Author Mafia - Game Over!

[Confucius]

To ignore a problem is to magnify it.

~

And just to be clearer: William Shakespeare, you did not answer my questions in your Post #442. It does not explain in the slightest why Thomas Pynchon and Marion Zimmber Bradley formed a "vile pair" apparently worth reading in tandem. It also does not explain why you would default voting for Thomas Pynchon over Marion Zimmer Bradley.

The follow-up question I was holding onto but I am no longer going to: after voting for Pynchon, why did you vote for Marion Zimmer Bradley in your

next

post (Post #338) if you had earlier decided Thomas Pynchon was the better vote between the two? Why did you not continue to pursue Thomas Pynchon (even if you were not going to continue voting him)?

Jane Austen's flip may "relight" the thread of play, but that will not excuse you from ignoring these issues.

~

Edgar Allan Poe, either answer questions sensibly or eat rope.

[Edgar Allan Poe]

Edgar Allan Poe, either answer questions sensibly or eat rope.

A rope.

A rope around the animals's neck.

A rope around 
my
 neck.

I first behold this apparition (of myself nonetheless) - 

for I could scarcely regard it as less - 

and my wonder and my terror are extreme.

There was meat enough to have feasted the Anakim.

Yet it was disregarded.

People enjoyed what they came here to do.

Watch people eat rope.

What a sad day it truly was.

Mmmmmmm, rope.

--

As for your "question" - you chopped, chopped, chopped, what I said.

And you spewed it at me like it was gold being handed down from the divine.

Answer thy own questions sir, before thou seek answers in others.

Re-read, in full, and lo and behold.

For what thou say I say and what I say are not of similar character.

[Mark Z Danielewski]

CON-SO-LI-DA-TE!

Ahem. Pardon me the flavor slip.

Enhusking time melts all, but gazing back,
Our laggard past beseems a Golden Age!

Voting Log, Vol. 1 No. 7

Christopher Marlowe - 0
Thomas Pynchon - 0
Shakespeare - 0
David Foster Wallace - 1 (Shakespeare)
Edgar Allan Poe - 4 (The Daily Bugle, David Foster Wallace, Jane Austen, Lemony Snicket)
James Joyce - 0
Moliere - 0
Bret Easton Ellis - 2 (James Joyce, Thomas Pynchon)
Lemony Snicket - 0
Charlie Kaufman - 0
Oscar Wilde - 0
Dr. Seuss - 0
Gregory Williamson - 1 (Dr Seuss)
Gertrude Stein - 1 (Marion Zimmer Bradley)
Tommy Wiseau - 0
Jane Austen - 4 (Gertrude Stein, Charlie Kaufman, Moliere, Tommy Wiseau)
ee cummings - 2 (Oscar Wilde, Rucks)
David Mamet - 0
The Daily Bugle - 2 (David Mamet, Christopher Marlowe)
Brian Jacques - 1 (Mark Z Danielewski)
God - 0
Mark Z. Danielewski - 0
Marion Zimmer Bradley - 4 (God, ee cummings, Gregory Williamson, Edgar Allan Poe)
Rucks - 0

Not Voting - 2 (Brian Jacques, Bret Easton Ellis)

In God and Poe I think our trust is safe,
But Cummings fingered Austen as a foe
Whilst leading justice down a different track,
And Williamson kept off her topic's whole.
VOTE: EE Cummings

This was an ill-disguised lurker hunt.
Why this wagon in particular? cummings and Williamson weren't even posting,
so how come you get to pick what they were doing/would do afterwards?

Why the two of them instead of others?
cummings has every right to have multiple suspects, and Williamson was blatantly

not around

.

