Open 190 - Trendy and Subversive C9 - Over

[DocPotter]

Nah, we should probably hold the FOS'es if we are planning a no-lynch.

Though don't be afraid to press any cases you might have. Two weeks (or however long until the deadline) of nothing is wasted time. Time better spent discussing things.

[startransmission]

My final word on no-lynch. Not going to be a part of it. I will use my vote and attempt to root out scum today, not tomorrow. Please do not throw math at me, it won't work. Here's my feeling,

1. If we no no lynch today then everyday afterwards will be lylo. Advantage: Scum.

2. If we no lynch today and assuming scum get a NK, they will NK the player that is the biggest threat to them. Advantage: Scum.

3. I we no lynch today then the precious 3 townies to 2 scum ratio will allow scum to have a bigger influence on which wagon to move forward with, as well as a larger presence on that wagon. Advantage: Scum.

4. Convincing each other about the merits/horrors of a no lynch will/has soak up a lot of discussion today. Advantage: Scum.

5. Committing to a no lynch today puts all the pressure off of scum. There are no immediate consequences for them, and town's only tool is being discarded. Advantage: Scum.

6. Activity has been bad enough, not having an objective that has to be achieved correctly and promptly will allow players to sit back and take a "wait and see" approach, instead of actively scum hunting with the goal of a town win. Advantage: Scum.

If I'm going to be "FoSed" or voted because I refuse to go along with the no lynch madness then please let me know so I can replace out, and if scum is lucky a noob will replace in and be fooled by why the "odds" are better if there's a no lynch.

Star:

Firstly, voted Mipe with a reason. I know you said that it was random and all, but it was several days after the game started, you gave a reason and then said that the reason wasn't a scum tell. Three posts to say that a vote was random, despite giving a fairly believable reason. Four before giving a new reason. Then a few posts later you come up with annother reason for the reason/no-reason/random/not so random vote.

Do you wonder why I call it disingenuous

Yes. I think I've been clear on why my "vote" for Mipe was a joke.

Why would you vote mipe when technically your vote was already on him?

As a joke.

Because voting flakes is scummy. Not removing your vote from a flake is scummy. I noticed that you didn't answer that question, just pushed it citing some incredulity.

Voting flakes is not scummy. I will place/unplace my vote for whomever whenever and for whatever reason I wish. And what exact question did I dodge?

when mipe was in a game with me recently he was "jokey" like that and ended up being scum.

He was also focused and played reasonbly well. Played scummy, but not like the mistake ridden player here. So I think this reason is rubbish too.

What? He was focused and played reasonably well? Are you serious? But wait, he also played scummy? So which is it? And when did I say that my meta on him was based on him making mistakes?

2. Personally, I think that playing as scum is generally more fun, unless there are some cool special good roles. I think playing as townie in some games boring.

20:20 hindsight. Mipe was less interested in the game and made mistakes because he was town.

He played almost the exact same as scum. And what is your point here?

But I still have to wonder why Star targeted him in the first place. The only reason I can think of is that he targeted a player who's normal play is scummy.

I RVed his predecessor. When Mipe replaced in and answered all the questions I "revoted" him as a joke, as his post was obviously a joke. I was clear on that at the time. But the more Mipe posted the more valid reasons there were to vote him. I documented and commented on those reasons throughout. Reread day 1.

Then Star starts pushing mipe because he lied.

It would be scummy if I tried to build a wagon and pursue a lynch for the reason I provided,

which you did. For something that it now appears you were doing yourself. So we come to a fifth reason for your mipe vote, which is normally fine. Multiple reasons for a vote are good. But not when everyone seems to say that the previous reason didn't count?

What the hell are you talking about? I did not pursue a lynch on Mipe for answering the damn questions. So when exactly did I lie? What previous reason are you referring? Citations/quotes please.

Then we get Star's response to Sleepless:

To paraphrase:

None of my previous reasons counted, my vote was already there.

Retcon and writing off scummy as silly.

not agreeing with SK

SK's accusal was way soft, and you followed it way hard. Yeah I can see sleepless' point.

I have reasons now

again retconning the previous 4 reasons for your vote.

I'm unfamiliar with "retconning". And I don't follow a single thing you're talking about here. Please, pull actual quotes so I know what I'm responding to, instead of literally putting words into my mouth without context.

