|
|
|
|
| View previous topic :: View next topic |
| Author |
Message |
mith
Pitbull of Truth
|
 Posted: Mon Oct 11, 2010 9:55 pm Post subject: 481 |
 |
|
Vote Count: 5 to lynch.
Internet Stranger: 3 (Zag, Alfie, Sofis)
Zag: 2 (Mackay, Elayne)
mole: 1 (Internet Stranger)
Not Voting: 3 (Antrax, Quailman, mole) |
|
| Back to top |
|
 |
Internet Stranger
Paragon of Mafia Hunters
|
| Posted: Tue Oct 12, 2010 2:11 am Post subject: 482 |
|
|
Not that Mith put up the vote count, its so easy to see that only the ravenous idiots are the ones voting for me.
Why? Because the scum (Antrax and Mole) know that they are toast once the others realize that I was right yet again.
If Antrax and Mole vote for me and prove my innocence, the jig is up. Why do you think everyone is trying to set up tomorrow's lynch already?
(Hint: Its because im innocent.)
Antrax knows that he can manipulate the three stooges to do his bidding. But Elayne and Mackay are to clever to fall for it and Quail was off playing with 15,000 boys (Sofis may have been one of the boys).
Oh yea... where did Mole go? His vocal partner (Antrax) starts posting again, so Mole can slink back into the shadows.
I am so, so, so right. But jealousy and fear of looking stupid is holding you all back. Just admit it, I got this nailed down and you dont. Lets finish this off now.
_________________
"I didn't know she was your sister I swear!"
www.InternetStranger.com |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
mole
Subterranean Member
|
| Posted: Tue Oct 12, 2010 2:22 am Post subject: 483 |
|
|
Don't worry Zag, your association with IS has only been a very small factor in my conclusion that you're scum.
| Zag wrote: |
| In this game, other than my accusations of IS (which are hardly subtle), I have not done what a number of people have done against me, which is to keep bringing up the same issues over and over. That's just a tactic to get the name out there, associated with something everyone found suspicious. Without realizing it, people end up thinking, oh yeah, I already suspected him, and, yeah, I found that suspicious, I'm sure he's scum. |
That was probably directed at me, among others. If I'm repeating the same points, then it's because you haven't responded adequately to them. I want answers, I didn't get them yesterday and I'm still not getting them. I realise there's a lot you need to account for, but what else do you expect me to do? |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
mole
Subterranean Member
|
| Posted: Tue Oct 12, 2010 2:28 am Post subject: 484 |
|
|
Hi IS!
The reason I haven't been posting so much recently is because sometimes I like to sleep. I know it's a tough concept for a Paragon of Mafia Hunters like you to grasp, since you're sniffing out mafia 24/7, but please try to understand what we mere mortals are going through. |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
Internet Stranger
Paragon of Mafia Hunters
|
| Posted: Tue Oct 12, 2010 2:39 am Post subject: 485 |
|
|
Fee-fi-fo-fum,
I smell me some scum.
Be me nightkilled or he be lynched
I will vote until he is dead
_________________
"I didn't know she was your sister I swear!"
www.InternetStranger.com |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
mole
Subterranean Member
|
| Posted: Tue Oct 12, 2010 2:55 am Post subject: 486 |
|
|
I also have a question for Alfie.
| Alfie wrote: |
| Either we're uncommonly unlucky (or unskilled) or there are only a few mafia. Either way, I'm not sure it changes our strategy. Each day, we try to lynch a target that has the most chance of being scum. |
Can you elaborate on this? You didn't vote on the Amb or DP bandwagons, do you think that they had the most chance of being scum? What do you think went wrong, to make us fall into the scum-trap, as you put it?
Sofis: If there's a third scum then who do you think it is? |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
Elayne
*gets sappy with L'lanmal*
|
| Posted: Tue Oct 12, 2010 4:06 am Post subject: 487 |
|
|
Wow post 482 was classic IS. I had to laugh at it.
Sofis: You asked why Zag before IS? Because I think there is a chance that IS voting for DP was pure unadulterated arrogence on his part. He has always claimed there are two mafia. So maybe he really did think he could sacrifice DP and lure out the mafia and play the hero. It would fit with some of the other crazy stuff we have seen in the game (fmb logic puzzle, amb claiming Sofis etc) and be in character for IS.
Do I think it more likely IS is scum? Yes, but I feel more confident about Zag being scum then I do IS. If people low on my scum probablity list would prefer to lynch IS first, I can live with it. |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
Mackay
Saviour of Spiders
|
| Posted: Tue Oct 12, 2010 5:31 am Post subject: 488 |
|
|
Zag: You're lying to the town again. Saying that my arguments don't hold up doesn't make it true, and I refuted your laughable responses last page. The only one of those which held up is the irrefutable "I changed my mind". Sorry you don't agree with my methods, but maybe the fact that you're apparently so morally opposed to repeating things is the reason you look like a squirming scum who can't answer the same question the same way twice. 
Alfie: I disagree that all coherent guilty-Zag theories include a guilty IS. For instance:
"Elayne, Antrax, and Zag are mafia. IS hammers DP, they celebrate overnight and then decide that Zag should lead the charge for what should be an easy lynch of IS the next day - if it doesn't work the other two haven't gotten their hands dirty (Ant has agonised over lynching IS like a true red-blooded townie, and Elayne had a vote on Zag! Would a scum do that? *wink wink*). Of course this risks a Zag lynch, but he is kind of a liability to the mafia at this point anyway." (I'd almost call that an argument for keeping him alive if it weren't for the rich mine of information his post history provides once he's a confirmed scum) =D
Less likely IMO, but certainly not negligible and definitely coherent. I'm gonna stick to the guy who I know has been lying to the town (an even more anti-town action than the hammering of DP). |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
Antrax
ESL Student
|
| Posted: Tue Oct 12, 2010 6:43 am Post subject: 489 |
|
|
| Quote: |
| This is why I was successful as scum, in the first two games I played. I tried to get people's names out there along with the word "scummy" or "suspicious" as many times as possible without seeming to do it. I do realize that this looks very much like a townie who is trying to relate his real suspicions. That's why it was only half a point. |
That's so interesting that you say that. Do you remember what started this discussion? Oh yeah, it was me asking you why you keep claiming I'm scummy without explaining the reasoning that supposedly makes my actions so. I admit I didn't expect so direct an answer, but thanks.
| Quote: |
| Of course, what I really don't think is that I would have supported him so obviously yesterday, if we were scum together. That would not be a very smart mafia move |
No offense, but I don't think you're a very smart mafia player yet. I think you're a very smart individual, but I don't think you have a lot of experience playing mafia, which is why I went after you for mistakes rookie scum would make.
