Once Upon A Killer Mafia (14/17) A Writers Block:Endgame

[StorrZerg]

Well here i am again, last post was a drunky aswell, think it came out pretty reasonable. im actually quiet pleased about it .. lol

anyway. in response to aage post sat 1 nov 3.34pm (not sure if its same in all timezones)
you dont have to excuse yourself or anyone for voting me for inactivity, its fair enough a reason.


i removed all but 2 of his list post reads. Why? because they are generally all 1 line comments, with no real conclusion or explanation on how he got to that point. So ill comment on his Anamaniacks, then lead on to zivel, since he is pushing zivel. And the main focus regarding virus, will be about zivel, and why he is pushing zivel. and imo, why it doesn't make much sense.

Anamaniacks: if i would have to say it now im leaning more to mafia with him then town, he has contributed in some posts but in my opinion low on content, just talking about mechanics, statistics etc, not much in the opinions departement.

I was going to strongly disagree with this statement, yet he is kinda right. I don't really agree though with his conclusion of scum how ever, i can agree that i would like to see more opinions. Now several people have called him town, and some have called him scummy. It would have been more interesting to see you push anamaniacks. Now while virus has read a few people scummy, he isn't following up with any of them save for zivel which is next.


Zivel: dont know how he has read anamianics town on the little content he placed (he did that somewhere friday i think), besides that i think his posts to content ratio is more towards posts, which is lighlt scummy in my book.
Now, i have a similar read as zivel on the same person, but he only calls zivel out. Now the content was fairly decent for his intro post. So timing wise, and how much he came into the game with it was fairly good imo. Now virus talks about post to content ration which is kinda silly. Its not anything directly scummy, he is trying to paint it as scummy. The focus should be on what content zivel has that is scummy. Then maybe you can talk about how he has lots of random posts with no meaning. Now, virus latter says his gut feeling is scummy on zivel. Since zivel didn't fully explain his read on anamianics or at least for virus to understand. Now does not understanding a read make someone scummy? imo no. I think pursuing the unknown, asking zivel to explain the read, wanting to further discussion so he could better make a read on him would make more sense.

just to through my vote out somewhere on my possible targets:
vote zivel
funny to see that my more scummy reads dont have many votes.
remember this comment. his read on zivel is scummy. this implies that imo it isn't a gut read. and he has reasons. Also note that it seems "like he randomly picked which person of his to pressure" odd imo.

Had i not voted im sure storr or someone else would have asked me who i voted for. The leading candidates for a lynch at this point are not the people i supsect most of all, and im not gonna bandwagon that just to stay under the radar or anything, if i wanted i could have just voted ultra, and everything would have been easy, logic vote, no one would comment on that. (well maybe cause i first disagreed people would but you get my point i hope)
I don't like this talk. I disagree, if he was on ultra, with a 1 line comment on why he was pushing ultra, i would be pushing him. As far as the point, no i don't think this indicates your alignment one bit. Since the talk is so early in the game, and no real base imo.

So i voted zivel, at no point i said it was a strong lead or anything,
Sure, but you had reasons, and pushed on him.
but its not like i ask anyone to vote with me or anything,
It is a good thing to get people to comment on your case, for discussion. I think its scummy that you havne't been talking more about zivel, and havn't asked people about him, that you haven't asked for others to vote with you. (now sure, your not that sure of your read since its gut"
i havent build a case on him. I just follow my gut feeling.
Contradiction, you started building a case on him. imo it seems you have no follow up, and the result is "hey it was a gut read, thats why i can't follow up on the read" This in itself doesn't help discussion, it just ends it.
I dont see how 1 vote is that big a thing, and i generally do this every game. And it already got a reaction from both zivel and streaker about that, 2 people towards i more lean(ed?) scum at the moment, 1 even called me scumbuddies with ultra, so i can further read on them. MISSION ACOMPLISHED !
why is there no follow up on zivel since you sparked a reaction? he is your lead suspect and no further pressure. You do comment with streaker. I don't see what you have learned.

@ streaker, i know your making a case and i think i worded that pretty well so i dont see how you say im skimming, see my comment again: im describing 3 post "phases"
first some remarks.
then the list
then the case on ultra.
its all there. on the first of the 3 i remarked not much content, to which i still agree, the 2nd i said that it where just remarks town/neutral/mafia and little more then that. and the 3th i didnt say anything about content, i said my opinion was different by referring to my opinion.
i more and more understand why people tend to think ultra's scummy, some real strange shit, dont see how i would set him up in anyway. but well in dutch we have a saying which kind of means: when under a lot of pressure people do strange things.

