Forum adverts like this one are shown to any user who is not logged in. Join us by filling out a tiny 3 field form and you will get your own, free, dakka user account which gives a good range of benefits to you: No adverts like this in the forums anymore. Times and dates in your local timezone. Full tracking of what you have read so you can skip to your first unread post, easily see what has changed since you last logged in, and easily see what is new at a glance. Email notifications for threads you want to watch closely. Being a part of the oldest wargaming community on the net. If you are already a member then feel free to login now.

I didn't set it out right, and I should have said what I meant by my "quote"

It seems to me most people just skim through this game, see how much they have to read and just give up and post every three days.

Also, I personally think that no one else is voting for me with you is because, unlike everything else you say in this game, you're not providing any reasons why. You're just saying "Vote for Drk_O, it's a good idea... really!"

Honestly Thor, I didn't know you cared <3

Thor665 wrote:@Drl_O - ...? Yeah, I want you dead. If one person votes for you I will come help that wagon like nobody's business.

That so? then why don't you go ahead and vote for him instead of Rusty? Could it be that you don't really care who goes as long as someone does? Could it be that you feel that these two pose a threat to your scumminess?

Of course it could, but the flip side to that is that nobody so far has given a real outright reason to be voted out, only to be suspicious about.

So far I'm leaning toward Thor and Ferret

Thor because, well, for the same reason Dark said, I'm not really seeing any real reason other than "he hasn't really posted so he must be a lurking scum" that doesn't sit well with me and that in itself seems like a lame attempt at diverting attention.

Ferret because his posts seem defensive, overly accusative, and really random, and even though I don't know his playing style, this being my first time and all, he seems suspicious to me....

I'm still thinking so I'll be back later for my vote.

Drk_Oblitr8r wrote:Also, I personally think that no one else is voting for me with you is because, unlike everything else you say in this game, you're not providing any reasons why. You're just saying "Vote for Drk_O, it's a good idea... really!

Um...sorta did;

Thor665 wrote:Obvious lurking scum is obvious - he's usually waaaay more bombastic.

WARORK93 wrote:That so? then why don't you go ahead and vote for him instead of Rusty? Could it be that you don't really care who goes as long as someone does? Could it be that you feel that these two pose a threat to your scumminess?

1. I did vote Drk_O, but nobody would give me the time of day, so I went to my second option - Rusty. Why are you acting like that didn't happen and that I didn't clearly say why I was doing it when I changed my vote?
2. I think Drk_O is a threat to me? Are you totally mental - please quote *1 comment* he made that even remotely looks like an attack on me prior to when I voted him. Otherwise, why would you sling that sort of mud?

Thor because, well, for the same reason Dark said, I'm not really seeing any real reason other than "he hasn't really posted so he must be a lurking scum" that doesn't sit well with me and that in itself seems like a lame attempt at diverting attention.

1. Drk didn't say that, but thanks for at least noticing I did make a case.
2. Go read ANY other game of Mafia here on site with Drk_O in it. Compare how he played there to how he's playing now. Ask yourself why you think he changed his methods, then come back and tell me why you think my case is lame. Playstyle changes mean something.

WARORK93 wrote:That so? then why don't you go ahead and vote for him instead of Rusty? Could it be that you don't really care who goes as long as someone does? Could it be that you feel that these two pose a threat to your scumminess?
1. I did vote Drk_O, but nobody would give me the time of day, so I went to my second option - Rusty. Why are you acting like that didn't happen and that I didn't clearly say why I was doing it when I changed my vote?
2. I think Drk_O is a threat to me? Are you totally mental - please quote *1 comment* he made that even remotely looks like an attack on me prior to when I voted him. Otherwise, why would you sling that sort of mud?

That last comment was actually more to elicit a response than anything else, see if you'd think about it or not, no ham no foul, and again I'm new at this, I dun even think I belong here honestly

Secondly, i figured if you wanted someone out, you'd vote for them, I saw you say you wanted Drk out but voted for Rusty ,so I wondered why, apparently I'm more naive than I thought.

