Mini 275: Subject Mafia - It's all over!

[Kenji]

First vote count of day 2:

Turbovolver - 2(CropCircles, RangeroftheNorth)
Quailman - 2 (Turbovolver, Sotty7)
Sineish - 1 (Pablito)

With 10 alive it takes 6 to lynch!

[How did no one pick up on that in the first post of the day?]

[Don Gaetano]

I agree completely with Ranger, except for the vote. I still think Turbo isn't scum. He just seems to be one of those people that would argue:

"Chickens can't fly, rocks can't fly. therefore Chickens are rocks."

Ofcourse he could very well be illogical AND scum but I don't think blatantly illlogical arguments are a scum-tell. Subtle illogical arguments are a scum-tell.

=====

Turbovolver, I noticed you described yesterday's lynch as a mislynch. I couldn't disagree more. IMHO Snowmonkey deliberately decided to sabotage the game because he didn't like the way we play it. He misplayed, we didn't mislynch. And even besides all the meta-gaming reasons, lynching a vanilla townie that was playing anti-town, is better than most of the alternatives.

=====

I'm going to

Vote: Quailman

. Either he gets back pretty quick, or he should be replaced, and I can't even understand why Sineish hasn't been replaced ages ago. He hasn't posted here since february 1st.

I'm going to re-read the thread before I make any comments on people who are actually playing.

[Turbovolver]

Look, all I can say is I've been trying to catch scum. Whether I've been doing a good job of it or not we will have to wait and see. If we keep lynching pro-town players just because they annoy us, though, we'll soon be out of bodies.

Also, I've never been illogical. If anything, I've been TOO logical and focused on details others would consider insignificant.

Reactions are just as important as actions in this game, and I've generated a lot of reactions for you guys. Don't be so quick to discount them.

I'm not going to change my ways... at least until it's proven that I have been wrong in the majority of my arguments. The last time I played this hard was in newbie game - I was lynched day 1, but correctly found both scum before I died.

In fact, tell you what - I'm willing to stake my life on one of my targets. Any town-supported bandwagon against one of those 4 I will join, and if I was wrong then feel free to off me next day (and I will vote for myself). That way I can either prove to you my worth as a scum-hunter or I can quite rightfully be ejected for being a dick. You guys can choose which one looks the scummiest yourselves, if you want to do this.

[petroleumjelly]

If you're pro-town Turbo, sacrificing yourself does not help us. Right now I am waiting for everybody to check up on this thread and say what they think.

For now I will

Vote: Pablito

. I voted for him yesterday and never received a response, perhaps I will get one today.

[Sotty7]

My absolute first priority today is get some talking or replacements out of Quail and Sineish. We need the input of the whole town if we are going to get any where today.

Turbo – Currently I am in six games of mafia (yeah I'm addicted...what can you do?) I had not expected this game to open up so quickly as a few of the games that I am in have had prolonged nights. I only spotted this game when I was looking for another one of my games (mini 249), so I may have posted in my other games before even noticing this game was back up. If it had been days until I checked while posting in my other games then your point would be vaild. That wasn't the case though, so I think you were really reaching there.

However, you're right reactions are a big part of mafia but if you keep making arguments about small silly little things then everyones reaction is just going to be the same – very annoyed. And that's not going to tell you a lot, now is it?

[Turbovolver]

If it had been days until I checked while posting in my other games then your point would be vaild. That wasn't the case though, so I think you were really reaching there.

Like I said, everytime I've come online I've checked whether the game was re-opened. Perhaps that's not the case with you, you are in more games than me. But for that reason I didn't really buy people not noticing the game being open.

Of course if you think I'm lying about that, then yes it would be reaching. People will have to make up their own minds.

[Turbovolver]

Unvote: Quailman
Vote: Turbovolver

I investigated him, he's scum.

[cropcircles]

Really not amused.

[petroleumjelly]

Unvote yourself, Turbo, the last thing we need today is a quicklynch on you when we could be poking at other people for information.

Speaking of poking, we seriously need a prod on Quailman and Sineish!

[Turbovolver]

Unvote: Turbovolver

.

Actually a quicklynch (or preferably ALMOST one) is what I was hoping. I was going to bed and wanted to see if any of the usual suspects were going to jump on while I was asleep.

Vote: Quailman

[Sotty7]

I'll never agree that voting for yourself is a good idea.

[Turbovolver]

Unvote: Quailman
Vote: Don Gaetano

It's been more than a few hours now, so even my detractors should support this move.