Seems to be an explanation for your actions, rather than further development of your reads. ALso your last comment is funny considering i think you are acting funny while under pressure.

have to go to work now

fped by dd.
milkshake did nothing so fos right back at you

His come around on ultra seems miss placed as well. almost as if he is leading up to the "easy vote" which he said he was going to avoid.

Ultra: I think it would be rather dumb for mafia to advocate a no lynch day 1 as its certain to gain discussion. (although it would be brilliant counterlogic, if so NICE! ) also i think he is contributing nicely and countering the votes / discussion pretty nicely. pro town feeling.

What has changed your opinion? "strange stuff" what? I really dont' know why you had a town read, not a clear reason that is. and i have no idea what started to change your mind. Imo town virus, is a lot more capable of expressing his logical expression, and does it willingly. Quotes things specifically, comments on things he finds important. You can read what the flow of his game and understand why he is doing what he is doing. This game it isn't like that. THis game represents more about what his past game was like. Comments like "i was to active last game and got caught" Which seem miss placed if he was town. His reads this game, is a list post, pushing zivel, with no follow up. He gets the reaction he wanted, but no one knows what he was looking for, and i assume his opinion that zivel is scum hasn't changed since he did not comment further on it. I'm even going as far to say virus is probably depressed he got scum again, hence the negative attitude he seems to have in his posts along with the lack of his scum hunting ability, as well as his ability to explain his town reads, and willingness to explain them.

[aage]

Ultra: I think it would be rather dumb for mafia to advocate a no lynch day 1 as its certain to gain discussion. (although it would be brilliant counterlogic, if so NICE! ) also i think he is contributing nicely and countering the votes / discussion pretty nicely. pro town feeling.

Holy shit aage, what do you think of this statement. Think its a weak arse try at saving his scum buddy?

'Contributing nicely and countering the vote' Bahahaha.

Adding virus to my ever growing list of scum.

Yes it's bullshit and scummy. But Virus' entire list looks poorly crafted and his vote is throwaway "cya guys im not on this bandwagon". A relatively 'safe' play because a wagon on you is not going to happen today, so he can prove he's town because he's hunting his 'own suspects'. If all townies did that, they would lose every game.

So because I chose not to discuss the merits of voting no-lynch (a discussion that wasn't really benefitting town), I was deflecting attention? You can't have it both ways. I brought up a new read instead of repeating like everyone else that I thought no-lynching was bad D1 because such and such a statistic. I hadn't really covered ultra's no lynch vote (besides saying it didn't mean on its own that he's scum) because instead of beating that discussion into the ground I chose to go a different direction. Not sure how my response look forced, but perhaps my opinion is biased because I know it wasn't forced means I am blind to how it looks to you. My scum read on him has grown since then (although still not strong), back then I was more neutral. AOG having a town read on him wasn't bad in and of itself, his reasoning for it was.

Yes. The discussion wasn't a liability to the town at the point of origin, the useless part was that it was dragged out for such a long time. I'm not having it both ways. You didn't waste a single syllable on the main discussion of that day and you think that's pro-town? You could have bothered to mention your opinion on the subject, as that is the point of a discussion.
And if AoG's reasons were bad instead of his read, maybe you shouldn't have lead with "Your strongest town read, really?" as if the read by itself was bad. I do see that you are criticizing his argument in the post though, so I stand corrected.

So it's damning to ultra if he wasn't aware the game was non-vanilla, but if storr and zivel weren't it is your duty to inform them? I don't see how the game being non-vanilla is damning to ultra, since it isn't like he claimed vanilla. He also didn't answer storr's question because you got there first. (I don't believe he has posted since then though) If he had answered that question (and I think storr knew the game was NV and was seeing how much ultra knew about how pointless his softclaim was) in such a fashion that he was only saying he shouldn't be voted because he was non-vanilla, then it would be damning for his lack of reasoning.

That above part got a little wordy, more simply put: It all depends on what ultra meant with his softclaim. If he was trying to save himself by claiming just NV, then that is poor and I think that is what storr was trying to find out.

Storr and Zivel aren't my suspects. I already explained why his claim is vague in my larger post on the previous page. I doubt Zivel was playing a gambit by removing his vote in an attempt to make Ultra slip up. Storr could have had a strategy, but I doubt game mechanics were involved because he's so adamant about not using those.

