Mafia 73: NEGWLTWWWTKY - Abandoned!

[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?"

[Albert B. Rampage]

I don't think anyone in this game trusts Quagmire's judgment now. Its safe to assume that he did though, just like we are assuming that everyone else in the game read their role pm. He said he did. If he goes back on his word then we lynch him, plain and simple.

hasdfas is really scummy though.

[Toaster Strudel]

[Yosarian] isn't pushing for a claim either. Which means he pushes wagons to see if players change their playstyle under pressure. This is pro-town.

You are assuming that is his intent. Can you think of any other intent that Yosarian might have, that may be anti-town?

Because he didn't want Quag to fall back on the argument that all his posts on Day1 are not scummy because he didn't read his role pm. Once he reads his role pm, he can then be viewed as scummy.

Yes. That is what Yosarian is saying. but the real question is,

why is Yosarian so willing to believe Quagmire?

Meh - I dunno why. It just seems odd.

The argument that I put forth was that we should lynch Quag regardless, because every post prior to reading his role pm cannot be viewed as scummy, and he has wasted our time with his unusual, fun-breaking tactic.

That is only the tip of the iceberg of an argument that can be made in favor of lynching Quagmire.

You are assuming Quagmire really didn't read his role PM. Why? Maybe he did read it, and he wants us to think he didn't. Jerking us around. Causing un-necessary wifoms, and whatnot.

What reason do you have to believe he did read his role PM? Maybe he still didn't. Maybe he'd read it before.

But the clincher is...

The moment he declared he didn't read his role PM, he was jerking us around.

Why? To what end? How is this pro-town?

[Toaster Strudel]

If he goes back on his word then we lynch him, plain and simple.

Question: how are you ever going to know?

The only thing I know is that he jerked us around.

[Albert B. Rampage]

[Yosarian] isn't pushing for a claim either. Which means he pushes wagons to see if players change their playstyle under pressure. This is pro-town.

You are assuming that is his intent. Can you think of any other intent that Yosarian might have, that may be anti-town?

I'm out of ideas here...you've been mysteriously hinting at something for a while now, it would be a good idea to state your interpretations for pushing wagons for pressure.

Yes. That is what Yosarian is saying. but the real question is,

why is Yosarian so willing to believe Quagmire?

Meh - I dunno why. It just seems odd.

Because we have nothing to lose. Either we are under the assumption that everyone read their role pm including Quagmire, or we policy lynch someone that claims that they didn't. Quagmire now falls under the first category.

You are assuming Quagmire really didn't read his role PM. Why? Maybe he did read it, and he wants us to think he didn't. Jerking us around. Causing un-necessary wifoms, and whatnot.

What reason do you have to believe he did read his role PM? Maybe he still didn't. Maybe he'd read it before.

But the clincher is...

The moment he declared he didn't read his role PM, he was jerking us around.

Why? To what end? How is this pro-town?

He didn't read it to benefit himself, of course. He knows that isn't doing anything scummy unconsciously. We could interpret his actions as scummy though, like we did in this game. And then he gets mad and falls on the ol' 'but i didn't read it!!' argument. And so we bandwagonned him until he claimed to have read it.

Nobody said it was pro-town. There was this great quote about ignorance being the main reason behind a bad action instead of malign intent, but I can't remember it. But you are committing a very grave mistake: you are underestimating the unpredictability of quagy's stupidity.

[Albert B. Rampage]

If he goes back on his word then we lynch him, plain and simple.

Question: how are you ever going to know?

The only thing I know is that he jerked us around.

We are under the assumption that he read it until he claims otherwise. If he claims otherwise we lynch him. If he doesn't claim otherwise but didn't read it, he isn't under the protection of his silly gambit.

[Toaster Strudel]

Let me answer your shorter post first.

We are under the assumption that he read it until he claims otherwise. If he claims otherwise we lynch him.

Why would he now claim otherwise? This part of the argument is moot, since there is no chance in hell that he's going to go back on this.