20:20 hindsight is a beautiful thing when looking at a mis-lynch. In this case it shows that Star pushed an easy lynch on a scum style player, mostly by building up the suspicion with random seeming reasons that he could walk away from, and a final claim the Star himself appears to be commiting.

It wasn't that easy a lynch. It was however the right lynch, despite the flip. My reasons weren't random, they were clear and concise, whether or not you agree with them. I had no plan to nor will I "walk away" from those reasons. And what's this final claim I'm committing to?

Well, now we know we have a doctor. Well done whoever you are.

Wait, what the hell? For all we know, scum could've no killed. Only scum would know for sure whether they tried to kill and it didn't work, or if they decided to not kill for whatever reason. Why are you making this assumption?

Because the idea that in this setup scum would choose to not kill anybody is ridiculous.

[KittyMo]

Sick and won't be posting much if at all.

Too sick to go to school = too sick for mafia.

[DocPotter]

Generally speaking the question you 'pushed' was why would you vote Mipe if your vote was already on him. Asked by multiple people. Including you.

As I said, there are scummy reasons for that vote as well as silly. I think you're trying to cover one with the other.

Voting a flake is scummy. When you vote them and it becomes obvious that they have flaked, there is no point keeping your vote on them. None. But you did. Then came up with an increasing number of reasons to keep your vote there, even re-voteing to make your point about having a reason. That you have walked away from all bar one of those reasons is bad.

You cited, and walked away from, meta as a reason for your vote. But you only claimed the part of his meta that suited you. If you had been serious about it, especially with the benifit of hindsight, t would be obvious that the scum/town element of his meta was his mistakes not his jokes. It was his attention to the game as scum. This was obvious enough that you should have seen it, and anyof us should have seen it if we'd looked.

Retcon, short for Retroactive Continuity, is a literary term that "is the deliberate changing of previously established facts in a work of serial fiction."

Wikipedia

In mafia terms it's trying to change, or refocus, things you have already said. Trying to change your history. Like saying that a vote was random several posts after you had made it with an actual reason.

If I'm going to be "FoSed" or voted because I refuse to go along with the no lynch madness then please let me know so I can replace out, and if scum is lucky a noob will replace in and be fooled by why the "odds" are better if there's a no lynch.

This worries me. Ourtight appeal to emotion. Saying you're against a no-lynch is one thing. That's why the discussion. Giving your reasons for being against is a good thing. But threatening to walk away or claiming that the "odds" are wrong? To me this sounds like you are worried by a no-lynch.

Perhaps you should treat it as an oppertunity to be as scum hunty as possible. Since the worst that will happen is that you will be NK'ed and confirm all your scum hunting. That goes for all of us btw. With no threat of being lynched it behooves us all to be as pro-town scum hunters as possible to attract the NK.

[startransmission]

Generally speaking the question you 'pushed' was why would you vote Mipe if your vote was already on him. Asked by multiple people. Including you.

I asked myself that question but I "pushed" it? Anyways, I made clear many times that I revoted him in jest.

Voting a flake is scummy. When you vote them and it becomes obvious that they have flaked, there is no point keeping your vote on them. None. But you did.

Mipe was more than a flake, he was scummy. I explained why I thought he was scummy. And I couldn't disagree more about moving my vote away from somebody I feel is scummy.

The point of keeping my vote on Mipe was because I thought he was scum and he refused to supply a defense.

Then came up with an increasing number of reasons to keep your vote there, even re-voteing to make your point about having a reason. That you have walked away from all bar one of those reasons is bad.

When did I walk away from those reasons??? And your timeline is wrong, I didn't provide any actual reasons for voting Mipe until after I revoted.

You cited, and walked away from, meta as a reason for your vote. But you only claimed the part of his meta that suited you. If you had been serious about it, especially with the benifit of hindsight, t would be obvious that the scum/town element of his meta was his mistakes not his jokes. It was his attention to the game as scum. This was obvious enough that you should have seen it, and anyof us should have seen it if we'd looked.

Again, when did I walk away from the meta? How do you know that I only used the part of it that suited me?

Retcon, short for Retroactive Continuity, is a literary term that "is the deliberate changing of previously established facts in a work of serial fiction."

Wikipedia

In mafia terms it's trying to change, or refocus, things you have already said. Trying to change your history. Like saying that a vote was random several posts after you had made it with an actual reason.

If I'm going to be "FoSed" or voted because I refuse to go along with the no lynch madness then please let me know so I can replace out, and if scum is lucky a noob will replace in and be fooled by why the "odds" are better if there's a no lynch.

