Leehar wrote:Sorry my fos in mid-paragraph was to chap and Ragian I think it was? Who didn't unvote but did fos clever?
I'm confused why you thought I was fos'ing you tho?
You seemed scummiest to me on my read-through with the vote before clevers defense and the unvote before jak, so since jak gave us 4 names from his 'trap', I picked you out of that bunch as the ones that jumped out most to me as scummy. Since jak's scientific analysis gave 4 outputs of vote hoppers, others are free to agree or disagree with me, you just seem the most likely scum to me personally probably due to more subjective opinions (I also think you were the one who was trying to delay getting concentration on anyone because 'there was a lot of time' left to lynch etc, but not adding anything concrete to cases and vote jumping as jaks results show)
Well, I understand your reasoning for voting me given a list of 4 players. I do not see why I am the scummiest but if you choose to pursue the case then maybe you can tell me more on that subject. As for the delay getting concentration etc etc, I did not try getting attention off people, I said I did not want to lynch someone when we had so much time and so we could concentrate elsewhere and come back to it later. I have added a couple things, but I will admit that I havent added a ton to the cases presented.
I find it kind of funny how my VC trap didnt work because I was 1 of 18 people and then jak's trap works when his has some sort of logic behind it cause its based on who voted instead of who wasnt paying attention to it.
new guy1 wrote: Well, I understand your reasoning for voting me given a list of 4 players. I do not see why I am the scummiest but if you choose to pursue the case then maybe you can tell me more on that subject.
As I said, it is mostly subjective. Reading through your vote and unvote on clever, it seemed amazingly shallow at the time, I haven't read back, so I don't know if it is or not, but you stuck out to me there. Everywhere also did at a slightly less level(as I said, perhaps because I had seen your votes and unvotes before that), but I really didn't get much of a read on saf and pmc being as scummy (and tbh didn't stick out to me as voting for clever until jak showed his list on that being what they did). Also, for them is that pmc has said in the beginning in the meta discussion that he's in favour of BW'ing anyway(?) and I think Saf was somewhat in support of his line of playstyle in a meta-gaming perspective, so it is kinda understandable from them if they have been bw hopping.
new guy1 wrote:I find it kind of funny how my VC trap didnt work because I was 1 of 18 people and then jak's trap works when his has some sort of logic behind it cause its based on who voted instead of who wasnt paying attention to it.
we can't tell if it did work, I just felt that Clever's case was a nonsensical one for people to jump onto, and jak's mention at the end was enough for me to feel it was worth voting for
I saw the part where you said it was subjective, but I would hope it would take more then "it was mostly subjective" to get me to L2 or worse. I understand your vote is on me, I also see your blatant support of pmc and saf. This has been noted for when/if I am forced to claim. Thank you for explaining your subjective reasons to me more as I did not get what you meant completly when you first posted it. Also, you are dismissing PMC because he admits to supporting bandwagonning? So does that mean he is excused this whole game so long as he follows the pack? This is not making a case on PMC as I do not have the evidence to support one, I am just asking you personally why he is getting a free card. How about I just say I support bandwagons and get away with it the rest of the game?
jak111 wrote: As for Ragian's post above me unless I'm fastposted (Most likely since I've spent an hour on researching this, so if you skim this you're truly anti town if you don't wish to take a quick look at some facts when they're presented with research done). I had you on my mental list before because of your activity, you're on and posting but you're not that active, or at least haven't caught my attention comment wise (Take that as good or bad, you decide for yourself there).
I don't understand the first parenthesis. Why would I skim something if you were fastposted? Also, you said that you had a case against me, but now it's just a mental note? Seems odd to me. I think it's unfair to say that I'm inactive. Perhaps you think that I'm not contributing enough. Can't really argue against what you think though I think calling me anti-town is nonsensical given that I didn't read your "research" until just now). And I am reading your scum hunt (as well as seeing you "claim" doctor with no heat on you) Several people have been generous with their votes, I agree to that. You should, however, notice that I took a stand on the clever-case deciding not to vote as I thought the case was thin. I consider that contributing.
