Mini 528 - Nervous Mafia (Game Over)

[Shanba]

Have you heard about the cannibalism? I don't know, what is the world coming to. Won't somebody please, think of the children? I know there aren't any, but still. Can't be too careful.

I blame that Kaleidoscope. Never trusted him. Shifty looking eyes. And I bet he was in league with that horrible Ethan character too.

Vote: Kscope

[Shanba]

My posting restriction doesn't actually get that bad with advancing levels - I didn't realise they were a big deal. Also, I didn't read his post as voting for kscope - in fact, I missed it entirely. Thirdly. Don't post restrictions go back a level when we unvote the player we were voting? Perhaps I missed something in the rules. I will go and check. I think that's enough words.

[Shanba]

Unvote

I don't think we need to put him at stage 3 if he's just stated it will be a pain in the arse for him. That's just vindictive. And mean. And many other synonyms to flesh out my post. And it doesn't seem like the sort of thing that is very good for children and stuff. Really, this nattering on and on without going anywhere. Isn't it fun?

[Shanba]

Is it allowed to claim our post restrictions? If so, it might be helpful. We could avoid useless speculation about what each player's restriction and maybe help filter out the fluff (such as PR induced anger, say) that could otherwise bias our reads on players. I don't see anything in the rules saying we can't. There's not even the downside of it revealing player's roles - Jdodge stated in signups that the setup was open 3:3:6 nightless.

[Shanba]

Considering we know the scum have PRs, I don't see any reason to believe they would be different from town PRs, and hence I don't see any benefit to soupfly's idea of attacking those who have different PRs. Especially I don't see what is suspect about Andy/Kscope's PRs not being obvious. I think soupfly is after an easy target. ZONEACE too, though I'm unsure whether he was trying to prove a point or actually believing what he said.

Vote: Soupfly

[Shanba]

I'm trying to work out whether that statement by soupfly was induced by his PR or he seriously believes we should lynch alphabetically . Seriously, if it's the latter, we should be killing him. Heck, we should be killing him anyway. Cause he's scum. Die die die die die die die die die.

[Shanba]

See, I was asking a question. Because from the context of the post, it's not really clear. Not to mention, you seem to have been earlier supporting lynches on the grounds that people don't seem to have PR's: another perposterous idea, which is roughly equivalent. It is precisely because I have played with you before that your suggestion of alphabetical lynches rang so oddly to me. Now, we need to proceed with your execution.

[Shanba]

I'm sure we've been over this already. SCUM HAVE POST RESTRICTIONS. The mod has said so. Maybe shouting it will help. Kscope cannot be faking a restriction because everyone in the game has a restriction. This was the basis of my attack on soupfly, that he was jumping on people because they seemed to have no PRs despite the fact that the mod clearly stated that scum have PRs. You repeating this terrible logic is, well, terrible.

Unvote Vote:DGB

Pooky, why do you think we were pressuring him for his PR? I was pressuring him for scummy actions which I clearly documented in my posts. Unless your PR explains him attacking people who have no obvious post restrictions. Bleh.

Fir the record, I don't think soupfly asking for replacement was scummy. Also, I'm just going to add some random fluff here to make my post longer.

[Shanba]

Instead of psuedowagoning, can't we be DGBlynching?

[Shanba]

Cuz DGB is scum?

[Shanba]

Cuz DGB is scum?

t...t...to be fair, DGB t...tends to v...vote hop in a...all of her g...g...ames.

That's not really why I'm voting her, though. It's more the way she seems to be searching for a weak target.

[Shanba]

Fudge it. It completely slipped my mind that I was restricted this game. Uhm. I guesss I ought not to break my restriction again with this post, cause that would be rather dumb, now, wouldn't it. So uh, lynch DGB. Cause she's scum. And cause she needs to die. Cause the mod sent her a scum role PM. Et Cetera. Fluff fluff.

[Shanba]

Shanba votes, hmmmm, fur me, und ze reason iz: "the way zhe seems zo be searching fur und weak target." Hmmmm, but it is day 1, und vhat kind uf ovher target iz dhere, hmmmm? Zhen Shanba gives no reason, hmmm, zo who iz looking furh veak targets, hhmmm? Iz it me, or iz it Shanba, I vonder.