Someone should be able to parse my claim and realize what I mean. (I traditionally play with outside communication so that was an example of something I would've done under those circumstances, PMing my role to only the most trusted)

Regardless, someone follow this thought path:

• Assume I am town.
• Figure out why I would post that assuming I am town.

I think you will realize why...

(As for assuming I am town, it is for this thought process only.)

It implies Town Mason to me. Irrelevant role that can be faked by mafia. If it's something else, please claim fully, this mystery is not helping your cause. Why are you so vague, do you think it helps, or does it only stall?

My other reads for scum (based solely on what I've caught up) on are Anarks, Whatsausage, and aage

Interesting combination, I'd love to see your reasons for those. Why am I throwing my buddies under the bus?


FP by a long post from storr, gonna post this first and read after.

[StorrZerg]

@you guys pushing ultra. I really think much of his pressure is being forced since his play is different. If the site he plays on, often no lynches day 1. His attitude makes sense.
I pointed out when no lynch was pushed down, instead of continuing the "no lynch" he unvotes, gives reads, and decides to pressure.

Streaker you point out much of his reads are "omgus" in nature. While thats nice, it isn't that helpful since some of those reads are not really omgus, but good statements. (take out the relationship between the 2, does that read, with no name attached make sense? ) If the answer is yes, it might not be omgus.

" Streaker: 70% Mafia, completely empty post, bandwagon" now this is a biased opinion, since its about you streaker.

Lol, advocating 'no lynch' before third day of the game? It might very well come to that, but you are basicly saying Hey Guys let's just not play this game and just do night actions and see what we come up with.
What will happen when there is no cop result, or a positive town check? No Lynch on D2?

Vote Ultra

The comment bandwagon, can make sense. you certainly are not the first person to push him for the concept. Not to mention your push is entirely policy, someone having different policy isn't inherently scummy. The post may not be that empty, since you prompt discussion yet again this is policy, its not about him being scum from this push. So after this, your entire discussion of the game, is about why lynching is good, and no lynch bad. This in itself doesn't make you scummy imo, but i can see from his perspective out of the people who pushed him, you seem to be lacking content / seems to be a wagon.

Also i'd point out in his post, he uses % on how much he feels someone is mafia. Notice he pouts me as green with 10%. That looks like it implies im most likely to be town, not scum. His red comments, and higher % indicates those who he actually thinks are scum. And those in orange, are ones he is more neutral on, and most likely wouldn't lynch. So anyone in orange, he doesn't seem to be "omgus" them, he is considering their input of the game over being attacked by them (note crasp 30%).

dd515087: 50% Mafia, empty post. lynch. = scummy. OMGUS 3

Reread what dd5 did that day. Pretty much close to nothing. He even went inactive and needed proding. So this if anyone else made this statement, i would 100% agree. I believe this is valid, and did require people to look at. I still think dd5 hasn't done much, and agree that he deserves a lot more pressure than what he has right now.

I honestly see ultra as someone who is trying to scum hunt. While i agree his style of play, regarding the soft claims, is strange, i don't think he is scum doing it. Would it be nice to end the soft claim, and know what he is ? yes. Would it be helpful to town, possibly.

Streaker one of your reasons to push him

-Not going after an actual case (not scumhunting AT ALL). Not by voting and not by posting. Many posts yes but nothing really pushing after mafia either.

I disagree, he is pushing people he finds scummy. (he did vote and push dd, before you made this comment) I wouldn't say its the best job, but considering how he started this game, and what he is doing now i believe he is.

I'm not really getting a mafia vibe from you streaker, i do think you are trying to figure out the game, i just think the bone you have with ultra is based on differing opinion on how the game is played, and you are tunneled a bit. Also you should relook dd5 again, what he had posted when ultra made his read.

I'd also ask ultra to relook streaker, since streaker has been commenting on more than just "ultra discussion" and that he is tunneled on ultra is probably more of a town trait than scum.

[rishaed]

TFO is replacing Crazymilkshake upon request. no time for new VC... will do later this evening.

[StorrZerg]

LOL holy crap, how did i forget ultra was in the pyp game.... So this isn't his first game, but its his first day 1 on this forum.

he replaced in, after day 1. so nothing to compare to that. BUT one of the big things he did was, hint, then claim his role as town.....

[strike wolf]

@you guys pushing ultra. I really think much of his pressure is being forced since his play is different. If the site he plays on, often no lynches day 1. His attitude makes sense.
I pointed out when no lynch was pushed down, instead of continuing the "no lynch" he unvotes, gives reads, and decides to pressure.

