Reckamonic's Ocarina of Time Mafia..OVER! Was Hyrule saved?

[Bunnylover]

Aikage why would you tell us that you have information about this and that which is beneficial to the town, but don't share it?
I have been in games where one person has done this, and they turned out to be scum (although it was a bastard game).

I don't think you need to claim (although it would help), but you do need to explain your actions.

[Kdub]

Bunny, what is your opinion of Beefster at the moment?

nameloc, am I correct in saying that there is NO way at all for you to remove the votes on you? If that is the case, I think at some point before lylo, you should full claim and voluntarily sacrifice yourself by targeting zwet at night. I don't think you need to do it just yet, but once we hit a few more scum, we can't afford to have a reduced lynch threshold. Are you willing to do so?

[Bunnylover]

Beefster I'm conflicted on.
I was giving him town credit for yesterday, as he was using his powers in a very pro town method. He was helping us find out what the shift was, and therefore if he was scum then he wouldn't want to do that. With the known fact of two scum fractions, he could be on the opposing scum fractions that isn't controlling the shift (because the shift is still around correct?), but I don't believe that.
DTM brings up a point about Beefster day 1 and his contridictions at the moment, but I've been lynched as townie for having not a straight forward answer to why my vote is where. What I'm saying is that I won't be on Beefster wagon for the reason DTM has brought up.
Overall: I am still leaning town on Beefster.

[Reckamonic]

PLUSHIE: Hmm... 17 alive...
BIG DADDY: What about it?
PLUSHIE: And there are two of us!
BIG DADDY: ... And?
PLUSHIE: 17 times 2 equals 34, which is how long until we're together!
BIG DADDY: OH MY GOD IT'S A SIGN!

nameloc1986 (5): "Fluffy", "Bridget", A Flying Pot, Peahat, Tektite
Beefster (2): DTMaster, Aikage
Aikage (2): Beefster, Mothrax
Chronopie (1): Lady Lambdadelta
Bunnylover (1): Kdub
DrippingGoofball (2): zwets, ABR
mothrax (1): Le Cupcake

Not voting: Chronopie, Ythan, vezokpiraka, AKnottedRope, DGB, Knight of Cydonia, nameloc1986, Bunnylover

CHRONOPIE HAS A FROG ON HIS HEAD!

Deadline is December 13th at 9:00PM.
With 17 alive, it takes 9 to lynch.
Nameloc, Goofball, Zwets and Cupcake prodded

[mothrax]

A week into the day and the vote leader has no player votes on him, come on guys...

[mothrax]

Also, Aikage, tell me where I did not follow through with a promise? If you are referring to my"real post later comment" I followed up with that. I post when I can. The most recent attacks on me have been due to my activity, I defended from them. These are not excuses but defenses. Learn to play. Also a knowledge of the English grammar structure would be incredibly helpful as well.

[DrippingGoofball]

Is Aikage stalling a claim?

[DrippingGoofball]

Iso'ing Aikage reveals 18 posts since Oct 6.

[DrippingGoofball]

Looking back at my vote analysis, Aikage is pretty much not voting whenever there is a significant wagon happenning.

[vezokpiraka]

unvote
vote Aikage

If he won't claim because he doesn't have to we will make him have to.

[DrippingGoofball]

Where there is stalling, there is scum.

VOTE: AIKAGE

[Lady Lambdadelta]

Fine. Let's drive him to the noose, and make him claim.

unvote, vote: Aikage

[Beefster]

nameloc1986 (5): "Fluffy", "Bridget", A Flying Pot, Peahat, Tektite
Beefster (2): DTMaster, Aikage
Aikage (2): Beefster, Mothrax
Chronopie (1): Lady Lambdadelta
Bunnylover (1): Kdub
DrippingGoofball (2): zwets, ABR
mothrax (1): Le Cupcake

Not voting: Chronopie, Ythan, vezokpiraka, AKnottedRope, DGB, Knight of Cydonia, nameloc1986, Bunnylover

Didn't Aikage say he was voteless? He doesn't look voteless to me.

[AKnottedRope]

He was voteless yesterday IIRC.

I want to see a response from aikage to the past few pages before I vote or not, this wagon stemmed as much from aikage's as it did from speculation. (see post 3100 for an example of this, I don't see where in aikage's posts he claims that he has rolebased info about someone or something.)

I do think he needs to claim, and I do think he's scummy, but I want to see what he has to say as well.

[AKnottedRope]

To aikage: if your next post does not contain a nicely quoted role PM, I will be voting you.

[mothrax]

wow i have some good news and bad news, but probably good news!

1. i have my vote now!!!!!!!!!1
2. ythan might not be scum, if my theory about my role is right
3. akr is scum!!

now that we know BE was town, akr's vote onto me at the end of the day is really really scummy. he wanted to get off the mislynch and vote another one! and look today he doesn't even mention me! he says he remembers suspecting beefsteR??? but he had his vote on me yesterday! he doesnt really suspect me, he was just fakin it

Vote: AKR

feels good to do that! now i can finally contribute more.

last night i targeted ythan, since he didn't die my theory is maybe i can only kill bad people and when i target good people good things happen to them. did you get anything psecial last night ythan?