If he doesn't claim otherwise but didn't read it, he isn't under the protection of his silly gambit.

I don't think you understand what I've been trying to say.

What is the gambit here? Really. What is it? Think for an instant about the true nature of his gambit.

(1) He declares he hasn't read his role PM.
If he DID read the PM, he wants us to believe that he didn't. Why? If he did read the PM, and he's saying he didn't, that means he HAS TO BE SCUM.

(2) If he didn't read the PM, then he's starting the day out to screw the town, in order *not appear like scum, if he's scum* - get it? Regardless of alignment. It benefits him ONLY if he's scum. Not if he's town. But chances are, when you pick up your role PM, that you're a townie, statistically speaking. Why does he want to start off helping himself more if he's scum, than if he's town, since he's more likely town? It's not helping him at all if he's town. So if he's really not reading his role PM when he is starting a game, then overall, it goes against his own success as a player, and therefore, it is not a rational strategy...

Why did he say he didn't read it? Motive?

I personally believe, if Quagmire is at all acting intelligently and rationally, that he

more likely read his role PM than not.

And besides... the other game where he made that announcement... he was scum.

[Albert B. Rampage]

I guess we are just going to agree to disagree. We are also one of the two only people who still want to lynch Quagy anymore, just to illustrate how the rest of the world don't care about our discussion. Anyway. Has is scummy.

[Toaster Strudel]

[Yosarian] isn't pushing for a claim either. Which means he pushes wagons to see if players change their playstyle under pressure. This is pro-town.

You are assuming that is his intent. Can you think of any other intent that Yosarian might have, that may be anti-town?

I'm out of ideas here...you've been mysteriously hinting at something for a while now, it would be a good idea to state your interpretations for pushing wagons for pressure.

There can be many other interpretations.

(1) He may be trying not to compromise himself on townie lynches.
(2) He may be trying to derail overheated scumbuddy wagons.
(3) He may be setting up a trail of players he defends, and players he attacks, to send us on false leads later if he dies and we find out he's scum.

Honestly, I don't know which it is. But I am alerted by his reluctance to lynch some players, defend others, and

especially

his attacking of MoS's attackers, after he himself stated that he found MoS scummy.

Do you have an explanation for the MoS bit, Albert?

Yes. That is what Yosarian is saying. but the real question is,

why is Yosarian so willing to believe Quagmire?

Meh - I dunno why. It just seems odd.

Because we have nothing to lose. Either we are under the assumption that everyone read their role pm including Quagmire, or we policy lynch someone that claims that they didn't. Quagmire now falls under the first category.[/quote]I am not as willing as you are to jump to this conclusion that we have nothing to lose, since we allowed him to jerk us around all day, and without him claiming, we have no way of knowing which way he's been jerking us around.

And so we bandwagonned him until he claimed to have read it.

But did he then? Had he before? And did he really? We don't know. He's still jerking us around.

But you are committing a very grave mistake: you are underestimating the unpredictability of quagy's stupidity.

Of this crime I surely am guilty.

[Toaster Strudel]

I guess we are just going to agree to disagree. We are also one of the two only people who still want to lynch Quagy anymore, just to illustrate how the rest of the world don't care about our discussion. Anyway. Has is scummy.

I believe my original point was that Yosarian and hassfas may be scum and deserves closer scrutiny. My argument wasn't about Quagmire's alignment in particular.

The Quagmire argument arose because both Yos and hasdfas were defending Quagmire quite strongly - when rationally, there were more reasons to lynch Quag, than not. And you argued that... aw, I even forget what you argued.

Why did Yos and hasdfas defend Quag so aggressively?

Did they both know it was to be a mislynch? I can't imagine any other reason to defend a player like Quagmire so strongly. But then again, I might be prejudiced.

[hasdgfas]

my comments in red

Analyzing:
hasdfas a.k.a. "God forbid we should lynch Quagmire"

Special love for MoS

Post #0 - semi-random vote: Mastermind of Sin. What's that all about?

I believe that I mentioned that was a not-truly-random random vote.