pmc's less scummier than you, because he didn't BW to vote Clever, and saf isn't as scummy because he voted before jak's 'trap', tho it seems his argument was based on the same 'kill' word usage, which Clever has defended by saying it was joke (and you can kinda sense the sarcasm looking back on it) but it is easy to miss without smileys etc
Therefore, it's a dead-heat between you and Everywhere (and I'm glad my subjectivism led me to that itself as well, gut-feel ftw!), Every provided a bit more for his voting, and with you being the sore thumb in being pure bandwagoner after your earlier claims of there being a lot of time left for a lynch (there's still until well into May isn't there?) just has you right out there. Others are free to agree or disagree on it, so I can't tell if it's enough to get you to L2, but it's definitely worth me voting for you.
I'd also like to keep it noted that since saf and pmc weren't in Jak's trap, I view it as an omgus by him to target them as some of the only others to vote for him, since they weren't really involved in jak's trap at all, and he even used Saf's case to make the trap anyway.
On a purely objective level with Jak's data as well, it would seem that Saf is the most susceptible to bw'ing, but since he was the first to vote for Clever at least (and I'm not sure about jg), thats probs not the case. Everywhere is suspect for voting clever back-to-back. Obv. not enough info to indicate he'd be targetting him specifically or anything, but worth Noting.
I'd also Note Chap and Ragian. It seems they specifically say they would have both been voting if not for the short period, so I personally count it as the 2nd bw for chap, and Ragian for being very reticent most of the game and bw hopping now when he's getting more active.
Fastposted Ragian, sounds reasonable. I doubt the skimming was directed specifically at you tho.
Also, just one last comment with regards to new guy. It's just awesome to see how much even a single vote can do. I think you've posted more in the last page then for most of the last 40, and you've also encouraged me to expand on my suspicions considerably more, so Bravo for that !
I have posted more because that is always how I react when someone votes me. I believe its kind of how 90% of people work on here. And truth be told I usually post alot more when I am forced to claim, just because I guess Im afraid to draw attention to myself and when I claim theres not as much reason to fear my posts. It probably is cause people read too far into peoples posts and I feel like I have to check my posts longer then it takes me to post them just to make sure nothing can be taken the wrong way. And I promise, (and I know this will probably make things worse) but you do NOT want me claiming. Its not a good trail to go on. Also, I am pretty sure I have posted an okay amount, and while I have posted the most in this game today, it is only because I am attempting to defend myself.
Well now we are beginning to play mafia,and it doesnt really seem to me alot of people are following the leader.
and each and everyone is putting what they think forward and why.
Granted it in some instances makes it harder to play than just BW'ing until you get to the end. But if everyone is playing it is harder for mafia to hide. They make mistakes they cant take back or cover easy.
And for the record I never once called anyone lazy or suggested it. What I said was everyone needed to participate rather than follower the leader on a bandwagon,And to read everything instead of skimming.(YOU MIGHT MISS SOMETHING).
BTW when I ask a question of someone and dont vote them I am looking for what their response is and to see what everyone else thinks and is going to do, I.e., if they are bandwagon hopping or seriously think something is wrong.
I personally detest BW's for the sake of doing it. Way to many things can go wrong (roles you dont want revealed might be). Have a valid reason for a BW and I will support it all the way. Fastposted by leehar The noose is tightening for a couple of you not much more you can do without at least one of you revealing yourself to everyone.
2. new guy1 - jg, x, clever, x 4. SG7 - jg, x 5. Chapcrap - jak, x 6. Dazza - jg, x 7. Safari guy - jg, x, jak, x, jg, x, clever, 8. Rodion - jg 11. / - jg 12. SPARTACUS1974 - jg 13. Lehar - jak, x 14. Everywhere - jak, x, clever, x/clever, x 15. DoomYoshi - jg, x 16. Jak111 - jg, x, clever 17. Thechuck51 - jg 18. PMC - jak, x, jg, x
So with this list, it seems Saf is the biggest jumper and appears on ALL 3 wagons. I was on jg's wagon, because at the time he seemed scummy, and I made up Clever's wagon pretty much to catch a few of you . PMC was on 2/3 wagons, Everywhere was on 2/3 wagons, New Guy was on 2/3 wagons.