The last paragraph AKR, where he implies ythan might be cleared.

[AKnottedRope]

FFS I logged out twice trying to post.

Didn't see that, and I think that's grounds for a vote, for pressure if nothing else.

VOTE: Aikage

Still want a full quoting of your role PM, though.

[zwetschenwasser]

Concurring over here,

Vote: aikage

[Albert B. Rampage]

Where did he go?

[Chronopie]

I too concur. VOTE: Aikage

[AKnottedRope]

kso aikage is at L-1 if I counted correctly.

/inb4 quickhammer

[Lady Lambdadelta]

8 Votes. L-1

[DTMaster]

Only have time of immediate responses.
@ABR.
Remember what I said earlier to the sages that I wanted to consider?

See this post in reference to Sage's targets being scum.

Some thoughts while I mull over this claim.
a. What substrike said about members not claiming unless is necessary is pinging on the towndar for me. (Seems odd to say that now from a scum perspective)
b. Also I have a thought for the sages to think about (do not answer these questions in thread) since it's a crazy idea I thought of that confirms though we shouldn't trust flavour analysis (Aside from Harry Potter Mafia and Nik and I's KOL mafia being good examples of not trusting flavour) but people seem to still want to do flavour analysis.

If a few of you are sleeper roles (as in you need to kill a specific target to gain your powers) it's possible to see that:

a. Dram is accurate to the flavour and it's likely that your targets if they are "villians" like Ganandorf would be scum.
b. If your targets are town aligned players, then simillar logic applies.
c. This validates any flavour analysis since Dram is known to be accurate (see his other Theme games) and any flavour based roles (like a flavour cop).

If there is a larger number of you to fall under this catagory.
a. In terms of villians, accurate flavours cause diminishing returns from scum lost to "town power". Scum would either have to be extremely powerful individually. (If you think about it in terms of game role balancing if all the targets were scum: scum would have diminishing power in exchange for town gaining power). This seems off for balancing it.
b. If they are largely town targets that might balance out (exchange of PRs) but it seems like a huge hit on town (i.e. if you are considering it, it means 6-8/28 people, some who are town to consider town on town actions if flavour was accurate). That's off.
c. It's more likely you have a mix of a and b to equal out the numbers, and this especially works out if you have flavour being independent of roles.

An angle we could try, is to break the game via the neighbours (but we have to assume most of them are town) via the above principle in terms of balancing. I'm not sure if it's possible though.

An addition would be not all the targets are in this game rendering some sages pretty much vanillia (except that they are neighbours). This is supported with Saria (sp)'s claim in regards to possible town:town killing where we have

Town-Sages having Targets to Town-Characters

. It's not that far fetched

and from a modding point of view acts as a balance against having all sages having targets of all scum

.

I'm inclined to believe Saria in this case to be a town neighbour because

her role would be anti-town if it matches with who I think it does

. Having anti-town elements would be a distraction, (eg. see my point on Beefster in his argument against Gandalf's role) rather then something scum would have.

@Town

I don't understand the need for Aikage to claim when Aikage claimed his night action and his results

. Ihmo from a motivation point of view,

it makes no sense for scum to do this

. It makes more sense for scum to be pushing for this claim because Aikage claimed a potential killing power.

What is with people and their obsession with his claim? Aikage claimed information, he claimed his town and scum targets and who would be town resulting from his actions. I face palm at this wagon.

@AKR
If you didn't suspect beef, why did you drop the case outlined in my post? If you were suspect with Beef and continue to be suspect with him:

why do you agree with Beefster?

.

Why are you pushing so hard on this Aikage case, and not doing anything to advance your Beefcase? I don't see how your actions corelate with your stances. When you work so hard on all these other cases like BE, etc and drop your Beefster case all of a sudden, this is suspicious. It's like a distancing ploy.

Ihmo this reads as Beef/AKR team. If either of them flips scum

it's very likely the other is the scum buddy

.

@Mothrax
You sir are scummy:

On top of that your posts are difficult to read.

This is not a reason why someone is scum. If you were town you would ask Aikage to clarify. You don't use someones' lack of clarity to be part of your argument to vote them. This alone is scummy.

@Beefster
1. Why haven't you replied to my Aikage defence? My points are valid in regards to Aikage's posts from what I read.

2. It's not OMGUS since Aikage provided a reason for his vote, which was my case where you contradicted yourself today from your day 1 play. Since you changed your reason for voting Gandalf from "he is scum" to "not enough time, it was all policy and that was the best vote", it's still a valid argument.