Thor because, well, for the same reason Dark said, I'm not really seeing any real reason other than "he hasn't really posted so he must be a lurking scum" that doesn't sit well with me and that in itself seems like a lame attempt at diverting attention.
1. Drk didn't say that, but thanks for at least noticing I did make a case.
2. Go read ANY other game of Mafia here on site with Drk_O in it. Compare how he played there to how he's playing now. Ask yourself why you think he changed his methods, then come back and tell me why you think my case is lame. Playstyle changes mean something.

I'm not about to go spend three or more hours looking through back logs just to figure a GAME out. If that makes me a sore sport then whatever, call me what you wish.

Okay so it turns out this ain't my schtick, go figure

Thor665 wrote:@n0t_u - what was the trap that failed? Who are your current suspects, if any? What is your Read on the Rusty/Thor competition? What is your read on ferret and/or Drk_O?

The voting after the deadline, before the lock out post. It didn't really go anywhere. As usual you seem to be leading the investigation and clashing with Rusty who is likely to take that position if you die. Ferret I'm not sure, I kind of got the slight impression he may be an innocent from what he said when he thought he died, but I'm not sure. Drk_O is just being Drk_O again, he's obviously the same regardless of whatever role he gets so it's like a roulette when going against him.

The only one that was made slightly suspicious from the trap was Ork. But he had good reasons to follow the vote so easily and quickly, most obviously to save himself. Thus I consider the attempted trap a failure as it has really revealed nothing.

Current suspects are, as usual, everyone until such a time I believe their innocence may be more likely than the others.

Here's how I see it; Ferret and Rusty are the most aggressive, for reasons yet unknown. Rusty is quick to point the finger at Ferret, and vice versa. Whose to say one of them is not guilty? Due to my silence, Rusty was quick to accuse, with no evidence to back him up. Therefore, I suspect him of being the killer.
I Vote: Rusty_Knight!

Ohhh sorry ^_^" I forgot about your one sentance where you did.

I haven't noticed my playstyle change, but it might be more because I haven't played for a very long time rather than I want to spend more time eating people. And don't I normally get voted off for that playstyle? By you? <3

I don't think Thor is suspicious because he wants me dead, he always does. I do think he's going about it differently, but I feel he only has a 5% chance of being scum.

Unlike the_ferrett, who I feel has a 0% chance of being scum, that guys cool and all.

The people I find most suspicious are n0t_u, RiTides and Mordoskul. With a possible n0t_u-Mordo partnership. I feel they've both been able to lurk pretty easily through the game, and Ri because I don't really know what to expect from him.

Sir, I do not lurk, I observe. I am innocent. If I were guilty, I would push for more deaths.

That's exactly why you jump out of nowhere and vote.

If you were really guilty, you'd say you would do something if you were guilty, and not do it.

If I were guilty I'd use my psychic powers to turn your brain in jelly. *stares and squints at you with strained look* Is your brain jelly? No? Then clearly I'm innocent, really

Drk_Oblitr8r wrote:If I were guilty I'd use my psychic powers to turn your brain in jelly. *stares and squints at you with strained look* Is your brain jelly? No? Then clearly I'm innocent, really

I agree though those last two posts by Mordo seem a little contradictory, but either innocent or guilty we all want the same basic thing just with different ways to achieve it. If anything DrK_O's most recent posts make him look more suspicious.

Care to explain why n0t_u?

Insisting you could only be innocent.

Thor because, well, for the same reason Dark said, I'm not really seeing any real reason other than "he hasn't really posted so he must be a lurking scum" that doesn't sit well with me and that in itself seems like a lame attempt at diverting attention.
1. Drk didn't say that, but thanks for at least noticing I did make a case.

Uhm, yah he did

Drk_Oblitr8r wrote:You're just saying "Vote for Drk_O, it's a good idea... really!"

and you said here that:

Thor wrote:Obvious lurking scum is obvious - he's usually waaaay more bombastic.