Streaker you point out much of his reads are "omgus" in nature. While thats nice, it isn't that helpful since some of those reads are not really omgus, but good statements. (take out the relationship between the 2, does that read, with no name attached make sense? ) If the answer is yes, it might not be omgus.

" Streaker: 70% Mafia, completely empty post, bandwagon" now this is a biased opinion, since its about you streaker.

Lol, advocating 'no lynch' before third day of the game? It might very well come to that, but you are basicly saying Hey Guys let's just not play this game and just do night actions and see what we come up with.
What will happen when there is no cop result, or a positive town check? No Lynch on D2?

Vote Ultra

The comment bandwagon, can make sense. you certainly are not the first person to push him for the concept. Not to mention your push is entirely policy, someone having different policy isn't inherently scummy. The post may not be that empty, since you prompt discussion yet again this is policy, its not about him being scum from this push. So after this, your entire discussion of the game, is about why lynching is good, and no lynch bad. This in itself doesn't make you scummy imo, but i can see from his perspective out of the people who pushed him, you seem to be lacking content / seems to be a wagon.

Also i'd point out in his post, he uses % on how much he feels someone is mafia. Notice he pouts me as green with 10%. That looks like it implies im most likely to be town, not scum. His red comments, and higher % indicates those who he actually thinks are scum. And those in orange, are ones he is more neutral on, and most likely wouldn't lynch. So anyone in orange, he doesn't seem to be "omgus" them, he is considering their input of the game over being attacked by them (note crasp 30%).

dd515087: 50% Mafia, empty post. lynch. = scummy. OMGUS 3

Reread what dd5 did that day. Pretty much close to nothing. He even went inactive and needed proding. So this if anyone else made this statement, i would 100% agree. I believe this is valid, and did require people to look at. I still think dd5 hasn't done much, and agree that he deserves a lot more pressure than what he has right now.

I honestly see ultra as someone who is trying to scum hunt. While i agree his style of play, regarding the soft claims, is strange, i don't think he is scum doing it. Would it be nice to end the soft claim, and know what he is ? yes. Would it be helpful to town, possibly.

Streaker one of your reasons to push him

-Not going after an actual case (not scumhunting AT ALL). Not by voting and not by posting. Many posts yes but nothing really pushing after mafia either.

I disagree, he is pushing people he finds scummy. (he did vote and push dd, before you made this comment) I wouldn't say its the best job, but considering how he started this game, and what he is doing now i believe he is.

I'm not really getting a mafia vibe from you streaker, i do think you are trying to figure out the game, i just think the bone you have with ultra is based on differing opinion on how the game is played, and you are tunneled a bit. Also you should relook dd5 again, what he had posted when ultra made his read.

I'd also ask ultra to relook streaker, since streaker has been commenting on more than just "ultra discussion" and that he is tunneled on ultra is probably more of a town trait than scum.

Dont disagree with most but I think you have said yourself that you want Ultra to post about people who are not on his wagon and the lack of content about those not on his case does make his analysis of those on his case appear more OMGus.

[StorrZerg]

Yeah, absolutely i want him to comment on things that are not relative to himself. Thing is, streaker made it appear that his entire reads are simplified to omgus, which i disagree with. And as someone who did get lots of quick votes, its understandable that most of his reads are about those that pressure him.

Strike, any comments on virus or pcm? you still pushing anark? whats changed anything?

[strike wolf]

Yeah, absolutely i want him to comment on things that are not relative to himself. Thing is, streaker made it appear that his entire reads are simplified to omgus, which i disagree with. And as someone who did get lots of quick votes, its understandable that most of his reads are about those that pressure him.

Strike, any comments on virus or pcm? you still pushing anark? whats changed anything?

Virus and Nark would be my top 2 scum picks right now. I tried to give Virus the benefit of the doubt but his follow up posts stunk worse than his first post. Nark I have said what I wanted for now. I would at least like to hear from him before I change my vote. As far as PCM. I am going to look back at the context of that first post you quoted before I come to an opinion on your analysis. As of right now, I am leaning slightly scummy for PCM but would say my read on him is a lot weaker than my read for Nark or Virus.

[strike wolf]

Ultra: I think it would be rather dumb for mafia to advocate a no lynch day 1 as its certain to gain discussion. (although it would be brilliant counterlogic, if so NICE! ) also i think he is contributing nicely and countering the votes / discussion pretty nicely. pro town feeling.

