Mafia 73: NEGWLTWWWTKY - Abandoned!

[Peers]

Full-random

vote: hasdgfas

[Peers]

Let's not start the whole "getting defensive" bull again. It's the first freakin' page.

[Peers]

Mod:

I voted for hasdgfaablagadad, not myself.

[Peers]

No problem. Just didn't want self-vote-bandwagoners to start piling on me or something.

anyway, now that it's fixed...

Unvote

vote: BM:

And if I need a reason, it's... um... due to frequent and recurring votehopping. Or something else that sounds similarly random yet not-random. Or whatever.

[Peers]

How many times do you get an actual, bona-fide legit serious reason to vote for someone on page 1 of a day-start game?

[Peers]

I agree with Yosarian2.

Not enough to follow his vote, but I've always wanted to say that.

[Peers]

Yeah, yeah, pile votes on the guy who tends to go hyper-defensive and get himself lynched. I've learned from my past games... I'm not over-reacting or getting hyper-defensive from now on. Maybe if the bandwagon against me had, y'know, players I knew and respected, I'd take it more seriously.

[Peers]

Why are we letting Peers, who pretty much told us all to fuck off, off the hook?

Technically, I was only saying that to BM and ABR. I don't know the rest of you well enough to tell you to fuck off.

Besides... random phase. You vote for people randomly, you let them off the hook randomly, until someone things they see a pattern in the randomness and then everyone decides if that person is right or if that person is scum.

[Peers]

Lol alright Mr Metagaming. Please tell me what games you have played with me and ABR? Because, speaking for myself, i dont recall EVER playing with you, let alone enough for either us to gain a good grasp of the other's playstyle.

Mafia 71. Not enough to get a sense of playstyle, but enough to get a sense of personality.

[Peers]

Unvote

[Peers]

vote Sikario8

content

Pot. Kettle. Black.

[Peers]

Hrm. You're right, I'm letting meta-game influence me. Sarcastic comment withdrawn.

[Peers]

Hey. Yeah. I need to be in this game more.

Yeah, yeah, pile votes on the guy who tends to go hyper-defensive and get himself lynched.

Examples, please.

Can't. Even though I'm dead, the game's still in progress. But apparently saying "I'm going to be calm and not flip out" makes people think you have a reason for being calm and not flipping out. *shrug*

[Peers]

Apparently we're not allowed to apologize for being too snarky here. *shrug*

[Peers]

Problem with the votecount: Zu_Faul is on twice, and I'm not on at all.

And, um... could someone explain the bandwagon on me? Is it because I apologized for being rude, or is there an actual reason behind it?

[Peers]

I'm glad we don't have a deadline right now. I'd have to vote for Sikario8 out of self-defense, and that's a horrible reason to vote for someone (well, not -horrible-, but there's better).

[Peers]

I could care less what your opinion of me is, honestly. There's nothing on that BW to make me think he's scum; unless someone comes up with something, the only reason I'd vote for him is to save my own skin.

Besides, if I -did- vote for him right away, you'd just use that as proof that I was voting specificly to appear not-scummy to you, and claim that it must mean I'm scum. I'm on to how you work, man. You don't hunt scum, you just make people look like scum.

[Peers]

If you're not willing to take Sikario down, then you are the one that's going to get lynched.

Interestingly enough, several of the people who are voting for me are defending Sikario. Your argument puts me in a position where, to appear less scummy to you, I must appear more scummy to them.

I continue to believe that Sikario is town, and will continue to believe so until someone gives me some actual evidence beyond "Well, he stayed in this game and flaked out of others, so he must have a reason to stay." (No offense, BM, I'm just not ready to trust your meta-game reasonings quite yet.)

At this point, however, ABR... you're wrong. But you might be right soon, it depends on how people vote and on how deadlines go. It's very possible that if I don't vote Sikario, I'll get lynched. But I will not be bullied into casting my vote before I absolutely have to, because I believe the man is town.