[Kenji]

Quailman - 2 (Sotty7, Don Gaetano)
Turbovolver - 2(CropCircles, RangeroftheNorth)
Sineish - 1 (Pablito)
Pablito - 1 (petroleumjelly)
Don Gaetano - 1 (Turbovolver)

If Quailman does not post soon I will be prodding... that goes the same for anyone yet to post since the start of the day.

[Turbovolver]

So umm yeah, I'm pretty sure of Sotty7 being scum now. That was a pretty weak response if you ask me - she basically admits she misrepresented me, tries to strawman by returning to the original argument and ignoring the other points I raise. She also attacks me for suggesting there is a link there - I'm sorry but if I was scum I would have nothing to gain by pointing out a link because either of you would just turn up town upon death anyway.

She really doesn't want to be linked with this Stewie guy, and she's using scummy arguments to try to sever the connection. I feel there's only one conclusion that can be made about their alignment here.

Unless of course snowmonkey turns up scum. Then, I look pretty bad

Bump.

PS: snowmonkey didn't turn up scum.

I think there are some good points here, please comment on them people (even if that means calling me an idiot again).

[Sotty7]

I don't think I called you an idiot. I just don't agree with you on a whole lot of things.

Alrighty, you're going back to the whole me and Stewie are linked thing again. I will point out what I find wrong and why.

So first of all you fail to deny that you left out something I said to make me look worse.

What did I leave out? If it's the fact I am the only one that Stewie defended then no, I think that I covered that point.

If you are going to say it's all because Stewie defended me, then that blows up in your face too. You say yourself his defense was solid, basically he made valid and true points as to why most of your attack on me was baseless. How is that suspicious?

Did it ever cross your mind that Stewie has only defended me because your reasoning

was wrong

? If the logic of someones attack is flawed it's players right to point that out! It's just plan commonsense, to correct someones mistake. If he hard augured against your valid points, making no sense, then yes, then I would understand there to be a link between us. The fact he did not do that and yet you

still

insist on this link is baffling to me.

I feel this does apply to Stewie so far only really defending me. I believe that the arguments you made against me that Stewie defended against were weak and reaching and that your logic in reaching those conclusions was wrong. I believe I have said this at least four times now, but you won't just concede this point.

And look at the last sentence, you claim that the fact I still link you two even though his defense was fair enough is baffling even though I've already explained myself on this point and you "grudgingly admitted" my response was OK.

I only said that because you went back and said -

His actual defense of you is fair enough. I think both you and Stewie are likely to be scum based on individual evidence

, so when one of you defends the other I will note that. While it would look even worse if the defense wasn't solid, it doesn't mean it still doesn't look suspicious to me.

That answer was good enough for me, because I felt like you were saying I was scum

because

Stewie defended me. But here you come out saying that you think we could be scum based of individual evidence

Grudgingly I'll have to say that this is a good answer. If you truly believe that we are both scum based of individual evidence then I guess you are allowed your opinion (as wrong as it might be).

If you were to try and push the “link” that does not exist then my slight suspicions of you would have sky rocketed.

Here I said that if you were to push that link my suspicions would rise. You did so they did, I attacked you again and you went off claiming I strawmaned and misrepresented you, both things I feel that I am not guilty of.

Oh, so you don't deny that you've misrepresented me? Pointing out "big holes" in my logic doesn't really count when you make your arguments with only half the facts.

I don't think saying you have big holes in you logic and misrepresenting you are the same thing.

In essence, I feel you said I am scum because Stewie defended me. I say that anyone would have defended me because your points against me at that time were weak.

I understand looking back now, how it would increase your suspicion in both of us if one defended the other if you believed both of us to be scum. I believe I got so caught up in the game yesterday that I just brushed that away, and figured your reasoning crazy, for that I apologise. I will ask though, as to why you find me scummy. The reasons that you gave (that I can remember of the top of my head) were the Snow vote, that we disagreed on, and the whole timing of the game. Can you give me any other reasons, apart from the fact that we pretty much disagreed on every turn?

I'm sorry but if I was scum I would have nothing to gain by pointing out a link because either of you would just turn up town upon death anyway.

Couldn't the same point be used with Stewie defending me? As in scum have nothing to gain by defending each other because if you lynch one and they're scum, the town will just turn round a lynch the other?

[Turbovolver]

I don't think I called you an idiot. I just don't agree with you on a whole lot of things.

I never said you did
I'm expecting the REST of the town to do that for you.

So first of all you fail to deny that you left out something I said to make me look worse.

What did I leave out? If it's the fact I am the only one that Stewie defended then no, I think that I covered that point.

If you are going to say it's all because Stewie defended me, then that blows up in your face too. You say yourself his defense was solid, basically he made valid and true points as to why most of your attack on me was baseless. How is that suspicious?

