylen wagon - obviously you must have thought it a mislynch if she wasn't in your top 4 suspects - or actively pushed an alternate case, but you did neither. Explain.

I don't know that I was correct on all of my main suspects. I think I am right on at least 1 or 2 of them, but I wouldn't be surprised if a few people I thought were town ended up flipping scum. In fact there are a few players I am going to be watching closely today that weren't in my top 3. Also, think about it. Would you rather I be the only person voting Furry a few days before deadline with only a few other players showing interest? How would that help?


Also, cruelty, what do you mean by:

Attacking the Haylen wagon.
and
Actively pushing an alternative case.

...?

Also I like how I get a roll of the eyes about SK even though I am probably correct, good job wicked!

I didn't post the eye-roll because of that. I posted it because I thought it was useless speculation.

Purple can be interpreted different ways (voting pattern/general uselessness) so if you see it different there can be debate.

I'll explain this one also, when SolemnJ comments.

Yes, you supported the mislynch while not being on the wagon. At the same time you were sitting on a wagon of another person who I think is a mislynch. Because of the second wagon you were not a part of the mislynch wagon.

I can't defend against this. Having different suspects doesn't mean I'm scum. You suspect SolemnJ who I think is town. So that means I should be suspecting you too for that? Also, apart from SolemnJ, I don't even think you have mentioned your other suspects.

Also, Furry, please respond to the rest of my earlier post.


Torqez's vote is terrible. I don't know what it means though.


foilist, are you ignoring me?


Also, Sir Chris deserves and

FoS: Sir Chris

. I only know one of his suspects and it is for bad reasons. BTW Sir Chris, if I am your biggest suspect, why not vote me?

[foilist13]

foilist, are you ignoring me?

I'm sorry, I don't remember you asking me something. Yes?

[SolemnJ]

O.o

I see an inconsistency.

I think voting for someone means you want them lynched. Then again im not really into the 'hip and trendy' lifestyles that are going on now adays. Does 'dont necessarily want' mean 'would like to have' in today groovy slang?

I'm just voting for pressure. I do not have any intentions to lynch you.

Wow. LOL.

HoS: CrueKnight

This is funny.

Need to get caught up, but this is a fail of a HoS. Pressure votes work wonders. People play differently under pressure

So...voting not only to lynch is good or bad? You're being unclear, scum.

Anyways, on to this whole debacle. I will ask this again since people havent answered this, and without an answer any case on me based on it gets a hole punched down the middle.

When is it acceptable to try and pressure vote someone that you have a town read on?

When is it acceptable to ever have a vote on a player you have a town read on?

Pressure voting a player is always fine, but you should always be willing to have that player lynched. A vote to lynch is a little more serious about that then pressure, but you should never say "damn I didnt want them lynched, I though they were town" if somehow a 10x multipost occurs lynching a player.

I mean frick, how hard is it for people to grasp this concept. Dont vote town, vote scum, pressure slight scum. Tah-dah!

You dont pressure vote people you dont want lynched. You never vote people you dont want lynched. Pressure votes are more for medium suspects who you wouldnt be against a lynch of, but you like other lynches more.

Furry, this also looks wrong.

You don't pressure vote people you don't want lynched?
Then why pressure vote at all?

What is the point of pressure votes?

-Correct (if im reading that double negative right)
-To see how slight scum reads react
-To see how players react to pressure on them

I guess it was more convenient to attack Haylen.

Dont think its necessary to elaborate on this when it was made well over a week to deadline

The reason that I thought CK only deserved an FoS at the time was because it was possible CrueKnight had just made a towniemistake.

You can just say fencesitting instead of this excuse. What makes it a town-slip as opposed to scumtell?

Anyways, poker is starting. Will try and finish this tonight in hopes that we get that extension by tomorrow.

1. There's a middle ground; those you have no read on. You pressure those who are scum, and those others who have not shown towntells.

2. Just repeating your own double negative;
neways: this goes back to number 1. And this doesnt seem to be an attack on me.

3. Procrastination is bad. I should have done it sooner. It would have led to a better end of a Day 1.

4. The voice in the back of my mind. Always, the number of possible outcomes are many, and one shouldn't assume things with haste. /emphasizes last part.

Hm...now I don't see much of an attack. Gimme some more.