Post #1 - Wimpy rebuttal after being attacked for a "semi-random" vote. What's that all about?

What else was I supposed to say?

Post #11 - http://www.mafiascum.net/forum/viewtopi ... 349#834349 - what's that all about?

MoS said Hi. I said Hi back

Post #17 - http://www.mafiascum.net/forum/viewtopi ... 485#853485 - pays special attention to MoS, asking him reasons for voting Jordan. What's that all about?

He said we need more pressure on Jordan. I asked him why because I didn't see anything that was a reason for putting pressure on him

Contradicts himself

Post #3 - berates votes unsupported by reasons.

I was referencing a different game

Post #4 - votes Peers unsupported by reasons.

It's called bandwagoning and it's not unheard of in mafia.

Post #5 - is sad that Jordan, schis, and ABR aren't berated for voting without reason.

Multiple people bandwagon voted, so why does panzer only point out one person who did it?

Post #6 - defends himself against the players that noticed his contradictions.

Because I had reasons for it, so I stated them. That's what I'm supposed to do.

Admits to a complete lack of independent thinking

Post #8 - admits his reasons for voting Peers are exactly the same as other players.
Post #10 - repeats his reason are exactly the same as other players, saying "See: everyone's posts about him."

So I'm not allowed to agree with other people? Every person has to come up with new reasons every time they vote for a person?

Meekly defends Sikario8

Post #12 - "leaning town on Sikario."
Post #13 - keeps up pressure on the main Peers wagon, away from Sikario8.

Because he's acting the same as he did in the newbie game I was in with him, and we was town there, so I thought he was town here too.

Defends Quagmire early on, in the middle, and at the end of the wagon

Even defends people that aren't voting Quag!!!

Votes players that (ack!) suggest we should lynch Quag!!!

Does not even question that Quagmire may be lying about it

Post #20 - Not reading role PM isn't anti-town, because the Day 1 lynch is random.
Post #21 - Thinks it's really pro-town not to read your PM,

especially if Quagmire is scum.

Post #22 - Maintains, against common sense, that Quag not reading his PM is really pro-town.
Post #23 - "just because someone [...] doesn't want to lynch Quag doesn't make them scum."
Post #23 - Quag not reading his role PM is

really great!!!

Post #24 - Attacks AND FOS's Sikario8 for going as far as saying we should

actually lynch

Quag.
Post #30 - Demands more pressure be put on Peers, a nice old wagon he might be able to revive.

I believe I stated quite clearly my reasons for why a Quag lynch just based on him saying he didn't read his PM was a bad thing.

Strudel must be done away with

Post #34 - "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."
WOW. I'm surprised that post didn't jump at people.
Post #13 - keeps up pressure on the main Peers wagon, away from Sikario8.

People already thought you were scummy, so a lynch is not necessarily a bad thing. I'm glad you came back to defend yourself. I was saying that the mod might have to replace you, but since people thought you were scummy, and it's still day 1, a lynch is not a bad thing.

Directs the vig

Post #34 - towards Peers. Why?

Because, hasdfas says:
Let's VIG Peers is still here to

defend himself

.
Let's LYNCH TS, who is

not here to defend herself

.

I said that Peers will always be here to lynch, unless he gets vigged. I also said that there may not even be a vig, so it's not really directing it. Just stating a possibility. You, on the other hand, might get replaced, so why not lynch a scummy person.

IN SUMMARY

(1) I don't know what's going on with the defense, then fleeting accusations against Sikario8. Maybe some other player can try to interpret this?
(3) That special attention hasdfas pays MoS...

I don't understand how you can see anything there.[/color[
(2) Just like Yosarian, defends Quagmire.
(4) Just like Yosarian, wants to get rid of me - does not state his own reasons as usual; relies on other people's.
(5) Dear players, please ask yourself what agenda hasdfas might have, that he'd want to lynch the person that can't defend herself, and vig the person that can. Please please please ask yourselves.

