Blacktron Mafia: Day 2, Space Oddity

[Dannylonglegs]

Vote Update:

2 votes for Claw (theLazychicken): CallmePie, Ranger of the Forest

1 vote for Harriet Stomper (Mediumsnowman): Bob

1 vote for Major Dave (Fhomess): Mediumsnowman

1 vote for Laura Starbucks (Tariq j): Dragonfire

1 vote for 4 of 2 (Mostlytechnic): Fhomess

1 vote for Bock Pathos (Bob): Mostlytechnic

Nonvoting: theLazychicken, Lind Whisperer, Tariq j, TinyPiesRUs, Piratedate84, Captain Nemo, Hinckley, Lady K, Sir Stig

9 votes required to lynch. Day ends in about 24 hours.

Edited September 9, 2015 by Dannylonglegs

[Hinckley]

It's a smorgasbord of votes.

If all 9 remaining non-voters vote for the same person, we'll have a lynch.

[mostlytechnic]

Or people can change votes, you know....

I mean, take my vote on Bock for example. Yep, I'm 100% willing to lynch him if others join me. But I recognize it's not a rock-solid case (though I calculate it's as solid as any case ANYONE can make on someone right now) so if something better comes along, or if someone needs another vote to get a lynch, I'm willing to switch.

[Hinckley]

I think we should stop posting host names in our signatures...

[Dannylonglegs]

I think we should stop posting host names in our signatures...

Why?

[Lind Whisperer]

I suppose could see myself seconding a vote on Bock. From what I've seen, being quiet is sort of his playing style - but like 4 of 2 said, that doesn't aid town at all.

I think though, Hinckley made a very good point earlier that we should all take a second look at:

This post could be interpreted as Fluff, there isn't much analysis here, all you've done is basically listed who voted at what time and why they chose to.

I don't have a better one, in fact I don't think there's much to analyse. To me it reads like a "think-out-loud" post rather than an actual analysis. The only true analysis we can do is pin the now-confirmed dead townies vote on there and see where they voted.

As someone else was craikin' earlier, Minga's vote analysis is the most substance we've seen all day. He took the time to check what everyone had said before voting started in order to separate those who appeared to put a lot of thought into their vote and those who seemed to just jump on the bandwagon. I wonder where Paul and Laura show up in that analysis, considering their opinion of it is eerily similar. Is the conversation you had about it on the writeboard spilling over into the day thread, Scummy Scummos?

"...there isn't much analysis here..."/"...there's much to analyse..."

To me, that just screams copying from a Whiteboard and changing it to seem original.

[Ranger of the Forest]

Explained above

True he could be the Godfather but I find that highly unlikely especially if there's a 6.-something% chance of him being one according to 4 of 2.

How do my other posts ping you? You could at least analyze my posts to see what you find scummy about them if you're going to say that

Well he's the one who starts the town block based off of past games and stuff. They always claim to him or Def.

I don’t need to; most of them are variations of the same fluffy “content." Hold on now, I take that back. They’re all different and confusing as hell, since many of your points contradict one another. I honestly feel like you’ve been trying to be more active than many of the other players, but activity means jack if you don’t post anything of substance. No explanation you have provided so far has convinced me of your innocence. Your attempts to explain your earlier posts end up being more suspicious than the original posts themselves. I’ve said before, I’m willing to change my vote if I find someone else more suspicious and/or if we need to get a lynch

You have to read back on what I am replying to, and what that is based on. I was accused of not contributing. I don't think that's fair, I use a lot of time reading, rereading, trying to see posts with others view to see if I have missed something, and finding weaknesses. I have voiced many concerns, while pointing out why they are concerns, not just pointing the finger to see if they put their hands up. The amount of information is a bit overwhelming though. I lost track on my exxelsheet by voting day 1, just to keep up with things. I feel you are trying your best at throwing distractions in the way, but I rely on my own deduction skills so far, and I don't see anything discriminating about your posts at first glance, except the voting post (see below). It's good to use critical thinking, but I don't see you looking for scum tells other than the occasional superficial prodding, and trying to catch people on the basis that they argues for their points. Here, the one you're voting for suggests claiming to Seamus, you use that for your vote reasoning, and you suggest to do the same?! There is some inconsistency here that ticks with me.

