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

[Turbovolver]

*[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.

Why would I vote/FOS him for saying he thinks I'm pro-town? He's right. But you have to be careful with people who do that, hence IGMEOY.

*[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.

Well, I didn't really see it as fishing. I mean if I said "townie" and meant it as "vanilla townie" then I would've been claiming then and there - pablito asking "did you just claim?" wasn't going to release any extra information.

*[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.

Umm, yeah? I'm pro-town, so either pablito was townie or he was scum ingratiating. What's the problem with saying that?

*[127] Turbovolver tells Snowmonkey that either Turbo/Pablito could answer a question: why nobody else?

Ranger linked pablito and I together, and snowmonkey claimed it was an inconsistency. I was addressing this point when I said that: it was a point dealing with me and Pablito.

*[282] Turbo practically votes or FoS’s everybody in the game except for Pablito.

The HELL? I vote a lurker and FOS the other lurker. I mention my suspicions from yesterday. In total it came to 6 players, which is hardly "everybody but pablito". And only 2 players were voted or FOSed. This is one HUGE stretch of the word "practically".

*[319] Turbo says that Pablito mentioned one of Turbo’s traps earlier. Last I recall, it was me who pointed them out, not Pablito.

Correct, I misremembered who said it.

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.

Funnily enough, we seem to agree on the list of things pablito has done that is suspicious. That is, NOTHING except for a dodgy lynch vote. The rest of your suspicions were all linking evidence, except possibly that tiny Sineish thing (point 6).

*[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).

A) I voted one lurker and FOS'd the other, to try to get them to post. Sorry for wanting people I think are pro-town posting.

B) I thought he was lurking too... that was a mistake on my part.

C) Yep, because I went back and noticed what he said when he put the second-to-last vote on snowmonkey. I'm also sorry here for never voting/FOSing someone I think is in my top three pro-town list

PS: If my analysis of top three pro-town players is supposedly so inconsistent with my actions, why are you still after pablito and not me? I'd say THAT's inconsistent.



So yeah, I think petroleumjelly's case against pablito is pretty much crap, and there were some conclusions drawn there which I don't agree with.

Also, PJ has (as far as I can remember) never voted for Sotty7 or Stewie, and now he's calling them both innocent. OMG!!

Seriously though, that analysis was NOT objective in my eyes. Still happy with a lynch on any of my three.

[petroleumjelly]

It's possible I may be wrong. What does everybody think about either of the following?

A.) Pablito and Turbovolver as scum
B.) Pablito and Quailman as scum
C.) Pablito and Turbovolver and Quailman as scum

[petroleumjelly]

And actually, I will pick apart the fact that I have not voted for either Stewie or Sotty7 through comparison.

People I have voted for and FoS'd

D1 Random vote: Sotty7 by "randomizer" (I won’t count this one)
D1 Vote

Turbovolver

D1 Vote

Pablito

D1 Vote Jimmy of the Rez
D1 Vote

Quailman

D2 Vote

Pablito

People Turbo has voted for and FoS'd

D1 FoS: PetroleumJelly
D1 Vote Stewie
D1 UnFoS: PetroleumJelly
D1 Vote PetroleumJelly
D1 FoS: Cropcircles
D1 Vote Cropcircles
D1 Vote RangeroftheNorth
D1 FoS: Sotty7
D1 unFoS: Sotty7
D1 FoS: PetroleumJelly
D1 FoS: Sineish
D1 Vote PetroleumJelly
D1 FoS: Sotty7
D1 Vote Sotty7
D1 FoS: PetroleumJelly
D1 FoS: Stewie
D1 FoS: Stewie, FoS: Stewie, FoS: Stewie
D1 Vote: Stewie
D1 "Not Quite" FoS: RangeroftheNorth
D1 FoS: PetroleumJelly
D2 Vote

Quailman

D2 FoS: Sineish
D2 FoS: Cropcircles
D2 Vote: Turbovolver
D2 Vote:

Quailman

D2 Vote: Don Gaetano

In short, people I have not voted or FoS’d include:
-Cropcircles
-Don Gaetano
-RangeroftheNorth
-Sineish
-Sotty7
-Stewie
-PetroleumJelly

And people Turbo has not voted or FoS’d include:
-

Pablito

-Jimmy pf the Rez

Funny thing, that. Heck, Turbo has even voted for himself.

For the record, Turbo, when I said that you had "practically voted or FoS'd everybody" by [282], I wasn't kidding. By that time, the only people you were missing were Pablito, Don Gaetano, and yourself, but you voted for Don Gaetano and yourself quickly enough after that post.

[petroleumjelly]

Whoop, add Snowmonkey to that list, I had him erased in my notes.