Holy shit aage, what do you think of this statement. Think its a weak arse try at saving his scum buddy?

'Contributing nicely and countering the vote' Bahahaha.

Adding virus to my ever growing list of scum.

Yes it's bullshit and scummy. But Virus' entire list looks poorly crafted and his vote is throwaway "cya guys im not on this bandwagon". A relatively 'safe' play because a wagon on you is not going to happen today, so he can prove he's town because he's hunting his 'own suspects'. If all townies did that, they would lose every game.

So because I chose not to discuss the merits of voting no-lynch (a discussion that wasn't really benefitting town), I was deflecting attention? You can't have it both ways. I brought up a new read instead of repeating like everyone else that I thought no-lynching was bad D1 because such and such a statistic. I hadn't really covered ultra's no lynch vote (besides saying it didn't mean on its own that he's scum) because instead of beating that discussion into the ground I chose to go a different direction. Not sure how my response look forced, but perhaps my opinion is biased because I know it wasn't forced means I am blind to how it looks to you. My scum read on him has grown since then (although still not strong), back then I was more neutral. AOG having a town read on him wasn't bad in and of itself, his reasoning for it was.

Yes. The discussion wasn't a liability to the town at the point of origin, the useless part was that it was dragged out for such a long time. I'm not having it both ways. You didn't waste a single syllable on the main discussion of that day and you think that's pro-town? You could have bothered to mention your opinion on the subject, as that is the point of a discussion.
And if AoG's reasons were bad instead of his read, maybe you shouldn't have lead with "Your strongest town read, really?" as if the read by itself was bad. I do see that you are criticizing his argument in the post though, so I stand corrected.

So it's damning to ultra if he wasn't aware the game was non-vanilla, but if storr and zivel weren't it is your duty to inform them? I don't see how the game being non-vanilla is damning to ultra, since it isn't like he claimed vanilla. He also didn't answer storr's question because you got there first. (I don't believe he has posted since then though) If he had answered that question (and I think storr knew the game was NV and was seeing how much ultra knew about how pointless his softclaim was) in such a fashion that he was only saying he shouldn't be voted because he was non-vanilla, then it would be damning for his lack of reasoning.

That above part got a little wordy, more simply put: It all depends on what ultra meant with his softclaim. If he was trying to save himself by claiming just NV, then that is poor and I think that is what storr was trying to find out.

Storr and Zivel aren't my suspects. I already explained why his claim is vague in my larger post on the previous page. I doubt Zivel was playing a gambit by removing his vote in an attempt to make Ultra slip up. Storr could have had a strategy, but I doubt game mechanics were involved because he's so adamant about not using those.

Someone should be able to parse my claim and realize what I mean. (I traditionally play with outside communication so that was an example of something I would've done under those circumstances, PMing my role to only the most trusted)

Regardless, someone follow this thought path:

• Assume I am town.
• Figure out why I would post that assuming I am town.

I think you will realize why...

(As for assuming I am town, it is for this thought process only.)

It implies Town Mason to me. Irrelevant role that can be faked by mafia. If it's something else, please claim fully, this mystery is not helping your cause. Why are you so vague, do you think it helps, or does it only stall?

My other reads for scum (based solely on what I've caught up) on are Anarks, Whatsausage, and aage

Interesting combination, I'd love to see your reasons for those. Why am I throwing my buddies under the bus?


FP by a long post from storr, gonna post this first and read after.

I didnt read mason from his soft claim. I read something else. I wont say what because. Ont want to bias people before he even makes a claim or give him ideas for a fake claim. He does need to claim though and my reaction may be very different pending what he claims.

[pancakemix]

Storr, you are ridiculous. I'm not sure what your point even is with me talking about the joke stuff. You get on me for my "philisitines" quip and say it's meaningless, but your entire attack on Nark over his joke is meaningless inherently. That was what I was pointing out: people overinterpreting something said in the joke vote phase. Y'all really need to look into Poe's law (or similar effects), because I don't really have time to put winky or tongue faces at the end of every joke I make.

You also made a horrific mistake by dismissing my final paragraph as mechainics, when it's actually a theoretical response to Ultra's posit of a no lynch. Not only that, I ended it with a read! Your favorite thing! Thanks for skimming, but I guess that's what happens when you take my quotes out of context and don't bother looking at what I'm responding to, e.g. crasp, which was a response to this:

Only need to post once every 4 days so somebody give me a shout when this gash is over.

Which elicited - you guessed it - a joke response!