I’m not talking about what you’re replying to. I’m talking about the fact that your post was barely legible and super confusing. I never said anything about your number of contributions, and from the content of your post it doesn’t seem like you were replying to anyone calling you out for that. I asked you to clarify what you meant by those sentences as well as the post in general. I’d still like an answer to the former, if that’s possible.

You misunderstood my point. I’m not suggesting people claim to Seamus unless he has been cleared, and not just by investigation. I’d say the same for almost any other player. Which is why I’m weirded out that Claw is so focused on Seamus alone in his posts, in regards to claiming. Yes he is an experienced player, and he generally does lead the town block, whether he’s actually town or not. Is that always a good thing? No, which is why I think claiming to him because “that’s the way things usually go” is utter nonsense.

By prodding people, I hope to get a better understanding of their intent before I make any sort of judgment. The reason I voted for Claw was because nothing he said in response to my post convinced me that he was actually town. I’m not 100% sure that he’s scum, by any means, but he is the person I find most suspicious today. I also mentioned 4 of 2 as someone I was suspicious of. I don’t always like stating my suspicions out loud because my opinions about people change fairly frequently, and sometimes people act as if these things are set in stone. Which they shouldn’t be, as long as you provide reasonable explanation for your line of thinking.

If you want to know, I had a town read on you for most of day one, but this post confuzzles me. Would you please clarify what you meant to say in the post I found weird? Or am I just being stupid for asking that, since I still don’t understand what you meant by it

I’d also like to ask that people stop picking on me when it comes to being quiet. I know I don’t post a lot, but I’ve posted more than many others have today. Scrutinize away, just please stop using my lack of activity as a reason for being suspicious. Generally when i post though, I try to bring up things I consider problematic that other people haven’t already talked about. Hence why I largely refrained from the Clementine talk. I’m sorry you don’t find what I post useful to the town; I’m trying my best to be helpful.

[Hinckley]

Why?

And as a bonus, if you're gone it'd be nice because you're a pain to search the day threads for because you've hosted a ton of games and so your name is in everyone's sigs over and over and over. So I don't want to ever have to search for your posts again.

Once the game is over, remove the host name or consider keeping your Mafia history in your profile...like I do. We tried to get people to stop keeping their histories in their signature because Guidelines have a pix height limit that a long Mafia history will violate but this is not the discussion for here and now...mates. Craik on.

[Ranger of the Forest]

Apologies in advance for any errors I made in my post. Turning in for the night, but I’d be happy to clarify anything than needs it later on

[Hinckley]

I suppose could see myself seconding a vote on Bock. From what I've seen, being quiet is sort of his playing style - but like 4 of 2 said, that doesn't aid town at all.

I think though, Hinckley made a very good point earlier that we should all take a second look at:"...there isn't much analysis here..."/"...there's much to analyse..."

To me, that just screams copying from a Whiteboard and changing it to seem original.

Ay, thanks mate, though you spelled my name wrong. It's S-E-A-M-U-S. Lot's of people seem to think I'm that guy who shot Reagan for some reason. Well, that's a dangling participle. He shot him because he wanted the attention of Jodie Foster but I meant that people think I'm him for some reason but.

Anyway, I'm glad someone picked up on my point as I thought it was a good one! Although, I think yar going a wee far to insinuate they literally copied and pasted an argument from the writeboard. It's just eerily similar after they were both incriminated by the analysis that they are both now trying to call fluff. It's pingy far sure.

[Hinckley]

Zipzop Beetlejuice has some interesting views of his own contributions.

That was very interesting read. Could you do the same summary on the Clementine votes? I see a lot of information.

Here he asks Minga to do an analysis.

I've been reading forever. It is getting late, and I keep rereading posts to check facts. I will comment on some I multiquoted, but there is more I am working out, but I have to take some things right now before I lose my trains of thought.

Here he comments on all the work he has been doing.