Another hour, another long long long post... just me sucking the fun out of the game as usual. I just make games stagnate and lose their focus. I apologize!

I quite appreciate your posts, just so you know, even if one of them is a post analyzing me. At least we're getting something that isn't just dumb discussion about policy lynches.

[Toaster Strudel]

Thanks hasdfas, but I don't think your defense of your defense of Quag is proportionate to the amount of Quag-defense you put into the game. I mean, you really went overboard... on pretty dodgy reasoning... for what is a pretty worthless player... who was jerking us around big time...

~anyway~ more importantly...

Your answer to this:

Post #34 - towards Peers. Why? Because, hasdfas says:
Let's VIG Peers is still here to defend himself.
Let's LYNCH TS, who is not here to defend herself.

... shows that you don't understand my problem with what you said. You probably just need to read my concern again slowly... please explain your words more fully.

In other word...

LYNCHING the scummy player who is there defending himself, and VIGGING the one that's not there to defend herself... that's would be the pro-town strategy, if you HAD to get rid of these two players.

VIGGING the scummy player who is there defending himself, and LYNCHING the one that's not there to defend herself... that's a scum strategy.

Do you get what I'm sayin'?

[hasdgfas]

All right, I do get what you're saying. BUT. We had no way of knowing whether you would be back from your prolonged absence. You and Peers seem to be the two most scummy players according to most people at this point. Could you explain to me why getting rid of each of them in the other way is a different strategy? It's still getting rid of both of them, so I don't understand the difference based on the mode of execution.

Also, I defended Quag because I feel that the reason for going after him, at least today, is stupid. I went over why it was a bad idea. However, if he starts acting strange now, after he claims he'd read his role, then let's go after him. If he doesn't know his role, he's basically a townie, so he was pretty much just a time-wasting bandwagon.

[Toaster Strudel]

All right, I do get what you're saying. BUT. We had no way of knowing whether you would be back from your prolonged absence.

BUT - that is not relevent. That sentence addresses absolutely nothing. Do you understand why?

You and Peers seem to be the two most scummy players according to most people at this point.

Like who? Who is "most players?" MoS, Quag, and Yosarian? Two people that "policy-voted" me, and another who's been acting pretty weird, at least by my evaluation.

Do you realize you are obliquely admitting that you have no reason to find me scummy, other than what you believe others have been saying? Do you realize you've been doing that a lot this game, and that's kinda a point that bugs me about your play?

Could you explain to me why getting rid of each of them in the other way is a different strategy?

With the greatest of pleasures.

(1) The player that is NOT here to defend his or herself is an easier lynch, agreed? Also, that player be be hammered and not claim, agreed? That's pretty good from a scum point of view, agreed?

(2) The player that IS here to defend himself, might put up a fuss if wrongly accused, agreed? Attacking him might also backfire, which is not good if you're scum pushing for his lynch, agreed?

So... lynching the player that's not around, and vigging the player that is around, is SUPER for the scum, but horrid for the town.

Like... the town gets ZERO info from the lynch because the player hasn't said a word... and gets ZERO information from the vig because the victim can't argue against a vig...

Also, I defended Quag because I feel that the reason for going after him, at least today, is stupid.

But you have voted people for much less dumb, and less blatantly anti-town plays. Have you actually taken the time to read my explanations as to why Quagmire's play is sooooo anti-town? Do you want me to explain that further too? I'll gladly slow down the pace if you need to catch up on it, it's important that you understand fully - in particular, that Quagmire is totally jerking us around? Seriously... I'll be happy to give you the long version.

if he starts acting strange now, after he claims he'd read his role, then let's go after him.

He has acted pretty badly already. First, the policy lynch business; second, jerking us around with the "I didn't read my PM" declaration, and that now we're supposed to believe that (1) he actually didn't read his role (2) he actually read it when he said he did (3) MORE IMPORTANTLY - his saying that he didn't read his role PM was "pro-town." How much nonsense are you willing to tolerate before you find someone lynch-worthy?

