Newbie Mini Mafia XXV

On August 20 2012 09:10 Dandel Ion wrote:

I feel for ya, bud.

On August 20 2012 18:42 Shady Sands wrote:
/in

On August 23 2012 22:52 mkfuba07 wrote:
Already making excuses for scum-like activity! Tsk tsk.

FoS Dandel lon

On August 24 2012 07:22 Dandel Ion wrote:
But if somebody active seems scummy, and a lurker seems equally scummy, I would probably prefer to lynch the lurker. Note that this is probably only applicable for day 1, since from day 2 onwards, scumreads should usually be strong enough to push through with them.

On August 24 2012 07:31 kushm4sta wrote:
Hey this is my first game. I dont wana lurk but I got nothing to say TT.

On August 24 2012 08:34 Spaghetticus wrote:
However, I agree with Dandel Ion in that lurking should contribute to your scum reading, and that lurkers should be prioritised over active scum-like players, as it is the lurking scum that is more dangerous than the active.

On August 24 2012 09:03 Lvdr wrote:
Shady this is like the third game I've played with you in the last few days. If you don't know my lurker policy you must be thick as a brick.

Policy: LYNCH LURKERS. Hopefully there are no lurkers and we can vote scumreads.

On August 24 2012 08:55 Spaghetticus wrote:
@Thrawn
If the worst outcome of lurking is to not get lynched, I don't see how town can possibly eventuate victorious. Lurking is an aspect of scum behaviour, or of poor play, and should be treated as such. You seem to propose it as some sort of tie breaking mechanism, but I believe this to be an over-simplification.

In day 1, there will be extremely little information to go by. Lurking will almost certainly be the biggest tell as to the value/alignment of a player.

On August 24 2012 09:27 Shady Sands wrote:


I think so. Right now I'm concerned about Kush. His post at the very best is completely useless to town.

On August 24 2012 09:33 kushm4sta wrote:
So everyone wants to lynch me because I didn't share my thoughts about if lurkers are really bad or just kind of bad? Everyone's posts so far have been useless IMO.
I have a lot of free time so yeah I will read this thread pretty much constantly and carefully. And as soon as I suspect someone or have something to say I will say it. But at this point it's impossible to know anything about anyone so dont point fingers at me because Im new.

On August 24 2012 09:45 WeeTee wrote:
Hey Lvdr.
I might elaborate that I disagree with the Lurker policy in part because it establishes a guideline for the scum to act upon, this is a Newbie game so as long as people are trying to participate I will not be basing any votes on Lurking at least for the first day.



Shady mentioned that you had experience in the game already so could you analyse some of the content at a better standard than 'you didn't write much'.
Help us all get the ball rolling!

On August 24 2012 09:51 thrawn2112 wrote:
Ok that definitely sounded suspicious to me. You shouldn't act like you are relying on other players to scumhunt for you. Shady expressed the same sentiment but he has been very active so far and all you did was agree with Shady. You gotta contribute more than that!

On August 24 2012 09:51 Shady Sands wrote:


FWIW I think what happened last game was that you got me lynched when I rolled town, in spite of me being the most active D1 poster by far, so I'm not sure how you could say that your focus on lurkers caused you to play poorly in the last game.

On August 24 2012 09:56 Shady Sands wrote:


Ah, I wasn't around for that.... being dead, thanks to you.

j/k I tunneled you just as hard that game, no hard feelings.

On August 24 2012 09:58 Lvdr wrote:
Lets leave previous games in the past.

For what its worth I think Shady is Town, he's doing a good impression of his town meta.

On August 24 2012 10:23 WeeTee wrote:
I hear on the grape vine that posting lots makes you look like town....
But then damn you meta comes into play!
In my opinion Shady is neither town or scum.

On August 24 2012 09:51 thrawn2112 wrote:


Ok that definitely sounded suspicious to me. You shouldn't act like you are relying on other players to scumhunt for you. Shady expressed the same sentiment but he has been very active so far but all you did was agree with Shady. You gotta contribute more than that!