Did it ever cross your mind that Stewie has only defended me because your reasoning

was wrong

? If the logic of someones attack is flawed it's players right to point that out! It's just plan commonsense, to correct someones mistake. If he hard augured against your valid points, making no sense, then yes, then I would understand there to be a link between us. The fact he did not do that and yet you

still

insist on this link is baffling to me.

I feel this does apply to Stewie so far only really defending me.

Apart from pushing the snowmonkey lynch, Stewie did nothing but defend you, despite saying that he thought a lot of the stuff I had said was "over-reasoned". I don't see how you pointing out Stewie's defense was reasonable addresses that point. That is what I meant by the misrepresentation and strawman stuff though, so if people feel that you have addressed that point then the strawman/mispresentation stuff is invalidated.

I believe that the arguments you made against me that Stewie defended against were weak and reaching and that your logic in reaching those conclusions was wrong. I believe I have said this at least four times now, but you won't just concede this point.

*ahem*

152: Defends Sotty7. Fair enough.

I've already conceded the point, AT LEAST once. Don't misrepresent me.

I'm happy to admit that his defense was sound, I'm just saying that a sound defence from one scummy player to another is still notable. We've been over this. You have agreed this point is fair enough, and even quoted it in your latest post.

And look at the last sentence, you claim that the fact I still link you two even though his defense was fair enough is baffling even though I've already explained myself on this point and you "grudgingly admitted" my response was OK.

Your response here is a whole bunch of quotes explaining why you got suspicious of me. Either way, I don't see how it explains why you found something baffling that you'd already acknowledged an explanation to.

Oh, so you don't deny that you've misrepresented me? Pointing out "big holes" in my logic doesn't really count when you make your arguments with only half the facts.

I don't think saying you have big holes in you logic and misrepresenting you are the same thing.

This quote doesn't even suggest that. It suggests your case against me is craplogic, due to a misrepresentation.

In essence, I feel you said I am scum because Stewie defended me. I say that anyone would have defended me because your points against me at that time were weak.

Yeah, right. I haven't been on your case at any other stages of the game at all, have I?

I understand looking back now, how it would increase your suspicion in both of us if one defended the other if you believed both of us to be scum. I believe I got so caught up in the game yesterday that I just brushed that away, and figured your reasoning crazy, for that I apologise.

OK. I guess this means the point above doesn't really apply then.

I will ask though, as to why you find me scummy. The reasons that you gave (that I can remember of the top of my head) were the Snow vote, that we disagreed on, and the whole timing of the game. Can you give me any other reasons, apart from the fact that we pretty much disagreed on every turn?

#27: A small attack on me, but I was kinda jumpy so it's fair enough. Strange that she decided to ask me a question based on the FOS I'd admitted to being not serious about, instead of questioning my actual vote on PJ. (-1)

#40: Accepts my reasoning for voting PJ, asks another question which is a bit dodgy, considering he's already answered it AND she answers it as part of the question (-1).

#79: Another question, and this one I really don't agree with. What, he's not allowed to express suspicion on anyone but who he votes for? It's the scum that think they only have to express suspicion on those who they vote for. (-1)

#84: Sotty7 fails to realise I buggered up the links here. I don't care what anybody says, I think she would point that out if she did notice, and the fact that she didn't notice means she wasn't genuine (-1).

#144: The paragraph I had explaining why this post is craplogic is actually based on another misunderstanding (I thought we were talking about OMGUS as in snowmonkey lists Ranger as suss and Ranger responds with a vote), so it's actually not a very good case. However, the fact remains that being hypocritical isn't much of a scum tell in my books. I still don't like this post justifying her vote, and seemingly trying to push the lynch (-1).

#163: The convolution continues (the fault of both of us, probably) in this post. The points she raises I have no problem with, but I was rather suprised she didn't defend against the dot points. She's later explained why, but there's still the chance she's lying. Because I consider strawmanning a significant scum tell, I'm going to give (-1).

#169: I don't really know if I am any closer to understanding... I think I've actually weakened my case by arguing so fiercely but I do think there are some suspicious things Sotty7 has done. Most of this post is fair enough, though she doesn't really address the logic hole the dot points express (-1). I'll put that in my next post, so it can be dealt with.

Those are the points I had a few pages ago. Since then it's been mostly arguments I haven't agreed with IIRC, and your refusal up until now to accept a linking between you and Stewie.

I'm sorry but if I was scum I would have nothing to gain by pointing out a link because either of you would just turn up town upon death anyway.

Couldn't the same point be used with Stewie defending me? As in scum have nothing to gain by defending each other because if you lynch one and they're scum, the town will just turn round a lynch the other?