For clarification, then:

People I have not voted/FoS'd:
-Cropcircles
-Don Gaetano
-RangeroftheNorth
-Sineish
-Sotty7
-Stewie
-PetroleumJelly
-Snowmonkey

People Turbo has not voted/FoS'd:
-Jimmy of the Rez (dead)
-Snowmonkey (dead)
-

Pablito

[Turbovolver]

For the record, Turbo, when I said that you had "practically voted or FoS'd everybody" by [282], I wasn't kidding. By that time, the only people you were missing were Pablito, Don Gaetano, and yourself, but you voted for Don Gaetano and yourself quickly enough after that post.

You didn't have the word "by" in the original post - it sounded like you were trying to say I voted/FOSd eveyone in that post. That is why I objected.

People Turbo has not voted/FoS'd:
-Jimmy of the Rez (dead)
-Snowmonkey (dead)
-Pablito

So far two people I've never voted/FOSd have turned up PRO-TOWN... is it so hard to believe the third might be as well?

[petroleumjelly]

Teehee, your connection towards Pablito is only being strengthened Turbo.

Still waiting for the town's input now.

[pablito]

Post 59

All right. I don't necessarily agree with the percentages above, but I almost never like it when I hear such phrases as "One of these people is probably scum", "If one is scum, the other is probably scum", or "If it turns out X is telilng the truth, we lynch Y". I may just be paranoid of scum setting up double lynches, but I usually do not put very much weight into those types of statements, and I try to avoid them unless I genuinely feel it to be true.

Using your logic, you must be very sure that your statements A B C are true.


Now, to defend myself.

As for Unvoting Quailman - I didn't see anything from Quailman and perhaps I unvoted too quickly. In my opinion, my vote wasn't doing too much and I hadn't seen anything from Quailman, so I took off my vote.

The Turbo/Pablito connection is fairly obvious. We've had similar actions and sometimes in unison. I haven't ruled out Turbo as being scum, though.

As for my vote switching, it looks suspicious and is one of your most valid points. Both snowmonkey and Stewie were in my list of top suspects. I initially supported a Stewie lynch mainly because I felt that his defense of some attacks were weak. I was suspicious of snowmonkey, but his actions were so incredulous that I believed that I attributed it more to it being his first game. The lack of claiming finally got to me and I opted to go against snowmonkey. I felt that I was making up too many excuses for snowmonkey (and also Turbo), and that I should trust my gut on the first day rather than overthinking it.

As for reason number five - I noted to look at the five voters. The logic there is sound, if snowmonkey turned up townie, look at the people that voted him before the deadline. Pointing this out should was necessary but also obvious - and the fact that Turbo nor Quailman were not on that list was independent of my own actions.

[petroleumjelly]

Thanks for posting, Pablito.

Now to hear the

town's

input.

[pablito]

Are you italicizing because one minute after you posted 330, I happened to reply to your original attacks? Because obviously my post took more than a minute, so...pfft

[Turbovolver]

Teehee, your connection towards Pablito is only being strengthened Turbo.

I think he's pro-town. Connect us all you want.


Also PJ, pablito's got you with post 59. You say you don't like to put much weight in statements like "if one is scum, the other is probably scum", and yet you build a whole case almost solely around that type of reasoning?

Vote: petroleumjelly

PPE:

town

indeed

PPE2: Woah, defensive.

[petroleumjelly]

*Yawn*

All right. I don't necessarily agree with the percentages above, but I almost never like it when I hear such phrases as "One of these people is probably scum", "If one is scum, the other is probably scum", or "If it turns out X is telilng the truth, we lynch Y". I may just be paranoid of scum setting up double lynches, but I usually do not put very much weight into those types of statements, and I try to avoid them

unless I genuinely feel it to be true.

I genuinely believe this one to be true.

[pablito]

Btw, post 333 was done jokingly.

And PJ, then you genuinely feel that option C is true - this is noted.

[Turbovolver]

*Yawn*

All right. I don't necessarily agree with the percentages above, but I almost never like it when I hear such phrases as "One of these people is probably scum", "If one is scum, the other is probably scum", or "If it turns out X is telilng the truth, we lynch Y". I may just be paranoid of scum setting up double lynches, but I usually do not put very much weight into those types of statements, and I try to avoid them

unless I genuinely feel it to be true.

I genuinely believe this one to be true.

*shrug* OK.

Unvote: petroleumjelly

Back to voting for the first person of the three to get a vote.

[petroleumjelly]

Option C?