On August 24 2012 11:02 kushm4sta wrote:


Im agreeing with the other noob here. Number 1, I don't think looking at the meta is an effective way of determining anything. Therefore, like weetee i have no idea what shady is.
If i had to suspect someone its speghetticus, who is the perfect combination of bandwagoning and being quiet to remain off the radar.
Also thrawn...this dude is just appointing himself town leader with his epically long posts with quotes etc, also intiating all topics of discussion.

It seems like he is trying to make himself essential so no one will suspect him. Why would anyone care as much about the minutiae of lurker policy as thrawn? Because his scum strategy is to not be a lurker and provide justication to lynch any innocents that might be lurking.

On August 24 2012 11:13 Alsn wrote:
This because this to me feels more like you are trying to make the new players do the work for you and then claim credit later on through "I made them do the analysis!"

@kushm4sta, @WeeTee: The entire point of discussion is to make people explain their thoughts and reasoning. So instead of thinking you have nothing to add, try and figure out ways to question people's motivations.

On August 24 2012 11:45 kushm4sta wrote:


Wow you sounded really smart about lvdr he seems fishy how he constantly shifts the focus to those he knows aren't mafia. And he does it in a very non constructive way.

On August 24 2012 11:27 thrawn2112 wrote:

I think what lvdr was doing was what you explained here:


I don't see it as anything more than trying to get discussion going and to get reads from players who haven't given any. Lvdr, Shady, and I have been doing it all game. (questioning people and asking for reads)

On August 24 2012 11:45 kushm4sta wrote:However you suspect me for some reason which is just wrong. If I were mafia I would be super nice and would not be aggressive or defensive in any way actually. It's because im town that I'm not afraid to act like this because I have nothing to hide.

On August 24 2012 11:45 kushm4sta wrote:Basically I think you are mistaking "bad play" for guilt. Lvdr is 85 percent mafia in my mind though. We should lynch him.

On August 24 2012 11:09 thrawn2112 wrote:

Hmm you must not have read all the posts I made disagreeing with people who said a lurker lynch is the only way to go. What you said I said and what I said are almost the exact opposite.

On August 24 2012 12:54 Lvdr wrote:
Shady has been accused of intentionally misinterpreting things before, but it has happened a lot when he is town. However, def is a point worth paying attention to.

Kush is my #1 scum read right now based on his 85% sure post. There is no real evidence and so it only spreads suspicion without anything to back it up. Please make better reads and use evidence.

##FOS: MKFUBA
##FOS:Kushm4sta

On August 24 2012 13:21 kushm4sta wrote:
Everyone is focusing on how I said 85 percent... That was just a completely arbitrary percentage based on how convinced I was from Alsn's post. Maybe I'm easily swayed but I feel like Alsn truly revealed lvdr's mo.

On August 24 2012 11:27 thrawn2112 wrote:

I think what lvdr was doing was what you explained here:


I don't see it as anything more than trying to get discussion going and to get reads from players who haven't given any. Lvdr, Shady, and I have been doing it all game. (questioning people and asking for reads)

On August 24 2012 13:49 kushm4sta wrote:
thrawn:
What i think about your read on Lvdr is possibly you are also mafia and you are protecting him.

On August 24 2012 13:49 kushm4sta wrote: I don't like the leadership role you took in the beginning and I think it reeks of mafia. You are playing the role of the townsperson in order to protect yourself except you are going overboard and acting as if you are the super townsperson. Fact: you are the best townsperson so far, in terms of questioning people and intiating discussion. That in itself should be suspect.

On August 24 2012 13:49 kushm4sta wrote:Your read on alvar is essentially that he is doing the same thing as everyone else. But he is making new people write stuff so that he can accuse them. What do I think about this random complicated meta? How the hell should I know. I dont even know how to check that stuff. Oh and who agrees with his meta theories, it's you.
Good cop bad cop type thing going on here. Except you're not cops your mafia.
##FOS:thrawn2112
##FOS:lvdr

And please don't think that Im mafia beaucse I'm spreading confusion or whatever. I know no one is going to agree with me but I just want to be able to say I told you so when these two guys who are clearly working together end up being the mafia.