This worries me. Ourtight appeal to emotion. Saying you're against a no-lynch is one thing. That's why the discussion. Giving your reasons for being against is a good thing. But threatening to walk away or claiming that the "odds" are wrong? To me this sounds like you are worried by a no-lynch.

I am worried about a no lynch. I'm very worried about it, because it is not in towns best interest. I'm not appealing to emotion by threatening to walk away, I'm making clear that I will not take part in an all but forfeited game.

Vote: DocPotter

For not having much of an issue with my vote for Mipe on Day 1. For voting for Mipe himself while not providing any case against him. For refusing to quote or cite exactly where I'm lying, or being inconsistent. For spreading suspicion on virtually everybody based off their activity. For buddying up to KittyMo, especially on the no-lynch issue. For supporting the no-lynch. For misrepresenting me.

[DocPotter]

I don't believe I have mis-represented you in any way Star.

Where you said I got my timeline wrong, wasn't a timeline.

Why I was worried was that nobody had even hinted that they would FOS or vote you for refusing to go along with the no-lynch. So for you to bring it up is strange.


My mistake with Mipe, which I admitted already by the way, was in not looking into your meta comments until after the vote. Checking that meta out took him away from being the most scummy. 20:20 hindsight at work. But then I've already said that.

I believe I have pointed out a few times where you are lieing. That you refuse to admit to it is strange. Since I have listed the main ones. But I will quote it exactly when I have time (and the forum/connection decides to play nice)

Do you honestly think that the low activity is good? I believe I said that everybody needs to pick it up. That Kitty needed a look at for doubling the post count, and after that look that I felt that she was the only one posting to near correct levels. (Kitty/SK actually, bu that's cumbersome)

Activity has been bad enough,

No you don't think that the low activity has been good. So you what. Agree with me but find it scummy in this case? Wouldn't be the first time you've said something like that.

[Excedrin]

wolframnhart is replacing Cat.

[wolframnhart]

Hello everyone, will post some thoughts soon.

[wolframnhart]

Ok lets look at that no lynch situation.

6 players remain. No lynch.
Night time, doc protects wrong person (assuming there is a doc).
5 players remain. Doc claims, along with who he/she protected night 1.
Two confirmed townies (assuming no counter claim hoopla) with three unconfirmed. Still lylo time because a mislynch here brings 4 townies at night, doc would die and scum would win

Another scenario.
6 players remain. No lynch.
Night time doc protects correct person.
6 players remain and Doc claims with two confirmed townies.
Three unconfirmed players, three confirmed players (again assuming no counter claim hoopla which I am sure there would be) We would still have to avoid a mislynch because if there is one that leaves 5 players going into the night, doc would be killed, 4 players next morning two of which are scum and it's game over.

So really I just can't see how no lynching is a good thing at this time. We are assuming the doctor is here, and IF there is a doctor there is another scenario to think about:

No lynch with 6 players and one of whom is a doctor and one of whom might be a mafia roleblocker, if that is the case then the mafia know who they tried to roleblock and who they tried to kill, which leaves them with two players they didn't target and roleblock to choose from, one of which would be the doctor and so either way if they roleblock one and kill the other they have taken the route of the first scenario, which is still lylo only this time with or without the doctor around to claim.

To me the situation needs to be looked at closer, and I understand where Kitty is coming with suggesting a no lynch, but I do not understand DocPotters immediate agreement to it.

[Excedrin]

Vote Count

DocPotter (2): Sleepless Assassin, startransmission
not voting: KittyMo, wolframnhart, kunkstar7, DocPotter

[startransmission]

I don't believe I have mis-represented you in any way Star.

You call me a liar, you say I abandoned the reasons I voted for mipe, you "paraphase" (putting words in my mouth without context to sell your point) and that I'm trying to "change history". You do all this without quotes or citations.

Where you said I got my timeline wrong, wasn't a timeline.

Really?

Then came up with an increasing number of reasons to keep your vote there, even re-voteing to make your point about having a reason. That you have walked away from all bar one of those reasons is bad.

This is another example of you misrepresenting me. I never offered a non-random/silly reason for placing my vote on mipe. The actual reasons came afterwards, and I didn't revote to make a point about having reasons.

Why I was worried was that nobody had even hinted that they would FOS or vote you for refusing to go along with the no-lynch. So for you to bring it up is strange.

