Mini 836: Commie Mafia (Game Over)

[SerialClergyman]

Raskol - I'm not having a go at you, I just thought the summary that was 'I defended every single argument to a logical certainty and the only people voting me were doing so in some tunnelled, spite-induced bout of irrationality' wasn't an accurate reflection of the game.

As for OMGUS, I think it's more closely related then you think. I hear this argument about it's not OMGUS if there's a reason, but remarkably often the 'reason' has something to do with being voted by them. I say this not in criticism, but have a look at your major reads throughout the game. You think le chat is scum, but then when he defends you you think he's town (and still vote him using bad logic to claim that if he dies with you voting him you should be declared town or vice versa). You don't mention me until I vote you, then you vote me immediately after until I flip on you and start defending you when you again start to think I'm town. You think charter is scum all game. Your suspicions and town reads are remarkably in line with how people are treating you at the time.

Again, I don't mean to criticise, and my play was a testament on how to get yourself lynched as town, but I think it's unfair to say that you had done everything possible to defend yourself legitimately or to look for other legitimate targets and had no choice but to result to a self-voting plan.

[Raskol]

I didn't say everyone voting me was irrational. Just some of them.

But yes, I actually did mention you before I vote you. You were my second favorite lynch after le chat from the beginning. Your vote (which did display all the trademarks of a jump-in scum vote, even if you weren't scum) was just what set it off. You and charter both had the same voting record (off peabody, on cathart) and you both defended Peabody. That was the main thing I was looking at early on, and you both fit.

I never thought cyberbob was scum even when he was trying to get me modkilled (I didn't start suspecting him at all until he started attacking *you*, actually). I never thought Socrates was scum even when he was voting me based on fictions. I didn't suspect mathcam when he voted me, and I gave my first town read on Hoopla when I was still one of her top two lynch suspects. The one place where you might have a point is where I cleared Danny too easily, but I've played with him twice before this as town and his actions were consistent with my experience of him there.

[Raskol]

Anyway---as for defending myself legitimately---I quickly ended any legitimacy that the claim that I wasn't contributing may have had. All the other points against me I answered, well enough that I never got any response to my arguments. I explained the lynch-me-or-Danny plan several times, explaining my reasoning, and abandoned it once I found that people didn't agree (even though some of the points I made in it were ones you later adopted in your theory of the game). The one thing I couldn't defend was CoCo's actions, and I couldn't force people like charter and Socrates to abandon their vote on me once their reasons for doing so were shown to be faulty.

[Raskol]

So anyway, I'm not attacking your play either. I didn't like your case on me from the start, but you were open to new evidence and stuck to the facts and I can't complain about that, nor have I been, even if I disagreed with you.

[MeMe]

last post