On August 24 2012 14:16 Dandel Ion wrote:
Alright, I'm back.
Very pleased with the activity levels so far

Gonna read the thread in detail now.

But first:
@thrawn: Concerning this post of yours: http://www.teamliquid.net/forum/viewmessage.php?topic_id=361579&currentpage=5#88

Do you still want my answer? I can clarify what I meant np, but the topic of lurkers seems almost redundant judging by the amount of posts. Just toss me a quick yes or no.

On August 24 2012 15:06 WeeTee wrote:
Hi all, sorry for not regularly posting I have Uni commitments and such.
I have read through the current content, and every ones filters.
It seems to me that everyone has taken a disliking to
kushm4sta's quote
"Lvdr is 85 percent mafia in my mind though. We should lynch him."
Even for a newbie like me I was like ....
But I think that a real scum wouldn't reveal information in this clumsy manner and I know i'm not directing any suspicion there as kush is too easy of a target to pick off.

I did however notice that Alsn did put a FOS on Kush; to me this seems like Alsn nibbled at the bait, sensing his opportunity to take a weak player down.



I will put a
FoS on Alsn for this

But it is undeniable that kushm4sta is rubbing everyone the wrong way.

Let me know what you think about Alsn Fos-ing Kush,
Does Alsn see an easy opportunity to take someone out?
and why is he the only one that chirped up for the obvious?

On August 24 2012 12:54 Lvdr wrote:
Kush is my #1 scum read right now based on his 85% sure post. There is no real evidence and so it only spreads suspicion without anything to back it up. Please make better reads and use evidence.
##FOS:Kushm4sta

On August 24 2012 11:33 Alsn wrote:
In this post thrawn argues with Lvdr about the lyrker lynch policy and makes clear and concise arguments and in fact comes to the conclusion that the policy post did it's job in that it put focus on starting discussion. Something which is good for town.

You then immediately jump to the conclusion that he must be scum that wants to look like town. I feel this is overly aggressive on your part and while it's entirely possible that you are just feeling attacked right now and reacting a bit emotionally, please understand that things are not personal. If you are in fact a townie trying to cast blame on someone you suspect as scum, you should use clearly articulated points with a clear explanation of the basis of your argument.

So until you prove to me otherwise, I feel I must suspect you for being overly defensive about your posting.

FoS kushm4sta

On August 24 2012 15:35 WeeTee wrote:
Leaders be leaders.
@dandel
I'm not interested in your negativity. I'm simply making my point.

My first quote had my message

"I did however notice that Alsn did put a FOS on Kush; to me this seems like Alsn nibbled at the bait, sensing his opportunity to take a weak player down."

I see my mistake in saying "the only one that chirped up", which thrawn just pointed out.
please disregard that comment.

Still I find it amazing how instead of just answering a question we need to nit pick.
Super encouraging.

On August 24 2012 15:20 thrawn2112 wrote:
What is your read on lvdr?

On August 24 2012 17:54 kushm4sta wrote:
Wow guys everyone wants to kill me because I'm annoying or something and everyone hates me?? Reading this thread makes me want to cry. Honestly I will try harder but if you kill me let me just say that would be a huge mistake beacuse I am no ordinary townsperson. I am the jailkeeper so yeah you really shouldn't kill me.

On August 25 2012 02:06 thrawn2112 wrote:
Shady thinks that the 2nd option is more likely I don't have a reason to believe one or the other.

On August 25 2012 02:21 Shady Sands wrote:First off, reserving judgment on Kush is bad. Lengthening the amount of time we talk about Kush is going to shorten the amount of time we have to talk about more substantial cases like Lvdr.

On August 25 2012 02:24 Shady Sands wrote:


How can you ignore the JK claim? Either way, it's a play of some sort, and the most significant thing to happen in the thread so far.