I kept an exxelfile logging all the posts until around voting day 1. I lost track trying to get everything that was going on. And I've been going back proofreading and trying to view posts with the mindset (based on their wording). It all takes time, but I am getting good info. Coming back to this one in some of the posts here:

Proofreading? Logging posts? I look forward to this good info. Because what we saw when asked for clarification is basically a defense from a simple question that Hannah asked him about clarifying a strangely worded post (which I actually understand what he is saying but it's not my place to clarify for him. Well, I understand the part that Hannah says is more confusing. The part she seems to understand has me lost a bit).

but the post I wrote disappeared, and going over it one more time seems alright as to the bandwagoning suspicions, and there are a few suspicious votes. At least for the Dr.Wen votes.

The post disappears and so apparently does the point he was going to make? I think...

I think it was the Clementine votes that had me wondering as to why there would not be scum there (especially because I have found you smelling a bit fishy, which I have already voiced. But I always double check my facts), and the two separate votes I felt had good enough reasoning at least for a day 1 vote. It was mentioned that it was statistically good odds of a town win with no lynch day 1, and this strengthens the separate votes.Well yeah, but you also a leading compilation of information. I may be nitpicking, but that's what I do.

But Minga did analyze the Clementine vote. And nitpicking is what you do, you say. I'm not sure I've seen evidence of that. It wreaks of you making it sound like you're working harder than you are to appear helpful.

I use a lot of time reading, rereading, trying to see posts with others view to see if I have missed something, and finding weaknesses.

See? More work...

I have voiced many concerns, while pointing out why they are concerns, not just pointing the finger to see if they put their hands up. The amount of information is a bit overwhelming though. I lost track on my exxelsheet by voting day 1, just to keep up with things.

Loses spreadsheets and posts. Works hard but has poor organization and potentially some sort of Delete–Key Tourette Synrdrome.

... suggest to do the same?! There is some inconsistency here that ticks with me.[/font][/color]That is bonkers.

And while I highly approve of the word "bonkers" the Admin in me can't help but notice things like font and color closing brackets and a portion of a quote within a quote which makes me think you are practicing your post or editing somewhere else...like some sort of digital vacuum that eats posts and spreadsheets.

This is my first time playing with you so maybe this is just your style but it strikes me as a bit bonkers.

I forgot to connect some dots. If he's asking for Minga to do work, what is the result of all his own hard work and what kind of information is being compiled in the act of "proofreading and logging posts"? Sounds a wee fishy to this brain-blasted Scotsman!

[Hinckley]

I’m not suggesting people claim to Seamus unless he has been cleared, and not just by investigation. I’d say the same for almost any other player.

Just in case I've never made this clear myself: I am also not advocating, in any way, that anybody claim to me (or anyone else for that matter) without a God damn good reason to.

And I'm happy to report that it is Day Two and I have not received one single claim. So, we can learn! Nice going, everyone. Play smart, use your nuts!

[MagPiesRUs]

I'm afraid if I'm on track I could end up a target for the scum killer... Ya know, classic "He knows too much!" type deal.

My full suspicious list is as follows:

Xenophobic Monoxide - (He's dead now though, and confirmed town. He was acting really scummy yesterday and I was legitimately surprised to see him flip town. )

Captain Nemo - (Fluff, and his strange monologue about NOT protecting Clem. See one of my earlier posts)

Mostlytechnic - (This was mostly just Day 1, when his opening comments (later he said they were supposed to be jokes) seemed weird to me. My suspicions of him have subsided since then as going back through his posts and responses can't find anything overly suspicious.)

fhomess - I noticed he hasn't posted much and looked back at all his posts. In a full 1 1/2 days of mafia... he has posted a whopping 3 times. Getting under the radar much?

None of these suspicions sound like anything the scum would have been eager to kill you for. I doubt that they'd conclude that you "know too much"...

Not exactly, I'm saying that he should probably be investigated if he isn't already. Then when he's confirmed to be town then claim to him.

If he's confirmed scum then don't claim to him, claim to someone else I guess or to the group as a whole.