[Peers]

Interestingly enough, several of the people who are voting for me are defending Sikario. Your argument puts me in a position where, to appear less scummy to you, I must appear more scummy to them.

I hate that sentance there. Sounds like you're more worried about how your vote makes you look, instead of how you can use your vote to find scum.

I have seven votes on me and nobody has yet to give a reason why they're there. Of course I'm worried about how my vote makes me look. If I get this many votes for no reason, I'll be lynched if I do anything that could be taken the wrong way. I'd love to find scum, believe me, it would get the pressure off me (Or at the very least, force people to give a goddamn reason...)

[Peers]

Vote: JordanA24

Reason: He's had four posts so far, two of them were votes with no other content. He has not explained his reasons for his current vote, which started a bandwagon on that player, and has tried to spin an apology the person he voted for made as 'backtracking', which feels like trying to retroactively justify his vote.

My other two of the 'requested list'...

Panzerjager, for the following, which feels like he's bandwagoning for the sake of bandwagoning, or trying to convince those who're voting otherwise to pick one of us:

So, are we lynching hasd or peers?

And #2, Sikario, which is more due to all the arguing about him than anything else giving much more to think about. I've seen plenty of town mislynches, especially day one, and they all seem to follow the same patterns as today, but I haven't played with a lot of this game before -- they could work differently as a town and be seeing something I don't.

[Peers]

Does it look anti-town to anyone? Other than ABR, I mean? Is it anti-town to vote for someone who -might- be scum in order to protect someone you know is -100%- town?

[Peers]

Oh, for crying out loud... Am I at L-1 yet? L-2? Anything like that?

[Peers]

Sikario and I are bigger targets?

[Peers]

Also, how on earth, after the last couple of pages, does Sikario still have more votes than Peers?

Because there's still some intelligence left in this town? Just a hunch.

[Peers]

Excellent rejoinder. I like how you managed to buddy up to every single potential voter in a single post.

Thanks. It's a talent I have. I figure, if trying to keep my head down got me votes, well, let's see how scummy I can make myself appear.

Without, y'know, unvoting and OMGUSing everyone who's voting for me in a single post. 'cause that's just a jester-tell.

[Peers]

Peers is currently a better lynch than Sikario i think, although that is subject to change depending on his response to my latest request.

Sorry, I missed it. What request?

[Peers]

Peers isn't scum. Peers is very much not scum.

[Peers]

Okay, you got me. It's time for me to claim... and I'm a vanilla townie. Whoo-hoo, the secret is out...

[Peers]

.... so, you both think I'm an idiot as well as scum. Well, nice to know you're both wrong on two counts.

[Peers]

No, we don't lynch Peers. We find some scum to lynch. Better for the town if we actually lynch scum.

[Peers]

Peers: are you just trying really hard to act casual in order to avoid your apparent "flipping out under pressure" meta? If so, you'd be much better off being useful rather than being cool.

Well, I've already partially flipped out, and it hasn't done me any good, so.

Personally? I've given my reasons for my vote... and MoS has slowly moved up the list. You don't see me voting for A.B.R. even though he's got a tendency to suck the fun out of the game, because every once in a while he actually posts something intelligent (it could be random coincidence, but heck... if there can be games where I agree with BM, anything can happen and policy lynches are bad).

[Peers]

I'm trying to use the same technique A.B.R. uses and be scummy as hell, just in an asshole way and not in a scum way. It seems to work for him. Be too hated to waste a NK on, but not quite scummy enough to lynch. Altho I've yet to resort to Jester-speculation and Vig-direction.

[Peers]

Hell, then I'd never be allowed to get clever. Besides... if you were 'good' or 'clever' are determined when the game is over, are they not?

[Peers]

Hey, I remember you! Weren't you scum?

Actually, he was being one of the most level-headed and rational people in the game. And also lurking. Which does make him sort of stand out as different.