On August 25 2012 02:24 Shady Sands wrote:Also, I don't get why you still want to offer Kush an out in terms of having him build cases. We asked him to build cases pages and pages ago, and he didn't. Why would he start now when his towncred is even lower?

On August 24 2012 09:20 Lvdr wrote:
Right now my eyes are on Kush and WeeTee. Yes it is their first games, but thats no excuse to just sheep onto others ideas. Get out there! Don't use your newbiness as an excuse!

On August 24 2012 09:14 Shady Sands wrote:
Ok Lvdr, you were the last one in, and I know you're an experienced player, so I'm going to ask you for a scum read now. Who do you read as scummy based on their posts so far, and why?

On August 24 2012 23:33 Shady Sands wrote:
He goes into the thread, asks questions to generate discussion, accuses someone of fluff, and then leaves after FoSing the fluffy poster (mkfuba) and the obvious lynch (kush). This behavior is inconsistent: why push so hard for scumhunting and activity, but then disappear (and leave himself plenty of outs) once the shooting starts? Answer: because, if he is scum, this is exactly what he wants to do: stir up discussion, and then be the second or third person to hop on a mislynch wagon.

On top of that, I know what he's capable of in terms of scumhunting and making votes based on reasoned cases. So far, he hasn't lived up to that. Because of both reasons,

FoS Lvdr

On August 25 2012 04:50 kushm4sta wrote:


So basically you started accusing lvdr after he began to accuse you. I see this as you just trying to save yourself and again turn the focus on others.
Tell me who to save and I will do it to prove that I am jk.

On August 24 2012 07:57 WeeTee wrote:
Thrawn you intimidate me with your confidence already, but I think that you'll be good to learn the game from!

On August 24 2012 09:45 WeeTee wrote:Shady mentioned that you had experience in the game already so could you analyse some of the content at a better standard than 'you didn't write much'.
Help us all get the ball rolling!

On August 24 2012 10:23 WeeTee wrote:
I hear on the grape vine that posting lots makes you look like town....
But then damn you meta comes into play!
In my opinion Shady is neither town or scum.

On August 24 2012 10:47 WeeTee wrote:
I just feel like he can read the meta well, Shady is clearly fluent in his play style and capable of leading us in a particular direction.
Thinking about the meta is retarded so I wont speculate aloud any more.
On me and my style, clearly i'm not as precise as some of you but there's no reason that everyone must conform to full fledged suspicions. Having a few cents is an influential position in any social scene.
Perhaps I will blossom with content when I see a read that I believe and something more than the pokes and prods i'm getting.

On August 24 2012 15:06 WeeTee wrote:
Hi all, sorry for not regularly posting I have Uni commitments and such.
I have read through the current content, and every ones filters.
It seems to me that everyone has taken a disliking to
kushm4sta's quote
"Lvdr is 85 percent mafia in my mind though. We should lynch him."
Even for a newbie like me I was like ....
But I think that a real scum wouldn't reveal information in this clumsy manner and I know i'm not directing any suspicion there as kush is too easy of a target to pick off.

I did however notice that Alsn did put a FOS on Kush; to me this seems like Alsn nibbled at the bait, sensing his opportunity to take a weak player down.



I will put a
FoS on Alsn for this

But it is undeniable that kushm4sta is rubbing everyone the wrong way.

Let me know what you think about Alsn Fos-ing Kush,
Does Alsn see an easy opportunity to take someone out?
and why is he the only one that chirped up for the obvious?

On August 24 2012 15:13 Alsn wrote:
First I would like to point out that I have not been the only one to criticize kush as you claim, several people jumped on the bandwagon(for good reason, I might add) when he first started accusing people.

I would also like you to see my latest post where I explicitly say that we should stop worrying about kush for now as I think it's taking up too much of our attention. I have every intention of forgiving kush's mistakes, if he can start acting like that's what they are, instead of coming up with convoluted explanations as to why he feels the way he does.