I would argue more, but it's kind of pointless. You practically admit that how you play as mafia is how you're playing right now. That's the most sure I can be that you're scum. If you play the same as scum as you do when you're town, more power to you, that's what most of us try to do, except then we don't attack others for behaving in that same way. Logically, either your attack means nothing (because people would play this way as innocents) or you're practically claiming scum. Since both are scummy (mounting meaningless attacks is basically all scum do during the day, except when they're failing to bus their partner quickly).
Now for "obvious math corner": based on the vote count, if there are four scum alive, then either:
a) IS and Zag are mafia, or
b) IS is innocent, mole, Zag, Alfie and Sofis are all mafia, or
b) Zag is innocent, Elayne and Mackay are mafia, and either mole or IS are mafia.
So, currently if forced to vote, I would actually go for Zag over IS because it's a safer play (he's mafia in 2/3 scenarios), and besides, if Mackay is mafia, then I will do something extreme after the game to reward her excellent play, seriously.
Besides all that, Zag condemns himself more with every post he makes. I've noticed before that he's trying to lure out cops or elicit role claims, and gave him the benefit of the doubt. He indeed stopped with those particular things - but didn't stop with acting anti-town.
_________________
After years of disappointment with get rich quick schemes, I know I'm gonna get rich with this scheme. And quick! |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
Mackay
Saviour of Spiders
|
| Posted: Tue Oct 12, 2010 7:42 am Post subject: 490 |
|
|
| Antrax wrote: |
| if Mackay is mafia, then I will do something extreme after the game to reward her excellent play, seriously. |
Now I wish I were |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
Zag
Tired of his old title
|
| Posted: Tue Oct 12, 2010 1:15 pm Post subject: 491 |
|
|
| Mackay wrote: |
| Zag: You're lying to the town again. Saying that my arguments don't hold up doesn't make it true, and I refuted your laughable responses last page. The only one of those which held up is the irrefutable "I changed my mind". |
Now who is lying?
I'll go one by one, since you are so set in your mind that you clearly aren't reading my notes anymore. First, you claimed that I had not said in this thread that I was going back to the scum-o-meter.
| Mackay wrote: |
| 1) The fact that you're claiming to have made your excuse about the scum-o-meter previously means that you probably have. Either I missed it, or you did it outside the thread. |
If this were true, I agree it would be damning. The fact that I have shown incontrovertibly that it isn't and you still keep trying to claim it is -- well, that's a scum tactic.
| Zag, in post 423 wrote: |
| In a complete reversal of yesterday, I am turning the scum-o-meter back on and I'm giving 100 scum points to IS. |
|
|
| Back to top |
|
|
Zag
Tired of his old title
|
| Posted: Tue Oct 12, 2010 1:21 pm Post subject: 492 |
|
|
And by "set in your mind" of course, I mean, "scum trying to perpetuate untruths."
What's amazing is that Mackay is obviously trying to derail the lynching of Internet Stranger. Is there seriously anyone who doesn't think he is scum?
I have been wondering who the third scum was, after IS and Mackay. I was thinking it was mole, but now I have to apologize for that. (Sorry, mole) The third scum has reared her ugly head, by trying to find a way to DEFEND the obvious scum hammer.
| Elayne wrote: |
| I think there is a chance that IS voting for DP was pure unadulterated arrogence on his part. He has always claimed there are two mafia. So maybe he really did think he could sacrifice DP and lure out the mafia and play the hero. |
|
|
| Back to top |
|
|
Zag
Tired of his old title
|
| Posted: Tue Oct 12, 2010 1:22 pm Post subject: 493 |
|
|
Ack. Hit submit too soon.
So the scum team is IS, Mackay, and Elayne. |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
Antrax
ESL Student
|
| Posted: Tue Oct 12, 2010 1:26 pm Post subject: 494 |
|
|
I thought I was scummy, no? Whatever happened to that?
_________________
After years of disappointment with get rich quick schemes, I know I'm gonna get rich with this scheme. And quick! |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
Zag
Tired of his old title
|
| Posted: Tue Oct 12, 2010 3:56 pm Post subject: 495 |
|
|
| Antrax wrote: |
| I thought I was scummy, no? Whatever happened to that? |
Well, I did find some things you did which I thought were suspicious, and I stated them. I don't quite understand why you say I didn't justify it. Here's one: (And I'll caution everyone that I've already said this. Don't count it twice. However, it seems no one is listening to me anymore, anyway. The scum crowd has managed to get their digs in.)
[quote="Zag"Antrax makes a huge post that is all over the place. The most interesting thing he has to say is that he thought Elayne was setting up L'lanmal, but then (if you assume Elayne is scum) the night kill makes no sense. He then jabs a me, with a lot of text, and finally ends up with a vote on DP (the 5th vote on him), saying he is pressing for a claim. He spends a ton of text accusing people (but not really) and then votes for someone else altogether, putting in the 5th vote of an eventual kill. +1 scumminess.[/quote]
How is that not justified? Spending a lot of text saying very little but vague accusations, then throwing in a 5th vote on a person we now know was innocent. Wouldn't you find that scummy? I mean, it's not as telling as the vote IS put on him, but its an indicator.
Just a couple lines later, I added this:
| Zag wrote: |
| Antrax argues with DP, but all good reasons, IMHO. |
If I were trying to provide a slanted view, I would have discounted this, or hyped up the fact that you are arguing with someone we now know was innocent. If I were just trying to paint you as scummy, rather than trying to give honest opinions, that's what I would have done.