UNVOTE: Fred Phelps (we'll get back to

this)

VOTE: William Shakespeare

[HP Lovecraft]

Voting Log, Vol. 2 No. 10

Shaft - 0
Thomas Pynchon - 0
Shakespeare - 2 (Paper, Danielewski)
Edgar Allan Poe - 1 (Wilde)
James Joyce - 1 (Poe, Pynchon)
Confucius - 0
Lemony Snicket - 1 (Seuss)
Charlie Kaufman - 0
Oscar Wilde - 0
Dr. Seuss - 1 (Phelps)
Gregory Williamson - 0
Gertrude Stein - 1 (Rucks)
Spinning Paper - 3 (Kaufman, Snicket, Joyce)
ee cummings - 2 (Shakespeare, God)
EL James - 0
Fred Phelps - 2 (Shaft, Williamson)
God - 0
Mark Z. Danielewski - 0
Marion Zimmer Bradley - 0
Rucks - 1 (EL James)

Not Voting - 4 (Confucius, cummings, Bradley, Stein)

With 20 alive, it's 11 to lynch.

Deadline is 12/17 1PM EST

[William Shakespeare]

[Enter Confucius with the asse head]

It also does not explain why you would default voting for Thomas Pynchon over Marion Zimmer Bradley.

The follow-up question I was holding onto but I am no longer going to: after voting for Pynchon, why did you vote for Marion Zimmer Bradley in your

next

post (Post #338) if you had earlier decided Thomas Pynchon was the better vote between the two? Why did you not continue to pursue Thomas Pynchon (even if you were not going to continue voting him)?

Such matters hook no interest from the wise.

Enhusking time melts all, but gazing back,
Our laggard past beseems a Golden Age!

Voting Log, Vol. 1 No. 7

Christopher Marlowe - 0
Thomas Pynchon - 0
Shakespeare - 0
David Foster Wallace - 1 (Shakespeare)
Edgar Allan Poe - 4 (The Daily Bugle, David Foster Wallace, Jane Austen, Lemony Snicket)
James Joyce - 0
Moliere - 0
Bret Easton Ellis - 2 (James Joyce, Thomas Pynchon)
Lemony Snicket - 0
Charlie Kaufman - 0
Oscar Wilde - 0
Dr. Seuss - 0
Gregory Williamson - 1 (Dr Seuss)
Gertrude Stein - 1 (Marion Zimmer Bradley)
Tommy Wiseau - 0
Jane Austen - 4 (Gertrude Stein, Charlie Kaufman, Moliere, Tommy Wiseau)
ee cummings - 2 (Oscar Wilde, Rucks)
David Mamet - 0
The Daily Bugle - 2 (David Mamet, Christopher Marlowe)
Brian Jacques - 1 (Mark Z Danielewski)
God - 0
Mark Z. Danielewski - 0
Marion Zimmer Bradley - 4 (God, ee cummings, Gregory Williamson, Edgar Allan Poe)
Rucks - 0

Not Voting - 2 (Brian Jacques, Bret Easton Ellis)

In God and Poe I think our trust is safe,
But Cummings fingered Austen as a foe
Whilst leading justice down a different track,
And Williamson kept off her topic's whole.
VOTE: EE Cummings

This was an ill-disguised lurker hunt.
Why this wagon in particular? cummings and Williamson weren't even posting,
so how come you get to pick what they were doing/would do afterwards?

Why the two of them instead of others?
cummings has every right to have multiple suspects, and Williamson was blatantly

Shall I remind thee of our glorious day?
  Miss Austen earned attention from the crowd
But several coted her for other prey
  And for a time they kept her womb unplowed.
In God and Poe I feel our trust is safe,
  Since neither hath much fault beyond a vote,
While Williamson with worthless posts doth strafe,
  And Cummings is two weeks without a mote.
But Cummings' stench hath viler features still,
  Like Crafting early distance 'reft of force      (ooc: see below)
And deviating from his focus nil
  Despite his weak posts wide throughout the course.
The hour of fatal action draweth near;
  The villain needing soonest death is clear.

poe

has Reinventness which is Untruthness

austen

has Awareness which is Scaredness

both fail

but the winner of Scumness

is

austen

[Confucius]

Vote: William Shakespeare

.