This trend is typical of scum, and in the words of DGB kamikaze, those who do this are typically scum (though you didn't hammer Gandalf, but the nature to vote in such a manner is the lesson that can be extrapolated here)

3. You don't read: Aikage was voteless and he GAINED HIS VOTE BACK TODAY CLAIMED TODAY AT THE START OF THE DAY. Want proof?
This is a vote count day 1:

Le Cupcake (1): Untrod Tripod
Lady Lambdadelta (2): Blooderection

nameloc1986 (2): "Fluffy", "Bridget", Aikage

Blooderection (1): mothrax
GandalfIzSik (14): KDub, zwetschenwasser, RayFrost, Fate, ABR, Le Cupcake, Lady Lambdadelta, Exilon, Bunnylover, jenniwren, Nikanor, Beefster, Chronopie, Substrike22, Ythan, jmj3000
Substrike22 (5): Hinduragi, chesskid3, DTMaster, JaBOC, Dekes, GandalfIzSik

Not voting: ZONEACE, nameloc1986

This was Aikage's first post today.

wow i have some good news and bad news, but probably good news!

1. i have my vote now!!!!!!!!!1

2. ythan might not be scum, if my theory about my role is right
3. akr is scum!!

now that we know BE was town, akr's vote onto me at the end of the day is really really scummy. he wanted to get off the mislynch and vote another one! and look today he doesn't even mention me! he says he remembers suspecting beefsteR??? but he had his vote on me yesterday! he doesnt really suspect me, he was just fakin it

Vote: AKR

feels good to do that! now i can finally contribute more.

last night i targeted ythan, since he didn't die my theory is maybe i can only kill bad people and when i target good people good things happen to them. did you get anything psecial last night ythan?

You are streching for arguments to stick on Aikage at this point and that's scummy.

You're not bothering to research your arguments through rereads, and that doesn't reflect well as the person leading this case. A townie would cross check is work. A scum player just looks to insight arguments/fires.

Why aren't you doing this sir?

@BL
1. Aikage explained what he thought his role does, and why he targeted X and Y. He thought Fate and Ythan were scum so he targeted them. He believes that since he targeted Fate he killed him. He believes that his kill is based on hero/not hero. Now ask me something here: Why would Aikage blatantly say that his role must only kill bad guys?

There is only one reason: and I believe that Aikage did target Fate but his role isn't exactly what we think it is.

I bet you that Fate's death and Aikage targetting him was a coincidence and you know what, from Aikage's POV he really think his "kill" is only based on alignment of his target.

Why do I think this? Because he's openly speculating on what his role is. There's no reason for someone to post tidbits of their role and speculate on that.

Now if you look at Aikage's join date and first post (assuming no Alt craziness) he just joined as a newb. What would a newb do with a crazy role? How would this "newb behave"? What if the newb targeted someone and they died, what would they think?

2. The difference between your self meta and Beefster is

he changed his stance entirely from Day 1 to what it was now

. Intimidation is a tactic, but he's using it to force a claim out of someone. That person claimed enough information for the town to go off if he didn't want to full claim in any one's hands (ie. Aikage targeted Fate N1 and Ythan N2, and his action appears to be a kill and maybe only reflects on one's alignment since Ythan didn't die, therefore Ythan is town. Aikage targeted Fate and Ythan because he thought they were scum (therefore his actions are an anti-scum action) and he wants to target AKR).

Everything that you want to know, is there. Aikage

SAID IT

. What more is it that you need to know?

We have list of players, his action, the results, and why. We don't know the specific action, but we know his motives. His motives match with his play all game. It matches with his scum list. That correlation makes Aikage look obv town to me. Aside from his lack luster posting, what he posted has all the information we need on what Aikage thinks of the game.

This is more then half the people in this game. ABR for example has concentrated more energy on proving there is a 3rd scum faction rather then scum hunting and pointing out who's scum in this game.

Aikage looks like gold in comparison to ABR since Aikage gave reads, while ABR actually contributed nothing to this game other then theory discussion

. Remember what KoC said about smokes and mirrors, ABR looks like a culprit of smoke and mirrors in this game, not Aikage's poor posting.

This wagon is silly, and a full role PM claim is retarded since we already have the above information.

If you are seriously thinking someone is scum for claiming he cleared Ythan you are heavily misguided. A scum player doesn't draw attention with unnecessary claims like this. Clearing Ythan is something we take from Aikage's partial claim. Voting him because he "cleared someone" is a kin to voting Nikanor when he "cleared Chess" because he wanted to stop the wagon. You can't do one thing and say another

If anyone voting for Aikage uses the role argument and didn't vote Nikanor for the same thing

deserves serious scum points

[DTMaster]

kso aikage is at L-1 if I counted correctly.

/inb4 quickhammer

Also this post reads like a scum admission. Like srzly, why would you be worried about quick hammers if you believe Aikage is scum?

[Lady Lambdadelta]

That's actually a more protown move.

Wanting to avoid a quick hammer.

We've wanted Aikage to claim for a few days now.

The votes are to make sure he claims.

Tell me this: Nikanor claimed A fake role (Cop) along with his clearing Chess. He didn't just softclaim that "Chess is clear". That's the difference. We want his claim.