That is nowhere near the same point. First of all, if scum defend scum then they might be able to avoid the lynch in the first place. Secondly, there is no guarantee that the scum partner will be lynched after one goes down.

On the other hand, linking two townies together will achieve very little, unless of course it's by trying to suggest one was scum trying to ingratiate themselves with a townie. I'm willing to promise that if either you or Stewie dies and comes up town, I won't be talking about ingratiation.

Lastly, I'm also not trying to say that just because I'm pointing out links I'm town - that would be WIFOM. I am only saying that there's nothing to be gained from doing it if you are both town and I am scum, and hence it's not really a good reason to be suspicious either.

[Sotty7]

Apart from pushing the snowmonkey lynch, Stewie did nothing but defend you, despite saying that he thought a lot of the stuff I had said was "over-reasoned". I don't see how you pointing out Stewie's defense was reasonable addresses that point. That is what I meant by the misrepresentation and strawman stuff though, so if people feel that you have addressed that point then the strawman/mispresentation stuff is invalidated.

Lets be honest here. Until you started attacking Stewie, he really didn't do much of anything yesterday. He was basically posting to avoid suspicion. I just happened to agree with the Snowmonkey reasoning and the fact that my time base comment was weak at best.

I believe that the arguments you made against me that Stewie defended against were weak and reaching and that your logic in reaching those conclusions was wrong. I believe I have said this at least four times now, but you won't just concede this point.

*ahem*

152: Defends Sotty7. Fair enough.

I've already conceded the point, AT LEAST once. Don't misrepresent me.

What I meant here was you seemed to be fixated on Stewie defending me and that was confusing to me because you had admitted that his defense was sound. That's why I was suspicious of what you were trying to achieve. On my re-read though I can see why (you finding us both suspicious then one defending the other) you thought that way.

I made my roughish re-read as I was making my last post there so that's why it's all kinda unclear and all over the place. My fault.

Those are the points I had a few pages ago. Since then it's been mostly arguments I haven't agreed with IIRC, and your refusal up until now to accept a linking between you and Stewie.

I do need to do a complete re-read, but I appreciate you bumping this for me. I was so consumed with the fact you thought I was suspicious because Stewie defended me I had almost forgot you made points like that list.

That is nowhere near the same point. First of all, if scum defend scum then they might be able to avoid the lynch in the first place. Secondly, there is no guarantee that the scum partner will be lynched after one goes down.

On the other hand, linking two townies together will achieve very little, unless of course it's by trying to suggest one was scum trying to ingratiate themselves with a townie. I'm willing to promise that if either you or Stewie dies and comes up town, I won't be talking about ingratiation.

The problem I had with you linking me to Stewie so rigorously was, that I truly don't know his alignment. What if he was scum, then what? I felt that in your eyes that would make me scum too and I wasn't ready to run that risk.

I do have another question for you Turbo – why the vote on Don? He wasn't on your list of top suspects and the whole thing about “even your detractors should support this move”....doesn't really make any sense.

[petroleumjelly]

A-ooooooooooga! Long post ahead: Dive, Dive!

I don’t think either Stewie or Sotty7 is scum, first off. But after a very long and agonizing re-read, I do think that Pablito is scum. And if Pablito is scum, my best guess for his scum partners would be Turbovolver (firstly) and Quailman (secondly). I will do a partial PBPA on all the connections between these three players. My best guess is that 2 out of the 3 of them are scum, and maybe all three. I haven’t decided which person to pair with Pablito yet, however, but I’m leaning towards Turbo.

This is a fairly long post, I apologize. To compensate, I made it colorful! Yay!

Day One

-Post 5:

Pablito

comes in to random vote

Quailman

.
-Post 10:

Turbo

FoS’s me for saying I used a randomizer
-Post 13:

Turbo

votes Stewie
-Post 14:

Quailman

draws more attention to my randomizer (with

Turbo

)
-Post 17:

Pablito

FoS’s Cropcircles for voting

Turbo

– Defending

Turbo

-Post 22-23:

Turbo

unFoS’s me, then votes for me for being “agreeable”
-Post 32:

Pablito

unvotes

Quailman

(because he “didn’t see anything scummy”)
-Post 34:

Turbo

FoS’s Cropcircles (17 posts after

Pablito

FoS’d cropcircles)
-Post 48:

Quailman

unvotes me to vote

Turbo

(slightly going against my theory)
-Post 53:

Pablito

says that

Turbo

has not done “anything negligibly scummy”, but fails to mention what he thought of Cropcircles – Defending

Turbo

-Post 54:

Turbo

votes Cropcircles
-Post 55:

Turbo

, instead of FoS’ing

Pablito

, only gives him a “IGMEOY” with a " ", saying

Pablito

may be trying to ingratiate to a townie
-Post 56:

Turbo

agrees with

Pablito

, asks town “one of cropcircles/

Turbo

scum?”, a trap post
-Post 67:

Quailman

shows up with no substance
-Post 71:

Quailman

unvotes

Turbo

to vote Sineish (putting on the third vote)
-Post 77:

Turbo

votes RangeroftheNorth
-Post 78:

Pablito

votes RangeroftheNorth (hmm)
-Post 81:

Pablito

attributes

Turbo's

play as “odd” and not “scummy”, but then seems to dig for a role-claim – Both defends

Turbo

and semi-attacks

Turbo

-Post 82:

Turbo

shows RotN’s posting record thing, fails to attack

Pablito

for “fishing”
-Post 86:

Pablito

says

Turbo

and Cropcircles on scumdar, says

Turbo

gave no “significant tell”
-Post 89:

Turbo

FoS’s Sotty7
-Post 113:

Turbo

FoS’s me, semi-defends Jimmy the Rez
-Post 116:

Pablito

semi-defends Jimmy the Rez
-Post 120:

Turbo

says that

Pablito

is the only one who understand him: or else ingratiating himself with a townie, again. Says that me and Cropcircles best people to look at, and possibly Sineish.
-Post 122:

Turbo

FoS’s Sineish, quotes own “cropcircles/PJ/Sineish” theory again
-Post 125:

Turbo

votes me
-Post 127:

Turbo

, when responding to Snowmonkey, says that one of himself or

Pablito

could explain something or other.
-Post 130:

Pablito

questions Snowmonkey, asks for prod on

Quailman

-Post 146:

Turbo

can’t read Snowmonkey, and FoS’s Sotty7
-Post 148:

Turbo

unvotes me to vote Sotty7
-Post 150:

Turbo

FoS’s me, and FoS’s Stewie
-Post 159:

Pablito

FoS’s Stewie
-Post 160:

Turbo

confirms vote on Sotty7
-Post 162:

Turbo

FoS’s Stewie three times, and draws connections with Sotty7. Talks about

Quailman

slightly, but no FoS
-Post 178-179:

Turbo

gives

Pablito

a positive score (the only one, in fact)! Gives

Quailman

a very bad score, however. Says top suspicions are Stewie, so votes Stewie, others being Sotty7/

Quailman

/Cropcircles.
-Post 182:

Turbo

draws connection with Stewie and

Pablito

.
-Post 191:

Pablito

votes Stewie, next suspicions are Sotty7/Snowmonkey, draws connections between Sotty7 and Stewie. “Everyone is linked to

Pablito

these days”.
-Post 196:

Turbo

fails to talk about the recently mentioned suspicions of

Quailman

. Brings Sotty7 and Stewie together again.
-Post 200:

Turbo

tries to clarify that Snowmonkey it Vanilla Townie. I think is because

Turbo

would rather have lynched a power role than Vanilla Townie (hence defenses of Snowmonkey later)
-Post 201:

Turbo

giant post against Stewie
-Post 208:

Pablito

shows why he thinks Stewie is scummy
-Post 209:

Turbo

gives another post against Stewie, and confirms vote, is “cool” with

Pablito

because they agree on who is scum
-Post 211:

Turbo

tries to trap me
-Post 213:

Turbo

acknowledges the trap, says that

Pablito

will mention it (?)
-Post 217:

Turbo

attacks Stewie

-Post 221:

Turbo

attacks Stewie
-Post 228:

Turbo

attacks Stewie, mentions Sotty7, directs lynch away from Snowmonkey
-Post 234:

Pablito

would rather lynch Stewie, but says it’s okay to lynch Snowmonkey
-Post 240:

Turbo

slightly FoS’s RotN, directing lynch away from Snowmonkey
-Post 249:

Turbo

mentions “safe claims”, directs lynch away from Snowmonkey
-Post 256:

Turbo

attacks me for defending Stewie, and FoS’s me, draws links between Stewie and me. Says “was I the only one suspicious when he voted

Quailman

?”, a subtle defense of

Quailman

.
-Post 259:

Turbo

says it doesn’t look good for Stewie, PetroleumJelly, and Sotty7
-Post 264:

Pablito

says if Snowmonkey is scum to look at “

Quailman

/Sineish”, and then me/

Turbo

/

Pablito

(what?!). Says if Snowmonkey isn’t scum, to look at the five voters, and says his vote on Stewie is fine.
-Post 266:

Pablito

unvotes Stewie, making it clear for him to vote Snowmonkey (so as to attain a majority)
-Post 269:

Turbo

says if Snowmonkey is town, look at Stewie, and if Stewie is scum, to look at me and Sotty7.
-Post 270:

Pablito

places his vote Snowmonkey (the sixth vote)
**Lynch on Snowmonkey
-Post 277:

Turbo

says he is more suspicious of

Quailman

than Sineish (weaking link to

Quailman

)

Day Two

-Post 282:

Turbo

votes

Quailman

, FoS’s Sineish, still suspicious of Stewie, Sotty7, me, and cropcircles, asks if Jimmy’s Mason should come out
-Post 284:

Pablito

votes Sineish for “not being around” (as if Quailman has)
-Post 285:

Turbo

FoS’s cropcircles, and says

Pablito’s

first post “seems townie-ish”
-Post 286:

Turbo

tries to throw suspicion on me, Sotty7, and RotN
-Post 289:

Turbo

attacks me
-Post 291:

Turbo

attacks me
-Post 293:

Turbo

attacks me
-Post 295:

Turbo

backs off, but throws in that “PJ is one who kills at night”
-Post 302:

Turbo

shows a willingness to sacrifice himself if he gets another pro-town player lynched
-Post 306:

Turbo

tries yet another trap post by voting for himself
-Post 311:

Turbo

unvotes

Quailman

and switches to Don Gaetano
-Post 313:

Turbo

tries to throw suspicion on Sotty7 again
-Post 315:

Turbo

tries to draw together Sotty7 and Stewie, and tries to play down suspicion thrown towards himself for linking players (which I think is silly).

*Pants* My goodness, that took a long time. It is worth noting that

Turbo

, in all of his FoS’s, has

never

voted or FoS’d

Pablito

.

Players I am almost positive are pro-town

PetroleumJelly
Stewie (for being attacked by

Pablito

and

Turbo

)
Sotty7 (for being attacked by

Pablito

and

Turbo

)
Sineish (for being attacked by

Pablito

and

Turbo

)
Cropcircles (for being attacked by

Pablito

and

Turbo

)

Players I am unsure about

RangeroftheNorth
Don Gaetano

Players who are likely scum

Turbovolver

Quailman

Players I am almost positive are scum

Pablito

[petroleumjelly]

Hum, maybe I should pull a Turbo now.

I have noticed that both Turbo and Pablito have been around since my last post where I throw some serious accusations at them, and they have yet to comment on it. I'll be lenient since it is the weekend, though.

[Turbovolver]

-Post 200:

Turbo

tries to clarify that Snowmonkey it Vanilla Townie. I think is because

Turbo

would rather have lynched a power role than Vanilla Townie (hence defenses of Snowmonkey later)

snowmonkey said all the information was already given to us. Assuming he was telling the truth, that makes him vanilla. Because he was being shifty with the truth, I asked him to clarify. I'm rather suprised at the conclusions you draw here

-Post 213:

Turbo

acknowledges the trap, says that Pablito will mention it (?)

Hehe. He pointed out before that he thought the "question to the town" I posed (way back when I was arguing with cropcircles) was a trap. So I threw that in as a reference to earlier events.


There's a lot of other stuff there, though most of it seems just a summary of events... if there's anything you specifically want me to respond to point it out.

I'm not going to try to deny that pablito and I have been friendly this game, and if he's scum it doesn't look good for me. Thing is, I don't really see why you think he's scum. On my quick read through your long post, I didn't really see much indication of pablito's scumminess, just an argument of us being linked.
My thoughts on pablito is that he is similar to another Don Gaetano... generally agreeable and a "voice of reason"... a good way for scum to play but there's no real slip-ups to investigate that I've seen.
The way he put the second-to-lynch vote on needs looking at - I'll go check that out.

And yeah, I've put a bit of hate on Quailman without much in the way of vote/FOS to back it up, and I suppose that could be seen as suspicious. But really, I think he's gone way beyond lurkerscum status - it's not like he's avoiding drawing attention to himself by not posting for a week or whatever.


I'm suprised that you're more sure that pablito is scum than me, considering how supposedly scummy I've been compared to him, and given the way you talk about me "trying to lynch power roles". (What, is that revenge for the "kills at night" comment? )

I do have another question for you Turbo – why the vote on Don? He wasn't on your list of top suspects and the whole thing about “even your detractors should support this move”....doesn't really make any sense.