If you do not consider my latest post on kush to satisfy your suspicions against me, could you explain to me why that is?

On August 24 2012 15:22 WeeTee wrote:
@Alsn
I like you response verrry smooth.
I must have started writing before you posted so sorry for that.

Are you willing to say that kush is in the clear then? or do you think there is something underlying still?

I guess throwing around FoS can mean next to nothing, especially if you change your mind so fast.
I wonder now you have stopped leading the bandwagon if someone will pick it up again. Kush is an easy target.

On August 24 2012 15:35 WeeTee wrote:
Leaders be leaders.
@dandel
I'm not interested in your negativity. I'm simply making my point.

My first quote had my message

"I did however notice that Alsn did put a FOS on Kush; to me this seems like Alsn nibbled at the bait, sensing his opportunity to take a weak player down."

I see my mistake in saying "the only one that chirped up", which thrawn just pointed out.
please disregard that comment.

Still I find it amazing how instead of just answering a question we need to nit pick.
Super encouraging.

On August 24 2012 15:38 WeeTee wrote:
Alsn I totally agree,

Id love to see where the discussion goes over the next few hour because i'm not convinced on anyone as of yet.
We need some new POI.

On August 24 2012 15:50 WeeTee wrote:
Alsn I see the err of my ways. noted.

On August 25 2012 13:16 WeeTee wrote:
Alrighty.
I am always busy and think the content you guys put up is (sometimes)utter crapola.
Im glad that iv been called out so that I can comment.
Ok, you say our content is crap, I say your content is definitely some of the worst. You are glad that you've been called out so that you can have something to say? As in, you wouldn't have anything to say if you hadn't been called out?
I have no reads on anyone at the moment and am happy for any outcome of the first day to happen.
What an incredibly scummy statement. No reads, and you don't care about the outcome of the lynch.
I have trouble articulating what I want to say so I might be brash enough to put my #FoS on thrawn,
because he just never ever places a FoS and is always non committal.
Non committal? I have aggressively gone after you and kush, and I just posted a huge wall of text on why I think you're scum. I'm also one of the first people to vote.
I know I make a target of myself for being clumsy but for me to participate and get better i'm going to have to ignore the criticism I get and just put it out there.
Continuing on with my FoS its clear that thrawn is so active, probably overactive in the sense.
I have a case that chugging the bandwagon against me is a well timed push,
experienced even.
So I'm scum because I'm super active, and because I am bandwagoning onto a case against you? I have been calling you all the whole game.
Building a case on me in my absence based on the fact that I am absent is not convincing enough to suspect me,
if it was then a FoS is surely sufficent.
You having not posted recently had nothing to do with my case against you, it was entirely about your actions while you were posting. On that note, you still have not answered the question that I've asked you over and over again.
Yet I recieved a vote from thrawn.
Just over the top imo.
I urge you all to read thrawns filter and see how passive his playstyle is.
And then make up your minds.

On August 25 2012 14:01 WeeTee wrote:shady really.. if your intelligent you wouldn't join this bandwagon too

On August 25 2012 18:16 WeeTee wrote:
Hey thrawn & all,
I really want to make an effort to improve my posts to a higher level, I certainly don't want to fall into this path that I am heading down.
I don't believe my actions display any anti town behaviors other than my incompetence, and I also think that in someways if I were scum that I would be more obviously bad in that negative direction.
This I will en devour to improve.

The reason I had a read on thrawn being scum is that he didn't put a FoS on anybody during the D1 period(except for agree with other FoS's), and I was willing to begin a case on that. However after thrawn voted for me out of the blue I was concerned that he was using his credibility to vote for me when he could have potentially pinned anyone he wanted. Why me? Why risk his town credibility for a result that he cannot be sure about and a result I can assure should get you suspected if i'm lynched. And it really was a risk I mean a VOTE is more powerful than a FoS in my opinion.