[Marion Zimmer Bradley]

In looking at those we have wagons on. Mestro Phelps though he seems a bit aggravating and closed minded, that does not rule him out as Darkovan. Though many of our people are understanding of different lifestyles, there are those who call Laranzus sandal wearers and lovers of men, because they do not fit the traditional male role for the Comyn. In the Towers, especially we have learned to accept and accommodate love in any form . Many very conservative old men however, are quite closed minded. The Christforo Brethren also look upon men who have been with men with horror. But though the Terrans are very anti any lovers of men or lovers of women, it does not mean that Mestro Phelps is a Terran spy solely based on this attitude. His tunneling on Mestro Seuss is also not enough to assume he is Terran.

Mestro Shakespeare, however, seems far more likely a candidate to be a Terran spy. He has posted with very little information and seems to want to avoid the limelight. He refused to answer several questions. (including one I made). He is supposed to have a reputation as a man of great word skills, but he votes people without explaining anything. Hiding his thought process from the rest of us is not a very Darkovan thing to do.


(OOC)
Time is running short, and though I would prefer we had more information about more of the players in this game a lynch needs to happen. Rarely is a NL a good idea and this is not one of those rare cases.


VOTE: Shakespeare

[Edgar Allan Poe]

Vote: William Shakespeare.

[OscarWilde]

VOTE: William Shakespear

In the interest of ensuring a decision, Wilde lent his vote to the proceedings against Shakespeare.

"Knowing where Mr. Shakespeare's loyalty lies will benefit us greatly. Perhaps it is time to begin giving your defense sir, in the interest of time."

[William Shakespeare]

Mestro Shakespeare, however, seems far more likely a candidate to be a Terran spy. He has posted with very little information and seems to want to avoid the limelight. He refused to answer several questions. (including one I made). He is supposed to have a reputation as a man of great word skills, but he votes people without explaining anything. Hiding his thought process from the rest of us is not a very Darkovan thing to do.


(OOC)
Time is running short, and though I would prefer we had more information about more of the players in this game a lynch needs to happen. Rarely is a NL a good idea and this is not one of those rare cases.


VOTE: Shakespeare

To flatter worthless queries likes me not.
  So oft I've writ of giants of the past
Too virtuous for this politick world
  Who get their deaths from those whose fears they fought.
Alas, I lack the powers that they had                              (VT)
  But still I feel their suff'ring as mine own.

[Gregory Williamson]

Sheep Danielewski,
Who is town, so
I am going to

Vote Shakespeare

.

I am going to
Sheep Danielewski.
Who is town? So
Vote Shakespeare!

[William Shakespeare]

VOTE: Williamson
VOTE: ee cummings

[Edgar Allan Poe]

To flatter worthless queries likes me not.
  So oft I've writ of giants of the past
Too virtuous for this politick world
  Who get their deaths from those whose fears they fought.
Alas, I lack the powers that they had                              (VT)
  But still I feel their suff'ring as mine own.

VOTE: Williamson
VOTE: ee cummings

You claim a simpleton with no powers, and then you follow to double vote? What madness is this?

[Lemony Snicket]

Shakespeare's push on two lurkers is perhaps the most hypocritical thing I've seen since I saw a man of God stealing from the needy. He is perhaps one of the most prominent lurkers of this game.

UNVOTE:
VOTE: Shakespeare

His double vote is also strange, interesting, but overall miserable. Whether or not it is symbolic we shall see. But I feel like it was a weak attempt to dissuade those calling for his head by faking he had a hidden power.

[Lemony Snicket]

Also I believe God had a question for me.

Snicket's post 400has a vote for Austen, while calling Austen a criminal and Suess a...gladiator?
However, he did have day1 Austen votes.
He was also voting Suess early in day 2
He moves to spinning Paper, giving the same reason as his vote for Suess but the vote actually comes in 369.

There was no agreement or arguement from Snicket with Suess about the Austen case Suess presented when he called her to combat.

I would like to hear more about how your vote went to Austen in 400 when it was on Suess prior to combat.