So now the question is, who's more scummier of 4? (Saf, PMC, Everywhere, New Guy) Or do you even think the scum were in the wagons?
As for Ragian's post above me unless I'm fastposted (Most likely since I've spent an hour on researching this, so if you skim this you're truly anti town if you don't wish to take a quick look at some facts when they're presented with research done). I had you on my mental list before because of your activity, you're on and posting but you're not that active, or at least haven't caught my attention comment wise (Take that as good or bad, you decide for yourself there).
While I admire the effort I am not so sure about the conclusions you reached. For instance to say I was on the jak wagon is a bit silly, I voted you first and right at the start of the game and never suspected you of being scum. I unvoted before any more than 2 votes were on you and I even explicitly said that I thought you were town during the mini BW on you. I think a similar thing is true of newguy being on the jg wagon, he was one of the few who were trying to stop it once he had claimed. Although I think leehar definitely has a a point in that ngs vote on clever was quite suspect, as well as everywheres.
However I think the best case atm is chapcrap. While it may not appear so through the list that jak has posted I believe he has either been part of or egged on 4 separate BWs today.
First jak:
chapcrap wrote:
jak111 wrote:Gi..give me till tomorrow afternoon to post guys. My friend just.. I'll be a day or two...
Is this trying to make fun of someone? I don't know.
However, I agree with was saf said about jak. More than anything, I think it's ridiculous that jak tries to guide the doctor for absolutely no reason. Guiding the doctor to a specific person is scummy in itself, because you need to guide the doctor on day 1 by giving them information to go on in general.
Not only is it ridiculous to guide the doctor to a specific person, it's even more ridiculous when the person in question is in no way proven to be town or be helpful to town.
AND, the reason given for saving him is even more absurd. If you have no idea what pmc's role is, how can you say that you need him to answer question about night intel? The whole thing is preposterous and makes me think that you are scum who is trying to guide the doctor into doing something predictable.
unvote vote jak
Through IMO faulty logic and repeating safs point three or four times he forms part of his first BW.
Next onto his opinions on jgordon. Here he never voted him once, yet all throughout it he kept hinting that he should very likely be the lynch target for the day and helped to spur on those who were voting for him.
chapcrap wrote:On to jgordon, the case seems ok, but not overwhelming to me. I do agree that his activity has been scummy though. After looking back at it, he seems to be waffling back and forth about everything and being very non-committal. That is scummy. For now, my vote stays on jak until he responds to my questions.
chapcrap wrote:I want to get more information for town to work with, but if we don't have someone who is inherently scummy at the end of this day, I will say that we need to lynch jgordon.
chapcrap wrote:Ok, first of all, jgordon, please try to stop double posting...and being so crazy!! What I mean is I feel like you are really amped up and just going on a rage when your posting and it makes it difficult to understand quite everything you're saying. Also, for the record, I didn't skim. I'm the first one who questioned you on it. There were multiple people who skimmed, but I'm over it. I believe your claim right now. I still think that if we don't have a great candidate (very, very likely), we lynch jgordon. I don't think those votes will show us anything though. What are you thinking that the votes will show?
One case that was not mentioned in jaks vote summary was dooms. At one point he looked like a decent BW target due to his outing of jaks soft claim. This for me stands out as the most scummy one he was involved in because he openly admits that he thinks doom is not scummy and he can even explain why, but he votes him anyway just because other people are pressuring him... BW much?
chapcrap wrote:jak, I accept your answers and had already picked up on the claim. I'm not sure Doom needed to point it out, but I don't think that it was the softest of claims and with you and pmc and doom talking about it so much, it's not like anyone with half a brain wasn't going to see it.
...
As far as my vote goes, I don't really see that Doom pointing out the soft claim was all that scummy. However, I will pressure him because someone needs pressured for more information. If he wasn't already being pressured, I would pressure Rodion. I don't like his level of activity in this game. I have played a few with him and this behavior on Day 1, I don't like from him. vote DoomYoshi
Finally we come to the clever wagon.
chapcrap wrote:So many new posts every day. I wish I could check in a little more often lately, but I just haven't had the time. So, about once a day is all I can muster at the moment. It would help if a few people could just be a little bit more clear and not make multiple posts when they aren't necessary...
mod-->Also, can we just set a hard deadline? I don't want this day to keep getting pushed back and end up having a two month Day 1.