The answer is...
(1) policy lynches and declaring openly you haven't read your role... that's OK...
(2) sorry to toot my own horn but useful, scumhunting players like myself... that's BAD...
(3) voting without reason... that's BAD when other players do it...
(4) voting without reason... following other players without even knowing what the players are talking about... that's GOOD when hasdfas does it...

If he doesn't know his role, he's basically a townie, so he was pretty much just a time-wasting bandwagon.

OK - you're going to need the LooooOoooNnnNnGgGggGg explanation.

(1) You are assuming that he actually didn't read his role PM.
Maybe he did read it.
Have you considered this possibility?

(2) You fail to question why a player would announce that he hasn't read his role PM.
Have you wondered why a player would do that?
What would his motives be?
Stop and think.

(3) You are assuming that he did read his PM when he did.
What if he didn't?
What if he read it before the game started like everyone?
If he really didn't read his role PM... how do you KNOW he did read it, without him claiming?
How can you believe a player that's jerking us around with "I haven't read my PM" declarations?

It doesn't really matter what you actually answer to the questions... the thing is, regardless of the answer, the only logical conclusion, is that Quagmire is jerking everybody around AND policy-lynching useful players with a brain that think (maybe not perfectly, but at least, put some genuine effort into the game).

In a nutshell:
(1) policy lynching useful players
(2) jerking the town around
(3) last time he pulled that nonsense, he was scum.

How much more do you need????

[Toaster Strudel]

For clarity, I'll add the following comments.

I am not advocating a Quagmire lynch.

Rather, I am advocating a hasdfas lynch, or maybe a Yosarian2 lynch, depending on Yosarian's responses.

Why is that?

(1) Quag's play is irrational, harmful, and to some extent personality-based, and really dumb. Plus, it's the kind of stunt he pulled as scum.
(2) That kind of play is indefensible.
(3) Who would defend Quagmire? (a) a scumbuddy or (b) a scum who knows this is a mislynch.
(4) Both hasdfas and Yosarian3 defended Quagmire against all logic and to such an extent, and so lacking in subtlety that I cannot possibly see them as Quagmirebuddies. Therefore, I consider hassfas and Yosarian2 to be, quite possibly, among the "knowing minority" that knew Quagmire was a mislynch.
(5) I can't imagine any other rationale for so vehemently defending such completely idiotic play.

Although... if Quagmire's stunt has forced the scum out of their safe haven, maybe he's not so idiotic after all!

vote: hasdgfas

[hasdgfas]

ah yes, the claiming thing. I completely forgot about that.
I think I need to do a total re-read. These last e TS posts have made me wonder what the heck I've been thinking throughout this entire game.
I hope to return with a much more clarified view of things. I think my thoughts have been muddled by this entire episode and a re-read will do them good.

[schismatized]

We need a VC so we can lynch someone. I don't care who.

[zu_Faul]

Votecount would be good. But finally people are voting KScope. Its new post was so bandwagonny and opportune it smells of scumminess.

[Toaster Strudel]

Votecount would be good. But finally people are voting KScope. Its new post was so bandwagonny and opportune it smells of scumminess.

Fascinating how how ignore both the cases I made against Yosarian2 and hasdgfas, only paid attention to the last post in the thread (a one-liner to boot), and concluded schis was scum.

Do you understand how you look at least as opportunistic as schis? More scummy by my book, because I understand schis's sentiment that this day has seen a great many good wagons derailed by er, say, Yosarian2 and hasdfas to name a few, has been sorely lacking in votecounts, has lasted way too long, and had stalled. Your berating schis is out of left field.

It's as if you can still see a star twinkling in the sky, when the sun is shining at noon. It smells of scum not paying attention - consciously or not.

Lucky for you, hasdgfas is the lynch today.

[Yosarian2]

TS: Fair enough, I do tend to defend people a lot. That being said, some of those things you attack me for weren't actually defending. For example, I'm not interested in defending MOS; what I am doing is attacking Kaleidoscope because his MOS vote looked incredibly scummy, the reasons he gave for it were simply not pro-town and I want a better explination from him.