Whatever the case I fell compelled to bring this game to a tie again

Vote: Thor

If only for the reason that I don't think that Rusty deserves to go more than i think Thor's a scum

Thor665 wrote: I have checked it and I have my own opinion (that what he did isn't scummy) I was rather hoping you would be willing to support your thesis that it is.

Other than two falsehoods already mentioned, I can't think of any others. How many false statements are necessary to make someone guilty in your eyes? I don't remember an apology and didn't find one after a cursory search of ferret's posts following my accusations.

Why ask about the apology thing if you knew he didn't? Looks to me like you're just flinging mud and hoping some sticks.

Thor665 wrote: Why were you so set the other way? I honestly am not sure I have a good way to read ferret's scum game - but I do know that thus far he is playing identical to his town game and yet you're calling him on it which leaves me wondering about you far more than him.

Past action isn't a good indicator of scumminess. Why are you so set on defending him?

Thor665 wrote: I think you and I disagree on what 'false' means.

How so? I've accused things of being false when they were contradicted by the rest of the thread. The claim that I only voted for ferrett was because he doubted me was false. I've provided evidence for voting for ferrett. The claim that the thread had been all joky was also false. I wrote a whole paragraph explaining why. Please, explain how ferrett's claim ("Until recently, no you haven't. Until..... oh 1/2 a page ago we were still all 'RVS'ing and cracking jokes. That's not serious in demeanor. And please try not to lie but saying otherwise. ") wasn't false.

Thor665 wrote: It makes exactly as much sense as me voting second serves his case - I was ointing out how the case itself was flawed, not that I actually believed what I was saying when i quoted his case exactly and just replaced his name in where he had mine. Do you see what I did there?

I see what you did, I just don;t think it worked well. Your amended accusation was unsupported by the evidence provided, or at least worse supported than the original. If you want to showcase the flaws in an argument, your amended argument has to be just as valid, not a random changing of words.

Mordoskul wrote:Sir, I do not lurk, I observe. I am innocent. If I were guilty, I would push for more deaths.

This is bad reasoning. Bloodthirstiness isn't a definitive trait of scum. Thor and I are rather bloodthirsty, yet we are acting antagonistically towards each other.

Mordoskul wrote: Here's how I see it; Ferret and Rusty are the most aggressive, for reasons yet unknown. Rusty is quick to point the finger at Ferret, and vice versa. Whose to say one of them is not guilty?

How is ferrett as aggressive as me? I'd have said that Thor and I are the two most aggressive.

Mordoskul wrote:Due to my silence, Rusty was quick to accuse, with no evidence to back him up. Therefore, I suspect him of being the killer.

How'd your silence cause me to vote? What do you mean no evidence? Thor and I have been arguing about whether or not the evidence against ferrett is all that scummy for pages now. Or do you mean suspicion of you?

the_ferrett wrote:Rusty, apart from my earlier vote on you, I was voting to start up the motor of this put-put boat. As I said, 2 days of silence makes me edgy that we'll end up in a no-vote situation.

We weren't going to have a no-vote. A majority was already present on Thor665. So, please explain why you want to lynch me.
---
On Drk_o: I'm not sure. He has been quieter than usual, but I still don't think shifts in playstyle are that great of an indicator for scumminess. They're too obvious.
---
Unvote:Thor665
Vote: Mordoskul

His last two posts have been meaningless drivel. I want him to either start making sense and contributing or die.

WARORK93 wrote:If only for the reason that I don't think that Rusty deserves to go more than i think Thor's a scum

I appreciate the effort, but I'm muckin' it up.

RustyKnight wrote:

Thor665 wrote: I have checked it and I have my own opinion (that what he did isn't scummy) I was rather hoping you would be willing to support your thesis that it is.

Other than two falsehoods already mentioned, I can't think of any others. How many false statements are necessary to make someone guilty in your eyes? I don't remember an apology and didn't find one after a cursory search of ferret's posts following my accusations.

