Mini 836: Commie Mafia (Game Over)

[charter]

CoCo is, once again, going out of his way to really unhelpful.

Col.Cathart, you are quickly joining CoCo's ranks. I've shown how your accusations are wrong, and if that's the most you are coming up with in terms of who is scum, then the only explanation I can think of for it is you're just trying to lynch me because I suspect you, not because you think I'm scummy. You never responded to my initial case on you, you didn't refute my points in that last post, and you're STILL going on about me and have STILL not given any reason why I'm scum, just that I post infrequently (which isn't actively lurking, another of your wrong accusations).

This is pure gold. How do you expect anyone to take your vote serious if you're not going to back it up with ANY reasoning? In my opinion, this is huge town mistake (yes, mine too, see below)

WHERE DO YOU COME UP WITH THIS? My vote was just a pressure vote, I don't care if people take my vote that early seriously or not. HOW DOES THIS MAKE ME SCUM?

The main fuel for your vote was the fact, that CoCo ignored SensFan and yourself in his 'bandwagon war'. Without it, your argument would never be created. And yet you just did the same thing as CoCo. In short, you did the same thing, as someone who you voted for, BECAUSE he did that.

No. Wrong. Don't tell me what I said, I said it and I know what I said. I voted CoCo because it looked like he was trying to build a lynch under the pretense of questioning bandwagon votes. I didn't do the same thing as CoCo, because I'm not applying logic inconsistently to build a lynch.

So the thief cannot say to other thief, that he's a thief? I admit, I WASN'T contributing, because I wasn't paying attention to the game. My mistake. Now in order to repair my mistake, I'm trying to contribute more, and scumhunt as good as I can. So now you can say, I'm someone who was accused of thievery, who's now the cop catching thieves. The cop, who probably won't be respected for a loong time, because of past deeds, but he still is doing his job.

A) This makes no sense
B) Why does this make me scum?

Col Cathart, none of what you've posted or said indicates that I'm scum in the slightest. You're even admitting that, so why are you voting me if you aren't trying to show that I'm scum?

Also, I'm done arguing with you because you ARE wrong but you just keep twisting what I say. I've set you straight, and I'm sure everyone else will see that.

[CoCo]

I don't see it Charter. I also think you're scum. And its funny I was called out because I didn't mention Sensfan. Now that I'm questioning him I'm being unhelpful? Bogus.

[Talitha]

Sorry for a few days of no posts. I got a little behind and have been catching up.

Peabody, in reply to your iso-Talitha post: Some of it I'm not sure i understand but if you feel I havent responded to anything you think is important, please let me know.

1. In a mafia game almost everything could be boiled down to wine-in-front-of-me. Nothing can be proven, mafia is all guessing at other players motives and reasons. Don't try and shut down potentially useful conjecture by lazily throwing out "WIFOM".

Opinions count.

2. My post where I asked Hoopla "why?", go and check what Hoopla said. It was not "I want more content from her". it was "I expect more from her". It kinda sounded like she expected me to have caught all the scum already. Anyway it was sufficiently vague that I asked for clarification.

3. Thinking about your random vote stuff gives me a headache. I guess we should agree to disagree.

[SensFan]

Than, I am lead to believe you jumped on the wagon solely to get Hoopla lynched. Am I correct?

No, you are not. To quote Tally, stop being obtuse.

[Kublai Khan]

Official Vote Count

Players needed to lynch: 7

charter

- 4 - Peabody, SerialClergyman, CoCo, Col.Cathart - (L-3)

CoCo

- 1 - mathcam - (L-6)

Col.Cathart

- 2 - charter, le Chat - (L-5)

Hoopla

- 1 - SensFan - (L-6)

Peabody

- 2 - Cyberbob, Talitha - (L-5)

SensFan

- 1 - Hoopla - (L-6)

Players not voting: Vaya

Great activity everyone. No prods needed at this time! Free apple pie to anyone who finds a Commie!

[CoCo]

No, you are not. To quote Tally, stop being obtuse.

Okay, aside from "being a big wagon" why did you jump on it? Its a simple question and I can't believe you haven't answered it.

[Talitha]

I'm not a fan of the charter wagon, for the record.

I wouldn't vote for Sensfan at this stage, assuming he'll be contributing regularly from now on.

CoCo is verbose enough that if he's scum I think he'll trip up eventually.

The other 3 players with votes (Pea, Col & Hoop) I do have some suspicion of. Still slightly more suspicious of PB than the other two but could easily switch to support a bandwagon on either of the other two.

