Mr. Wiggles Mini Mafia II

Pandain's point is valid none-the-less. We need to avoid getting sidetracked. That's all I was trying to say.

I would say why don't we wait for a few hours and see if we actually have any lurkers. And obvious scum should still be lynched first day one, if there are really no good candidates I would say then we should consider lynching a lurker. But in that case the lurker would be the best candidate, so I still say lynches need to be based on good analysis.

I reiterate: silly lynch rules really only benefit scum. Logical analysis first please.

wasn't trying to specifically call you out. See the first word in that bolded sentence? "WE" As in ALL of us, together, need to avoid getting side tracked. I'm also unsure how you get me accusing you of "spamming" from me saying we need to avoid getting side tracked.

And to be fair, you did start a side conversation with Misder. I don't know that constitutes "spamming", but it's not going to lead to posts that can provide good analysis one way or the other. Just saying.

I wasn't trying to say you were spamming, I don't know why you are being so defensive about this. Pandain made a point about avoiding outside conversation in the thread, I agreed with that point. I wasn't trying to accuse you of anything. So no, I don't have a problem with it.

And you're right, I do try to think logically. As such I don't think two posts by themselves are enough to prove anyone as scum.

On March 02 2012 08:49 Probulous wrote:


I agree on RG. If you have courage take a look at Arkham City (Adam rolls his eyes). He claimed everything under the sun and looked scummy as hell but ended up being a regular vet. The fact that he put together an atrocious case on me and called it so makes him pretty much town in my eyes. Weird play but produced some interesting results.

Tea however jumped at the opportunity to call me scum when everyone else who pushed me, never did. RG clearly didn't believe I was scum or he would have pushed much harder but tea sheeps. Then he tries to explain his sheep with the worst possible logic available. He could be townie who doesn't know what is going on, but if that is the case why jump at me? He wants to look like he is contributing when he isn't.

I am fully aware that townies will target other townies. That happens all the time, that is why people's motivations for posting are important. From what I have seen from Tea he wants to look like he is contributing without contributing. Hence my suspicion. The fact that it was me is irrelevant.

On March 02 2012 08:55 TheToast wrote:


Let me get this straight. You think I'm scum because I'm being too nice? Based on what, the one* other game of mafia I've played? Well then, why don't you take a closer look at that game, you might see that I didn't post any serious analysis or votes until like 24 hours into the game. I prefer to wait until there is a good amount of evidence before making any votes or claims. And why does agreeing with you contribute to my scumminess? Are you now suddenly in favor of conversations that side track the game? Or just in favor of lynching people who agree with you about avoiding conversations that side track the thread? I love how you quoted me defending you against Probe's accusation as well. Excellent evidence you have provided.

Pandain right now you have 4 posts in this game. You called out Probulous with some vague accusations:



Then after both probe and sandroba call you out on this, you've very next post is--not responding to either of these--but rather to come out claiming Probulous is town--without a single shred of evidence or analysis--and claiming that I am scum based on scant evidence. Then post #4, have you addressed probe or sandroba's accusations? Nope. You tell Probe (who again, has not mysteriously become townish) that his vote on AKCoT is bad and that tunneling me is the best bet.

Pandain, right now I still don't think there is enough evidence against you to make a scum call; but it looks to me like you are desperately trying to focus attention off of yourself.

I love how you quoted me defending you against Probe's accusation as well. Excellent evidence you have provided.

On March 03 2012 01:59 Mattchew wrote:
Current Vote Count:

Paindain -1
Sandroba

TheToast - 1
Paindain

Paindain

On March 02 2012 09:54 Probulous wrote:


Well for one he has been pretty consistent.




Then he got indignant when I was needling him. I admit that my reading of his accusation was weak, I was really just seeking clarity around what he meant by "sidetracked" but he got flustered. To me this reads like someone trying to avoid a stupid argument.

Given that was what he was trying to do from the start, it looks townie. Finally his response to your case is clear frustation. He isn't scared or submissive but rather frustrated that he can't seem to establish his innocence. It would have been much easier for him to target someone else but instead he attempts to clarify his position. His point about you quoting me looks like sarcasm.

All in all it doesn't read as scum to me.

On March 03 2012 05:31 TheToast wrote:


Are you trying to discourage me from arguing against you as scum? Sandro, you've got only got 12 posts this game, clearly you've been lurking. You've made only one piss poor attempt at analysis, every other post you have made so far has been a short bit of weird fluff. It's glaringly clear you're not a vanilla townie this game. Idk what you rolled, but SK makes the most sense to me right now. It explains the lurker, and explains the abundance of fluff--even scum would be attempting to steer the game in some direction.

If you can come up with something that explains your behavior this game, I'm all ears.