I still don't quite understand why we need to claim specifically to Seamus. Why not anyone else who was investigated? As far as I'm concerned, no one should be claiming to anyone until they have reason to trust them - not solely because of an investigation result.

True he could be the Godfather but I find that highly unlikely especially if there's a 6.-something% chance of him being one according to 4 of 2.

The chance that he is the godfather is just as likely as anyone else being the godfather though. And as has been mentioned, an investigation result on Seamus is actually more likely to be tampered with assuming a tailor/framer is in play.

Well he's the one who starts the town block based off of past games and stuff. They always claim to him or Def.

That's usually because they often do something to gain the town's trust. The times people have claimed to them before they gave a reason to trust them were the times we were punished. It just seems odd how keen you are on the idea of specifically claiming to Seamus, when so far he has given us little reason to trust him.

Then when he's confirmed to be town then claim to him.

This quote really bothers me. It reminds me of another comment of yours from earlier today:

Doctor Wen was town as I'm pretty sure everyone was expecting.

It feels like you know more about our current situation than a townie ought to know.

[Hinckley]

This quote really bothers me. It reminds me of another comment of yours from earlier today:

It feels like you know more about our current situation than a townie ought to know.

I feel you summarized my own suspicions in a way my rambling couldn't pinpoint.

Vote: The Claw (LazyChicken) and give me my pooched clothes back, washed after being an yoar boggin' alien body!

[Tariq j]

Wait what?

When I made that statement I originally thought that they killed him/her/it because he was a mid-range poster and was suspecting Minga who (I originally thought) was scum.

Oh, I forgot about that possibility but that's also possible, you could've also been scum and protected, where's that possibility?

You've posted 19 times in this thread now, and its all been very... wishy washy really, here you've given a possibility, is it valid? or another way of making you look like a helpful townie?

Vote: Claw (The Lazy Chicken)

I suppose could see myself seconding a vote on Bock. From what I've seen, being quiet is sort of his playing style - but like 4 of 2 said, that doesn't aid town at all.

I think though, Hinckley made a very good point earlier that we should all take a second look at:"...there isn't much analysis here..."/"...there's much to analyse..."

To me, that just screams copying from a Whiteboard and changing it to seem original.

You seem to have this funny habit of taking something someone has said, completely taking it the wrong way and calling it scummy.

[Lind Whisperer]

You seem to have this funny habit of taking something someone has said, completely taking it the wrong way and calling it scummy.

And you have a funny habit of "rambling on quite a bit, but then she you never hasve anything to say".

[Tariq j]

Anything to say about what? I've made my points as have everyone else, although according to you I am trying to scare the town.

[Lind Whisperer]

Anything to say about what? I've made my points as have everyone else, although according to you I am trying to scare the town.

Your posts have trended towards fluff, repeats, and stating obvious facts everyone already knows*, and your post hinted that we 'have no idea just how big the scum-team might be**,' subtly suggesting a large scum crowd - something that, could have been posted to nudge us towards a state of paranoia/concern over the topic/concept, keeping us from focusing on important matters***.

*Or should have learned before Day One was over.

**Not a direct quote, wording has been slightly changed to make the point more obvious.

***Fill in your own blank as to what would be "more important matters."

[Bob]

Time for me to actually weigh in on things. Let's take a look at Bock. He's currently ranked 14th in total posting. That's barely showing up here! On day one, his 6 posts were:

Fluff

Fluff

Fluff about fluffiness

Fluff

threat to vote for Doc Wen

An actual vote for Doc Wen, with the justification being simply that Doc was "fishy and suspicious" - not exactly a solid case there, nor any effort at all really.

And that vote was #4 on Wen, right after the first 3 votes were immediately placed on him. That's a decent place for scum to hide in the voting, especially with how much everyone expected the votes to be nearly unanimous.

Today, he's made wow, 2 whole posts.

Very short post yelling at Clem for claiming and how that ruined town's chances to hunt scum

sort of building a case against Harriet and voting her - complaining that Harriet the new girl was not intense enough in accusations and therefore scummy.