[cruelty]

I gave reasons for my suspicions of my top 3. They were completely ignored. Is that my fault? Also, we were close to deadline, and I didn't want to waste time trying to persuade players to jump on one of my top three bandwagons, because, I doubted my capability of being able to do so in such short time, and if I wasted time doing that, we would have even less time to switch to another bandwagon if somebody claimed a PR.

So basically you were apathetic. Ok.

I don't know that I was correct on all of my main suspects. I think I am right on at least 1 or 2 of them, but I wouldn't be surprised if a few people I thought were town ended up flipping scum. In fact there are a few players I am going to be watching closely today that weren't in my top 3. Also, think about it. Would you rather I be the only person voting Furry a few days before deadline with only a few other players showing interest? How would that help?


Also, cruelty, what do you mean by:

Attacking the Haylen wagon.
and
Actively pushing an alternative case.

...?

I really don't care too much where your vote is as long as you have decent justification for it.

And are you serious? I am saying, if you didn't like the Haylen lynch (which you obviously didn't, given that you were supporting another wagon) then you should have actively pushed for a lynch that you did support, or at least seriously voiced concerns.

[Sir Chris]

Posting thoughts is never useless, if nothing else it gives you some shred of insight into what I am thinking. Someone had commented on the prospect of an SK, so I responded with that.

[Sir Chris]

Oh and I don't vote you because the day is lasting for weeks and I have all the time in the world to vote for you. I don't see it as a pressing concern either way.

However I am going to vote for you because your demeanor has shifted drastically today from yesterday, and by golly, you did ask me to.

Vote: Wicked

I am unsure how I can phrase this properly, but I just don't like the way you come off in your posts. You seem to be a bit edgy and a bit back and forth in your tone and I find it not so subtle that I, one of the people who didn't like you yesterday is now gifted with the merit of a suspicious nod my way. It seems to fit rather nicely together to me. I think I am on target with you, and my only mistake yesterday was allowing a bratty personality to override my instincts to see you dead and buried, wicked.

[Kdub]

Vote Count

CrueKnight (1)

- Torqez

Furry (2)

- Wickedestjr, Rhinox

cruelty (0)

-

Sir Chris (0)

-

Rhinox (0)

-

Wickedestjr (1)

- Sir Chris

malpascp (1)

- cruelty

Faraday (0)

-

SolemnJ (1)

- Furry

Torqez (1)

- Faraday

foilist13 (0)

-

Katniss (0)

-

No Lynch (0)

-

Not Voting (5)

- Katniss, CrueKnight, SolemnJ, foilist13, malpascp

12 players alive, 7 votes needed to lynch.

Deadline is December 19, ~11:00 am MST

[malpascp]

This nightkill reveals nothing I supose
Sir Chris do you know what OMGUS is? Also your arguments are simply useless, and some of them are purely wrong. This is the kind of post that I think its basicaly scum-talk.
I hope someone else understands how obvscum this guy is.

Vote: Sir Chris

[Sir Chris]

Google tells me you just said I suck, which isn't exactly nice. But hopefully there is a fancy mafia term I have not heard before.

Also I find it quite odd how I am obvious scum when in fact I am not scum, which I understand in and of itself is a useless barb in the here and the now but makes it more interesting if I am to die and you say I am "obvious scum." Why am I such obvious scum? Instead of having a faint and all so insincere hope as to why I am scum, explain it to everyone. Please. In vivid detail. Leave nothing tot he imagination malpascp. Why am I scum for voting for the guy I voted yesterday who I still find to look bad? Also which ones are purely wrong? In fact, all I posted was just what I feel to be true: His demeanor seems scummy to me, so I voted. How can things that shift from person, their reads on people, be quantified as outright 'wrong.' Useless I can see because there is no basis in fact on what I am posting, it is all speculation like mafia often time is, but "purely wrong." I'd like you to talk more about that. If you are going to hang me you can at least do a better job than a bad post like that to tie the noose, if you don't mind.

[Furry]

See my post #7, my post #25, and my post #26 in isolation. Also, please explain how forgetting his reasons for voting somebody wasn't scummy.

Then you are in fact underestimating the case. There were pretty good points on page 10.

7 is a slightly valid point, not really something to lynch for though.

25 looking at it, I think CK is right for the wrong reasons. You also are taking some liberties in interpretation such as "voting for pressure" has nothing to do with "trying to get an explaination"

26 is a lot of the same thing... I dont think there is a huge differnece between these two reasons. Possibly im sympathetic to this given my read on who he was voting, but I think it makes some sense.

Not sure what else im missing from what you had.