I believe I mentioned this in post 400, although I may not have. But Seuss being both a criminal and a gladiator was quite improbable, as what use would a criminal have for making it so that others could only vote him or whoever he chooses to gladiate (that is not a word, but sometimes proper wordsmiths must create them for the interest of progress and heroism).

Furthermore, Seuss was looking more and more like an innocent (which is what I meant by "gladiator," although I can see how one might not glean that) during his arguments with the criminal Austen.

[Thomas Pynchon]

This had been at the Clongowes or perhaps Belvedere, where he excelled as a student. James Joyce knows well that for Seuss to be a gladiator and scum, is unlikely, so unlikely, that his vote for him in that instant, requires justification, much more than simply her belief that Jane was town. Should one not accept her excuse of drunkenness for her action, one is left only with the explanation that it was too create wifom

for surely no scum would not vote a buddy in that situation.

Now, MZB, I said almost as much in my post where I voted for Joyce, and yet you question me about it, not just once, but again, before I'd even posted, acting as though I was somehow dodging your question. Why? Why the impatience?

Joyce asked for the flipped mafia to be recolored and Phelps says it's a town-tell. It's not. It's null. One the one hand she could just be town, asking for the mafia to be recolored, which I can see, but Joyce knows better than this, that the colors of flips are intentional, so when he sees this, as town, I think that it is much more likely that he simply makes that observation, rather than asks for the color to be changed, and as scum, I can see him trying to fabricate a town tell by asking this question.

To Mark, do you believe that Phelps is bussing Shakespeare? Do you care if this a possibility?

[Mark Z Danielewski]

To Mark, do you believe that Phelps is bussing Shakespeare? Do you care if this a possibility?

Yes. There's probably three+ scum alive, and Phelps's vote was at an early time that had no danger for either of them.

Shakespeare:

you're still
not explaini
ng why that 
wagon over o
thers, and w
hy that part
icular VC. It feels fa
bricated because there i
s no reasoning why you pic
ked this specific four-perso
n wagon and c
alled out tw
o of its me
mbers as


scum.

[Thomas Pynchon]

Shakespeare! mulled with the HAMMERS of Hell!

Vote: Shakespeare

[William Shakespeare]

Shakespeare's push on two lurkers is perhaps the most hypocritical thing I've seen since I saw a man of God stealing from the needy. He is perhaps one of the most prominent lurkers of this game.

UNVOTE:
VOTE: Shakespeare

His double vote is also strange, interesting, but overall miserable. Whether or not it is symbolic we shall see. But I feel like it was a weak attempt to dissuade those calling for his head by faking he had a hidden power.

To flatter worthless queries likes me not.
  So oft I've writ of giants of the past
Too virtuous for this politick world
  Who get their deaths from those whose fears they fought.
Alas, I lack the powers that they had                              (VT)
  But still I feel their suff'ring as mine own.

VOTE: Williamson
VOTE: ee cummings

You claim a simpleton with no powers, and then you follow to double vote? What madness is this?

OOC:
I explicitly stated otherwise. I even used the letters "VT." Also just because I haven't posted much because my voice takes some composing time and I'm busy doesn't mean lurking doesn't make someone else context-considered more likely to be scum. It's your job to tell the difference. Wagon vs counterwagon on d1 is one of the absolute best things to pull scum off of. In this case there were two counterwagon options and Austen was on one so I figured at least one buddy would be on the other and spent my limited reading time investigating the people on it. Cummings and Williamson both look like potential buddies for Austen, especially Cummings given the FoS scumbuddy vote townie, counterwagoning, lurking, and using language befitting a scumbag combo.

[Confucius]

"In delay there lies no plenty."

-- William Shakespeare

~

My vote is staying. Rather than answering questions as a wagon built on you, you merely hinted that you were not Vanilla Town without actually claiming. When more votes accumulated, you simply double-voted (i.e., still not-quite-claiming but practically doing so). Now that you are at L-1, you are

finally

talking out-of-character and making yourself seem mildly presentable.