This might make sense if you hadn't already said what my reason was. If you want, I can go back through the thread and pick out the votes that worry me

I ask you, vhat ovher kind of target iz dhere, und Day 1? Dhere is no strong darget und Day 1. Zo, it iz nurmal to get ze action going, vith vote, vith changind vote, und, hmmm, etc.

Like I said, votehopping is not the issue (well, not the central issue, anyway). I dislike the way you've been going with the flow and I dislike the weak votes you've posted (Flameaxe for his restriction? I mean, bleh.)

I ztrongly zuggest dhat you find zumeone elze to prezzure, hmmmm? Rrrread beveen zee lines.

Diescumdie.

[Shanba]

Z'it iz Day One, mmm? Undless szumthing djumpz at me, hmmm, I go with zee flow. Und it iz early Day one, vhat do you vant from me? Ztrong votes, hhhmmm? How can I make ze ztrong votes on Day one? I know nothink at all, hmmmm? It iz not even page 10 yet, hmmmmm...

Im pretty sure that's a crap excuse. I mean, I know I've only been here for a year, but I've just proven it's possible to catch scum in that timeframe. Incidentally, though my gut was convinced, the evidence against you was hardly damning, until a recent post. Remind me to get back to you on that one. I'm enjoying this. I'm enjoying being scheming.

Und z'I mistakenly dhought zhat Flameaxe was faking und reztrigtion, I did not vote Flameaxe furh hiz reztrigtion, but becuause I hmmmmm make mistake, hmmm? I thought I caught him faking ein reztrigtion. I vas rrrong, I undvoted.

I don't get how you can possibly believe he was faking a restriction, given the mod had already confirmed everyone had restrictions. Now, Flameaxe may be annoying sometimes, but honestly, you're crediting him with very little intelligence.

Hmmmm, und, zpeaking of ein veak vote, your vote iz sehr veak, no? Hmmmmm...

Actually, no. I'm nigh convinced you are scum, and save... well, I guess you might convince me to unvot, but it's not looking likely.

[Shanba]

Alright. DGB, although I still have little clue how you think he was faking a stage 0 restriction (I mean, honestly, why the heck would he? What exactly did you think he was trying to gain? It's all bizarre to me) I'm going to drop that for a while and ask a simple question of you. DGB, what is your role? Consider this a tightrope. Answer wrong, and I have you, scum.

[Shanba]

DGB, I note you seem to have completely failed to respond to my very reasonable request, that is, that you should claim. I'm sure that once you do, things will become clear, or at least, clearer. So go on, claim. I'm waiting.

[Shanba]

Oh yay. That makes me feel better. I caught the scumbag. Given it was 3:3:6 nightless, I was convinced that [quote]
I ztrongly zuggest dhat you find zumeone elze to prezzure, hmmmm? Rrrread beveen zee lines.[.quote] could only have come from careless scum. But I wanted partners, so I span it out a bit: unfortunately, my only reaction was from Yosarian2. I'm not sure, though, that iit was a particularly telling reaction, though he did defend her. Also, Pooky's play was interesting too. However, I'm also thinking about the othe scumgroup, and wondering whether we had scum jumping on an easy lynch syndrome. I'll have to go look back.

[Shanba]

W...wow, I screwed up t...those quote t...tags. B...but you k...know what I mean.

Eh. Whether you say is true or not, it's still true that you're the only one who really responded to my early attack on TS, and it was a defence. Still... I'm less convinced now. I'm also considering whether it might not be more useful to search for the other scumgroup mathematically. At any rate, I think Pooky is a decent candidate for a TS partner. Speech stuff more words yay good

[Shanba]

Eh.

I realise I said I could go for Pooky, but I've reread since then. More interesting to me is Gorrad.

The prosecution presents quote A, from december 5:

Well, that response is certainly enough for me to

Vote: HurriKaty

. Also, your shining face has a slight stain of blood on it. You should probably wipe it off.

That is not a hint. It is only flavor. Do not analyse it, for it does not mean anything.

Here he is clearly after Hurrikaty, and has been for most of the time he's in. But Hurrikaty doesn't pick up. So that's a dead horse. What happens next?

The prosecution presents quote B, from december 8:

DGB, your recent attacks have been worse than Hurrikaty's. And that's saying something.

Unvote, Vote: DGB

. I think one of y'all is scum, and I'm willing to bet it's you.

He's hopped on the DGB wagon, for little reason, after it's started to take hold. This reads strongly as bussing to me.

Disliking Yos muchly right now too.