[Peers]

Hey, I remember you! Weren't you scum?

Actually, he was being one of the most level-headed and rational people in the game. And also lurking. Which does make him sort of stand out as different.

butt-kisser...

Only my wife's, but she's hot so I've got an excuse. The fact is, in the few posts he's made, Neo-Viper has been consistently level-headed and refused to rise to the bait placed before him. However, that, combined with his low numbers of posts, makes him look like he's doing his best to a) stay under the radar and b) not do anything stupid when he's actually on the radar. Sort of the way I intended to play, only I intended to not stay off the radar at all. The addition of lurking is what worries me.

[Peers]

It's not really a case so much as I'm pointing out he's not playing like a majority of the people in the game. If I had a case, I'd be voting.

[Peers]

It's not necessarily unusual to react (although come on, if you can't stand the heat, get out of the kitchen) to what he said, but the way she reacted is what set me off.

Speaking as someone who's reacted that way plenty of times before... there's nothing wrong with that. TS could be distressed at once again being killed day 1 for no good reason beyond "Hey, someone doesn't like me."

[Peers]

Show me where she's reacted like this before.

I've given up on metagaming, actually. Do you have any case against her that involves this game and only this game?

[Peers]

uh...that's my case. only this game. i don't know her in any other games.

So your case is that she appears to be trying to not get angry, but got angry when someone insulted her.

... Case dismissed for insufficient evidence.

[Peers]

uh...that's my case. only this game. i don't know her in any other games.

So your case is that she appears to be trying to not get angry, but got angry when someone insulted her.

... Case dismissed for insufficient evidence.

This post swings my vote.

You are -so- trying to butter me up into taking my vote off you, aren't you?

Gotta try harder than that.

[Peers]

Peers does not seem good, actually. Peers just can't prove it because there's nothing to base a case off of anyone else right now.

[Peers]

Hrm. Peers is apparently paranoid due to elsegame happenings. Peers misread that as 'Vote: Peers', not 'Unvote -- Peers seems good'.

[Peers]

Peers: looks like your strategy worked.

Strategy? What strat... erm, I mean... of course it did, it was brilliantly conceived, planned, and executed by myself, so naturally it worked... uh... pssst, what exactly did I do, again?

[Peers]

What did Jordan do already ?

I think that, at this point, it's more "Like has he not been doing?" He's giving off serious "Lurk and hope it goes away" vibes.

[Peers]

Jordan makes an excellent point; I can't in good faith keep my vote on him.

Unvote

I would like to hear MoS's response to that last post. We may very well be in a situation where the top three bandwagons are all town.

[Peers]

Forgive me if this sounds a bit off the wall; however, I've been stricken as of late by the queer feeling that Peers and TS could be distancing. I don't know what to think of this; however, I just want to put it out there to be either shot down or exonerated.

.... What?

No, wait... What?

So, since we voted for different people before, and now she's voting for me while I unvote for someone because he made a point that my reasons for voting him are no longer valid, that means we're distancing?

... ow, my brain...

[Peers]

IGME(andmyvote)OY: Peers

vote: peers

Wow. Under such a carefully thought-out and well-worded logical attack on me, I have no choice but to say every single part of your case is correct.

Of course, given that you have no parts to your case, it's rather easy.

Reasons, man, you need to give reasons!

[Peers]

Is that from a different game that's going on right now?

... dude, I don't even know anymore. I feel like I just got Rabbit Season / Duck Season'ed...

[Peers]

ABR, do you always try to protect the people you really want lynched?

[Peers]

I think we're all just going through the motions at this point, folks. We haven't had a votecount since November.

[Peers]

Cool, Yosarian gets two votes...

[Peers]

IGME(andmyvote)OY: Peers

vote: peers

Wow. Under such a carefully thought-out and well-worded logical attack on me, I have no choice but to say every single part of your case is correct.

Of course, given that you have no parts to your case, it's rather easy.