Is that so?

At this stage no-lynch is a viable tactic for the town. Any lynch today would have to be extra certain.

fos Star

Kitty partly explained one reason why what you started talking about was a bad idea. There are more.

What am I missing here? By the way, I don't recall you ever going into what those other reasons are. Please do, and make sure they're different from Kitty's.

My mistake with Mipe, which I admitted already by the way, was in not looking into your meta comments until after the vote. Checking that meta out took him away from being the most scummy. 20:20 hindsight at work. But then I've already said that.

I still have no idea what you're talking about. How did you look into the meta I brought up when I never offered (game's still ongoing) a link? But let's say you did your homework (conveniently after mipe was lynched) and found the meta I briefly mentioned. Mipe, who was scum, played almost exactly the same as he did here. So it wasn't an issue of how active or interested he was, although that was consistent with this game as well. Also, the meta was not a big part of my case on him. I brought it up to explain why I felt his being dodgy and jokey was making me more suspicious of him than I might have been otherwise.

All that said, I don't actually believe you read the game in question. When did I discard the meta? You say I only brought up the part of the meta that suited me, so what parts did I leave out?

I believe I have pointed out a few times where you are lieing. That you refuse to admit to it is strange. Since I have listed the main ones. But I will quote it exactly when I have time (and the forum/connection decides to play nice)

You have not once pointed out where I lied. And you still haven't provided any quotes or citations. MS is shitting the bed on me too, yet I am able to provide quotes for my arguments.

Do you honestly think that the low activity is good? I believe I said that everybody needs to pick it up. That Kitty needed a look at for doubling the post count, and after that look that I felt that she was the only one posting to near correct levels. (Kitty/SK actually, bu that's cumbersome)

Activity has been bad enough,

You pointed fingers at people based on their activity- either they posted too much or not enough.

No you don't think that the low activity has been good. So you what. Agree with me but find it scummy in this case? Wouldn't be the first time you've said something like that.

Excuse me? My point was that a no-lynch today would hurt the already insanely slow pace of this game. So where's the inconsistency? And when else did I agree with somebody about something, and then hold it against them? I'm not going to hold my breath waiting for you to cite or quote an instance, not something that you're good at.

You picked the wrong guy to strawman. Start backing up your accusations and stop misrepresenting me.

[startransmission]

And welcome wolramnhart. I look forward to your thoughts on the game so far.

[DocPotter]

I don't believe I have mis-represented you in any way Star.

You call me a liar, you say I abandoned the reasons I voted for mipe, you "paraphase" (putting words in my mouth without context to sell your point) and that I'm trying to "change history". You do all this without quotes or citations.

You did lie, you do appear to have abandoned reasons for your votes, and yes you are trying to retcon yourself.

Vote:ksun481

For being the last to confirm.

Reason 1

Yeah. Mipe, answering other peoples questions is a scumtell.

Unvote {ksun who was replaced by Mipe}, Vote: Mipe

Reason 2. Mostly reason 2 because of your insistance later that you were already voting Mipe so reason 1 counts.

I voted Mipe for shits and giggles, consider it a random vote.

Reason 3

There was a small amount of non randomness in the vote though, when mipe was in a game with me recently he was "jokey" like that and ended up being scum.

Reason 4*

Several posts about Mipe lieing

Reason 5

From what I can see, you have failed to mention your previous reasons except to claim random everytime. At least until you get to his lieing. Of course claiming that your vote was random and claiming a non-random reason, (see 4*) is a direct contradiction of yourself. So when you claim it was all random, which you did until you started on the lieing case, you were retconning yourself.
Hell, you managed to walk away from reason 2 pretty quickly and no I don't think it was a joke.

Where you said I got my timeline wrong, wasn't a timeline.

Really?

Then came up with an increasing number of reasons to keep your vote there, even re-voteing to make your point about having a reason. That you have walked away from all bar one of those reasons is bad.

This is another example of you misrepresenting me. I never offered a non-random/silly reason for placing my vote on mipe. The actual reasons came afterwards, and I didn't revote to make a point about having reasons.

Firstly, This is amusing.

Then came up with an increasing number of reasons to keep your vote there, even re-voteing to make your point about having a reason. That you have walked away from all bar one of those reasons is bad.

When did I walk away from those reasons??? And your timeline is wrong, I didn't provide any actual reasons for voting Mipe until after I revoted.