Why ask about the apology thing if you knew he didn't? Looks to me like you're just flinging mud and hoping some sticks.

1. He did apologize.
2. Falsehoods - if they are absolute evidence of scum, means that WARORK is scum because I just showed how he lied. The question is, did he "lie" or did he "make a mistake." You have shown no evidence that what ferrett did was intentional lying for scum gain, and consequently the case is weak.
3. Also, quite frankly, I still think you're saying stuff he said is "false" when in reality it is a simple disagreement of opinions - and opinions cannot be false, only facts can.

Past action isn't a good indicator of scumminess. Why are you so set on defending him?

Past action is a good indicator of scumminess. Remember how I caught Manchu scum via his change in playstyle? Yeah.

Please, explain how ferrett's claim ("Until recently, no you haven't. Until..... oh 1/2 a page ago we were still all 'RVS'ing and cracking jokes. That's not serious in demeanor. And please try not to lie but saying otherwise. ") wasn't false.

Because humor and personal reads of attitude are subjective and not factual.

Your amended accusation was unsupported by the evidence provided, or at least worse supported than the original. If you want to showcase the flaws in an argument, your amended argument has to be just as valid, not a random changing of words.

So you honestly believe his case is functional?
I now am much happier voting you.

Vote: Mordoskul

His last two posts have been meaningless drivel. I want him to either start making sense and contributing or die.

You don't support a Drk_O lynch though?
Also, why is 'meaningless drivel' more scummy than two lies from ferrett or...whatever it is you were voting me over?

I do have to begrudgingly admit Rusty's move here does surprise me if he's town. I'll be back with more thoughts about it when my head isn't so boggled.

EBWOP - does surprise me if he's *scum* derpy, derp, derp.

WARORK93 wrote:Uhm, yah he did

No he didn't.
*you* said all my case was is "he's lurking" which is functionally true.
*he* said all my case was is "vote Drk_O -it's a good idea" which is not what I said.

Whatever the case I fell compelled to bring this game to a tie again

For the record, if Rusty flips scum at any point in the game - lynch WARORK next. Don't forget this.


*sigh* and this should have gone at the front of my 1st post to show how WARORK lied so ...whatevs, like I said, I'll be back later when the mind isn't boggled.
Apologies for quad-post.

RustyKnight wrote:
Vote: Mordoskul

His last two posts have been meaningless drivel. I want him to either start making sense and contributing or die.

You wish me dead for not making sense? Not because I might be scum? Seems a tad wasteful.

Current Voting Situation
1 - n0t_u (Drk_Oblitr8r)
0 - Drk_Oblitr8r
3 - RustyKnight (the_ferrett, Thor665, Mordoskul)
0 - the_ferrett
0 - WARORK93
1 - Mordoskul (RustyKnight)
0 - RiTides
2 - Thor665 (RiTides, WARORK93)

0 - No lynch

Not voting (n0t_u)
Not posted during Day 2 (-)

If the day ended now, RustyKnight would be lynched

Day 2 ends at 0900 GMT 5th April 2011 [5 Days 10 Hours 25 Minutes]

RustyKnight votes Thor665
Thor665 votes Drk_Oblitr8r
RiTides votes Thor665
the_ferrett votes RustyKnight
Thor665 unvotes Drk_Oblitr8r
Thor665 votes RustyKnight
Drk_Oblitr8r votes n0t_u
Mordoskul votes RustyKnight
WARORK93 votes Thor665
RustyKnight unvotes Thor665
RustyKnight votes Mordoskul

Thor665 wrote:

WARORK93 wrote:Uhm, yah he did

Thor665 wrote: No he didn't.
*you* said all my case was is "he's lurking" which is functionally true.
*he* said all my case was is "vote Drk_O -it's a good idea" which is not what I said.

WARORK93 wrote:Whatever the case I fell compelled to bring this game to a tie again

For the record, if Rusty flips scum at any point in the game - lynch WARORK next. Don't forget this.

