Page 23 of 38

Posted: Sat Feb 14, 2015 6:47 pm
by Herodotus
Adjustments based on direct vettrock ISO:

I think Morgan is more townie than ever. 158
Teapot also looks good. 184

vettrock wrote:
BBmolla wrote:
TheCow wrote:Food for thought: would Mafia vote on a day one lynch, when they run the risk of being killed by the D1 Vengeance?

And I mean like

really
I saw that the first time, and meant to comment, but I forgot about it. This looks like newbscum trying to get a hint from town as to how they should vote to avoid suspicion. Probably would have been better asked in the scum PT instead.

Significant to reading TheCow, but I'm not sure if it was a slip (i.e. telling thecow they should have posted in their PT) or slinging mud ("looks like newbscum").

+ a small amount of scumpoints to texcat for an indirect defense. 507

+ a small amount of townpoints to cow, slimer, teapot. 518

Posted: Sat Feb 14, 2015 6:53 pm
by Morgan
ABR has all my love.

I'll get back into this game either later tonight or tomorrow.

Posted: Sat Feb 14, 2015 6:54 pm
by Herodotus
In case it wasn't clear, I didn't realize Albert thought he had self-hammered. He had been talking about venge killing for days, I thought he was just threatening Sup.

Posted: Sat Feb 14, 2015 6:57 pm
by Morgan
Herodotus, explain why I should care about those post numbers.

Posted: Sat Feb 14, 2015 7:06 pm
by Herodotus
In 158, I don't feel like that's how one responds to a scum-buddy, so you get town credit.

Vettrock 184 is a very OMGUSy response to Teapot, which makes me like Teapot.

Vettrock 507 took some wind out of the counterwagon on texcat while trying to stay neutral on her alignment.

Vet 518 tried to direct the vig. He could have included a buddy, so it's only a small amount of townpoints.

VOTE: texcat

Posted: Sat Feb 14, 2015 8:13 pm
by theslimer3
I really wasn't expecting a kill untill like day 2 or something. Interesting o.o

archaebob wrote:Yeah ok fine.

unvote


The only problem (and I mean the
only
problem) with lynching TheCow is the vig shot.

In other news, I think Teapot is probably town.


archaebob wrote:
vote Albert B. Rampage


I enjoyed my brief escapist fantasy of town-Albert, backed into a corner, pulling a scum lynch from the jaws of death with an awesomer-than-thou last possible second flash wagon, but this still needs to be the lynch.

I want TheCow tomorrow, and possibly pisskop.

I think in this there's a reason for the Vig shot. I really don't understand why that shot was fired.

Herodotus wrote:All of the above still applies; I think the person we lynch shouldn't kill either Teapot or Albert, but there is no more reason to be secretive about this strategy.
Herodotus wrote:
I'll sheep vettrock.

UNVOTE:
VOTE: Albert
Going through your posts, I don't see what made you change your mind here. Is it the fact that Albert decided he wasn't going to kill you or...?


pisskop wrote:Quick. Check 'last visited' dates on profiles

its not guarentteed, but . . . Texcat last visited 0020.
Outside information... Useful, but is it inadmissible?
It's enough for me to think it's true, but who else did you look up as well? Or was that the only person you decided to check?

Wisdom wrote:
Albert B. Rampage
was lynched D1! He was a
Townie
.


He doesn't go down without a fight though! He manages to kill one of his attackers.

vettrock
was vengekilled D1! He was a
Mafia Goon

Sup-Zero wrote:good shot

Posted: Sat Feb 14, 2015 8:44 pm
by Teapot
VOTE: Herodotus

Posted: Sat Feb 14, 2015 8:46 pm
by Teapot
Herodotus wrote:@Sup: My concern is that you didn't say much to them or pressure them while they were around. So I don't understand the vote or how you were paying attention to Astinus.

I'll sheep vettrock.

UNVOTE:
VOTE: Albert

Preview edit: threadsplosion and votes.
My vote is L-1
, including a self-vote.


I like the new ISO feature, but I keep clicking on posts to see them in context, then clicking on new ISO's, then new posts from those new ISO's. It's like that website that it's poor etiquette to link to. Trying to read Albert in ISO this happens even more because he tends not to quote or name the person he's talking to.

Scummy vote right here, lynch it with fire. I must apologise Albert, I was wrong.
Texcat's probaly a mislynch he's pushing, we'll see when he flips.

Posted: Sat Feb 14, 2015 8:48 pm
by Teapot
Herodotus wrote:In case it wasn't clear, I didn't realize Albert thought he had self-hammered. He had been talking about venge killing for days, I thought he was just threatening Sup.

You said in your post "Counting self vote", you're ****** lying.

Posted: Sat Feb 14, 2015 9:04 pm
by Wisdom
TheCow has been prodded.

Posted: Sat Feb 14, 2015 9:05 pm
by Herodotus
@Teapot, I thought he put himself at L-2.