Anyway, I don't really see what CLEVER just did that was that awful. It's still day though and every little thing will be jumped on. At least we're finally doing something. I suppose that CLEVER is the scummiest (other than jgordon, who I'm not sure I believe anyway), so I'll go ahead and make DoomYoshi happy and unvote FOS CLEVER. No vote for now, because that's 3 votes in a row already and we don't need to get out of control when we have until May 7.
FASTPOSTED...make that 4 votes in row.
The above post is clearly an endorsement of the clever wagon while once against acknowledging he had done little to deserve it. This time he appears to not vote him only because of his awareness that a quick BW is happening.
unvote vote chap
p.s. please stop with the PR soft claiming ng.
2009-08-12 03:35:31 - Squirrels Hat: MWAHAHAHAHAHAHA!!!!!!!!!! 2009-08-12 03:44:25 - Mr. Squirrel: Do you think my hat will attack me?
Leehar wrote:unvote Vote everywhere to get him talking then, since you've somewhat assuaged my worries of being deadweight, so he's the best target
Alright. I voted Clever because, at the time, I thought the case made sense. I focused on his "slip up" because, like I said, I had personal experience with it. Back in the day when I was a noob, I was mafia in an RT and made the mistake of using the wrong pronoun or something like that, and I was lynched. I learned my lesson and started to go over what I wrote, and I also realized that other newby players (like, say, clever) were likely to make the same mistake. When clever got on and beautifully defended himself, I realized that I and the rest of us had misinterpreted his post and saw a slip that wasn't there, so I unvoted.
Everywhere is suspect for voting clever back-to-back. Obv. not enough info to indicate he'd be targetting him specifically or anything, but worth Noting.
My vote was on milkshake at the time and I had not unvoted, so my first vote against clever was not valid. I caught my mistake and corrected it.
PMC fastpost. Did not read it. Will read.
"Disease, suffering, hardship...that is what war is all about."-Captain Kirk, from "A Taste of Armageddon"
jgordon1111 wrote:LOL I just asked the question before anyone else did or threw a vote on you, nice sidestep on the answer though.
And why exactly would anyone throw a vote on me for something Shield did? I can understand lynching Shield and suspecting me if he flips mafia, but outright voting me would make zero sense.
And as far a sidestepping goes, were you fishing for a mason claim (2 actually)?
The way I see it, your mention of sidestepping means my answer did not directly tackle the question you asked. From the realm of answers I could possibly give, which ones would not be considered a sidestep? I can only think of 2:
1 - "Ok, I am masoned with Shield. That's why he 'gave' his vote to me. "
2 - "Wow, smart Gordon (and Shield D1 screws the pooch one more time)! I guess it's no use defending ourselves now, so I'll just go ahead and confess both Shield and I are mafia. That's why he 'gave' his vote to me."
pmchugh wrote:Normally I would think that clevers play was scumbuddying, although Ragian is right, the exact same thing was pointed out between these players in power role where shield was scum and clever was town. I think the BW was surprisingly fast, and I would be surprised if there were not one or two scum on it who were either trying to pick on the easy target or worried about being seen to not vote for a scumbuddy.
Let me get this straight: you are saying the players on the wagon are scummy regardless of what Clever flips?
@Jak - why didn't your analysis consider Doom's BW?
My previous post was fasposted by PMC and Everywhere.
PMC's vote reminded me of something I had forgotten to adress.
chapcrap wrote:
Rodion wrote:(Chap mentioned he saw a good ammount of those lately, could you please mention which games other than my FFVII one?).
This is about mafia busdrivers. Yes, I could go through my old games and find them since I don't remember, but what would the point of that be?
It is just good practice to force people into backing their statements up. You can either prove that you have seen mafia busdrivers a lot lately (and then whatever point you were trying to make with this statement stands) or we conclude that you lied when you said that (and you know what happens to proven liars in mafia games).
jgordon1111 wrote:LOL I just asked the question before anyone else did or threw a vote on you, nice sidestep on the answer though.