Now I remember why I hate this game. I hate the feeling of not knowing what's going on, doing my best to do analyze what I can and speak my mind, and then getting lynched for it. 2 out of 3 times this has happened on day 1. It probably would have happened here if there weren't already factions and rivalries going on by the time I joined. (And the new guy gets a veneer of innocence.) Someday I'll learn to keep my mouth shut, more. Since, as I said, my analyses have not been that great, I probably should, anyway. But it's not in me.
But, hot damn! I just can't believe that IS is getting away with his hammer. And Mackay has so slickly turned everyone on me that even if we lynch him, you all lynch me next. That trade will be worth it to the scum -- easily.
Assume that there are three scum -- This seems most likely to me. If there are 4 it's hopeless anyway (because we would need perfect lynches to the end), and two seems too few. So there's 9 people now. If you lynch IS and me, plus two night-kills, there will be 5 people left, two of which are scum. All it takes then is for one of the three townies to vote for one other, and the two scum jump on it and win.
Whatever. I finally feel like I am sure about a vote -- and my declaration of it has gotten suspicion on me. I guess, once you lynch IS and me, if you then turn on Mackay, at least we'll have a chance. It will be down to 2 vs. 1. At this point, I'll take a posthumous victory. |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
Antrax
ESL Student
|
| Posted: Tue Oct 12, 2010 5:17 pm Post subject: 496 |
|
|
That's really all you have to say? Zag, the man and the walls of text, and after I show how you're acting scummy by your own definition, all you can offer is a feeble "you were pointing fingers at people but then made a different vote" that I already answered to several times?
It's especially ridiculous you're blaming me for being the "fifth vote" on DP. Who cares what vote I was, I am openly admitting I was very for lynching him even when he had zero votes. I said so in day 1, I said so much louder in day 2 and when the bandwagon wasn't hopeless I went with it. I was wrong, but being wrong isn't scummy, unless it's deliberate - but you said yourself you don't think my reasons were contrived. So again that makes no sense except when considering your belief that if you say something often enough, people will subconsciously buy it. Well, good luck with that, but again that makes you scum.
| Quote: |
If I were trying to provide a slanted view, I would have discounted this, or hyped up the fact that you are arguing with someone we now know was innocent. If I were just trying to paint you as scummy, rather than trying to give honest opinions, that's what I would have done.
|
So because only most of what you said is logically inconsistent and means you're acting the way you confess scum would act, that makes it okay?
_________________
After years of disappointment with get rich quick schemes, I know I'm gonna get rich with this scheme. And quick! |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
Alfie
Bovine Member
|
| Posted: Tue Oct 12, 2010 7:15 pm Post subject: 497 |
|
|
| mole wrote: |
I also have a question for Alfie.
| Alfie wrote: |
| Either we're uncommonly unlucky (or unskilled) or there are only a few mafia. Either way, I'm not sure it changes our strategy. Each day, we try to lynch a target that has the most chance of being scum. |
Can you elaborate on this? You didn't vote on the Amb or DP bandwagons, do you think that they had the most chance of being scum? What do you think went wrong, to make us fall into the scum-trap, as you put it? |
I voted for Sofis when Amb went down, though work kept me from noticing most of the craziness with Amb until after it had happened. I'm not sure what I'd have done if I'd been more attentive. I probably would have joined the wagon like everyone else, though. After all, one of those things was not like the others. I would have guessed that Amb didn't know much about other people's roles and was playing it straight hoping the truth was outlandish enough to save him. (I now know that he wasn't, but again, I'm hypothesizing.)
And as for DP, I kinda expected to have more time to vote. You'll note I voted for Sofis early in the day, but unvoted so as not to snip the day short.
In both cases, I voted for the person I thought was most likely to be Scum. My personal hypothesis was that Sofis and IS were scum together and IS's crazy time was both a distancing technique and a way to buy time. Sofis had displayed scummy tendancies early on that more than just myself picked up on.
Since then, more outlandish things have occurred to take the heat off of Sofis. I've not seen anything that would point to his innocence, but IS is really making me think about Sofis' guilt. Perhaps his 'Vocal Partner/Silent Partner' theory is more than a theory, it would seem to fit a Sofis/IS strategy pretty well. He did back of off Sofis awful fast when it looked like things might start going somewhere with Sofis. He hasn't hardly talked about Sofis recently.
My current working theory is this:
IS is scum.
IS distanced himself from Sofis, but not in any way that was dangerous to Sofis, which leads us quickly to Sofis' guilt.
Zag lied to the town and has behaved inconsistently. This feels eminently scummy.
Here are my evidences toward IS' guilt:
- He was the first to suggest a set of precisely 2 scum. Sounds like inside information. (Post 25)
- He jumped on the FMB bandwagon just late enough not to arouse suspicion, but not late enough to draw heat as the hammer. (Post 140)
- He terminates a perfectly good day early without giving DP a chance to respond. IMO, this evidence stands on its own. (Post 418)
- He produces almost nothing but Sofis-noise (and jumping on the end of bandwagons) until post 427. This seems like a clever way to 'lay low' without actually laying low. We have very little to analyze from him. (Post 427)
- He is talking about a Silent Partner and a Vocal Partner. This may be a tell from his own strategy. (Post 435, among others)
When I look at the body of evidence, I can only come to one conclusion. IS is scum. I'm not playing some kind of deep mind game, I'm looking at people's actions and coming to conclusions from them.
As for Sofis, I think he's scum, too, but since one of the major reasons I think that is his association with IS, it makes sense to go with IS first.
I've been rereading Zag's posts as well, though. It seems possible that he just made some strange plays. I'll admit to wondering early on if IS was a cop. Antrax (among others) made it very clear that 'talking about copness' was taboo, especially early on. If I'd been truly convinced that IS was a cop, I might have done the same thing to avoid condemning him to an immediate night kill. That might also explain the viciousness of the attack, Zag may feel somewhat betrayed. Nevertheless, Occam's Razor still applies to some extent: If it looks scummy, it probably is. Zag is on my scumlist, though I think he's behind IS and Sofis in probability.
In any case, I don't have to think too hard about Sofis, Zag, Antrax or Elayne. We only need to lynch one scum at a time.