Both of those are safe, pretty meaningless posts. Nice places for scum to hide while making non-threatening and non-pinging posts. So I'm going to

Vote: Bock Pathos (bob) because you're either scum or really lazy town and therefore not helping us. And as a bonus, if you're gone it'd be nice because you're a pain to search the day threads for because you've hosted a ton of games and so your name is in everyone's sigs over and over and over. So I don't want to ever have to search for your posts again.

I wasn't aware that accusing someone, building a case, and then presenting said case was a "meaningless" post. If you're defending Harriet for being "the new girl" which is what it looks like you're doing, then that's a scummy enough thing to do in itself. Yes, she's a new player, but if she didn't have a grasp on the game, she should've waited for a mafia school. The things I've called her out for are basic mafia concepts.

There's literally no defense from this kind of an accusation because this isn't an accusation. It's you pointing out that I haven't posted as much. My case against Harriet, which it's well-noted that you're trying to discredit, wasn't a "sort-of case." But like I said, it's well noted that you're coming to her assistance when she herself hasn't even properly addressed my claims. Helping out the new player teammate?

[Dannylonglegs]

Vote Update:

4 votes for Claw (theLazychicken): CallmePie, Ranger of the Forest, Hinckley, Tariq j

1 vote for Harriet Stomper (Mediumsnowman): Bob

1 vote for Major Dave (Fhomess): Mediumsnowman

1 vote for Laura Starbucks (Tariq j): Dragonfire

1 vote for 4 of 2 (Mostlytechnic): Fhomess

1 vote for Bock Pathos (Bob): Mostlytechnic

Nonvoting: theLazychicken, Lind Whisperer, TinyPiesRUs, Piratedate84, Captain Nemo, Lady K, Sir Stig

9 votes required to lynch. Day ends in about 13 hours.

[mostlytechnic]

Not defending Harriet at all, I have no knowledge of her allegiances. My complaint was that your case on her was weak. But you explained yourself well and logically, so I'll

Unvote: Bock (bob)

I'm still not sure on this line building on Claw. I'll go re-read it's posts and see before I make a final decision on joining in or not.

[Captain Nemo]

Yesh there's a lot of votes across the board. Not that affects my vote on Claw, here which follows:

The Claw has been very wishy-washy in my opinion today--specifically starting with the poorly disguised claim that Minga was responsible for the death of Ender, because she feared his day one statements about her (or something). It's really not a clear suspicion anyways, and the Claw itself admits this later in the day--by claiming it was never actually suspicious and that it suddenly just trusts Minga; or that the whole thing never happened or something--everything is all over the place with these green guys. And then Claw just passed it off as a 'side suspicion'. I'm still looking for the reasoning in the actual change in heart on Minga; other than 'it just changed' basically. I doubt I'll get an answer on that. The suspicion was built on nothing other than paranoia mixed with the failed perception of helpfulness; and I'm sure the answer would be just as useless.

There's also the stuff with Claw's continual prodding of Seamus; which he completely admits was entirely based off meta gaming:

Let me clear this up;

3. For meta gaming reasons I feel that you're [seamus] scum, but then I'm also not 100% sure that you are, it's like a 50% of me feels that you're scum but the other 50% feels that you're town.

And even then, the Claw is wishy washy. Looking at it now, that's almost as ridiculous a statement as noting that one 'shouldn't claim to confirmed scum'. Genius!

Vote: Claw (theLazychicken)

[Hinckley]

And even then, the Claw is wishy washy. Looking at it now, that's almost as ridiculous a statement as noting that one 'shouldn't claim to confirmed scum'. Genius!

Actually, that was more explanation of how he felt about Minga. I also thought he was talking to me as I had just asked him a question but he clarified. He even quotes Minga before saying it.

[mostlytechnic]

Oooh, look, Seamus is defending a scumbuddy and explaining for them < / sarcasm>

Or is that just an argument used against me?

[Hinckley]

Well, seeing as I'm voting for the person I'm "defending" and that "defense" is actually pointing out a fact that makes Claw's flip flop view of Minga look even stranger, I'd say your statement just makes you look defensive.

By the way, its is the possessive form of it. It's only means "it is".