Mafiascum.net

Spolium In the games that you've been in (lets say on this site for simplicity reasons) how do you usually get out of the random voting stage?

Zilla wrote:From my read on Nightfall, he hasn't been very pro-town at all, and has contributed little.

Ouch
I went after people I thought were scummy and then defended my reasons for thinking they were scummy. I'm not sure what else I could have done...

Woah, wrong person. Nightfall actually has contributed a bit, though he does spend most of his time defending rather than analyzing. His big posts are just answers to accusations. They're not exactly pro-town any more than a well-crafted scum defense.

However, he does make some cases. He doesn't advocate them very much though, and that's concerning, especially in early game. He has thrown in some advice, but it seems so soft...

Still, I was thinking of someone else.

Jebus, that's who I was thinking of. He hasn't contributed much, and I don't like the hypocrisy in calling out Alabaska on it, when they both have about the same level of activity.

Nightfall wrote:Spolium In the games that you've been in (lets say on this site for simplicity reasons) how do you usually get out of the random voting stage?

Any number of ways. One I've seen a lot of recently is people taking a stance against the RVS itself, which seems to pull conversation right out. Purposefully dropped scumtells/bold statements/declarations of policy vote on a given player all seem to be effective too.

IME though, it is usually the case that someone will mistakenly say something that is perceived as suspicious, and conversation branches off from there. In fact, other than in this game, I don't think I've ever seen an RVS wagon highlighted as suspicious, which is probably why the as-yet-unsupported claim stands out to me.

Zilla wrote:There's no link to ac1983fan being scum for saying that suspicion on the bandwagon gets us out of RVS.

Not directly, no, but then I never said that was the case.

My point is that you guys are debating minutia that is completely inconsequential to his (or anybody's) alignment. At best, it may improve later games by discussing theory, but at worst, it sidetracks us from finding scum. It doesn't matter how we got out of RVS. The point of the matter is that he suspects the bandwagon that formed "randomly." It's a valid thing to express, no matter whether it's part of RVS or not. Your backlash against his claim that that gets real discussion going is pointless.

I propose we pressure lurkers back into the game, and I'd like to start with the people who haven't contributed much in their posts anyway, hence Alabaska.

V/LA is taking longer than I thought.

now that drama is over i'll be able to post

tomorrow for sure

I don't think you see what I'm getting at Zilla, but I'll settle for continuing to find those unsupported declarations suspicious for now.

alabaska wrote:now that drama is over i'll be able to post

That's the worst reason not to post that I've ever seen.

Deadline is tomorrow guys.
Everybody should vote before then.

Ac is off the hook for now, but Ooba/gamma is not.



In a game where almost everyone has been lurking, ooba posted ONCE.

also, Ooba did nothing to alay the suspicions of gammas hammer in day one, or the breakdown that was quoted before which seemed suspicious.

At this point in the game (final hours before deadline) we need to TRY to lynch someone cause we have a fair chance of hitting scum just as much as we do of lynching a townie.

(im not gonna do the math, but with very little in the way of strong arguements towards someones scumminess, I have to go back to the scummy behavior of someone who left the game.)

We should not let this day go by with a no lynch. we need to try to lynch a scum, or we will be in the same position tomorrow, with what will most likely be one less townie.

Grimmy

If you want to try to lynch somebody, why aren't you voting Alabaska?

I would be extremely critical of you should Alabaska come up scum...

Zilla wrote:I propose we pressure lurkers back into the game, and I'd like to start with the people who haven't contributed much in their posts anyway, hence Alabaska.

if it is for this reason, then I would be a hypocrite when my work flow outweighs my mafia time and I post rarely.

grimmy
answering (sort of) the zillaquestion.

Who else is not voting and who are our lynch options at this point?

Spolium wrote:I don't think you see what I'm getting at Zilla, but I'll settle for continuing to find those unsupported declarations suspicious for now.

alabaska wrote:now that drama is over i'll be able to post

That's the worst reason not to post that I've ever seen.

FoS: alabaska

as in my high school state drama competition? sheesh we had rehearsals everyday for like 4+ hours leading up to the contest. just cuz you aren't a lover of the arts doesn't mean they don't take up time

ac1983fan wrote:Haven't I already stated my reasons? To clarify: Asking for analysis when giving none of his own, voting for nightfall to "spice things up" or whatever, when I find Nightfall to be pro-town and trying to end a distracting conversation.

just because i'm not analyzing doesn't mean other people aren't too.

and i gave reasons for voting nightfall thank you very much, and i'm sorry you think he is the epitome of townieness (although you've waited until trying to make a half-assed case against me to state this), but i disagree.

How do you disagree? Your reasons have been poorly communicated, IMO.

Grimmy wrote:At this point in the game (final hours before deadline) we need to TRY to lynch someone cause we have a fair chance of hitting scum just as much as we do of lynching a townie.

I don't understand how your fear of being hypocritical outweighs this. In fact, for putting his own image above lynching possible scum.

Alabaska J wrote:

vote: Nightfall

that should spur things a bit i think

This is your reason?

In fact, if you look back at Alabaska, many times he seems to support Nightfall in Nightfall vs Spoilum, and generally disagrees with Spoilum's case.

Alabaska, I've thought you were scummy for a while. I feel like you're scum. I have nothing else to go on except for your active lurkiness.

Alabaska J wrote: and i gave reasons for voting nightfall thank you very much,

To be honest Alabaska I thought you're vote was more of a joke vote on me. And the only reason I know of that you're voting me is the one Zilla quoted below -> to spur "things" (which I took to have meant conversation but maybe I was wrong...)

Zilla wrote:

Alabaska J wrote:

vote: Nightfall

that should spur things a bit i think

This is your reason?

FOS Alabaska

Sorry, just re-read 337-340 where you explained your thoughts further, but to me both of your entries in that block of posts sound like you're trying to come up with an excuse to keep your vote on me.

^ That's what got me interested in Alabaska in the first place. His original vote seemed like it was just tossed out there, and then he tried justifying it one way, and that was disproven, then he said it was for an entirely different reason. I don't like the way he has switched his reasoning.