Reasons, man, you need to give reasons!

::mulls it over and eventually shrugs half-heartedly::
Can we hurry and lynch him so that I don't have to provide any reason behind my vote...?

Okay, I've waited, I've gotten no answer. He's voting for someone without a case and hoping to get them lynched quickly so he doesn't have to present a case.

Vote: Sikario8

Also, MoS is being a douche, but honestly... he feels like he's playing like I do when I act that way. He's town, but played bruskly enough (I believe he said it himself, "Why can't I be pissed-off pro-town?") that people started turning on him, and instead of backing down he geared up and went into snarling-home-defense-Doberman mode. He's town, he's just unable to dig himself out of the hole he's started.

[Peers]

Why does it figure that the one time I can't edit the post is the one time I screw up my vote count...

Sorry, the vote on MoS is correct and the one on Sikario is incorrect.

You also missed MoS's vote on Jordan, I believe.

[Peers]

Wow. That's... amazingly stupid. Seriously.

[Peers]

... damn this game. I... I agree with ABR... I have to go clean my brain out with bleach now...

[Peers]

Unvote. Vote: Quag

If you're not letting your role affect how you play, then you can't give off any scum vibes, true... but you also can't give off any town vibes. What's worse... each of us who've read our roles know the alignment of at least one person: Ourselves. You don't even know that. It's the old saying... I'm not sure if you're scum, but you're definately not pro-town.

[Peers]

Teflon, not Astroglide. And like Erg0 said... it's him, hsfalalala, and two lurkers. And judging from the most recent bandwagon... we now have president for people to not bother claiming today, since we didn't force a claim here... just a "No, I read it, I swear".

[Peers]

Sorry, Peers wasn't on.

Peers can sum up Peers' thought son the matter by simply stating that Peers has not moved his vote. Whether or not Quag lied about reading his role, whether or not he lied about having done so in the first place, he has engaged in 'bad gameplay', as most people in that thread Yosarian referenced decided this technique was (well, those who didn't practice it decided it was bad play; those who did, decided it was good).

What Peers am most interested in right now is why The Strudel is so interested in getting Peers to speak on his own behalf -- is The Strudel fishing for something for later, or does The Strudel think that, in some amazingly obtuse way, Peers will convince someone to hammer Quagmire, and do The Strudel's dirty work for him?

... Peers thinks Peers has been watching too many wrestling promos on YouTube lately...

[Peers]

Vote Count:

9: Quagmire

(Panzerjager, ABR, schismatized, Elmo, Toaster Strudel, Battle Mage, Peers, Kscope)

•

Whoa...what happened...?

Short version: Quag said he hasn't read his role PM yet. We all dogpiled on him despite not really being able to tell if a) he told the truth or b) if he's telling the truth now that he says he read it.

[Peers]

ABR's just being retarded again, as per usual.

That, or he's making an incredibly brilliant observation about how you've decided to "stand down" but not unvote...

[Peers]

I'd rather lynch someone who is scum than someone who is useless for Day 1. Considering that there are actually people who seem like scum right now, we're better off lynching then than Quagmire.

Everyone in the town would rather lynch scum than someone who is useless; that's the game. But in this case, nobody can agree just who seems scummy. At least, no more than a few people can agree. Quag is the first person the whole town has really gotten together on, to push to the point of hammering. It's day 1, we don't have much to go on and Quag sent up a huge signal fire to distract us.

[Peers]

God help me, ABR is making perfect sense to me.

unvote

Vote: hasdgfas

[Peers]

You seem to agree with ABR a lot when it keeps suspicion off of you.

I know. This worries me greatly. Perhaps I can use it as an inverse scumdar -- if I agree with ABR, I'm playing wrong...

[Peers]

.... all the color-coded quotes are hurting my brain, people. Simplify, simplify, simplify...

[Peers]

Oh, god, we're still in Day one, aren't we...