As for what "went wrong", I don't really know. In retrospect, I can say that we discounted IS because he was acting crazy and Sofis because he was staying quieter than some other people. Basically, we had scummy-looking townspeople, so we lynched them. (Special Request To Fellow Townsfolk: Please don't act scummy unless you are scum. Thank you.  ) I mean, FMB was playing strange riddle-games, Amb lied about his role to make himself look more guilty, DP refused to defend himself. I didn't join all these lynches, but I see why they were lynched.
But we can end that streak now. IS is the MPS (Most Probable Scum), so we lynch him. |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
Zag
Tired of his old title
|
| Posted: Tue Oct 12, 2010 10:18 pm Post subject: 498 |
|
|
| Antrax wrote: |
| That's really all you have to say? Zag, the man and the walls of text, and after I show how you're acting scummy by your own definition, all you can offer is a feeble "you were pointing fingers at people but then made a different vote" that I already answered to several times. |
I was just responding to your specific question. Since you kept asking it, I kept answering it. The fact that you asked again didn't change my answer.
To answer your second question, I don't believe I have behaved that way. I've tried to say exactly what I've seen that I was suspicious of. When you analyze post by post, you are inevitably going to end up with a wall of text. But it isn't a big lump of vagueness, it was a lot of small specifics. There are only a couple of times that I said, "I don't know why this feel scummy to me, but it does." Everything else was specific. This was just me writing the truth.
But it seems that you've made up your mind and aren't listening anymore. I don't know why I bother.
By the way, I know that you, Sofis, and mole both ended up with 3 points on my rating, at the point where I stopped. However, I am absolutely sure that one of you, and probably two of you, are innocent. By the fourth day, I don't consider 3 to be a very significant score, because I am less likely to deduct points than to add them. |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
Internet Stranger
Paragon of Mafia Hunters
|
| Posted: Wed Oct 13, 2010 12:52 am Post subject: 499 |
|
|
The scum are ANTRAX and MOLE.
All this psychoanalyzing is just a bunch of pseudobabble. You all have NO idea what youre talking about.
But I do.
The scum are ANTRAX and MOLE.
_________________
"I didn't know she was your sister I swear!"
www.InternetStranger.com |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
mole
Subterranean Member
|
| Posted: Wed Oct 13, 2010 1:03 am Post subject: 500 |
|
|
| Zag wrote: |
| Now I remember why I hate this game. I hate the feeling of not knowing what's going on, doing my best to do analyze what I can and speak my mind, and then getting lynched for it. 2 out of 3 times this has happened on day 1. It probably would have happened here if there weren't already factions and rivalries going on by the time I joined. (And the new guy gets a veneer of innocence.) Someday I'll learn to keep my mouth shut, more. Since, as I said, my analyses have not been that great, I probably should, anyway. But it's not in me. |
No, you don't want to do that! In this game, keeping your mouth shut yesterday, when we knew you were capable of more, was what got you into this mess! I don't know why you felt the need to switch your style of playing so suddenly -- at the start of Day 3 you were just one of a number of people who thought Amb was scummy and turned out to be wrong. You didn't stand out until you threw away the scum-o-meter.
I haven't read those games, but in general it's a big mistake for the town lynch someone just because they speak their minds. Townies post things that are "not that great" all the time. Sometimes they even post things that are completely nuts. (See HytoChaz this game). The way to help us figure out if you're lying, or if you're honestly doing your best, is to post more, not to shut up. |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
Zag
Tired of his old title
|
| Posted: Wed Oct 13, 2010 2:23 am Post subject: 501 |
|
|
| Well, it's a good theory, Unfortunately, speaking my mind has gotten me lynched in the first day two out of the three times I was town in games that I was there in the first day. And here it is having gotten me in trouble in this game. Well, I'll take your advice and stick with this approach, since it is all I'm capable of doing, anyway. |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
Mackay
Saviour of Spiders
|
| Posted: Wed Oct 13, 2010 6:22 am Post subject: 502 |
|
|
| Zag wrote: |
| Now who is lying? |
(...it's still you)
| Quote: |
I'll go one by one, since you are so set in your mind that you clearly aren't reading my notes anymore. First, you claimed that I had not said in this thread that I was going back to the scum-o-meter.
| Mackay wrote: |
| 1) The fact that you're claiming to have made your excuse about the scum-o-meter previously means that you probably have. Either I missed it, or you did it outside the thread. |
|
OK, um, I simply didn't say that you hadn't said you were going back to the scum-o-meter. The POST YOU DIRECTLY QUOTED references this!
I said you hadn't previously posted your excuse - the one where you say you lied to the town and 'pretended' to ditch the scum-o-meter to apparently protect IS' cop-hood. The one about which you said "I don't know how many times I have to say this" and then cracked out for the first time. Got it? I wasn't accusing you of not having mentioned the scum-o-meter, I accused you of having a completely bogus excuse about it, claiming to have told me (and Elayne) that bogus excuse multiple times, and then claiming that saying "I am turning the scum-o-meter back on" is equivalent to "I just said so because I wanted to claim some reason for following the person I thought (at the time) was a cop." I can't imagine you don't know this, because we were both asking you about WHY you ditched the scum-o-meter, not whether you had or not.
I then posted your "ditching the scum-o-meter" and "I thought IS was a cop" posts side-by-side to prove how ridiculous it was that you were claiming that you had told us before that you thought you were following a cop, and that you were using that post as 'evidence'. You completely ignored them and declared yourself the winner of the argument, or something. If saying how great you are actually made it true, you and IS would be unstoppable
| Quote: |
| If this were true, I agree it would be damning. The fact that I have shown incontrovertibly that it isn't and you still keep trying to claim it is -- well, that's a scum tactic. |
The only things you have shown incontrovertibly are a willingness to lie to the town and an apparent lack of reading comprehension. (I don't believe the latter is characteristic for you, which is why I assume that you are simply wilfully misinterpreting my posts in the manner of a relatively inexperienced mafioso.) |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
Mackay
Saviour of Spiders
|
| Posted: Wed Oct 13, 2010 6:34 am Post subject: 503 |
|
|
Here's a reminder for everyone about Zag's scum points after day 2 (before he got a chance to consult his fellow scum and make it less obvious  )
Amb: +4 confirmed innocent
Dragon Phoenix: +2 confirmed innocent
L'lanmal: +2 confirmed innocent
Sofis: +2
CzarJ: +2
HyToFry: +1 confirmed innocent
Alfie: +1
mole: +1
Quailman: +1
Antrax: 0
Elayne: -1
IS: -1 |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
Internet Stranger
Paragon of Mafia Hunters
|
| Posted: Wed Oct 13, 2010 11:55 am Post subject: 504 |
|
|
blah blah blah. Im innocent too.