He's posting in other threads but not here. The comment about my detractors was referring to the fact that I was hammered for suspecting you and petroleumjelly because the thread hadn't been open for long, but now it's been open a bit longer and still no sign of Don despite him returning to the forums (I think on several occaisions, even). Kenji has said he's going to be prodded soon though, so perhaps it's not a good home for my vote.

Unvote: Don Gaetano

I'm still liking the looks of my "big 3", so first one of them to get a vote I will also vote. 8)


PPE: Oi, PJ! (So that's how it feels ). I've been here writing this up the whole time. Well, actually I was also playing some Lemmings.

[petroleumjelly]

All right, since you're here:

Turbo:
-Who are your top 3 picks for scum?
-Who are your top 3 picks for pro-town (not including yourself)?

[Turbovolver]

-Who are your top 3 picks for scum?

You couldn't tell?

Stewie, Sotty7, petroleumjelly (not in order, btw)

cropcircles next, then probably Quailman

-Who are your top 3 picks for pro-town (not including yourself)?

This one's harder...

Sineish's lack of posting seems genuine, considering he hasn't posted anywhere on mafiascum in 12 days. As I said, I got a slight pro-town from the posts he did make.

Don Gaetano I'm actually rather suspicious of, but it's all gut-feeling/paranoia. In terms of his actions, he's pretty clean. So I guess he would go on this list.

Last place would go to either pablito or RangeroftheNorth... I cant really pick between the two.




I seriously get the feeling PJ is asking me this question just to try to find stuff to pick apart in my replies... sounds like me >.>

You still haven't explained why pablito is suspicious, PJ.

[petroleumjelly]

I have explained my suspicions on Pablito, but I will condense them down for Turbo.

1.) Pablito began with a random vote on Quailman [5], and later retracted it because "Quailman had not acted scummy"[32]. At that point in time, Quailman had hardly posted at all, so as noted earlier, such a vote and unvote looked mechanical to me.

2.) Pablito just so happens to have a lot of coordination with Turbo this game.
Examples:
*[17/34] Both Pablito and Turbo FoS cropcircles.
*[77/78] Both Pablito and Turbo vote for RangeroftheNorth.
*[113/116] Both Pablito and Turbo semi-defend Jimmy the Rez, which in turn throws suspicion on me.
*[150/159] Both Pablito and Turbo FoS Stewie.
*[179/191] Both Pablito and Turbo votes Stewie, while both showing suspicion on Sotty7.
*[201/209-228/234] Both Pablito and Turbo make cases against Stewie, and show a willingness to lynch Stewie.
*[264/269] Both Pablito and Turbo say that if Snowmonkey turns up town, to look at Stewie, as well as myself.

3.) Pablito has also shown verbal connections with Turbo, and vice versa.
Examples:
*[17] Pablito defends Turbo by chastising Cropcircles.
*[53] Pablito says that Turbo hasn’t done anything “negligibly scummy”, although he should have been talking about both Turbo and Cropcircles, not just Turbo
*[55] Turbo only gives Pablito a “IGMEOY” instead of a FoS or vote, while adding a “ ” . Further says that Pablito seems pro-town, but if he turns up scum, he must have been trying to ingratiate himself with Turbo.
*[56] Turbo agrees with Pablito, and then commences with the trap post.
*[81] Pablito says that Turbo’s play is “odd”, but not “scummy”. Says Turbo looks more like he is “spraying bullets”, and then finished up with that he hopes he did not misrepresent Turbo. Finishes the post by “fishing” at Turbo’s role…
*[82] And Turbo answers Pablito without pointing out Pablito was fishing.
*[86] Pablito says that Turbo and Cropcircles are on his scumdar, but qualifies that statement by adding that Turbo had given “no significant tells”, without pointing out any “significant tells” about Cropcircles.
*[120] Turbovolver says that Pablito is the only one who understands him. Of course, if Pablito is scum, he must have been trying to ingratiate himself.
*[127] Turbovolver tells Snowmonkey that either Turbo/Pablito could answer a question: why nobody else?
*[178-179] Turbovolver gives Pablito

the only positive score

for his suspicious list.
*[282] Turbo practically votes or FoS’s everybody in the game except for Pablito.
*[319] Turbo says that Pablito mentioned one of Turbo’s traps earlier. Last I recall, it was me who pointed them out, not Pablito. Heck, let’s just quote the entire paragraph:

I'm not going to try to deny that pablito and I have been friendly this game, and if he's scum it doesn't look good for me. Thing is, I don't really see why you think he's scum. On my quick read through your long post, I didn't really see much indication of pablito's scumminess, just an argument of us being linked.
My thoughts on pablito is that he is similar to another Don Gaetano... generally agreeable and a "voice of reason"... a good way for scum to play but there's no real slip-ups to investigate that I've seen.
The way he put the second-to-lynch vote on needs looking at - I'll go check that out.