[Hoopla]

Hoopla: The shananigans with trying to get both myself and that Translation Party person lynched for weak reasons. In my case, it was something I posted in MD ages ago that was very obviously not the case here, in an attempt to make me look ridiculously scummy while she knew I would be unable to defend myself. In the TP-guy's case, it was saying he should be lynched just for using TP; should be be smacked for it? Absolutely, but lynches are too valuable to lynch someone just for that.

That is such a blatant misrepresentation and you know it. I was never pushing to get you lynched or Haru. Reread the translation party exchange again and you'll see my vote was there get answers for his anti-town play.

I have no problem with V/LA's, but you were gone for 11 days, not 7 which you asked for. I understand external problems, but how are we supposed to know you want extra time if you don't tell us?

[Cyberbob]

I'm not seeing the charter wagon at this time. Cathart's being super incoherent and CoCo is kind of coming across as being more interested in scoring cheap "wit" points than anything else. I'm far more inclined to take a case seriously if it isn't full of "haha

got you scum!!!

"-type comments, so perhaps consider approaching it again from a more detached angle?

I'm prepared to accept Sens' explanation of his extended absence, as well as Hoopla's one of her vote on him.



I would like to see some kind of a response from people to my point against Peabody in post 280. His wagon is flagging and I haven't seen too much of a reason why.

[SerialClergyman]

I acknowledge I've promised much and haven't delivered, so I shall promise some more and give you my thoughts within a day or two, I'm still struggling to find the time to re-read. Great apologies, friends.

[Col.Cathart]

You never responded to my initial case on you, you didn't refute my points in that last post, and you're STILL going on about me and have STILL not given any reason why I'm scum, just that I post infrequently (which isn't actively lurking, another of your wrong accusations).

Lies.

1) I answered your initial case. Find my answers plausible or not, but I answered it.

2) I gave you my reasons. You don't agree with them, but I gave it to you, so don't tell me I didn't.

Also posting infrequently combined with almost no content added looks like an active lurking to me.

WHERE DO YOU COME UP WITH THIS? My vote was just a pressure vote, I don't care if people take my vote that early seriously or not. HOW DOES THIS MAKE ME SCUM?

Because you never explained that vote. You never said it's to add pressure. You never said anything about it, besides 'this wagon is good'. Call me crazy, but in my opinion, vote without any explanation, after RVS, just don't have right to exist.

What is more interesting, in your case against me, you said that I never followed my case on Peabody. It sounds weird from a person, who had his vote on him, but never mentioning it until actually unvoting. Who's not following his case here?

No. Wrong. Don't tell me what I said, I said it and I know what I said. I voted CoCo because it looked like he was trying to build a lynch under the pretense of questioning bandwagon votes. I didn't do the same thing as CoCo, because I'm not applying logic inconsistently to build a lynch.

Ok, I'm dropping this because I have a feeling we'll go into circular argument in a while.

A) This makes no sense

Because you said so? It makes sense. Actually following your way, I'm handicapped in my scumhunting, because you're almost forbidding me to use one of the arguments to find a scum, even if there are clues that indicate it. And this example is not the reason, I think you're scum. Reasons for my vote are already covered in previous posts, whether you agree with them or not.

Col Cathart, none of what you've posted or said indicates that I'm scum in the slightest.

That's your opinion. I'll stay with mine.

You're even admitting that, so why are you voting me if you aren't trying to show that I'm scum?

Allow me to use your own words here.

No. Wrong. Don't tell me what I said, I said it and I know what I said.

Now, you're twisting my words. I admitted to not paying attention in early game. It has nothing to do with you, or my case on you.

Also, I'm done arguing with you because you ARE wrong but you just keep twisting what I say. I've set you straight, and I'm sure everyone else will see that.

Again, it's only your opinion. And fine. Let's drop it. We'll see in the future who's right. For now I'm not going to unvote, and you probably gonna keep your vote as well, so we're in status quo for now.

CoCo, you didn't answer my question.

Wait, I don't get this one. Why it brings us back to Charter?

[le Chat]

I will easily acknowledge that I am more hesitant to vote than most people. I’ll also acknowledge that its easier for me to give opinions on what I don’t find scummy than what I find scummy… I guess that’s your point when you ask whom I’m most suspicious of and why I haven’t voted. It does make me feel bad when Cyberbob tags onto you saying that I haven’t said anything of value.

So does this mean that you only vote like once a day or what? Only when you're reasonable sure you're voting for scum? Just looking for some reason why you tend to be hesitant.