Notice that you reversed your timeline comment and the quote it was in answer to.

My mistake with Mipe, which I admitted already by the way, was in not looking into your meta comments until after the vote. Checking that meta out took him away from being the most scummy. 20:20 hindsight at work. But then I've already said that.

I still have no idea what you're talking about. How did you look into the meta I brought up when I never offered (game's still ongoing) a link?

I searched for all posts by Mipe and looked at the three games that came up. Of which you are/were only in two, being this one and the one you mentioned. Something you should have realised when I quoted him from a finished newbie game!

But let's say you did your homework (conveniently after mipe was lynched) and found the meta I briefly mentioned. Mipe, who was scum, played almost exactly the same as he did here. So it wasn't an issue of how active or interested he was, although that was consistent with this game as well.

No there were differences. While he played scummy in the other two games (He was scum in both), and here, it was here that he was mistake ridden as well.

Also, the meta was not a big part of my case on him. I brought it up to explain why I felt his being dodgy and jokey was making me more suspicious of him than I might have been otherwise.

It seems to be the only part of your case. Eventually started calling him a liar, and you also have claimed that the meta case was silly/random.

All that said, I don't actually believe you read the game in question. When did I discard the meta? You say I only brought up the part of the meta that suited me, so what parts did I leave out?

Well, given that I quoted Mipe from the middle of one of those games ...
You discarded it when you described everything before the lie case as a random reason, and you only mentioned the part that was consistant across all three games, not the part that was different. I mentioned it specifically by the way. Mistake ridden and lurkery.

I believe I have pointed out a few times where you are lieing. That you refuse to admit to it is strange. Since I have listed the main ones. But I will quote it exactly when I have time (and the forum/connection decides to play nice)

You have not once pointed out where I lied. And you still haven't provided any quotes or citations. MS is shitting the bed on me too, yet I am able to provide quotes for my arguments.

Something to do with trying to get five kids ready for the school year to start on Monday. But I still should have gotten to this quicker. Oh, and see above.

Do you honestly think that the low activity is good? I believe I said that everybody needs to pick it up. That Kitty needed a look at for doubling the post count, and after that look that I felt that she was the only one posting to near correct levels. (Kitty/SK actually, bu that's cumbersome)

Activity has been bad enough,

You pointed fingers at people based on their activity- either they posted too much or not enough.

I was suspicious that SK had doubled t... What the hell I already answered this already. Strange that you bring it up again.

No you don't think that the low activity has been good. So you what. Agree with me but find it scummy in this case? Wouldn't be the first time you've said something like that.

Excuse me? My point was that a no-lynch today would hurt the already insanely slow pace of this game. So where's the inconsistency? And when else did I agree with somebody about something, and then hold it against them? I'm not going to hold my breath waiting for you to cite or quote an instance, not something that you're good at.

Mipe, answering other peoples questions is scummy

But not in this case

Same thing Star, same thing.

You picked the wrong guy to strawman. Start backing up your accusations and stop misrepresenting me.

I don't believe I have staw manned anything here. Quotes and all as I said I would (Ok, it took longer than it should have)


Finally, I never ment for you to think that I was fossing you for you stance on a no-lynch. That was not the reason and I'm sorry for making it appear like it was.

I still think a no-lynch is the way to go. Even if nobody starts talking, and we are, we'll just end up where we would be if the NK had worked anyway. But I think we will get people talking, and we don't have to decide until nearly the deadline anyway since if anybody ends the discussion early they will probably be scum.

But if you still don't like it Star, can you think of a better way to increase the towns chances? (Better or improve on either option)

[wolframnhart]

Doc how can you even remotely think that a no lynch is the way to go? Did you see my post where I describe three possible scenarios, all of which are bad for the town?

[kunkstar7]

I'm not seeing what your saying with points 1 -3, although I do see a slight contradiction in these quotes:

There was a small amount of non randomness in the vote though, when mipe was in a game with me recently he was "jokey" like that and ended up being scum.

I voted Mipe for shits and giggles, consider it a random vote.

You have to admit Startransmission that you attributed a small amount of nonrandomness into a vote that you previously called random.

Yeah. Mipe, answering other peoples questions is a scumtell.

Unvote {ksun who was replaced by Mipe}, Vote: Mipe

As it were Doc, I see that he was joking with this. To a certain extent yes, answering other people's questions for them could be construed to mean defending them. Yet this was not the case. Mipe simply felt like answering all the questions that SK posed to everybody. So unless you believe that Mipe was trying to defend everyone from accusation/questioning, I don't see how Star was being serious.