[Peers]

That's the big Mafia Philosophy Debate, isn't it? Are we town until proven scum, or scum until proven town?

[Peers]

I think it all depends on how much proof you have and on how many people are in the game.

There's 19 of us. We can't all be scum. Judging by tradition, there's going to be 4-5 scum or other anti-town roles. One in four, roughly. And we have very little evidence to suggest anyone is town or scum at this point, just words. We don't even have random actions to link words to, other than votes... the problem is, what happens when I think A and B are both town, but they're going after each other tooth and nail? Should I be forced to pick between them, or hold tight to the assumption they're town until proven otherwise?

[Peers]

Because TS hasn't posted for over a week now, most likely. Out of sight, out of mind. It does look suspicious, yes...

[Peers]

The burden of proof lies in the person deciding if he agrees with the accuser; in the end, it is that person's decision whether or not to vote, and they are answerable only to themselves; this is the burden of the uninformed majority, to decide how to find proof where there is no proof, to determine guilt where there has been no act of a guilty man yet performed.

These are the fundamental questions of the game. The only people with proof of who is and is not guilty, at least at the start of the game, are those who are themselves guilty. And they don't want to share that information.

[Peers]

Yeah, but he's at least talking, and we can still get him tomorrow. TS doesn't seem to be here to defend herself. We can make the mod's job a lot easier if we lynch someone that scummy today. Peers will still be here tomorrow unless he's vigged or something.

You know, some people might see that as 'trying to direct the vig' and call it scummy. But then, perhaps I'm just descending into generalities by pointing out something potentially useful to the town instead of arguing and calling people names and whatnot.

[Peers]

Unvote

Vote: Toaster

At this point, it's the best option available. Nobody bust ABR sees hasdgfas as scummy, and maybe that should be a warning sign. Whereas TS has been scummy and then gone all lurky... like, more lurky than even I've been.

[Peers]

..... Okay, that's a good reason. I guess TS just posted a whole lot ot other games in the two days between the last post to this one and V/L/A.

Unvote

[Peers]

Vote: Mert

Reason: Hasn't posted since November 10th, yet hasn't been replaced. Hardcore lurking.

[Peers]

Unvote

Dammit. Can someone tell me which lurkers -aren't- away, on vacation, sick, injured, out of the country, incarcerated, abducted, or otherwise have a legit reason to not be here?

[Peers]

Lynching Peers would be a bad thing. Trust the only one who knows.

[Peers]

You both need to chill the heck out. You're both decent players when you actually play the game and not antagonize everyone else...

[Peers]

There's no point in having a jester in the game, really.

Right now, we've suffered such a loss of momentum that nobody's really sure what's going on anymore... when was our last votecount?

[Peers]

I'm giving the information.

Draw your own conclusions.

....



Can't wait to read the rebuttal on this one.

[Peers]

Anyone else feel like TS is being played by My Cousin Vinnie? "Tell me, hasdfas , how could you look up and see these two yutes driving away when it takes the entire rest of the grit-eating world twenty minutes to cook their grits?"

[Peers]

All along, I thought that if we just put enough pressure on Quagmire, he would give up and read his role PM

For the gazillionth time... we don't know whether he did, or when he did it, and what parts of his stunt are manipulating lies, and which parts of his stunt are true.

Devil's Advocate time: How do we know you read your PM, TS? How do you know I read mine? How do we know anyone read their PM?

[Peers]

Full-random

vote: hasdgfas

Speaking of distancing between you and hasdfas. Let me remind you of your first, "full random vote", Peers.

Coincidence?

Nope. not random at all. You caught me. I'm obviously distancing myself from my scumbuddies, hasdfas, Yosarian, and Quagmire. We had a brilliant plan that was going to get us the win in this game quite easily, but your keen, analytical mind managed to pierce our veil of secrecy, sieze upon every minute, unseen flaw in our plan, and have managed to win the game for the town on the very first day.