Umm I guess the difference comes not in actually voting in becoming comfortable with someone to vote for. I vote when I'm comfortable just like everyone else but I guess it takes me longer.

I started an iso-Charter and its more time consuming than i thought it would be. I promise to finish this later and come back and talk about it because at very first glance at this game with my mind's eye i dont find charter scummier than some people who have just not talked much read: haruSC, peabody, Vaya. maybe even Talitha, Hoopla as of late. vote is on col.Cathart because i have yet to decide how i currently feel about the way he responded to me. whether for good or for bad, I was completely taken aback by an unexpected "le chat you have disarmed me." @_@

[le Chat]

hmm no I will

unvote

for now

[SensFan]

No, you are not. To quote Tally, stop being obtuse.

Okay, aside from "being a big wagon" why did you jump on it? Its a simple question and I can't believe you haven't answered it.

Because it was a big wagon, and I wanted a bigger wagon.

In a perfect world, someone else would have placed the L-1 vote right after the L-2 vote was placed.

[mathcam]

You really haven't done anything but vote for CoCo, and it's pretty pointless to vote for him. Who are you going to vote for instead of CoCo after your "soul searching" (which I see as an excuse to wait around a bit before deciding).

First, I haven't voted for anyone but CoCo, but that doesn't mean I haven't done anything btu vote for CoCo. Second, I dispute that it's pointless to vote for someone who isn't one of the current forerunners, espeically early on the first day before two major candidates get identified. Third, putting "soul searching" in quotes with an attempt to stigmatize the phrase is as ridiculous as CoCo's "early reports" fiasco. Finally, you can see it however you want, but that doesn't make it a valid interpretation -- I can see SensFan's absence for 11 days as his attempt to embody his mafia character and going and killing people in real life for 11 days on a massive crime spree, but that doesn't make it anywhere near a reasonable interpretation of events. Even without this hyperbole, this was a cheap shot. If I had just unvoted and not mentioned the fact that I was actually grappling with the decision, you wouldn't have even brought it up.

Most importantly

: I find it interesting that you think I'd vote for someone other than CoCo, and not CoCo himself -- why do you assume my soul-searching will necessarily come up pro-CoCo? Know something we don't?

Cam

[mathcam]

Btw, charter: With chat's unvote, is your vote on cathart now "pointless"?

[CoCo]

Cathart, it brings us back to Charter because his early bandwagon vote put Hoopla at L-2 which he dropped not three hours later to vote for me because "I'm ignoring his and Sensfan's votes." He said Hoopla looked town even though all she'd said was she's doesn't mind blatant bandwagons and voted Vaya as an alternative.

I really think, of all "odd" bandwagon voters, Charter is the scummiest one. Second would be Vaya. I don't even think Sensfan is scummy because of it. His responses seem to indicate a carefree attitude. I believe his vote was what he says it is, just a bandwagon vote. He doesn't defend it vehemently like the other two have.

I am puzzled about Sensfan saying "in a perfect world, someone would have put L-2 to L-1" though.

[SensFan]

Hoopla: The shananigans with trying to get both myself and that Translation Party person lynched for weak reasons. In my case, it was something I posted in MD ages ago that was very obviously not the case here, in an attempt to make me look ridiculously scummy while she knew I would be unable to defend myself. In the TP-guy's case, it was saying he should be lynched just for using TP; should be be smacked for it? Absolutely, but lynches are too valuable to lynch someone just for that.

That is such a blatant misrepresentation and you know it. I was never pushing to get you lynched or Haru. Reread the translation party exchange again and you'll see my vote was there get answers for his anti-town play.

I have no problem with V/LA's, but you were gone for 11 days, not 7 which you asked for. I understand external problems, but how are we supposed to know you want extra time if you don't tell us?

Except its not a misrep. You said something about how we should lynch Haru because he wasn't going to contribute or something, didn't you?
As for me, you strongly implied to anyone that doesn't have time to manually search the forums that I wasn't actually on V/LA at all, which would be ridiculously scummy for a time period as long as a week.

[SensFan]

To clarify that last part, you took the time to look up that one post I made in a MD thread a while ago, while not looking up the fact I wasn't posting at all on the site.

[Hoopla]

To clarify that last part, you took the time to look up that one post I made in a MD thread a while ago, while not looking up the fact I wasn't posting at all on the site.

I would have done a thorough search of your post history had search been available.

Hoopla: The shananigans with trying to get both myself and that Translation Party person lynched for weak reasons.