As for ultra himself, there's a very defined arc to my interpretation of his actions, from "newb mistake" to "voteworthy". As I've stated, I'm commenting as I follow the thread. Something may change my opinion while I'm making a post, as the case was with ultra. You would have noticed this if you hadn't skimmed the end of my big post. As for being passionate about him being scum, you're right, I'm not really. He backed off the NL thing, so the big factor in that case is out, but multiple choice softclaims that don't really say anything are just bizarre, and I don't take kindly to games. That said, I always take foreign players with a grain of salt given the amount of "culture shock" that comes into play. It's not my end-all, be-all case, but it's worth pressuring in my estimation. But that doesn't really matter to you, because if I had kept my vote off (as I might have, I'm not sold on it), you'd still chide me for not having a vote down, even with no pressure gamewise to do so. I'm damned if I do and damned if I don't.

That does not, however, absolve Streaker. Much of his play can be summed up with "NO. ULTRA." And while he may have a point, his adamance is disconcerting. I'd be wary of anyone pushing so hard on such an easy target.

As for you Storr, I'm somewhat suspicious of your actions. Your meta is consistent, but I sense more aggression. Your post at Streaker feels a little... constructed, like you felt the need to make a town-looking post. And your questions to passersby: Are you interested in their reads, or are you taking a litmus test to see if you can make a strong push (perhaps both)? Maybe I'm seeing things this way because you're pushing on me where I don't feel it's warranted, but I feel like a great deal of your suspicion on me (if it is that) has to do with me not playing consistently between games, and that's by design to some extent and by RL to another. That probably actually works against me here, but I just feel that if we played the game the same way every time it wouldn't be fun.

On Anamaniacks: Well I already went on the my spiel about joke votes, but Anam took it to another level by declaring we all had to put on our Serious Faces because someone had a Serious Conversation. There's some truth to overplaying a joke, but overinterpreting that joke and then backtracking to save face is pretty silly. Not really scummy, but kinda goofy. He seems heavy on Nark, but other than that there's been very little content (taking into account his declared absence). I don't know that it's enough to form a cogent case one way or the other, which seems to be the consensus of the town at the moment.

Let me comment on Nark as well: I don't think I need to repeat the joke thing again. That said, I think his standard play tends slightly scummy, which makes it hard to form an opinion. His actions aren't excused, but taken with a grain of salt (at least from me).

[HotShot53]

Damn. I don't check in in like 2 days and there are like 3000 posts to catch up on. Not done yet. I did notice this though:

DD: kind of same as crazy milkshakes but more posts -> less content. so more scummy

More posts? Unless milkshakes has done absolutely nothing than there is no way I have more posts than him. FOS @ virus
My other reads for scum (based solely on what I've caught up) on are Anarks, Whatsausage, and aage
I will continue reading in the morning, but I'd like to get something in tonight. Again have not fully caught up and my reads could change by the time I do
Keeping my vote on HotShot for now

Umm... just as a FYI, you've never voted (or made a case on) me, your vote is still on Ultra as far as I can see. Was this a typo? Or did one of your posts not make it to the forums or something?

I saw somewhere a few pages back it was requested that I give more details on my Nark read... this was a very busy weekend for me, and I'm at work now, so I haven't had time to go back and find the posts, I will do that this evening.

With some pressure, virus made a few posts... after making all his reads, he then threw out a virtually random vote on someone he thought was "slightly scummy" and then admits he didn't build a case on zivel and wasn't actually trying to get other people to vote zivel either. (Even though the leading candidates for lynch aren't ones he suspects, he doesn't try to offer much of an alternative.)

To me, it still seems as if virus was scummarizing, got caught and tried to make some posts "giving reads", but still trying to not make waves by voting someone random without a case anyone else is expected to discuss... so still trying to scummarize and stay under the radar. So I will leave my vote on Virus as my top scum suspect for now.

[StorrZerg]

Storr, you are ridiculous. I'm not sure what your point even is with me talking about the joke stuff.
the point was, conversation had moved away from anark joke comment. Your input had not progressed from the joke comment.

You get on me for my "philisitines" quip and say it's meaningless, but your entire attack on Nark over his joke is meaningless inherently. That was what I was pointing out: people overinterpreting something said in the joke vote phase. Y'all really need to look into Poe's law (or similar effects), because I don't really have time to put winky or tongue faces at the end of every joke I make.

thing again. I moved past the joke. Like last game. I caught onto virus because of his poor joke.