Can we lynch Antrax and Mole now? Do they just not look scummy to anyone else?
_________________
"I didn't know she was your sister I swear!"
www.InternetStranger.com |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
Zag
Tired of his old title
|
| Posted: Wed Oct 13, 2010 12:04 pm Post subject: 505 |
|
|
Mackay, the very first post of this day:
| Zag wrote: |
| I stupidly backed him yesterday, because I thought ... well, never mind what I thought. But Internet Stranger practically confessed with that hammer. |
Is this not obvious that I thought he was a cop? I thought it was -- I consider this to be saying it -- what else could I mean by that.. I didn't want to say anything more specifically about anyone being a cop because Antrax already pointed out that one should do that. I did say it directly later, because I realized I hadn't been clear. I'm out of time, but I'll find it if you need me to.
Anyway, once again I'm trying to convince you, even though I know it is a waste of time. ~looks up definition of insanity again~ |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
Mackay
Saviour of Spiders
|
| Posted: Wed Oct 13, 2010 12:47 pm Post subject: 506 |
|
|
I don't doubt that you acted as though you thought he was a cop - albeit in a way so clumsy that it looks as though you were trying to set him up as a 'cop'. As I said earlier, and you failed to address, you had a scum-o-meter with Sofis on +2 that you could have used, as well as various other people's arguments to agree with/expand upon. Instead, you "ditched" the scum-o-meter, stated outright that you were following IS and offered little to no justification for doing so. (I've been working through your day 2 posts little by little, btw, and you do play with the idea of IS being a cop prior to day 3, so I apologise for calling it sudden - though I have to admit I'm wondering why you told me that you decided that it was the case after Amb's lynch instead of correcting me. Seems a tad... instinctively defensive, but I'll give you the benefit of the doubt in this case - I have been turning the screws pretty hard =] )
The way it looks to me is that you posted scum-o-meter rankings that your teammates weren't happy with, so your kneejerk reaction was to ditch the whole thing. You choice to follow IS could be an indicator of either alignment on IS' part (your building on the impression that IS is a cop*, or your attaching yourself to a townie), but you almost refused outright to use your reasoning from the previous day. It also looks as though you revived it because once a few people asked, you got worried that it looked suspicious. Interestingly, other than your +100 to IS, the biggest swings in points went to the two next lowest scorers, Elayne and Antrax - giving them both +3 points to put them back in the middle of the field, nice and inconspicuous. mole also cops a generous +2.5.
In addition, you were the first to turn around and point the finger of condemnation at IS on day 4 - which is understandable, because hammering DP was an incredibly anti-town action - but I would have expected someone who was apparently convinced that he was cop to maybe give him a bit more benefit of the doubt. As it stands, it looks as though it was a prepared action from the mafia to have one of you lead the lynchwagon - and while it is likely that IS is in on it, it is not a necessary condition. Not only do I feel that you are scummier than IS, but I think that your lynch yields more information.
*It occurs to me that IS could have intentionally been implying without stating outright that he was a cop. In this case, his abandonment of Sofis this game day is extremely telling. |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
mole
Subterranean Member
|
| Posted: Wed Oct 13, 2010 2:00 pm Post subject: 507 |
|
|
You left out part of the story! Everyone says that IS's quick hammer was anti-town, but they don't mention how the mafia benefited from it. The scum knew that DP was innocent even though he was refusing to give us any information. I don't think much would have changed in the three days before the deadline. So what were the mafia so afraid of?
The people (aside from DP, obviously) who were in the hotseat at the end of the day were Zag (after a number of questions from others throughout the day, I had just asked him again to explain what he was trying to do with his vote), and Elayne (Mackay had just joined the game and accused her). My thoughts are that the mafia were worried about Zag's answers for why he was sticking with Sofis. After he slipped up over whether Sofis had roleclaimed, they didn't want to give me a reason to jump off DP and onto him. And then on the next day, the town could follow the bold leadership of Zag mark 3, and finally lynch a scum! After that we'd wonder why we ever suspected him!
-----
Incidentally, I don't think Zag's theory of IS/Mackay/Elayne makes any sense at all if you try to include this point. What's the story of this group? Mackay arrives in the thread, attacks her scum partner, and then the mafia decide to end the day early because their fake argument isn't going as planned? |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
Zag
Tired of his old title
|
| Posted: Wed Oct 13, 2010 5:11 pm Post subject: 508 |
|
|
| Mackay wrote: |
| you do play with the idea of IS being a cop prior to day 3, so I apologise for calling it sudden - though I have to admit I'm wondering why you told me that you decided that it was the case after Amb's lynch instead of correcting me. Seems a tad... instinctively defensive, but I'll give you the benefit of the doubt in this case - I have been turning the screws pretty hard =] ) |
It's simple. I had forgotten that I had even mentioned it. Honestly, I had forgotten that I had even thought it earlier, though that might explain why I slipped into thinking it so easily. The big reason I thought IS was a cop was during the wait for the next day I was bored so I was rereading parts. I was actually trying to figure out where I had gone so wrong in accusing Amb -- I had felt pretty sure about him the previous day. I reread that section in which he claims that IS denied being a cop, and the section it refers to, and I came to exactly the opposite conclusion, that IS WAS hinting at being a cop. I wasn't clever enough to consider him hinting falsely.