In my case, it was something I posted in MD ages ago that was very obviously not the case here

, in an attempt to make me look ridiculously scummy while she knew I would be unable to defend myself. In the TP-guy's case, it was saying he should be lynched just for using TP; should be be smacked for it? Absolutely, but lynches are too valuable to lynch someone just for that.

4 months ago isn't ages, it's barely the length of a game in some cases. The fact you're here now and seemingly active makes it a moot point, because I doubt I'd ever know if you were lying or not. I am more than happy to unvote you now you're here.

Find me a post where I said I wanted to lynch Haru. I made it quite clear my vote was placed to demand answers.

Unvote

[CoCo]

For the record, Hoopla doesn't appear to have voted Haru to get a lynch. She did so because his posting style provided murky waters for scum to hide in.

It took me all of 5 minutes doing an iso-read to see that.

[Peabody]

In a perfect world, someone else would have placed the L-1 vote right after the L-2 vote was placed.

Wait... what? SensFan, maybe I can understand this better if you answer this question. What, in your opinion, is the point of an early bandwagon? Secondly, would you be content if Hoopla was lynched right away during the day one phase in the beginning of the game?

I don't even think Sensfan is scummy because of it.

Coco- What

exactly

led you to change your mind about Sensfan? Not even two pages ago, you were drilling him for making a suspicious vote and then leaving.

Hoopla - Going with Sensfan's point, I'm starting to see a pattern. You are pushing cases consistently based on "policy" votes. Haru did translation party, Sensfan for lurking...

I want that observation out there just for the record. I'm not meaning that comment to be contesting your judgment, but I'm sensing a pattern. Behaviorally, who do you think is mafia?

[SensFan]

In a perfect world, someone else would have placed the L-1 vote right after the L-2 vote was placed.

Wait... what? SensFan, maybe I can understand this better if you answer this question. What, in your opinion, is the point of an early bandwagon? Secondly, would you be content if Hoopla was lynched right away during the day one phase in the beginning of the game?

An early bandwagon gets fun reactions, like CoCo and company's.
I would absolutely be happy with a hammer placed that early, it would be a guaranteed Scum.[/quote]

[CoCo]

But votes 4 and 5 aren't scummy at all?

[charter]

You really haven't done anything but vote for CoCo, and it's pretty pointless to vote for him. Who are you going to vote for instead of CoCo after your "soul searching" (which I see as an excuse to wait around a bit before deciding).

First, I haven't voted for anyone but CoCo, but that doesn't mean I haven't done anything btu vote for CoCo. Second, I dispute that it's pointless to vote for someone who isn't one of the current forerunners, espeically early on the first day before two major candidates get identified. Third, putting "soul searching" in quotes with an attempt to stigmatize the phrase is as ridiculous as CoCo's "early reports" fiasco. Finally, you can see it however you want, but that doesn't make it a valid interpretation -- I can see SensFan's absence for 11 days as his attempt to embody his mafia character and going and killing people in real life for 11 days on a massive crime spree, but that doesn't make it anywhere near a reasonable interpretation of events. Even without this hyperbole, this was a cheap shot. If I had just unvoted and not mentioned the fact that I was actually grappling with the decision, you wouldn't have even brought it up.

Most importantly

: I find it interesting that you think I'd vote for someone other than CoCo, and not CoCo himself -- why do you assume my soul-searching will necessarily come up pro-CoCo? Know something we don't?

Cam

I would like you to reiterate what else you've done besides interacting with CoCo and what opinions you've formed on players besides him. I say your CoCo vote is pointless because no one else has expressed interest in voting him, you aren't trying to convince anyone else to vote him, and you aren't really questioning him much anymore either. I don't see the point of your vote on him other that to mark your suspicion on him. I guess that's a point, but it's a poor one.

Yes, I'm not trying to use the soul searching phrase as an argument, I know that you meant you need time to think about it, but that's what I find scummy. It seems like you're waiting for the town to go in a definite direction and THEN decide on CoCo. I say this because you have expressed mild, at best, suspicion of anyone else.

Why do I assume you're going to unvote CoCo? Same reasons as before, the vote is pointless, it has nowhere to go and you're not trying to make it go anywhere.

Btw, charter: With chat's unvote, is your vote on cathart now "pointless"?

I stand that it isn't. I'm trying to get others to see Col.Cathart's scumminess. I addressed a question to everyone, but they must have missed it.

Everyone, what do you think of Col.Cathart's using 'charter is active lurking' as a reason to vote me while admitting he is doing it himself?

The fact that I'm not active lurking is besides the point, but I touched on this in 290 saying I find him scummy for it.