Attacking someone because of a scummy looking vote is not the same as defending the person they're voting for.

[Yosarian2]

Oh, to comment on a few other things:

1. I stand by my early comments on the Battle Mage wagon. I think trying to start up an early wagon against an "easy target" like Battle Mage for no good reason is a pretty decent scumtell; I've caught scum with that exact scumtell before, in fact.


2.

Once you come that far on a wagon, and a player needs so much pressure to make a post that claims he read his role PM, isn't it important that this player prove his honesty by claiming?

You have to believe that Quag actually didn't read his PM in the first place; then you have to believe he read it when he said he did.

I'm not willing to take this kind of guff from a player - unless he's my scumbuddy and I really need him to read his PM (haha!), or unless I'm scum and I know he's town and I want to be credited for saving his skin later... but hey... I reckon there's more than one explanation for Yosarian's behavior in this game.

Eh...I do tend to believe Quag didn't read his PM in the first place, because he's mentioned in the Mafia Discussion forum in the past that he has, in the past, not read his PM. I was not interested in allowing him to do that, so I pressured him until he read his PM. On the other hand, I do believe him when he said he did read his PM now; this might sound a bit strange, but I have never seen Quagmire lie as town, and a person who hasn't read his PM basically has to assume he's town, right? I donno, it's hard to explain, but I do, in fact, think he was telling the truth both times. Which dosn't mean he's not scum anyway, of course, but it does mean by Quag wagon accomplished what I wanted it to accomplish.

Not only that, one of the biggest problems with a person who hasn't read his PM is that it's much harder to make connections or get information if they do turn out to be scum. However, the large bandwagon on him also helped solve that, I think; if he does turn out to be scum, I think we'll get a lot of info from the way his bandwagon went.

Oh, and before I forget, I'm glad you decided to keep playing. Your analysis posts have also made me feel somewhat better about your alignment as well, they seem to show some good pro-town thinking.

[Toaster Strudel]

TS: Fair enough, I do tend to defend people a lot. That being said, some of those things you attack me for weren't actually defending.

You give only one example of someone you're "not defending," namely, MoS - but I know you are not defending MoS, so you picked rather poorly if you tried to defend yourself. You are not responding to my challenging your reasons why you've defended so many players, including Quag, basically saving his worthless skin by unvoting him

in extremis

. Forgive me for thinking that you had to KNOW it was going to be a mislynch.

For example, I'm not interested in defending MOS; what I am doing is attacking Kaleidoscope because his MOS vote looked incredibly scummy, the reasons he gave for it were simply not pro-town and I want a better explination from him.

If you think MoS is scum, why are you attacking his attackers? Presumably you want MoS to be lynched, since you think he's scum, right? So why are you derailing the nascent MoS wagon? YOU said we should pile votes on him until he begins to make sense. Has he?

So what, if, by your own evaluation, Kaleidoscope wants to help by bus'ing MoS?

Attacking someone because of a scummy looking vote is not the same as defending the person they're voting for.

I disagree; especially if the person that player is voting for tops your own scum list.

Attacking Kal for voting someone who you think is scum does not make sense as town play. I have no idea what you're trying to accomplish with this, but I don't this it's pro-town.

[Toaster Strudel]

Oh, to comment on a few other things:

1. I stand by my early comments on the Battle Mage wagon.

That's an easy one, everyone is tired with the "BM First Class Wagon."

What about all the other players you defended?

No more dodging please.

Eh...I do tend to believe Quag didn't read his PM in the first place, because he's mentioned in the Mafia Discussion forum in the past that he has, in the past, not read his PM.

So, you are saying that because he's said it in Mafia Discussion before, that it's true?

Are you saying that it's impossible that he said that in Mafia Discussion to give himself a bit of a Day 1 advantage across the board?

I was not interested in allowing him to do that, so I pressured him until he read his PM.

And you believe that he read his PM when he said he did? There's no doubt in your mind? Like, there's no chance that he's lying and jerking you around?