These moves all seem calculated solely to get votes off of you, and do nothing to convince me you are Town. Waiting this close deadline and only doing so under extreme pressure is too little, too late.

Like Jane Austen was, you seemed to be hiding behind your author. It is

not

our job to fill-in-the-blanks for your cases, especially when questions

about

your blanks are put directly to you. If you actually

believed

your words, you could have easily taken the time to explain them.

[Fred Phelps]

Yes. There's probably three+ scum alive, and Phelps's vote was at an early time that had no danger for either of them.

When did I ever vote Shakespeare?

[Fred Phelps]

In fact, I never voted Shakespeare, and neither did my predecessor.

Now, I am sick and tired of you lying heathens accusing me of this that and the other to further your fag agendas.

Stop it at once, for the Bible says, THOU SHALT NOT BEAR FALSE WITNESS.


You hear that, you devils?


THOU

SHALT

NOT

BEAR

FALSE


WITNESS

How can you even pretend to be building proper cases when YOU DON'T EVEN KNOW WHO VOTED FOR WHOM.

Though you attempt to honey your words, in truth they are as bitter as glass!

[Mark Z Danielewski]

You'll probably want to tone the fuck down and let the mod know there is a mistake in the VC, then.

In the meantime, shut the fuck up and stop railing at a VC mistake while you blatantly ignore the L-1 wagon.


(Actually, please

do

tone it down. There is a difference between being in character and being offensive, and you cross that line all too often for the sake of pointless characterization.)

[Mark Z Danielewski]

First off: I'm getting the impression that I know who you are, and if so, what I'm seeing so far displeases me. Since I'm
not certain and alts and whatnot, though, I'll give you the benefit of the doubt, given that I might just be completely o
ff my rocker on my guess. 
I miss my meta tools and Mr. Lovecraft is far too cruel on his masked guests.
 With that said, c
ut the "it takes a while to write in-character" shenanigans, as our gracious host has allowed us out-of-character posts, 
and amid all the wild BBcode (I'm a
maze
d--is there anyone out there? Pa ra pa pa...), I don't seem to be having any parti
cular difficulty writing my posts. You picked your author, one would assume you like writing in that style and expected t
o be able to keep it up. So--less whining, more developing reads, as you did in that OOC post.
There wasn't really a wagon v
ersus counterwagon on D1. Doe
sn't count. It was a rather f
ast deadline wagon on Town, s
cum could be out frolicking a
nd eating ice cream while vot
ing anyone. Scum, especially 
experienced scum, don't reall
y care where their buddies ar
e voting as long as mislynche
s keep going through, and I s
aw all the scum in a D1 scum 
wagon on D1 in a recent multi
Wagon vs counterwagon on d1 is one of the absolute
best things to pull scum off of. In this case ther
e were two counterwagon options and Austen was on
one so I figured at least one buddy would be on th
e other and spent my limited reading time investig
ating the people on it. Cummings and Williamson bo
th look like potential buddies for Austen, especia
lly Cummings given the FoS scumbuddy vote townie, 
counterwagoning, lurking, and using language befit
ting a scumbag combo.
ball game. What is important 
is the reasoning, and I don't
think your "FoS scumbuddy, vo
te Townie" analysis is enough
here. It falls flat and easy.
Stuff like "one scum on each
wagon" doesn't work, and four
-vote wagons in a game this l
arge, in a situation where sc
um probably weren't in any da
nger, don't mean a damn. The 
fact that you pick this parti
cular method to hunt and happ

en to hit two lurkers leaves a very bad taste. This makes your analysis look flawed and opportunistic, because it points
at two players who are clearly not on top of their game if they are Town; I would be much more interested in seeing an an
alysis of what happens in parallel of Austen's votes/Austen voters, but you chose a wagon/counterwagon pair from a mislyn
ch. They are rarely significant, at least at this point in the game. Give it a few more Days, and a VCA pattern may begin
to emerge, but in any case, it's never that cut and dry.

[HP Lovecraft]

fixed the votecount