That looks like a pretty blatant defense of Pablito to me.

*[321] Suddenly, when asked top 3 pro-town players, Turbo gives me:
A.) Sineish (who was FoS’d by Turbo on the first post of D2)
B.) Don Gaetano (who was just recently voted by Turbo this D2)
C.) RangeroftheNorth / Pablito (who just yesterday had the most pro-town score according to Turbo, and now has suddenly dropped to a difficult tie for third even though Turbo has never voted or FoS’d Pablito, nor has shown

any

real suspicion towards Pablito until I drew a connection between Pablito and Turbovolver).

4.) [270] Pablito had to find an excuse to put his vote onto Snowmonkey. First unvoted Stewie, “slept on it”, and placed the sixth vote on Snowmonkey, even though he had earlier defended Snowmonkey as likely being a Vanilla Townie.

5.) [264] Even though Pablito voted for Snowmonkey, he asked that we look at the first five voters on Snowmonkey if Snowmonkey turned up pro-town. For the record, those five players were:
-RangeroftheNorth
-Stewie
-Sotty7
-Don Gaetano
-Jimmy the Rez (confirmed Mason)

Funnily enough, neither Turbovolver, Pablito, nor Quailman happened to be within those five players.

6.) [284] Pablito votes for Sineish for “not being around”. This does not tell anybody where his suspicions lie, and gunning for a lynch on an inactive does not sit well with me. Further, Quailman has not been around either, so selectively choosing Sineish for a vote without consideration of Quailman does not seem pro-town to me either.

It hardly gets better than this. Also, I can easily imagine one of two people being scum with Pablito: Turbovolver and Quailman. I think this is more than enough to indicate his scumminess. I may have a seventh reason to believe he is scummy soon.

[Turbovolver]

I'll wade through that later, I've leaving for dinner now.

[Turbovolver]

I have explained my suspicions on Pablito, but I will condense them down for Turbo.

1.) Pablito began with a random vote on Quailman [5], and later retracted it because "Quailman had not acted scummy"[32]. At that point in time, Quailman had hardly posted at all, so as noted earlier, such a vote and unvote looked mechanical to me.

OK, so there's slight evidence of a Quailman/pablito connection.

2.) Pablito just so happens to have a lot of coordination with Turbo this game.
<Examples>

Yeah, there's evidence of a Turbovolver/pablito connection. I'm happy to admit that.

3.) Pablito has also shown verbal connections with Turbo, and vice versa.
<Examples>

See point 2.

4.) [270] Pablito had to find an excuse to put his vote onto Snowmonkey. First unvoted Stewie, “slept on it”, and placed the sixth vote on Snowmonkey, even though he had earlier defended Snowmonkey as likely being a Vanilla Townie.

This is suspicious, I agree. I didn't post it before when I checked out his voting reasons because I wanted to see if it was part of your reasoning or not.

5.) [264] Even though Pablito voted for Snowmonkey, he asked that we look at the first five voters on Snowmonkey if Snowmonkey turned up pro-town. For the record, those five players were:
-RangeroftheNorth
-Stewie
-Sotty7
-Don Gaetano
-Jimmy the Rez (confirmed Mason)

Funnily enough, neither Turbovolver, Pablito, nor Quailman happened to be within those five players.

OK, so this is more "connection" evidence.

6.) [284] Pablito votes for Sineish for “not being around”. This does not tell anybody where his suspicions lie, and gunning for a lynch on an inactive does not sit well with me. Further, Quailman has not been around either, so selectively choosing Sineish for a vote without consideration of Quailman does not seem pro-town to me either.

Possibly suspicious, or perhaps after I voted for Quailman he decided he'd vote for the other inactive player. You'll notice Don Gaetano has also expressed desire to go after inactives today, and that Sotty7 has also targeted Quailman.

It hardly gets better than this. Also, I can easily imagine one of two people being scum with Pablito: Turbovolver and Quailman. I think this is more than enough to indicate his scumminess. I may have a seventh reason to believe he is scummy soon.

It hardly gets better than this? All you've got is that his reason for his lynch vote was dodgy. Yes it's suspicious, but so are so many other things in this game. The rest is all connection-based evidence, which is good to look at but not a sign of scumminess in itself.

Hell, I just realised Don Gaetano HAD posted in this thread, and just before I voted him for lurking . That ALONE is probably more suspicious than anything pablito has done. (Now I see why Sotty7 felt she had to ask why I voted >.>)


OK, that's my general response to PJ's post. Now I'll pick apart the individual things.