[Wickedestjr]

foilist, are you ignoring me?

I'm sorry, I don't remember you asking me something. Yes?

I didn't ask you anything, but you seemed to ignore these:

He seems to be overloading the thread with wall posts that no one wants to read, but which have exceedingly little content. That to me is a form of lurking. He is posting lots, but saying almost nothing, so that people pay little attention to him. Its pretty WIFOMy, but its the best I've got.

I disagree. I think I have posted content, given my thoughts, and given my suspects.

Lurking is a problem for me, and Haylen did it in the last game we played together too, so this is the wagon I'm getting on.

What was her allignment that game?

Also, you didn't seem to have a problem with this;

foilist seems to be copying VistaSoldier's scummy behavior

So basically you were apathetic. Ok.

How was I apathetic?

I really don't care too much where your vote is as long as you have decent justification for it.

Didn't I give reasons for my vote for CrueKnight? What was wrong with those reasons?

And are you serious? I am saying, if you didn't like the Haylen lynch (which you obviously didn't, given that you were supporting another wagon)...

When did I say I didn't like the Haylen lynch? There was a moment when

I

was voting Haylen. I just thought that CrueKnight was more likely to be scum.

...then you should have actively pushed for a lynch that you did support, or at least seriously voiced concerns.

I'm tired of repeating this over and over again. We were really close to deadline. I had a feeling that if I attempted to divert the bandwagon to my preference, that I would only be wasting time, which is very detrimental a few days before deadline.

Oh and I don't vote you because the day is lasting for weeks and I have all the time in the world to vote for you. I don't see it as a pressing concern either way.

First of all, we have like 15/16 days. That is not "all the time in the world". Also, even if we did have "all the time in the world", that doesn't mean you waste a day just for the heck of it.

However I am going to vote for you because your demeanor has shifted drastically today from yesterday,

How?

and by golly, you did ask me to.

Where? Quote it.

You seem to be a bit edgy and a bit back and forth in your tone and I find it not so subtle that I, one of the people who didn't like you yesterday is now gifted with the merit of a suspicious nod my way.

How am I supposed to defend against this?


Sir Chris, I don't think malpascp was trying to insult you. OMGUS is a common mafia term that isn't meant to be insulting. OMGUS would be if a player A attacked player B, and player B attacked player A just for attacking him.


Also, Furry, can you respond to this:

1: What's wrong with coming up with another scenario? You said voting for somebody means you want them lynched. You also said pressure votes can be very helpful (or something like that). It doesn't matter that I brought up another scenario. It just shows that there are scenarios where pressure votes don't mean votes for a lynch. Also, who cares if you wouldn't have voted for him? It is just a scenario I came up with. You are doing a poor job of defending yourself.

[Wickedestjr]

cruelty, could your suspicion of malpascp be summarized as not contributing much?

Rhinox, what do you think of cruelty?

[Faraday]

I don't really think Furry is that scummy for defending the lynch, before it happened. I mean it's something I tend to do as scum, declare the wagon bad or w/e but I dunno he/she feels fairly geuine to me in the defense.

Torquez needs to post something too, he's lurking like a motherfucka' (Note I've not statistical evidence to suggest motherfucka's lurk)

[Faraday]

Wait I see I've missed a post from him.

Why do you think that's scummy Torq? I mean it's a soft claim of not being a mason with Furry, as far as I know. hardly narrows down posibillities too much.

You say it's not damning, but is it even scummy?

[Furry]

Also, Furry, can you respond to this:

1: What's wrong with coming up with another scenario? You said voting for somebody means you want them lynched. You also said pressure votes can be very helpful (or something like that). It doesn't matter that I brought up another scenario.

It just shows that there are scenarios where pressure votes don't mean votes for a lynch.

Also, who cares if you wouldn't have voted for him? It is just a scenario I came up with. You are doing a poor job of defending yourself.

As far as I am concerned, this is false. You may pressure vote someone who isnt your IDEAL lynch, but anyone who deserves a pressure vote is someone that you would not be against a lynch of. Period.

Lets say player A is scummy, so I vote player A. Player B who I have slight suspicions of starts acting stubborn and wont explain something that someone is asking him, so I pressure vote player B. In that situation, a player B lynch isnt a bad thing to me. I would prefer a player A lynch, but B is acceptable. Now lets say player C who I think is town is being useless, im not going to pressure vote him for it, because player C (being town) is a BAD lynch.

I really dont get how I can explain this any clearer