Tell me, what's more likely... that a random vote was cast weeks ago and that person is now voting against me simply out of coincidence, or the above scenario?

The sad thing is... I was buying your case on Yos and hasdaflag. It was logical, it made sense, and then I ask one little question and you go rabid-pit-bull on me. Ease off the paranoia a little before you begin to lose what momentum you've earned with the rest of us the last couple days.

[Peers]

Also, I'd like the following from you:
Please give your opinion of Peers.
Please give your opinion of hasdfgas.
Please give your opinion of Yosarian2.
Please order these 3 players on a scale from town to scum.
Please provide appropriate quotes to support any statements that you make.

"You must have the above typed out, double-spaced, in no larger than fourteen-point font, on my desk at the beginning of class on Tuesday. This paper is weighted just the same as a test, so it will have a definite impact on your grade. Make sure you correctly use footnotes for your citations and no, Wikipedia and 'I heard on TV' are not allowed as sources."

[Peers]

I cannot think of anything that you have done, Peers, that is so scummy that a player would always want to go back and vote for you.

Really?

Oh, please.

Your very third post, you thought someone was bussing me and decided to help them by voting for me. Now you think someone's distancing themselves from me. You go far as to say (your sixth post) that I'm trying to make myself look good because I know Sikario is a mislynch. Your entire early game here was based on the theory that I was scum and was trying to throw people off the trail of my buddies (eighth post). Then you add MoS into the mix for policy lynching you, claiming the scum are him, me, and either Panzer or Jordan.

What I find amazing is that, in your twenty-first post... Nov 25, 11:32am... you say hasdgfas has a genuine reason to be voting for me. And yet now, over a month later, you decide he's distancing from me? Well, that -does- support your newest arguement better... screw the past, we can always call it hindsight!

You left your vote on me until early December, when you changed it to MoS. Two days later, you switched to Quagmire for the read-your-PM bandwagon, while still saying you're not happy I 'got away' without claiming. You then leave for thirteen days and come back focused on Yosarian and hasdaflag.

(...) I thought, hmmm... why is Peers beingn so irrelevent... and... hey! Funny how hasdfas is obsessed with Peers... yes, that's really been bugging me a lot... so then I look at your posts, and all seem fine, so hasdfas's obsessions seems even more bizarre... and then I notice that your first vote is on him.

Yes.... hasdfas was the only one obsessed with me... you've been thinking I'm scum since the game started, had your vote on me for nearly an entire month, and now you're drawing at straws to try and justify it, because you're praying for someone else to start a bandwagon on me. If I turn up scum, you can say "I told you so!" If I turn up town, you can berate whoever started the wagon because you obviously had seen I was town when you took your vote off me. Either way, you come out smelling like roses.

And yet you can't think of anything I've done that's so scummy someone would go vote for me again... I find that an amazingly hard thing to believe.

[Peers]

Why are you totally ignoring Yosarian2 and hasdfas, by the by?

Because Yosarian's responded to every attack you've launched on him, and the last time I voted for hasdaflag you decided I was scummy, so there's no point in me mentioning him either way, now is there?

[Peers]

Yay, I have the approval of someone who threw a hissy-fit, said they were quitting the site, and then decided to start playing the game again! With such rational behavior approving of me, I should go slit my wrists now before I realize just how bad things have gotten!

[Peers]

Haha. You can't be talking about me, because you don't have my approval!

Really? Post 778:

I approve.

You can't even keep straight what you've posted in the last hour. Astonishing.

[Peers]

Yosarian has answers your case on Yosarian better than I ever could.

And your case on hasdaflag includes, as one of the more important parts of it, that he's distancing himself from his scumbuddy -- me. Since I read my PM, I know my alignment and know this is false -- which kinda takes away a good portion of your case against him.

So yes, I am ignoring your cases, since they've both been answered and/or had holes big enough to drive a Mack Truck through in them.