And yes, you have. My thumbs really hurt! 
| Mackay wrote: |
| In addition, you were the first to turn around and point the finger of condemnation at IS on day 4 - which is understandable, because hammering DP was an incredibly anti-town action - but I would have expected someone who was apparently convinced that he was cop to maybe give him a bit more benefit of the doubt. |
Again, I had several days to brood about it, this time feeling tricked, so I had my response ready to go. I actually had it written and saved in a PM to myself. I was that ticked off.
I did, as part of my brooding, consider the possibility that the cop I was following also had knowledge of DP, and wanted to finish him before someone unvoted. In fact, it was my first thought. But I discarded this almost immediately -- even before that note I posted telling people to stop talking. I had two reasons: First, the one cop we know about was a one-shot cop. I had speculated earlier (I think you quoted it) that I didn't think there would be a one-shot cop AND a normal cop in the same game. I still don't think so. My belief was that there were two one-shot cops. So IS couldn't have knowledge of both Sofis and DP.
Second (though I didn't think of this one till later), if IS were a normal cop and were sure of DP's guilt, he still wouldn't hammer right away. I would think that the right approach still would be to let him squirm a bit. The bandwagon didn't seem likely to fall apart right away, and DP had said he wouldn't claim (even though that might have been a ploy). Even a cop who has him identified as scum would let him say something and hope that he reveals something about his partners. Of course, anything he would say would be false distancing, but it might at least indicate whom to investigate the next night.
I wrote the note I posted long before the day started, and I copied it over as soon as I saw the thread was open again. It seems like a sudden thing, especially to someone who is reading the thread in order, but remember that I really had a long time to think about it between the hammer and the start of the next day. |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
Zag
Tired of his old title
|
| Posted: Wed Oct 13, 2010 5:32 pm Post subject: 509 |
|
|
I don't think I was that much in the hotseat at the end of day 3. I had you and Antrax (I think) asking me some questions, and an FOS, but no votes on me. I certainly didn't feel terribly threatened. If I had I would have been more cautious on day 4. Honestly, I thought that my behavior was completely justified, I would be able to answer the questions against me, and that would be it. My behavior seemed reasonable to me, because it was honestly what I had thought.
| mole wrote: |
| Incidentally, I don't think Zag's theory of IS/Mackay/Elayne makes any sense at all if you try to include this point. What's the story of this group? Mackay arrives in the thread, attacks her scum partner, and then the mafia decide to end the day early because their fake argument isn't going as planned? |
Yeah, I have to agree. I think my attack on them was mostly a response to the thumbscrews. I felt threatened, I didn't feel it was justified, so I lashed out. If you were I, knowing you are innocent, and you read what Mackay and Elayne said about you, wouldn't you make a similar conclusion? But I agree that the story doesn't hold up. One, maybe both of them even, really is innocent, certainly. I don't like what Mackay has said, and I still feel that some of it is just dead wrong, claiming that I have or haven't said things when I know it isn't true. But I'm not sure there is malice in it.
Mackay has a theory that I rated my supposed scum buddies the lowest, and then was told at night to cut it out. (Sorry, tired of quoting.) I may be inexperienced, but I'm not stupid. I have played enough to know about distancing. I would have worked to put them in the middle of the pack, maybe a little above it, not enough to be suspicious either way. In any case, as somebody pointed out, this aspect of the theory starts with IS being guilty, and we know that he is anyway. Let's string him up, and I'll try to explain tomorrow how the theory doesn't work, in spite of you now having part of the prerequisite. (OK, I'll probably try to say you should lynch Elayne before me, too, but even I am not buying that one.) |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
Internet Stranger
Paragon of Mafia Hunters
|
| Posted: Wed Oct 13, 2010 10:33 pm Post subject: 510 |
|
|
Blah blah blah ANTRAX and MOLE!
_________________
"I didn't know she was your sister I swear!"
www.InternetStranger.com |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
Alfie
Bovine Member
|
| Posted: Wed Oct 13, 2010 10:43 pm Post subject: 511 |
|
|
| mole wrote: |
| You left out part of the story! Everyone says that IS's quick hammer was anti-town, but they don't mention how the mafia benefited from it. The scum knew that DP was innocent even though he was refusing to give us any information. I don't think much would have changed in the three days before the deadline. So what were the mafia so afraid of? |
Not quite. The scum knew he was innocent, but couldn't be sure how innocent. DPs 'refusal to claim' might have just been an attempt to keep people from voting for him just to increase pressure. This would be particularly important if he had an actual role. I maintain that IS was afraid that DP had specific cop (or other) knowledge that he might have shared. After all, DP said, "I'm not at Lynch-1" for a reason. Scum should have been reasonably concerned that he might exonerate (or worse, indict) someone.
In short, I don't think the scum gained much by hammering him quick. But only because he turned out to be a townie. Before the hammer came down, they should have been afraid that he had something to share. |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
Mackay
Saviour of Spiders
|
| Posted: Thu Oct 14, 2010 12:02 am Post subject: 512 |
|
|
| Zag wrote: |
| I don't think I was that much in the hotseat at the end of day 3. I had you and Antrax (I think) asking me some questions, and an FOS, but no votes on me. I certainly didn't feel terribly threatened. If I had I would have been more cautious on day 4. Honestly, I thought that my behavior was completely justified, I would be able to answer the questions against me, and that would be it. My behavior seemed reasonable to me, because it was honestly what I had thought. |
I think that particular theory doesn't require you to feel threatened. It requires IS to think that you are close to being threatened.
| Quote: |
| Yeah, I have to agree. I think my attack on them was mostly a response to the thumbscrews. I felt threatened, I didn't feel it was justified, so I lashed out. If you were I, knowing you are innocent, and you read what Mackay and Elayne said about you, wouldn't you make a similar conclusion? But I agree that the story doesn't hold up. One, maybe both of them even, really is innocent, certainly. I don't like what Mackay has said, and I still feel that some of it is just dead wrong, claiming that I have or haven't said things when I know it isn't true. But I'm not sure there is malice in it. |
While I admit that attacking you is giving me far more enjoyment than I normally get from a game of mafia, it's not due to malice. It's because you post a lot so it's easy to stay really interested, and you squirm beautifully I don't think I have lied about anything you've said though, and you should point it out if I have.
