Medieval Mafia - Game Over

[OhGodMyLife]

Vote Count:

10 to lynch

zwetschenwasser: 6 (hasdgfas, Thestatusquo, Yosarian2, scotmany12, sam.samhorn, Kmd4390)
Jebus: 3 (camn, populartajo, Caboose)
DrippingGoofball: 2 (farside22, CounselWolf)
Thestatusquo: 2 (DrippingGoofball, zwetschenwasser)
camn: 1 (Jebus)

Not Voting: 5 (Simenon, stark, crywolf20084, Caboose, qwints)

Jebus has been prodded.

[Thestatusquo]

DGB: Generally the burden of proof is on you in order to demonstrate why you SHOULD be voting me, rather than on me to show why you shouldn't be.

Zwet: I am voting you because every action you have taken makes no sense from a town perspective and all kinds of sense from a scum perspective. I am not going to ignore behavior that makes sense only from a scum player because you say I "Know your meta"

I'm not even sure what that means, by the way? I've modded one noobie game with you in it, I believe. One we shouldn't even be talking about, because it's not over.

You claim you're trying to provoke reactions, in which case, if you are town (which I doubt) you ought to learn to do it properly. If you make an action that is scummy, the only reactions you're going to get from players is attacking you. The natural reaction from both scum and town players is so attack a player who is doing scummy things. If you are trying to provoke a reaction you need to work out what you need to do in order to maker scum and town players react differently. So even if you're town, I think you're town thats playing without thinking.

[camn]

I'm not so much defending Jebus as I am attacking the validity of your case against him. My comments about Jebus are directed to everyone, including tajo.

What case? I don't recall myself or Tajo stating any reason for voting Jebus.
Despite me not stating a reason, you called my vote "mindless". Seems like an overreaction, considering it was the first vote on him.

Maybe you are locked into your conversation with DGB, though, and aren't minding these details.
Which is sad, because I love attention.

[Caboose]

You already came out and said that you have information to believe that he is town. If you have said information, you not releasing it is hurting the town. Call it rolefishing, but no one is going to believe you until you explain it fully.

That would require a full roleclaim, which I'm not giving.
No, not releasing the info is not bad for the town, it's bad for the scum's ability to decide if I'm worth nightkilling or not.

[scotmany12]

I'm not so much defending Jebus as I am attacking the validity of your case against him. My comments about Jebus are directed to everyone, including tajo.

What case? I don't recall myself or Tajo stating any reason for voting Jebus.
Despite me not stating a reason, you called my vote "mindless". Seems like an overreaction, considering it was the first vote on him.

Maybe you are locked into your conversation with DGB, though, and aren't minding these details.
Which is sad, because I love attention.

You not stated shows your vote has no validity, hence it being mindless. And I was assuming that your vote was in agreement with DGB's assessment.

[Jebus]

Sorry, been busy with stuff and overwhelmed by the D1 burst of activity.

Will be done reading first eight pages which seemed to have appeared overnight by Monday (yay holiday).

[Yosarian2]

We fucking serious people? Seriously, stop unvoting. I do not get what makes this claim so believable; and after reading about William Wallace, I really don't see how martyr (or bodyguard for that matter) fits for him. And we should not be letting him get away with his OMGUS on shea.

What is believable is that scum will do everything in its power to reduce discussion and ensure the quickest, least informative mislynch possible. Thanks for helping the scum's agenda.

Unless Zwet is scum, in which case the "scum agenda" would be to stall and delay the lynch until the waters are so muddy that the town's short attention span wanders and someone else gets lynched instead. Which is already starting to happen.

It dosn't help that his vote on TSQ is just terrible. Nothing TSQ has done so far this game seems like it'd be more likely to come from scum-TSQ then town TSQ. Voting a claimed miller day 1 is a perfectly reasonable move, especally when the guy is freaking lying about his role anyway. The only excuse he gave was "TSQ should know my meta", which makes no sense, unless Zwet has a habit of claiming miller-vig on day 1, getting backed into a corner where he had to either prove his claim or die, and then admitting he was lying all along.

[Yosarian2]

And it is still a null-tell. Attacking someone's activity, regardless of his activity in other games, is ridiculous to do on day 1.

Although this is pretty much just wrong; lurking is a great scumtell, and day 1 is a great time to go lurkerhunting, or even lurker lynching if it's absolutly necessary.

That being said, the time to lynch a lurker is not the point when you've just cornered a scum into a position where he was forced to admit his entire roleclaim was a complete lie. And who claimed to be a miller and then "un-claimed" miller when it looked like he was going to take more flak for it then it was worth. And who claimed he was "trying to get reactions", but has not made any comments on any of the "reactions" from his lies at all, except to OMGUS vote someone who voted him for perfectly legitimate reasons, and to do so without any real analysis of his "reaction".

[sam.samhorn]

Lynch him or not, I will not tolerate a QUICKLYNCH on day one, and we must discuss alternative lynches. Day 1 is the most informative day of all. We're not letting the scum rob us of it. Not on my watch.

Huh? Do you seriously believe this? You seriously would discuss 'alternative lynches' to a 100% bona-fide scum player on day one just to "get more information?" Are you trolling?

Because that's a really stupid way to think. Who cares about "information" on day one?

What does that even mean?

[Incognito]

Awesome. I now have mod powers.

Carry on.

[scotmany12]

And it is still a null-tell. Attacking someone's activity, regardless of his activity in other games, is ridiculous to do on day 1.