On the other hand, I do believe him when he said he did read his PM now; this might sound a bit strange, but I have never seen Quagmire lie as town, and a person who hasn't read his PM basically has to assume he's town, right?

Er - yes, it sounds uber-strange. OK. You haven't read, or understood, my argument. At all. See, you're looking at it from the wrong angle. It's not that he's assuming he's town; it's that the stunt

can only help him as scum

and that

it never helps the town, especially not with Quagmire doing it

. Again, for the millionth time, the problem is that he feels the need to declare: "I haven't read my PM." If he didn't read it, and shut up about it, that's one thing; but once he makes this declaration... regardless of whether or not it's true... he's embarked on a course of jerking the town around.

I donno, it's hard to explain, but I do, in fact, think he was telling the truth both times.

This kind of blind trust of a player that advocates policy-lynches and pulled this stunt as scum before, is VERY ANTI-TOWN.

Which dosn't mean he's not scum anyway, of course, but it does mean by

Quag wagon accomplished what I wanted it to accomplish.

What did you want the Quagwagon to accomplish, Yosarian? Tell the whole class.

...the large bandwagon on him also helped solve that, I think; if he does turn out to be scum, I think we'll get a lot of info from the way his bandwagon went.

Argh! How do we know without lynching him, and without him at least claiming??? The large bandwagon solved NOTHING. Thanks to you and hasdgfas, we have nothing. Except the both of you of course, so yeah, I take that back.

[Yosarian2]

If you think MoS is scum, why are you attacking his attackers? Presumably you want MoS to be lynched, since you think he's scum, right? So why are you derailing the nascent MoS wagon? YOU said we should pile votes on him until he begins to make sense. Has he?

(shrug). A pro-town person has to be willing to switch direction in an instant if something dosn't feel right; stubborn pro-town people who stick to their guns no matter what are a scum's best friend. MOS seems somewhat less scummy so then I did before because I do think he is making some sense now. Basically, when he voted you, I, at the time, had a bad vibe about you, so his vote did make sense to me.

In conclusion, meh. MOS might be scum, but I'm not sure enough that he is to ignore suc h anti-town looking votes like the one Kaliedoscope dropped on him. And, honeslty, MOS almost always feels scummy to me day 1, so while I'm still not entierly comfertable with him, I'm not willing to bet on my vibe being right.

So what, if, by your own evaluation, Kaleidoscope wants to help by bus'ing MoS?

Eh. Kalei's vote dosn't look or feel like a bussing move, though. It looks more like he was thinking that everyone was mad at MOS at the moment, and that he might be able to use that to get MOS lynched without having to actually give any reasons that might get him in trouble later. It just felt like a "I don't care if he's scum or not, let's lynch him for being a jerk" move, and I always find those kinds of things really scummy.

Attacking someone because of a scummy looking vote is not the same as defending the person they're voting for.

I disagree; especially if the person that player is voting for tops your own scum list.

(shrug) Then we'll have to agree to disagree, I suppose, at least during this stage of the game. The thing you have to keep in mind is that at this point of day 1, most people are pro-town, and most bandwagons are probably wrong, even the ones that sound good at the time. At this stage of the game, I always keep in mind that I might be wrong, and that if I am scum will most likely take the bandwagons I start and run with them. No one gets a free pass just because they agree with me.

[hasdgfas]

All right, my re-read is complete.
The basics of it right now because I don't have much time
TS looks far more pro-town to me than before. I have no idea how I got on her being scum. I'm not a big fan of MoS's contributions. I don't think Quagmire needed to mention that he didn't read his role. There was no point in stating it when he did.

FoS: Quag.

I don't think it deserves a vote, because we don't need to get back on that issue right now.
Schis is lurking and just coming in for bandwagons.

FoS: schis

There are a bunch of people who need either major prodding or replacement.

However, I still feel that Peers is scum. He has not done anything this game that has changed my mind on his alignment.

unvote, vote:Peers

More probably coming when I have more time.