[Peers]

And your case on hasdaflag includes, as one of the more important parts of it, that he's distancing himself from his scumbuddy -- me.

Not the most important, though: here's a reminder.

Hrm.

Okay.

Vote: Hasdaflag

[Peers]

This game is almost two months old and still on day one. Can we possibly get a deadline please? I think it's safe to say we've been deadlocked for quite a while now.

[Peers]

Maybe he's sick of contributing to the same conversation over and over again. You go me to change my mind; congrats. It doesn't mean you should expect everyone to flock to your banner.

[Peers]

... so what was the point of making a convincing case on hasdaflag and a not-so-convincing case on Yos if you were just going to switch over to yet another person who's ticked you off???

(Mind you, if the scumteam is Yos, hasdaflag, and Quag, you're going to look like a genius.)

[Peers]

Pressuring Quag to claim is pointless right now, given that must of us don't even believe that he's bothered to read his PM. He's possibly the only person in this game where a BW would be for a lynch, not for pressure.

[Peers]

If he has to claim... he will HAVE to read his PM if he still hasn't - regardless of all the nonsense he's previously ruined the game with.

That's not "pointless" - that's a very specific goal that cannot fail.

Okay, TS, tell me this... think about your answer before you give it, be honest, be truthful...

If he claims vanilla townie, how loud is the voice in the back of your head going to be screaming "No! He's lying!"

Quag has proven untrustworthy already in this game. Pressuring someone for a claim requires a certain level of trust in them to tell the truth. Nobody ever claims Mafia, nobody ever claims Serial Killer, nobody ever claims Cult Recruiter, etc, etc, etc. When someone claims nurse, or vanilla, or whatever, we have to decide if we trust them or not.

Do you trust Quag, TS? If so, why bother pressuring him? If not, why bother pressuring him?

[Peers]

I claimed Serial Killer a couple times ^

Sorry. nobody sane claims Serial Killer, or Mafia, or...

... dammit, I claimed Mafia once. But it was in a two-Mafia game and resulted in the deaths of two of the other scumgroup... and I only claimed once discovered...

*sigh*

Okay, no good player claims Serial Killer, or Mafia, or...

[Peers]

Oh, well then, carry on.

[Peers]

I count six there for Quag, O Mod, My Mod.

[Peers]

So, TS thinks that ABR, Bookitty, Quagmire, and either myself or Sikario are scum? That's four... in a 19-person game... hrm. Sounds plausible.

[Peers]

... I said it sounds plausible. Do you need a thesaurus, Erg0?

Personally, I think if there's only four scum, then we've got a huge number of vanilla townies. Maybe two power roles at most. I think it's more likely that there's five scum and four power roles. I've been in a six-scum 19-player game, but that was two mafias in a no-cross-kill game, so I don't think we've got that many. Four or five makes the most sense...

[Peers]

Since you're in a mind to speculate, why do you think the name of the game is NEGWLTWWWTKY?

.... Mod fell asleep on his keyboard while naming the game?

I think the "self-defense vote" on someone he thinks is town to save himself is probably the worst of his actions, but most of these aren't very good.

.... but I never actually performed that action, I simply said I was willing to vote for someone I thought had a slight chance of being scum in order to save someone I knew wasn't scum.

[Peers]

I'd just like to list the players that have defended Quagmire:

YagamiLight, MoS, Peers, Yosarian2, and hasdagas

... wait... where the hell did I defend Quagmire? I'm the one who's been saying that we have no proof he actually read his PM, and even if he claims, we don't a reason to believe him... now you say I'm defending him?

You really oughtta work in politics. Reminds me of Karl Rove saying "Congress wanted to send troops into Iraq, the President didn't want to."

[Peers]

I'd just like to list the players that have defended Quagmire:
YagamiLight, MoS, Peers, Yosarian2, and hasdagas

... wait... where the hell did I defend Quagmire? I'm the one who's been saying that we have no proof he actually read his PM, and even if he claims, we don't a reason to believe him... now you say I'm defending him?