I can't tell if you think I am suspicious or not! Who do you suspect, other than IS?
| Quote: |
| Mackay has a theory that I rated my supposed scum buddies the lowest, and then was told at night to cut it out. (Sorry, tired of quoting.) I may be inexperienced, but I'm not stupid. I have played enough to know about distancing. I would have worked to put them in the middle of the pack, maybe a little above it, not enough to be suspicious either way. |
I'd like to believe you, but from my perspective everyone to whom you gave 2 or more points from day 2 is a confirmed innocent, except Sofis - of whose innocence I am more convinced than anyone else's (still not that much). Admittedly the bottom of the list could be clear too, and all your scum could be 1-pointers, I guess?
| Quote: |
| In any case, as somebody pointed out, this aspect of the theory starts with IS being guilty, and we know that he is anyway. |
Do you mean that someone said that IS being your scumbuddy is a necessary condition for your scum buddies telling you to cut it out? Or are you referring to something more general? |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
Mackay
Saviour of Spiders
|
| Posted: Thu Oct 14, 2010 12:13 am Post subject: 513 |
|
|
| Mackay wrote: |
| While I admit that attacking you is giving me far more enjoyment than I normally get from a game of mafia, it's not due to malice. It's because you post a lot so it's easy to stay really interested, and you squirm beautifully |
I forgot the most important part - the touches of dramatic flair like "Now who is lying?", which still makes me giggle.
But I'm actually posting because I forgot to say "Where's Quailman?".
Where's Quailman? |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
Elayne
*gets sappy with L'lanmal*
|
| Posted: Thu Oct 14, 2010 12:18 am Post subject: 514 |
|
|
| That's what I keep checking for! I wonder if some sort of bird call would work? |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
Zag
Tired of his old title
|
| Posted: Thu Oct 14, 2010 12:50 am Post subject: 515 |
|
|
| Mackay wrote: |
| While I admit that attacking you is giving me far more enjoyment than I normally get from a game of mafia, it's not due to malice. It's because you post a lot so it's easy to stay really interested, and you squirm beautifully I don't think I have lied about anything you've said though, and you should point it out if I have. |
I've pointed out some that I felt were inaccurate, but, other than when the thumbscrews were really hurting, I didn't really think that you were intentionally lying. Even if you are scum, I'm sure you are too clever for that.
BTW, you're welcome for me providing you such entertainment. I wish I knew whether the entertainment was that of a detective on a trail, or that of a scum being glad that some stupid townie is making himself look guilty. I'm sure, for instance, that all the scum found firemeboy's antics on day 1 to be hilarious.
| Mackay wrote: |
| I'd like to believe you, but from my perspective everyone to whom you gave 2 or more points from day 2 is a confirmed innocent, except Sofis - of whose innocence I am more convinced than anyone else's (still not that much). Admittedly the bottom of the list could be clear too, and all your scum could be 1-pointers, I guess? |
Or, I'm just giving my honest opinion, and I'm not very good at sniffing out scum.
| Mackay wrote: |
| Quote: |
| In any case, as somebody pointed out, this aspect of the theory starts with IS being guilty, and we know that he is anyway. |
Do you mean that someone said that IS being your scumbuddy is a necessary condition for your scum buddies telling you to cut it out? Or are you referring to something more general? |
I was just referring to that theory specifically, the one in which I am mafia and was stupid enough to rate my two mafia buddies the lowest on the scum-o-meter. For that specific theory, the mafia team has to be IS, Elayne, and me. Someone else (Antrax? Alfie?) pointed out that finding me guilty based on that reasoning requires IS to be guilty. Since he seems guilty for other reasons, we might as well lynch him, first. I know that it wasn't I who first mentioned that, because I know I didn't think of it. And I also know that this wasn't the only reason you suspected me, but it was one.
| Mackay wrote: |
| I can't tell if you think I am suspicious or not! Who do you suspect, other than IS? |
Well, now you, of course, but that's for bad grammar.
I suspect that one of Antrax and mole is, because IS, in his death throes, is pushing so hard at them. I suspect him of pretending to be distancing and really distancing at the same time. Assuming there are three scum, then with one more townie lynch and then one of the three remaining townie putting in a single vote for another townie, the mafia can just claim victory. He certainly would not be pointing at both his fellow scum, but maybe he would point just one of them. Or maybe neither. I really don't know. And let's not forget his three-day-long distancing effort from Sofis. Was he intentionally nutty enough so he wouldn't be taken seriously? But now I'm only reacting to what IS has been doing. If I think about the past day, I still have both you and Elayne near the top of my list, though I agree with mole that it can't be both of you and might not be either. And then I also suspect Alfie, too (just to complete the list). |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
Zag
Tired of his old title
|
| Posted: Thu Oct 14, 2010 12:54 am Post subject: 516 |
|
|
| Mackay wrote: |
| the touches of dramatic flair like "Now who is lying?", which still makes me giggle. |
I'm glad I made you giggle. I still am not exactly sure what it is you claimed I lied about there. I thought I had given direct contradicting evidence, and you continued to call me a liar. I guess I believe you that you were talking about something else, but I'm still not sure what.
| Mackay wrote: |
But I'm actually posting because I forgot to say "Where's Quailman?".
Where's Quailman? |
Oh yeah, I forgot to include him. I suspect him, too.  |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
Internet Stranger
Paragon of Mafia Hunters
|
| Posted: Thu Oct 14, 2010 1:13 am Post subject: 517 |
|
|
I see Alfie and Zaq as nothing more than yapping chihuahuas trying to bite my ankle.
I think everyone else agrees or else they would have tried to get rid of me already.
You know why they dont? Because they know im innocent!
I think everyone is just waiting on Quailman to come back from his latest NAMBLA field trip (Love you Quail.. err.. I mean, yea. Whatever) and for Antrax to finish ruining his life.
When they come back everyone else will see the light that Antrax and Mole are the scum. Just the fact that they are sitting back and enjoying the Zaq/Mackay slugfest confirms it.
At some point Mackay will get bored and just put a scorpion deathlock on Zaq and that will be the end of it. I seen her in action before, you dont want this. (Hey Mackay, you owe me snogs, btw)
Anyways, can we stop goofing off and hang us some scum now? (Antrax and Mole).