You also made a horrific mistake by dismissing my final paragraph as mechainics, when it's actually a theoretical response to Ultra's posit of a no lynch. Not only that, I ended it with a read! Your favorite thing!
it wasn't a mistake. It was mechanical talk about your view about lynch on day 1 vs his. And you should know from me, that different views on policy isn't alignment indicative. So your read of him becoming scummy for being stubborn about his view on day 1 lynch (yes I label him as being stubborn) didn't need to have a comment from me since it was again mechanical.

Thanks for skimming, but I guess that's what happens when you take my quotes out of context and don't bother looking at what I'm responding to, e.g. crasp, which was a response to this:

Only need to post once every 4 days so somebody give me a shout when this gash is over.

Which elicited - you guessed it - a joke response!
ok, so then it's filler in your post. Not to mention I'm sure no one thought it was a joke.
As for ultra himself, there's a very defined arc to my interpretation of his actions, from "newb mistake" to "voteworthy". As I've stated, I'm commenting as I follow the thread. Something may change my opinion while I'm making a post, as the case was with ultra. You would have noticed this if you hadn't skimmed the end of my big post. As for being passionate about him being scum, you're right, I'm not really. He backed off the NL thing, so the big factor in that case is out, but multiple choice softclaims that don't really say anything are just bizarre, and I don't take kindly to games.
yet as I pointed out, he did the same thing last game.

That said, I always take foreign players with a grain of salt given the amount of "culture shock" that comes into play. It's not my end-all, be-all case, but it's worth pressuring in my estimation. But that doesn't really matter to you, because if I had kept my vote off (as I might have, I'm not sold on it), you'd still chide me for not having a vote down, even with no pressure gamewise to do so. I'm damned if I do and damned if I don't.
not really. A push on someone not based on mechanism and different opinions on policy. Heck it still could have been ultra. You have to admit he does look like low hanging fruit...(which you do).

That does not, however, absolve Streaker. Much of his play can be summed up with "NO. ULTRA." And while he may have a point, his adamance is disconcerting. I'd be wary of anyone pushing so hard on such an easy target.

sure, maybe it's a ruse to keep the pressure on ultra away from someone else. Doesn't feel that way to me though. Your motivation might not be scum driven

As for you Storr, I'm somewhat suspicious of your actions. Your meta is consistent, but I sense more aggression. Your post at Streaker feels a little... constructed, like you felt the need to make a town-looking post. And your questions to passersby: Are you interested in their reads, or are you taking a litmus test to see if you can make a strong push (perhaps both)?
if i don't pressure peopleto comment about the people I want to lynch, it's likely they won't talk about it. There is motivation to do this as either alignment of course. Imo this tends to be a pro town thing since it forces people to give opinions. (Even when scum do it)

Maybe I'm seeing things this way because you're pushing on me where I don't feel it's warranted, but I feel like a great deal of your suspicion on me (if it is that) has to do with me not playing consistently between games, and that's by design to some extent and by RL to another. That probably actually works against me here, but I just feel that if we played the game the same way every time it wouldn't be fun.


On Anamaniacks: Well I already went on the my spiel about joke votes, but Anam took it to another level by declaring we all had to put on our Serious Faces because someone had a Serious Conversation. There's some truth to overplaying a joke, but overinterpreting that joke and then backtracking to save face is pretty silly. Not really scummy, but kinda goofy. He seems heavy on Nark, but other than that there's been very little content (taking into account his declared absence). I don't know that it's enough to form a cogent case one way or the other, which seems to be the consensus of the town at the moment.

Let me comment on Nark as well: I don't think I need to repeat the joke thing again. That said, I think his standard play tends slightly scummy, which makes it hard to form an opinion. His actions aren't excused, but taken with a grain of salt (at least from me).

The last bit from you feels better. I'd like to see a push from you that isn't ultra. You can keep your vote on ultra or not won't bother me. ( I can see the merit in a claim from ultra considering his play, but he isn't the person to be lynched imo.)

I will say this post is moving you more towards town.
unvote
Vote virus90

[TheForgivenOne]

Alright, I'm here, I essentially kept up with the game, reading every post, but not a lot has stuck (Since I wasn't allowed to post Lulz). I'll attempt to make a post when I'm home from bowling tonight, if not, for sure tomorrow.

[Zivel]

Well it appears that Storr has taken the info I attempted to get out of PCM and run with it, most of which seems logical and the responses from PCM make sense to me as well. I feel better now, but still have some concerns.