@shady


My read on thrawn was looking in a different direction to the what the group is discussing, It was an observation that I made and wanted to elaborate for some extra input, much like any of the content so far.
As I mentioned above I was building to the case and just lacked the confidence to make it at this point. I can see my timing was all off. I think it could be worth noting that thrawn certainly did go hard in by voting. To me this is why my case has substance.

Thrawn's Quote:
"You having not posted recently had nothing to do with my case against you, it was entirely about your actions while you were posting. On that note, you still have not answered the question that I've asked you over and over again."

This quote cements that your case about me is based on my quality, and I really hope to improve my posting and ask that I am not target anymore based on this if I improve.
The action of not putting a read on shady for you thrawn is that I can't formulate a good read, I am not sure if I have permission to decline but I can assure you that I will have a look and examine it and post more for a better result.

On August 26 2012 01:22 Lvdr wrote:
WeeTee says he has no reads and then comes at thrawn with

You have refused to make a case and then OMGUS'ed someone for actually making a case against you.

This is not even an argument, just an emotional appeal.

On August 26 2012 01:47 Lvdr wrote:
@spags + anyone else that wants to comment

I don't like Shady as a d1 lynch for these reasons:
1. I think there is a legit meta case for shady being town. His aggression and tunneling so far does match Newbie Mafia IV where he got mislynched d1 as an overeager townie.

2. He has been active enough that I think that if he is mafia we will be able to catch him later based on stances he has taken.

3. As a general rule, lynching active but contriversial players D1 leads to mislynches.

On August 26 2012 02:46 mkfuba07 wrote:
Also, does anyone have any comments on my case on Lvdr? I'd like any feedback at all from someone who isn't myself or Lvdr.

@Dandel Ion, Alsn, kushm4sta
Please get a vote in soon. Scum already have the advantage during the lynch, so we need all of the information we can get asap. We know your vote may change, but who is your strongest scumread at the moment?

On August 26 2012 03:21 Lvdr wrote:
@Thrawn and Mkfuba

At this point I REALLY think Dandel is a much higher quality lynch than WeeTee. WeeTee is playing poorly, But Dandel is playing Scummy.

Scummy>bad

On August 25 2012 22:33 thrawn2112 wrote:
@spaghetti

So you're saying that I should set aside my suspicions of WeeTee and see his behavior as poor play? I am more willing to do this for Kush because I think he more accurately fits the profile you outlined of someone who doesn't know what to do. Kush did commit very heavily too reads, in fact it was his 85% post that gave him the most attention. WeeTee didn't commit to reads, and when asked for reads he gave a reason why a player might be mafia, and reason why they might be town, and then dropped the subject without saying which he thought was more likely. Also, I can't ignore how he has still refused up to this point to give a read on lvdr. When he made that post where he FOS'd Alsn for being the only one to "chirp up" at kush's 85% statement, I looked at the thread and noticed that lvdr had strongly called out kush for that post. I asked WeeTee for his read on lvdr, and he did not give it. He continued posting in the thread so I asked him again. I continued asking him up until I went to sleep, and when I woke up he had still not responded. Even now, after making it part of my case against him, he still hasn't answered the question. Am I supposed to ignore this? I have called him out on it multiple times, it's been over 24 hours since I originally did it, and still he doesn't answer. I honestly can't think of any reason why a town-WeeTee would do that. I do not believe that he hasn't read the question. I asked him multiple times while he was still active during the beginning of the game, and I made it a major point of my case against him, and in his post where he says he is going to improve his play (top of the page) I included the question again as part of my response. He posted a 2nd time after that and even then he didn't even address the question or the fact that he had ignored it.

On August 26 2012 03:44 Lvdr wrote:
Can i get a sound off of who is here?

On August 26 2012 04:01 Lvdr wrote: Dandel's vote here is essentially 'I pick the more scummy of kush vs. WeeTee.' This also SCREAMS mafia.

On August 26 2012 04:10 kushm4sta wrote:
Ahhh sorry guys I was sleeping. Yup I'm going to vote for WeeTee because I defended him then he voted for me??