And why exactly would anyone throw a vote on me for something Shield did? I can understand lynching Shield and suspecting me if he flips mafia, but outright voting me would make zero sense.
And as far a sidestepping goes, were you fishing for a mason claim (2 actually)?
The way I see it, your mention of sidestepping means my answer did not directly tackle the question you asked. From the realm of answers I could possibly give, which ones would not be considered a sidestep? I can only think of 2:
1 - "Ok, I am masoned with Shield. That's why he 'gave' his vote to me. "
2 - "Wow, smart Gordon (and Shield D1 screws the pooch one more time)! I guess it's no use defending ourselves now, so I'll just go ahead and confess both Shield and I are mafia. That's why he 'gave' his vote to me."
pmchugh wrote:Normally I would think that clevers play was scumbuddying, although Ragian is right, the exact same thing was pointed out between these players in power role where shield was scum and clever was town. I think the BW was surprisingly fast, and I would be surprised if there were not one or two scum on it who were either trying to pick on the easy target or worried about being seen to not vote for a scumbuddy.
Let me get this straight: you are saying the players on the wagon are scummy regardless of what Clever flips?
@Jak - why didn't your analysis consider Doom's BW?
Thanks for the candor in your answer Rodion, Unfortunatley this is the first time in mafia anywhere I have seen someone turn their vote over to someone else. In light of it being D1 it was mind boggling,to out of the blue with no evidence of either of your alignments to do so.
So I just asked before anyone else did or started voting you,for your response.
Me I would have just stated sheild lost his mind for some reason and maybe likes my avatar or as you said thinks your really smart.
And it was in no way intended as an omgus or FOS.
Which leads me to this. MODERATOR is this really going to happen with the vote thing?
jgordon1111 wrote:Which leads me to this. MODERATOR is this really going to happen with the vote thing?
I hate to say it, but "Skim much jg?"
ghostly447 wrote:To answer your questions SG7 (Tagging your votes with Clevers) I must say no due to that no one knows each others alignments. I hint at nothing in that post. It is simply because if you werent the same alignment then it would make it completely idiotic . Still not hinting at anything there guys, just want to make my reasons clear.
pmchugh wrote:Normally I would think that clevers play was scumbuddying, although Ragian is right, the exact same thing was pointed out between these players in power role where shield was scum and clever was town. I think the BW was surprisingly fast, and I would be surprised if there were not one or two scum on it who were either trying to pick on the easy target or worried about being seen to not vote for a scumbuddy.
Let me get this straight: you are saying the players on the wagon are scummy regardless of what Clever flips?
The BW was unnaturally fast and it requires an explanation, I think there is as plausible explanation either way. Unfortunately that provides me with a null on clever from other peoples reactions.
2009-08-12 03:35:31 - Squirrels Hat: MWAHAHAHAHAHAHA!!!!!!!!!! 2009-08-12 03:44:25 - Mr. Squirrel: Do you think my hat will attack me?
ok saying that someone is ok or whatever because they didnt vote me is not possible. the fact that i had four votes is amazing due to the fact from the time i was voted by jak and the time i defended was LESS THAN 12 HOURS. i have no doubt that not everyone read it so you cant say "o that guy is ok cause he didnt jump on the bandwagon" it doesnt work in this situation.
jak111 wrote: As for Ragian's post above me unless I'm fastposted (Most likely since I've spent an hour on researching this, so if you skim this you're truly anti town if you don't wish to take a quick look at some facts when they're presented with research done). I had you on my mental list before because of your activity, you're on and posting but you're not that active, or at least haven't caught my attention comment wise (Take that as good or bad, you decide for yourself there).
I don't understand the first parenthesis. Why would I skim something if you were fastposted? Also, you said that you had a case against me, but now it's just a mental note? Seems odd to me. I think it's unfair to say that I'm inactive. Perhaps you think that I'm not contributing enough. Can't really argue against what you think though I think calling me anti-town is nonsensical given that I didn't read your "research" until just now). And I am reading your scum hunt (as well as seeing you "claim" doctor with no heat on you) Several people have been generous with their votes, I agree to that. You should, however, notice that I took a stand on the clever-case deciding not to vote as I thought the case was thin. I consider that contributing.