@PCM
You bring up the joke vote a lot, that happened a long time ago in the day. Basing you reads of that far ago goes against what you state as reading the game as you go along as you seem to be still using information from early in the day to relate to what is happening now.
I agree with your reads on Anamaniacks, he has not posted much and so I am still on the fence.
I like the idea of watching streaker for pushing so hard on an easy target but his concerns are valid, Ultra has some questions to answer.

@Storr
Why is Ultra not the person to be lynched?

[Zivel]

Can we get a VC in here.

[rishaed]

This evening... right now my time is very very limited.

[StorrZerg]

unoffical vote count + unvotes.

crazymilkshake(1): Whatsausage
Anarkistdream (1): strike wolf, StorrZerg, strike wolf
UltrasPlot (5): anamainiacks, Zivel, HotShot53, dd515087, Streaker, aage, Whatsausage, Army of GOD, pancakemix
crasp (1): crazymilkshake
virus90 (1): StorrZerg, crasp, HotShot53, StorrZerg
StorrZerg (1): Anarkistdream
dd515087 (1): UltrasPlot
pancakemix (2): zivel, StorrZerg
Zivel (1): virus90
Streaker(1): UltrasPlot

no lynch (1): UltrasPlot, Army of GOD
Those with no votes placed. mtamburini, TheForgivenOne, crasp, anamainiacks
(pending what mod does, TFO tech has a vote on crasp)

[StorrZerg]

unoffical vote count + unvotes.

crazymilkshake(0): Whatsausage
Anarkistdream (1): strike wolf, StorrZerg, strike wolf
UltrasPlot (6): anamainiacks, Zivel, HotShot53, dd515087, Streaker, aage, Whatsausage, Army of GOD, pancakemix
crasp (0): crazymilkshake
virus90 (2): StorrZerg, crasp, HotShot53, StorrZerg
StorrZerg (1): Anarkistdream
dd515087 (0): UltrasPlot
pancakemix (1): zivel, StorrZerg
Zivel (1): virus90
Streaker(1): UltrasPlot

no lynch (1): UltrasPlot, Army of GOD
Those with no votes placed. mtamburini, TheForgivenOne, crasp, anamainiacks
(pending what mod does, TFO tech has a vote on crasp)

didnt have correct votes per person. fixed now

[UltrasPlot]

Fck it, I'm fullclaiming. I am a Lover/Mason.

Gj forcing me to reveal myself, mafia.

I know Lover is a scum safeclaim but fakeclaiming doesn't help us here does it?

[UltrasPlot]

Also I was being vague because you guys most definitely did NOT want to have a Lover claim... ffs

[StorrZerg]

Question, do you know for certain that your "lover" is the same alignment as yourself?
(i mean, the role pm specifically said, their alignment)
If not, you should check with the mod. If you don't know their alignment, tell me what you think of the person, you don't have to name them (im sure everyone is going to call for you to force the person to claim) (this question doesn't matter so much if you have been told their alignment is town)

Now i might be wrong about what your role does, so it would be helpful if you could clarify some details about your role. The way i see it, you are tied with someone, the death of you or that person will force the other to die as well.

[strike wolf]

Agreed as far as revealing your lover.

[aage]

Also I was being vague because you guys most definitely did NOT want to have a Lover claim... ffs

Not sure if I'm unhappy about your claim. In my experience on this board, lovers are scum-town pairs, but it depends on the mod. Rish has had lovers once before in Werewolf mafia, but those were chosen by a Cupid-type role.

Are you a lover by default or were you informed after you received a role PM?
I suggest you don't share who your lover is, as I suspect that player will totally hate you if you do.

Other than that, I kinda hate your claim. Mainly because you're basically holding another player as hostage. If we assume the lovers have differing alignments, I suggest we lynch now and get it over with; one treacherous towny and one scum dead isn't so bad for D1. But we can't yet.


Welcome TFO, btw.

[StorrZerg]

@aage we shouldn't assume anything about the lover/mason role till he explains more.

[rishaed]

Vote Count:

Pancakemix (1) - Zivel
Streaker (1) - Ultrasplot
Virus90 (2) - Hotshot53, Storrzerg
Storrzerg (1) - Anarkistsdream
Ultrasplot (6) - Pancakemix, Streaker, aage, Whatsausage, ArmyofGod, dd515087
Zivel (1) - Virus90
Anarkistsdream (1) - Strikewolf

With 17 alive it takes 9 to lynch. Deadline is Nov 8th.