[Shanba]

@Yos

May I answer your question with my own question? It seems to me that's the most sensible way of getting my point across

Y...y...yeah, I can s...see a pooky vote. He only m...made 3 posts all game, and t...two of them were a...attacking E...Elmo for v...voting DGB; basically, 2/3'ds of his p...posts so f...far this g...game were defense of a s...scumbag.

vote:Pooky

How strong a scumtell do you think this is? Enough to jump on the Pooky? It's just, you see, in my experience direct defence of a scum is not necessarily a scumtell, or, at best, a weak one. As such, your hop on his wagon seems doubly bad to me - you've hopped on a wagon for bad reasons at a point when it's reasonably "safe" to do so.

That, plus I'm still not entirely happy with your previous interactions with the convicted.

[Shanba]

Shanba, since Gorrad and Pooky's "faults" are pretty much the same, why you prefer Gorradvote over Pookyvote?

Wrong. Pooky's faults and Gorrad's faults are vastly different. For one, Pooky was directly defending, an act which always seems less scummy to me than indirectly defending like Gorrad was doing. Second, Gorrad jumped on the wagon when it was inevitable, whereas pooky didn't jump on at all. As such, Gorrad reads scummier to me than Pooky, especially as it could be that he is from the other scumgroup as well, which is not the case for Pooky.

Does that answer your question?

[Shanba]

Vote: Gorrad

Whatever it is, you are one closer to it, scum.

Also, I cannot believe I was not voting at the end of the day. I really really ought to have been doing this yesterday. But now, you cannot escape. We will lynch you, scumbag, and we will revel in your timely demise. For that is cool.

Also, mafia are evil. Won't someone

please

think of the children?

[Shanba]

W..wow. Y..yesterday l...lasted, what, 3 r...realtime days? I n...never even had a chance to post, heh. W...what was t...that about?

You're right, it was quick, but the wagon was a good one. If I had the opportunity, I would vote for Gorrad again. That said, it's literally impossible for there to be no scum on the wagon (it's currently 4-3-2). We need to hit the other scumgroup soon, but the only current difference between the two should be on the DGB wagon, but Gorrad was my best bet for that. I still think you're fairly likely dgbscumbuddy, but eh.

[Shanba]

Shanba, why whould you vote for Gorrad again? (apart from the fact that he's already dead)

Because I believe I had several legitimate, strong scumtells on him, he was completely failing to provide any adequate defence and he was sending my scumdar through the roof. I'm nit often certain people are scum, but I was certain Gorrad was scum. Every other time, I've been right. /me shrugs. Perhaps I ought to rephrase that: if I saw someone perform teh actions that Gorrad did, again, I would vote him again.

Yos: I believe I've already mentioned that I disliked the fact that you defended her day 1 against some fairly meaningless stuff. Yes, you were voting her most of the day, but as far as I can see, you just left a random vote on her. It's only Dec 08, the sixth vote on teh wagon, where you actually seem to be serious about your vote. And then the reason you give is that she failed to answer a question. No, I think it's definitely likely that you were bussing.

As I said, though, we have other fish to fry. Specifically, Elmo. For the past two days, he's just been voting on the wagons and keeping the lynches rolling. This reads pretty strongly other scumgroup: dgbscum need to lynch otherscum, so they would be more active in their scumhunting efforts.

Vote: Elmo

[Shanba]

Yeah yeah, can't handle the heat, so divert me instead?

Andy - wow. He's pretty bad too. However...

Why Pooky, Elmo? Just because Pooky suggested pseudovotes and then realvoted? Also, I'd like to read again all your reasons behind DGB's wagon.

Defence of a scumbuddy? I hate the way he tries to slip it in as a sidenote.

Why you voted yourself in the first place? Just for post restriction ease? I don't see enough guilt in DGB to vote her, though.

It would not surprise me to discover he is DGB's scumbuddy, but I'm not really after DGB's partners. Next...

Kscope - eh. Doesn't seem that unlike his normal town play. I would also note that if he were ssimply trying to keep lynches rolling (as I'm sure you're trying to get at, at this point, having chosen people on both wagons), he would not have voted me, as unlike pooky after the dgb lynch and unlike gorrad I am not an easy lynch.

Flameaxe - Again, he voted on both wagons, but again, his play is pretty typical of what I've seen from flameaxe before.

[Shanba]

I'd just like to point out I nailed the entirety of the opposing scum team.