Although this is pretty much just wrong; lurking is a great scumtell, and day 1 is a great time to go lurkerhunting, or even lurker lynching if it's absolutly necessary.

Disagree; town members lurk just as much as scum. Unless you have say a solid meta on someone who only lurks as scum, which I don't think people have on Jebus, I view lurking as a null-tell.

[Kmd4390]

Lynch him or not, I will not tolerate a QUICKLYNCH on day one, and we must discuss alternative lynches. Day 1 is the most informative day of all. We're not letting the scum rob us of it. Not on my watch.

Huh? Do you seriously believe this? You seriously would discuss 'alternative lynches' to a 100% bona-fide scum player on day one just to "get more information?" Are you trolling?

Because that's a really stupid way to think. Who cares about "information" on day one?

What does that even mean?

DGB is making sense here. When Day 1 turns into a quick lynch, we have almost nothing for Day 2. You can always look at the lynch wagon, but that's about it.

[qwints]

Lynch him or not, I will not tolerate a QUICKLYNCH on day one, and we must discuss alternative lynches. Day 1 is the most informative day of all. We're not letting the scum rob us of it. Not on my watch.

Huh? Do you seriously believe this? You seriously would discuss 'alternative lynches' to a 100% bona-fide scum player on day one just to "get more information?" Are you trolling?

Because that's a really stupid way to think. Who cares about "information" on day one?

What does that even mean?

vote sam.samhorn

This must be the most anti-town post I've ever seen.

[Thestatusquo]

To quote vollkan "Quicklynch is the equivalent of the mafia boogey man."

Its big and scary but it pretty much never actually happens, so I get kind of suspicious of people who trot it up as a means to attack a wagon.

In addition, I would hardly call a wagon where a player has had time to claim, unclaim, and then claim something else before getting lynched a "quicklynch"

[zwetschenwasser]

Oi!

Unvote; Vote Sam

[Yosarian2]

You already came out and said that you have information to believe that he is town. If you have said information, you not releasing it is hurting the town. Call it rolefishing, but no one is going to believe you until you explain it fully.

That would require a full roleclaim, which I'm not giving.
No, not releasing the info is not bad for the town, it's bad for the scum's ability to decide if I'm worth nightkilling or not.

I don't need or want a roleclaim from you, but it would be useful to know if you mean, say, you believe his role flavor for reasons related to your role flavor, or something.

Zwet: You know, you still haven't really explained the vote on TSQ, and now you're making another OMGUS vote without any reasoning? If you do have some kind of pro-town reason to suspect Sam, I'd like to hear it.

[DrippingGoofball]

I think TSQ is scum.

He is not his measured, intelligent, considerate self. The 'logic' he displays is what I call 'partial logic.' He makes logical arguments that serve his cause, and willfully ignores the

more obvious

logical arguments that go against it. A quick read give a rough impression of tunnel visioning. But TSQ is too smart for this common human pitfall; I think he's doing it on purpose. His pronouncements are painted in stark black and white, and feel very calculated.

This leads me to suspect that rather than hunt scum, he's but a vassal to a scum agenda. I very much doubt that I will convince anyone with points this subtle, given the elephants in the room. However I wish to urge everyone to use their wits and not allow TSQ to pull the wool over their eyes.

[zwetschenwasser]

TSQ seems logical to me, just a little too trigger-happy. Sam's last post is why I voted him.

[DrippingGoofball]

TSQ seems logical to me.

Appearance can be deceiving. You'll have to start thinking a layer deeper.

[zwetschenwasser]

.......

Scalpel please.

[DrippingGoofball]

Scalpel please.

Sorry, I didn't prepare one, doc. Can we use the blowtorch? It will cauterize and sterilize as it 'cuts.'

[Kmd4390]

So the case on Sam is not caring about information? And the case on TSQ is that he's intentionally ignoring good logic?

I honestly don't think scum would come right out and say something like what Sam did just because of alignment. The argument on TSQ though, I can buy. Still think a Zwet lynch is better, but if that's not going to happen, I'm prepared to switch to TSQ.

[Caboose]

You already came out and said that you have information to believe that he is town. If you have said information, you not releasing it is hurting the town. Call it rolefishing, but no one is going to believe you until you explain it fully.

That would require a full roleclaim, which I'm not giving.
No, not releasing the info is not bad for the town, it's bad for the scum's ability to decide if I'm worth nightkilling or not.

I don't need or want a roleclaim from you, but it would be useful to know if you mean, say, you believe his role flavor for reasons related to your role flavor, or something.

Zwet: You know, you still haven't really explained the vote on TSQ, and now you're making another OMGUS vote without any reasoning? If you do have some kind of pro-town reason to suspect Sam, I'd like to hear it.

From zwet's precise choice of words when responding to questions about his role, I am about 99% certain that he's telling the truth and that he's town.

[zwetschenwasser]

I don't see the case on Jebus or TSQ, but Sam's post is definitely at the very least a Freudian slip.

[scotmany12]

TSQ seems logical to me, just a little too trigger-happy. Sam's last post is why I voted him.

I don't see the case on Jebus or TSQ, but Sam's post is definitely at the very least a Freudian slip.

Did you not just call TSQ scum three pages ago? And did you not just vote him last page because he "knew your meta?" Seriously, what the fuck is going on in your mind. Did you just happen to forget that you called TSQ scum?