What I have said is that I am very sure you are scum Pablito. And if you are scum, that:

A.) Turbo is scum with you
B.) Quailman is scum with you
C.) If both A and B are true, then

yes

, Turbo and Quailman are obviously scum with you

What I

genuinely

believe is that Pablito is scum, and by connection, Turbovolver is scum. Also, there is a

good chance

of Quailman being the third scum if A turns out to be true (assuming a regular scum group). This connection is not as "genuine" as the first, but I would like my suspicions known on the off-chance I die in the near future.

[Turbovolver]

This connection is not as "genuine" as the first, but I would like my suspicions known on the off-chance I die in the near future.

But you're only allowed to make statements like that if they are "genuine"... at least that was your justification for the earlier inconsistency.

Vote: petroleumjelly

(still happy to move it to the others though)

[petroleumjelly]

You're very convincing, Turbo.

I suggest people hold on to their votes for the moment, I just want to hear what everybody has to say. This is still the weekend directly after this game opened up, so I am more than willing to wait for input. There is certainly no rush on this Day 2.

[Turbovolver]

I suggest people hold on to their votes for the moment, I just want to hear what everybody has to say. This is still the weekend directly after this game opened up, so I am more than willing to wait for input. There is certainly no rush on this Day 2.

Heh, I'm sure my one vote won't be lynching you anytime soon. Oh how I wish it could though...

Guess this had better be my last post for a while... give the others a chance.

[Stewie]

Some quick notes: if you hadn't already, please check the limited access/ vacation thread. That'll explain why I haven't been posting, and why I won't really say anything worthwhile until tomorrow, or possibly tuesday.

Also, I skimmed the thread and I have one comment: the mason should not claim

yet

, but he should claim when he is pressured into claiming OR the next day if we don't catch scum by then. The reason being that while we don't want to narrow down the field for scum now, we might need to narrow down the field for us later, when it would yield a higher chance of success. Also, we don't want to allow scum to counter claim the mason when it's lynch or lose, because if we make the wrong choice then we are screwed. We need to be able to lynch the scum on the next day in case we get it wrong.

More to come later, possibly tomorrow, most likely tuesday.

[cropcircles]

Okay, pablito's been irking me for a bit, and this game needs to get going

somewhere

. So

Vote pablito

[pablito]

-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.

Well in this post, I did mention to look at everyone - the only person I left out is cropcircles because I hadn't received a read on where he stood with snowmonkey - and as evidenced by him placing the seventh vote (before the deadline) - he would probably belong in the if "snowmonkey turns up townie" category.

I feel right now that PJ is tailoring his evidence to his argument and not necessarily using evidence to confirm his suspicions. I'm really suspicious of him using post 264 as one of the keystones in his suspicions. And it's obvious it was coming, but

Unvote, Vote: petroleumjelly

[Turbovolver]

Okay, pablito's been irking me for a bit, and this game needs to get going

somewhere

. So

Vote pablito

Okay, cropcricles recent voting has been irking me.

FOS: cropcircles

(His last two votes have both joined bandwagons, without any reasoning)

Hell, he can join my Big 3 and make it a Big 4!

[petroleumjelly]

And with that Cropcircles climbs up onto my "very likely innocent" list. This game gets pretty easy when you just use the opposite lists made from somebody else.

[petroleumjelly]

EBWOP: Cropcircles was

already

on my very likely innocent post, good to have confirmation.

[Turbovolver]

And with that Cropcircles climbs up onto my "very likely innocent" list. This game gets pretty easy when you just use the opposite lists made from somebody else.

Daykill: petroleumjelly

Or more seriously, check cropcircles out. You're quite welcome to suspect Pablito and me and possibly Quailman or whatever, but it shouldn't blind you. After removing himself from our argument with "OMG I'm not going to respond to you just claim", he's done very little but lurk and join bandwagons without reason. I don't think he's really connected to the "big 3" at all, but I would be in no way suprised if he was scum.

PS: If you are so sure that Pablito and I are scum, you should probably be voting for me. I think there are a lot more people who think I'm scummy than pablito.

PPE: You have a "very-likely innocent" post? You talking about the big analysis on page 8-9?

[petroleumjelly]

PS: If you are so sure that Pablito and I are scum, you should probably be voting for me. I think there are a lot more people who think I'm scummy than pablito.

My reasons for voting Pablito are obvious: vote Pablito and you will defend him. Now your connection is clearer to the town. Since I can very easily imagine Pablito being scum with either you (Turbo) or Quailman (or both), I could tell by your playstyle that you would try to divert attention away from Pablito if I attacked him,

especially

if I drew connections between the two of you.

PPE: You have a "very-likely innocent" post? You talking about the big analysis on page 8-9?

The bottom of [317] actually. I'll quote it for you:

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

As it is, it isn't necessary to "look at cropcircles" today when we already have two heads on the block for the next two days. I may look at him later (assuming I am still alive), but my eyes are firmly on you and Pablito for today.