On August 26 2012 04:58 Lvdr wrote:
Also, I am still super disappointed that people are just missing at the key lynch time.

On August 26 2012 05:08 Lvdr wrote:
GUYS WE MUST AVOID A NO-LYNCH!!

On August 26 2012 05:30 Lvdr wrote:
@Thrawn You hold the lynch in your hand.

On August 26 2012 05:36 Shady Sands wrote:


I don't want to waste my vote, and my prior read on WeeTee still stands. I'll hammer him if you're still not sold on Lvdr.

On August 26 2012 05:40 Shady Sands wrote:


If Mkfuba doesn't vote WeeTee nobody gets lynched. And shouldn't WeeTee be in this thread?

On August 26 2012 05:53 mkfuba07 wrote:
I'm gonna go to a sweetcorn festival, but getting high sounds like a good time too.

On August 25 2012 02:05 Dandel Ion wrote:

That actually is a decent point.
But I'm not so sure that him being "alone" is necessarily a town tell either, the way his case was going for the most part whould most likely discourage scum-partners to defend him too much - it's even more probable that he is subtly bussing him, rather than defending.

But this is all pretty WIFOM. As it stands, your point, while a good one, looks like a straight-up null-tell to me. But I understand if you see it as a town-tell..

I also think that kush was playing "bad town" rather than scum for the most part.
But I will reserve judgement on him, no matter which way, until he explains why he was claiming JK there.
I really don't get it, and as I said, it's not very believable imo.

On August 26 2012 20:22 Dandel Ion wrote:
Meh.
Work just cut into my freetime like knife into butter.
I didn't know it would, or I wouldn't have signed up in the first place. But now I'm here.

I'll have about ~2 hours of time today in the evening. And probably the same amount for the rest of the week.
Not that I expect this time will help any, with how it looks. So I'm just gonna play GW2 for most of that. I'd much rather do that anyways. If my best fucking efforts to still be active despite everything are still not enough, no need to bother.

Usually the sensible thing would be getting replaced I guess, but the replacement would just get lynched day 2 too, so no need to bother, hm?

A dick move?
Yeah. But I don't care anymore.

On August 26 2012 20:22 Dandel Ion wrote:usually the sensible thing would be getting replaced I guess, but the replacement would just get lynched day 2 too, so no need to bother, hm?

On August 26 2012 21:33 Spaghetticus wrote:
My thoughts on it are that I would much prefer a lynch on Shady, as although I am suspicious of Dandel, this recent lack of interest is either a very good self bus play, or genuine disinterest, which I would not expect from a scum player.

On August 26 2012 22:05 kushm4sta wrote:That is why people should decide who I RB. They can pick the least scummy person to minimize the chance that it will be my "scumbuddy."

On August 26 2012 22:05 kushm4sta wrote:@thrawn You have actually been riding shady's dick quite hard this game. I'm not saying it makes you suspicious but maybe you are putting too much stock in his meta.

On August 26 2012 22:53 kushm4sta wrote:


Oh no. I reread the rules. The scum RB is just going to RB me, so my RB isn't going to go through. I did not realize this.

On August 26 2012 01:11 mkfuba07 wrote:My second candidate at the moment is WeeTee. Though in general I agree with Spag's recent posts, Thrawn raises a good point in that WeeTee has yet to take a side in most matters. Also, he has voted for kush because of his defensive, inexperienced play, when WeeTee himself is using it in his own defense as a bad townie. I would prefer to vote for him only as a last resort, but am willing to as he was my second scumread earlier in the game. As an aside, I realize I didn't mention this earlier. I found him more suspicious than kush for reasons that I couldn't put into words, so I didn't comment on him until I found out what was bugging me. Thrawn's post showed me what I was missing.

On August 26 2012 05:48 mkfuba07 wrote:
##Unvote
##vote WeeTee

I do feel reluctant for reasons that I can't quite explain, but I truly want to avoid a no-lynch, and WeeTee is my second scumread anyway.