Mipe, answering other peoples questions is scummy

But not in this case

Same thing Star, same thing.

I would really like you to clarify what you meant here. Ah, and please try and copy the real quote, whole quote.

The entirety of that post went as follows:

star, how is that a scumtell?

In this case it isn't. But... sometimes answering questions intended for other people could be seen as scum coaching their partners, or just answering for them.

Which only serves to confirm his statement that that sentence was not meant to be taken serious.

[Sleepless Assassin]

I'm actually finding myself agreeing with Star now.

[startransmission]

I searched for all posts by Mipe and looked at the three games that came up. Of which you are/were only in two, being this one and the one you mentioned. Something you should have realised when I quoted him from a finished newbie game!

What? I don't understand this. You quoted Mipe from a game I wasn't even in. So when did I discard the meta I mentioned? What part of the meta I mentioned did I leave out?

But let's say you did your homework (conveniently after mipe was lynched) and found the meta I briefly mentioned. Mipe, who was scum, played almost exactly the same as he did here. So it wasn't an issue of how active or interested he was, although that was consistent with this game as well.

No there were differences. While he played scummy in the other two games (He was scum in both), and here, it was here that he was mistake ridden

as well

.

Bolded for emphasis. Ok, so you agree with why my experience with him as scum made me feel more strongly that he was scum in this game? The mistake he made here was not taking the game seriously, something he also did in the game I played with him when he was scum. That was my point, that is in fat what metas are all about. So where did I discard/cherrypick? By the way, what was the name of the game that I played with him? I really don't think you have even read through it.

Well, given that I quoted Mipe from the middle of one of those games ...
You discarded it when you described everything before the lie case as a random reason, and you only mentioned the part that was consistant across all three games, not the part that was different. I mentioned it specifically by the way. Mistake ridden and lurkery.

I didn't read all of his games. I referenced the one other game I played in with him. His behavior as scum was fairly consistent with his behavior here. I discarded nothing. The mistake is yours. And what does lurkery mean?

Finally, I never ment for you to think that I was fossing you for you stance on a no-lynch. That was not the reason and I'm sorry for making it appear like it was.

I don't believe that. So what was the reason? Why wouldn't you bring up that reason when you FoSed me? How could I not think that you were FoSing me for not going along with the no lynch, when the only content of that post was you agreeing/buddying with Kitty for being for it, while scolding me for not?

But if you still don't like it Star, can you think of a better way to increase the towns chances? (Better or improve on either option)

Yeah, lynch you.

I'm not going to respond to the other nonsense in your post Doc. I've addressed all of it, and if you actually believe the points you're trying to bring up, I suggest you reread the game. If anybody else thinks that Doc is making good points against me, please ask me about them and I will respond.

And Doc, there are several direct questions I've asked you in my last few posts which you have yet to answer. Why is this?

[DocPotter]

I answered everything. You're still misquoting me, and you're not thinking.
Do I need to show exactly where you're misquoting me?

Anyway, There is a better way which you should of thought of of by now.

Cop/Doctor. Claim. Who you did/ when/ why/ result.

We will get 2 confirmed townies and plenty of time for discussion, so claim.

The quicker the better, because a false claim takes too much time to provide the information.

[startransmission]

^ I hope I'm not the only one who sees all the things that are wrong here.

And if you don't, for the time being please do not claim.

[DocPotter]

My mistake with Mipe, which I admitted already by the way, was in not looking into your meta comments until after the vote. Checking that meta out took him away from being the most scummy. 20:20 hindsight at work. But then I've already said that.

I still have no idea what you're talking about. How did you look into the meta I brought up when I never offered (game's still ongoing) a link?

I searched for all posts by Mipe and looked at the three games that came up. Of which you are/were only in two, being this one and the one you mentioned. Something you should have realised when I quoted him from a finished newbie game!

I searched for all posts by Mipe and looked at the three games that came up. Of which you are/were only in two, being this one and the one you mentioned. Something you should have realised when I quoted him from a finished newbie game!

What? I don't understand this. You quoted Mipe from a game I wasn't even in.

Notice the misquote. Your comment was that I couldn't have found the game you were takig meta from because you didn't say which one it was. My response was that it was easy to find and given that I quoted Mipe from a third game you could quite easily realise that I had actually looked and found them.