@Teapot, do you understand now why tunneling is bad?


theslimer3 wrote:
Herodotus wrote:All of the above still applies; I think the person we lynch shouldn't kill either Teapot or Albert, but there is no more reason to be secretive about this strategy.
Herodotus wrote:
I'll sheep vettrock.

UNVOTE:
VOTE: Albert
Going through your posts, I don't see what made you change your mind here. Is it the fact that Albert decided he wasn't going to kill you or...?

There is no contradiction. Before archaebob was killed, I was voting for Albert because I thought if he was town he might shoot someone other than Teapot, and if he was scum, hooray. He did shoot someone other than Teapot.

Posted: Sat Feb 14, 2015 9:47 pm
by Herodotus
@theslimer3, I may have misunderstood your question. When I thought I was putting Albert at L-2, vettrock was starting to give me town-feelings, so after their vote I went back and read Albert in ISO. Nothing popped out but he seemed acceptable for a combination of: the possibility that he was scum, the information it might provide, and the above-average vengekill possibility. After I saw there was another vote on him, I almost deleted the vote from my post, but I counted the votes very carefully, and there were only five. When I saw that Albert had self-voted again, I decided I was sick of the WIFOM, so I put the vote back into my post with the warning about L-1. Only I thought it was going to take 7 votes to lynch, but it only took 6.

Posted: Sun Feb 15, 2015 12:09 am
by pisskop
vote:texcat

Posted: Sun Feb 15, 2015 1:15 am
by BBmolla
VOTE: herodotus

Posted: Sun Feb 15, 2015 1:16 am
by BBmolla
I'm not opposed to texcat

I was insanely off on vettrock but I know why.

Posted: Sun Feb 15, 2015 2:17 am
by pisskop

pisskop wrote:Quick. Check 'last visited' dates on profiles

its not guarentteed, but . . . Texcat last visited 0020.
Outside information... Useful, but is it inadmissible?
It's enough for me to think it's true, but who else did you look up as well? Or was that the only person you decided to check?

I checked everyone on pages 1, 2, 3.

Only other lead was Sup, and he logged in at 2330 and posted here. I also think Sup kinda scummy too.

Lets kill Texcat!

Posted: Sun Feb 15, 2015 2:18 am
by pisskop
Also, how do you question the validity of it and then ask me for more?

Posted: Sun Feb 15, 2015 3:55 am
by Herodotus
pisskop wrote:I checked everyone on pages 1, 2, 3.

You may have missed Morgan. BBMolla was also logged in during that time but didn't have a post on page 1-3 for you to follow because replacement.
Slimer3, Albert, and vettrock I remember were all set to not reveal. I don't remember about theCow.

Posted: Sun Feb 15, 2015 5:58 am
by TheCow
I guess that Vengekill thing paid off. At work, will get a good post out after.

Posted: Sun Feb 15, 2015 1:45 pm
by Herodotus
Teapot, how much have you thought about your vote? Have you reasoned out the idea of my being scum, or are you policy voting because I said Albert was at L-1 when that was not true?

Posted: Sun Feb 15, 2015 7:27 pm
by Herodotus
Are people just waiting for others to post?

BBMolla, do you keep a Mafiascum tab open 24/7 like texcat says she does?

Morgan, which of my comments on Vett's ISO do you agree with? Which do you disagree with?

Posted: Sun Feb 15, 2015 8:03 pm
by pisskop
Herodotus wrote:Are people just open 24/7 like texcat says she does?

Yea about her weaksauce statement . . .

Unless her computer logs her out of MS, reboots, then opens up her IE, navigates back to IE, and liogs her back in 10 minutes before a dayshot while it watches over her Im calling shenanigans.

Im imaging a cartoon cat sleeping while the glow of her comuter is sinisterly cast upon her face.
The computer conducted the dayshot! OooooooooO!
.

Posted: Sun Feb 15, 2015 10:21 pm
by BBmolla
Yeah I do

Posted: Mon Feb 16, 2015 5:14 am
by texcat
This game has become a lot less fun now that I am under suspicion for something I can't defend myself against.

TheCow wrote:I guess that Vengekill thing paid off. At work, will get a good post out after.


VOTE: TheCow

Posted: Mon Feb 16, 2015 8:02 am
by Morgan
Stop using log in times to determine in-game behavior.

Herodotus wrote:Morgan, which of my comments on Vett's ISO do you agree with? Which do you disagree with?

Herodotus wrote:In 158, I don't feel like that's how one responds to a scum-buddy, so you get town credit.


Okay.

Herodotus wrote:Vettrock 184 is a very OMGUSy response to Teapot, which makes me like Teapot.


How was it OMGUSy? vettrock complained and tried to shift attention back to ABR.

I don't feel any particular way about the rest of your points.

Another question for townies:

What do you think of scum!Sup-Zero?