On August 25 2012 02:31 mkfuba07 wrote:
At the moment it's actually Lvdr.

On August 26 2012 05:29 mkfuba07 wrote:
##Unvote

Naturally, I'm currently looking at Dandel lon or WeeTee. As far as Dandel lon goes, I'm ignoring the fact that he's voting for WeeTee, because that is basically his only viable option. WeeTee's vote, on the other hand, I find to be one of his most suspicious actions. He votes for kush for the same reasoning that he uses to defend himself. Also, though I know there's a lot of speculation as to whether or not the JK claim was real, saying "I'd rather lynch him and know if he was JK than keep wondering" (paraphrased) is scummy. Whether or not you believe kush's role claim, WeeTee's reason for voting for him is anti-town.##vote Dandel lon

On August 27 2012 10:45 Spaghetticus wrote:
##FoS thrawn2112

I have been thinking you bad town for some time, but the constant discrepancies between your reads and my own are starting to be suspicious. I'm putting you as my scummiest read after Shady Sands and Dandel Ion. It is not that you are completely irrational like WeeTee and Kush have been previously, but that you seem both capable of logic and complete irrationality.

On August 27 2012 12:03 mkfuba07 wrote:

This quote is suspicious to me.

The second sentence implies that they're either both town or both scum, and their attacks on each other make them appear townish because scum wouldn't bus each other this hard. This is a false dichotomy, and I'm not sure why Thrawn would see their suspicions of each other as two parts of one whole. It's as if he's reduced the situation to: they're scum bussing each other, or they're both town suspecting each other. Why abandon the possibility of one of them actually being scum?

He then says that Shady looks more townish than Lvdr because of Lvdr's inconsistencies, but then says that Lvdr has given reasons for his actions which removes his suspicion. He gives no reasons for why Shady looks town, but says that he looks more townish because of Lvdr's previously suspicious behaviour. This ties back into his previous implication that they share an alignment, an implication that has no basis.

The entire first paragraph seems like a soft defense of Shady without actually providing any evidence of his towniness.

On August 27 2012 14:29 Spaghetticus wrote:
If I can't get a lynch on Shady, I am sure as hell getting a lynch on Dandel. He is so scummy it hurts. His opting out of the game is the only reason I have to doubt him, and that is also consistent with a mafia who is looking at a lynch. Think about it, if you were mafia and everyone was zeroing in on you, you could opt out to preserve your fragile self-esteem, or you could opt out to stop people lynching you as scum, which would lead to a better chance of scum victory.

I will be doing more posting later, at the moment I'm just doing spot responses.

On August 26 2012 20:29 thrawn2112 wrote:


So what are you going to do? This statement...


...makes it look like you are going to stay in the game. But if you don't care about the game, then why would you remain in it? If you truly don't want to play anymore then you should drop out and ask for a replacement.

On August 27 2012 14:45 Lvdr wrote:


I agree with this and I also think that the fos on mkfuba from thrawn is quite suspicious.

First, the wagon on WeeTee was largely thrawn's doing. I thought it was just bad play at the time, but it could be more sinister. Second, given WeeTee's green flip, I think Dandel HAS to be suspect #1. This smells like mafia trying to disperse the suspicion on the hopes that the replacement wipes the slate for dandel and town can be sent in another direction.

The case made by Thrawn also seems like a huge reach and not very strong.

HOWEVER, we need to lynch dandel before we decide who to lynch next. If dandel is mafia, THEN we can decide (based on evidence) who his partner is. If he is not, we will have a body of evidence and a number of suspicious players to look at.

On August 29 2012 13:53 Lvdr wrote:
Also to clear up the 'experience' read on dandel.

In Newbie III (which I played with him) he was a key player for the town. Whether he's played a lot of games or not, he showed skills that I didn't think he was applying in this game.

On August 29 2012 13:55 Lvdr wrote:
Also it seems my town meta is extremely scummy. Hasn't gotten me lynched yet lol.

On August 29 2012 14:24 Blazinghand wrote: Newbie games are very swingy.