Then you ignore the first part of the discussion to quote my answer, then say that you don't understand it. YOu do understand it but are trying to make it look like you don't by quoting it out of context.
That is a major scum tell.

Well, now we know we have a doctor. Well done whoever you are.

As KittyMo was aluding too, and as I aluded to. THis is a bad statement. You are either the doctor who has just outed yourself, or are scum who is fishing.
I have given you every oppertunity to claim. I've demanded it. I even pushed you real hard, with no vote so that if you were town it would be harder for the actual scum to cause your mis-lynch, to ensure a fake claim would follow if you did claim.

But your constant misquotes and mis-reps and generally anti town behaviour has convinced me that you are in fact scum.

Vote Startransmission

WIFOM:

If you are the doctor, which I now doubt, and since you clearly outed yourself as possibly being one, ask yourself this. Why would a scum me want to lynch the only person who could be safely NK'ed? Lynch the doctor and the deputy takes over. NK the doctor and he can't protect himself.

If you were the doctor you would have claimed your target. That gives 2 confirmed townies. Then there might be a scum fake claim with iffy information. Worst case we have to choose a lynch between 2 doc claims, best case the other two townies have 2 scum in 3 targets, while the doctor and his protectee has scum in 4 targets.

[Excedrin]

Vote Count

startransmission (1): DocPotter
DocPotter (2): Sleepless Assassin, startransmission
not voting: KittyMo, wolframnhart, kunkstar7

fyi, fixed DocPotter's quote tags in his prev post and deleted his EBWOP (content was the same).

[DocPotter]

Thanks Excedrin.

[Sleepless Assassin]

Wow. So Docpotter is trying to find out who the doc is to the point where he asks for a claim, gets a reaction from Star, and posts a conclusion that Star isn't a Doc. If that's not scummy, I don't know what is. Let's lynch this guy.

[wolframnhart]

@Doc

Please explain:

If you are the doctor, which I now doubt, and since you clearly outed yourself as possibly being one, ask yourself this. Why would a scum me want to lynch the only person who could be safely NK'ed? Lynch the doctor and the deputy takes over. NK the doctor and he can't protect himself.

I can't seem to get what you are saying here.

[KittyMo]

So I logged onto MafiaScum today to take a look at my games, but wasn't planning on posting in them. I noticed I had a private message. I check my inbox, and see it's a prod for this game. At first, I was pissed off because I thought I made it clear I was sick, but when I opened it, it was the most amusing prod I've ever received. xD I'm not sure if I should be quoting Mod-supplied info, but I'll post it when the game's over. So basically, I'm in a good mood, so I'll go ahead and comment on what I've missed.

With 3 people opposed to no lynch, I guess it's not worth pushing. I've been taught and had it drilled into my head that that is the proper strategy for hours and hours of irc games that involve even-numbered player numbers a lot more often than here on MS. But okay. We'll do it your way~

I'm making clear that I will not take part in an all but forfeited game.

Whether we no lynch or not, and from both perspectives, it's not "forfeiting the game." I think that's a really ridiculous way to look at things. I don't think you can seriously say there's not some sort of appeal going on here, because it's certainly not a fact...

Also, clearly I need to look up Mipe meta. I will do that later.

Voting flakes is not scummy. I will place/unplace my vote for whomever whenever and for whatever reason I wish.

Well yeah, everyone has the freedom to act within Excedrin's rules, but that doesn't make them not scummy...?

I'm actually finding myself agreeing with Star now.

Well, you could be talking about 2 things here:
1. No lynch
2. How scummy DocPotter is

Both of which you already agreed with Star with...

I'm liking Sleepless less and less as the day continues...

-----------

QUESTION:
What if we actually did massclaim right now?

1. Massclaims often happen in 5 player lylo, and since we're treating today like lylo, it wouldn't be particularly unusual.
2. It would narrow the possible scum down.
3. It would stop all these blatant softclaims.

However:
4. It would give scum the setup.
5. It would tell the mafia roleblocker exactly who to roleblock.

I can see it both ways, but I actually am seeing it as a good idea. Am I crazy?

Another note:
The following scumpairs are now pretty unlikely:
Kunkstar7/wolframnhart
Kunkstar7/KittyMo
wolframnhart/KittyMo

because any of these pairs would've had a chance to quickhammer DocPotter by now. Just figured I'd put that out there. =]