I have looked back at your posts, and I have to admit... I can't seem to find where I got that impression. Apologies.

Apology accepted. Consider it a warning to slow down and think a bit before posting names. I've gotten mislynched a few times by naming the wrong names or being sure I had something to back up an accusation when I didn't.

[Peers]

You are dense

Huh ?

Comedy gold, people! You two should take this act on the road, maybe to the Open forums... anywhere but here, really...

[Peers]

... This game confuses me greatly. I ca't decide who's trying to use reverse psychology and who doesn't...

[Peers]

So I'm uneven and inconsistent now... well, if that's the worst arguement you've got against me, maybe you should hold off that vote until you have an actual reason for it?

[Peers]

Let's just say I've now got several names to look for on a player list before I join a game.

[Peers]

... holy crap. TS might just be right.

Unvote
Vote: MoS

No, not voting for Kscope. I'm not convinced on him. MoS, however, is either scum... or being expertly set up by the scum.

And for those of you voting for me who aren't scum, I'd like to remind you that voting for me could be a very bad thing.

[Peers]

Lynching Peers is bad for the town.

[Peers]

Understandable. But the truth will come out eventually.

[Peers]

I thought I wasn't the leading wagon until you voted for me?

[Peers]

Ah, right, I was thinking Panzer. My bad. You did, indeed, vote for the person who had the most votes simply to lynch someone, regardless of if they were scum or not, because you're bored. You are completely without blame.

... hey, waitasec...

[Peers]

... Yes, I -am- voting, thank you for bothering to read the votecount before asking an amazingly stupid question.

[Peers]

I hope you don't expect me to speak only in my name...

[Peers]

Hrm. Well, I guess I'll do what anyone else would do if they had a chance to save someone they know is 100% town...

Unvote vote: Kscope

[Peers]

Chance of Quag being scum > chance of KScore being scum.

Unvote, vote Quagmire

[Peers]

The fact that I've been reading the damn thread since the game started?

[Peers]

I find it hard to believe that Quagmire really thought he might draw a NK after how today has gone. If he's town, after his play today no scum in their right mind would waste their time on him.

The fact that I've been reading the damn thread since the game started?

Nice, Peers. Is it really so hard to give your reasons for thinking Quag is scum and Kscope is town?

Show me where I said Kscope is town. I said the odds of Quag being scum were better than those of Kscope being scum. I never said one was definately town or definately scum.

[Peers]

Oh, please, you're just lazy. You were too lazy to see if I was voting for anyone, and now you're too lazy to go read the cases everyone has made against Quagmire. Almost as if... nah.

[Peers]

A Peers lynch will be bad for the town.

Quad, MoS, and Setael are scum. No proof, just hunch. Unfortunately, my death will be the proof...

[Peers]

*sigh* This town sucks...

Lynching Peers is bad for the town because he's the freakin' Doctor. Get your votes off of him, willya?

[Peers]

Last night, Peers protected someone who he thought would be a prime target if they weren't scum. That person was apparently not attacked.

Unless.

If we have Werewolves, a Serial Killer, and a Vigilante, then I -did- stop someone from killing last night. The only person who knows for certain is the killer, if there is one. So I'm a bit loathe to reveal who I protected.

[Peers]

ABR has a point. A weak one, but still a point. I feel I have a stronger point: My revealing who I protected does absolutely nothing. They may not have been targetted. They may have. If I reveal a name, and they -were- targetted, all it does is confirm my doctorship to someone who has the ability to kill me. If I reveal a name and they weren't targetted, well, nobody can verify it anyway.

Given that I think the only reason I'm alive is that the mafia (and SK if there is one) thinks my claim is bunk. I have no reason to want to confirm myself to them.

[Peers]

... OMGWTF time. Oh, well. Go, Town!