_________________
"I didn't know she was your sister I swear!"
www.InternetStranger.com |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
Sofis
Beautiful and Decadent
|
| Posted: Thu Oct 14, 2010 5:50 am Post subject: 518 |
|
|
| Elayne wrote: |
| Sofis: You asked why Zag before IS? Because I think there is a chance that IS voting for DP was pure unadulterated arrogence on his part. He has always claimed there are two mafia. So maybe he really did think he could sacrifice DP and lure out the mafia and play the hero. It would fit with some of the other crazy stuff we have seen in the game (fmb logic puzzle, amb claiming Sofis etc) and be in character for IS. |
Admittedly, this is plausible.
| mole wrote: |
| Sofis: If there's a third scum then who do you think it is? |
Gods, I don't know. I was never particularly good at this game.
A small thing I picked up on while skimming the thread:
| Internet Stranger wrote: |
Hell yea -1 bitchez!!
I like this Zaq guy. |
| Internet Stranger wrote: |
I like this Zaq guy, he amuses me. I want him to be in every one of my mafiascum-hunting endeavors.
By the way, im -1 bitchez!! I am the Paragon of Mafia Hunters. I got the best innocent score out of anyone here. So if anyone wants to be against me or starts to fear me, its the scum.
They have always quaked in fear when they see my name on the list. Its as if the moderator turns on the IS-signal, like Batman; I get to ride in and save the day.
So, since im like so superior and awesome (I do hold a -1 to prove it), why isnt Sofis lynched yet? |
IS actually calls attention to the low rating Zag gave him, several times. I think this contradicts the idea that Zag was downrating his scumbuddies and they told him to cut it out, as IS, at least, did not seem to mind. |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
Antrax
ESL Student
|
| Posted: Thu Oct 14, 2010 6:04 am Post subject: 519 |
|
|
I'm also waiting for Quailman or a deadline before I vote.
| Zag wrote: |
| I suspect that one of Antrax and mole is, because IS, in his death throes, is pushing so hard at them. I suspect him of pretending to be distancing and really distancing at the same time. Assuming there are three scum, then with one more townie lynch and then one of the three remaining townie putting in a single vote for another townie, the mafia can just claim victory. He certainly would not be pointing at both his fellow scum, but maybe he would point just one of them. Or maybe neither. I really don't know. And let's not forget his three-day-long distancing effort from Sofis. Was he intentionally nutty enough so he wouldn't be taken seriously? But now I'm only reacting to what IS has been doing. If I think about the past day, I still have both you and Elayne near the top of my list, though I agree with mole that it can't be both of you and might not be either. And then I also suspect Alfie, too (just to complete the list). |
Wow, that's really saying a lot without saying anything. Let's dive into this.
| Quote: |
| I suspect that one of Antrax and mole is, because IS, in his death throes, is pushing so hard at them. I suspect him of pretending to be distancing and really distancing at the same time. |
I've been waiting for a while now to see who's going to go for it. IS is clearly setting it up to maximize confusion, and he was probably pretty annoyed that everyone's playing correctly by ignoring everything he says that's not an answer to a question he was asked (in other words, everything he says), but luckily Zag rides to the rescue.
| Quote: |
| Assuming there are three scum, then with one more townie lynch and then one of the three remaining townie putting in a single vote for another townie, the mafia can just claim victory. |
First, let's create a general vibe of analysis by stating the obvious: with 9 players alive, assuming one NK every night, if there are three scum, then one bad lynch puts the town in lynch-or-lose and then let's define lynch or lose just in case it's not obvious despite everyone already discussing it thoroughly today. Now that's quality analysis, almost as good as Alfie's guess from before. Okay, we have the aura of intelligence, let's push the Antrax or mole thing.
| Quote: |
| He certainly would not be pointing at both his fellow scum, but maybe he would point just one of them. Or maybe neither. I really don't know. |
Oh wow. That's quite a conundrum. I'm sure glad you brought it up, in the typical "yes no yes maybe no yes" fashion that plagued your earlier posts. After accusing people of sowing "opinions" out there meant to confuse, you sure seem to have a penchant for stating all probable cases and helping probable scum IS reap the rewards of his deliberately confusing voting patterns.
| Quote: |
| And let's not forget his three-day-long distancing effort from Sofis. Was he intentionally nutty enough so he wouldn't be taken seriously? |
Of course, let's not! Why should we not try to outguess the scum instead of relying on people's actions and posts?
| Quote: |
| But now I'm only reacting to what IS has been doing. If I think about the past day, I still have both you and Elayne near the top of my list, though I agree with mole that it can't be both of you and might not be either. And then I also suspect Alfie, too (just to complete the list). |
Also everybody else but me is likely scum, Antrax is scummy, Carthago delenda est.
Thank you Zag, for this quality analysis.
_________________
After years of disappointment with get rich quick schemes, I know I'm gonna get rich with this scheme. And quick! |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
Mackay
Saviour of Spiders
|
| Posted: Thu Oct 14, 2010 10:17 am Post subject: 520 |
|
|
| Internet Stranger wrote: |
| When they come back everyone else will see the light that Antrax and Mole are the scum. Just the fact that they are sitting back and enjoying the Zaq/Mackay slugfest confirms it. |
To me it feels less like they're sitting back and more like they're egging me on, so if they're scum and Zag somehow manages to have the elusive role of "defensive, panicking, lying town", then I'm pretty much doomed.
| Quote: |
| At some point Mackay will get bored and just put a scorpion deathlock on Zaq and that will be the end of it. I seen her in action before, you dont want this. (Hey Mackay, you owe me snogs, btw) |
So come get your snogs then, sugarpants. *prepares scorpion deathlock* |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
|
|
You cannot post new topics in this forum
You cannot reply to topics in this forum
You cannot edit your posts in this forum
You cannot delete your posts in this forum
You cannot vote in polls in this forum
|
Powered by phpBB © 2001, 2005 phpBB Group
|
|
FAQ
Search
Memberlist
Usergroups
Register
Profile
Log in to check your private messages
Log in