Also, dazza is a bloke.
I think you misinterpreted my post bud. The parenthesis was to the general populace in the game. As for inactivity I mentioned you just may have not caught my attention during the fights and arguments so mentally your name didn't click for me.
@ Leehar to be honest, I never read Saf's post until I made up the fake case. It's just lucky it was somewhat similar that others fell for it real quick .
@ PMC, I'm glad you responded, my list is not 100% telling everything that happened, it's based strictly off of votes. You're the only one who voted me who did not wish for it to turn into a full fledge band wagon. The next part about Chapcrap, I agree, the list I constructed is strictly around the votes people have cast, though I'm glad you're doing your research on a few other characters and in more detail PMC It adds for a broader view on the things happening in this game so far.
@ Rodion, as I was reading it over I seen the bandwagon again, but initially forgot about it. If you wish to find a simple way to get the voters on Doom's bw feel free to do so, but I went through page for page for the info I got. But I believe I mentioned earlier I'm doing a full read through of both mafia's I'm in this weekend. So what I posted was a bit quicker than what I'm working on tomorrow and Sunday. Also I'll make sure to check up on Chap's posts. PMC and you seem to be really on him, so I'll see if I can't dig some old info back up on him
@ Clever, I am clearing no one, nor is anyone else, we are merely observing what is going on. The last case I made on you was a false one to see who quickly jumped on and off, but you're pushing your luck with misinterpreting things lately. I do wish you seen what I was doing before defending though I was hoping for 1 or two more people to check in on. But like I mentioned in one of my replies above, my analysis was not perfect, it was something put together of an hour of going over 3 bandwagon votes. A more detailed analysis will come either tomorrow or Sunday.
Highest Rank: Major:2157
"All wars are civil wars, because all men are brothers"
jak111 wrote: @ Clever, I am clearing no one, nor is anyone else, we are merely observing what is going on. The last case I made on you was a false one to see who quickly jumped on and off, but you're pushing your luck with misinterpreting things lately. I do wish you seen what I was doing before defending though I was hoping for 1 or two more people to check in on. But like I mentioned in one of my replies above, my analysis was not perfect, it was something put together of an hour of going over 3 bandwagon votes. A more detailed analysis will come either tomorrow or Sunday.
i didnt realize it im sorry lol. i just saw like five votes on me and got anxious to get it off of me. sorry.
Well look at you, I had even you convinced I was making a huge band wagon on you, and look who quickly jumped on
Though tomorrow, when I go through the entire game's posts, I'm making sure to note every switch in votes Saf makes. His vote hopping D1 makes me uneasy, it's almost as bad as Hippo's hoping (and he does it at least regularly).
Anyone got anything else to add for this RL night or shall I try and pick up the convo again tomorrow?
Highest Rank: Major:2157
"All wars are civil wars, because all men are brothers"
The odds of us outing and lynching any scum are small (approx. 1 in 4 I would guess). We can continue to go back and forth, casting suspicions here and there, creating fake cases to see who joins the bandwagon, and in my opinion continue to accomplish very little or we can lynch somebody we know is not town, JGordon. If we wait, our focus in the following days will be on finding/lynching scum, allowing JGordon to survive further into the game which would only make him more dangerous to the town. He says he wants the town to win but if we end up in a lynch or lose situation it would be to easy for him to vote with the mafia and meet his win condition.
I've started a pro/con list for lynching JGordon. please add to it if you like
Pros: - we do not lose a town member to a lynch - we do not mistakenly out another power role by continuing to pressure with more bandwagons - we prevent the potential LyLo condition described above. - we prevent the chance of our vig being busdriven while trying to NK him (if both roles are present in the game) - we move the game to the next phase where we can use our power roles to build real cases
Cons: - we do not lynch scum - if JGordon is a jester, he wins (will the game end with his lynch? if not, then this may not be much of a con)