Okay, besides the fact that you think I'm lying and besides the fact that I voted for you, what does me wanting to make a tie have to do with me being scum? Or do you just not like me?

Surely a non scum would want a no lynch instead of a bad lynch? Or is that just me?

Thor665 wrote:*sigh* and this should have gone at the front of my 1st post to show how WARORK lied so ...whatevs, like I said, I'll be back later when the mind isn't boggled.
Apologies for quad-post.

Oh, now you're going to argue technicalities with me? You all know what I meant and from what I saw Drk was saying basically the same thing, please don't muck up all our confusion more by calling people liars when they may mean something different from what you think and they're making such a very small point anyway.

WARORK93 wrote:Okay, besides the fact that you think I'm lying and besides the fact that I voted for you, what does me wanting to make a tie have to do with me being scum? Or do you just not like me?

Surely a non scum would want a no lynch instead of a bad lynch? Or is that just me?

1. Rusty is going to be lynched. WARORK leaps in and votes Thor, making it a tie and preventing Rusty lynch. If Rusty is later shown to be scum who is suddenly looking very much like a partner to scumRusty? WARORK. (that, and I don't like you ) Also, it has absolutely nothing to do with me catching you in a "lie" and the only reason I even brought up the "lie" was to make a point to Rusty about lies as scumtells.

2. non scum should want a lynch because of this simple math example;

If town lynches someone today we have a 2/8 chance to lynch one of the scum (and a 6/8 chance to lynch town)
If we no lynch than we have a 0/8 chance to lynch scum.
My role PM suggests I win by lynching scum, so the most likely strategy to win is to perform the action with the best chance to lynch scum - which is lynching someone.

Oh, now you're going to argue technicalities with me? You all know what I meant and from what I saw Drk was saying basically the same thing, please don't muck up all our confusion more by calling people liars when they may mean something different from what you think and they're making such a very small point anyway.

??? What are your thoughts about Rusty's case on ferrett then? Also, that is a pretty negative reaction to me basically pointing out you were wrong about something but claiming at the same time it's fairly likely all you did was make a mistake - why so defensive?


@Rusty, could you please asap explain why Modoskull is more scummy than me?

Thor665 wrote:

WARORK93 wrote:Okay, besides the fact that you think I'm lying and besides the fact that I voted for you, what does me wanting to make a tie have to do with me being scum? Or do you just not like me?

Surely a non scum would want a no lynch instead of a bad lynch? Or is that just me?

1. Rusty is going to be lynched. WARORK leaps in and votes Thor, making it a tie and preventing Rusty lynch. If Rusty is later shown to be scum who is suddenly looking very much like a partner to scumRusty? WARORK. (that, and I don't like you ) Also, it has absolutely nothing to do with me catching you in a "lie" and the only reason I even brought up the "lie" was to make a point to Rusty about lies as scumtells.

2. non scum should want a lynch because of this simple math example;

If town lynches someone today we have a 2/8 chance to lynch one of the scum (and a 6/8 chance to lynch town)
If we no lynch than we have a 0/8 chance to lynch scum.
My role PM suggests I win by lynching scum, so the most likely strategy to win is to perform the action with the best chance to lynch scum - which is lynching someone.

Oh, now you're going to argue technicalities with me? You all know what I meant and from what I saw Drk was saying basically the same thing, please don't muck up all our confusion more by calling people liars when they may mean something different from what you think and they're making such a very small point anyway.

??? What are your thoughts about Rusty's case on ferrett then? Also, that is a pretty negative reaction to me basically pointing out you were wrong about something but claiming at the same time it's fairly likely all you did was make a mistake - why so defensive?


@Rusty, could you please asap explain why Modoskull is more scummy than me?

Okay well, now that at least you admitted you dont like me, I already told you I brought the vote to a tie because I didn't think rusty was scum, if he turns out to be then oops I'm a nub, go figure, if you all wanna vote for me for that, go ahead, end my misery

That aside, sure my other reaction is negative, or at least defensive, the only thing I've been told by you is that I'm wrong, in fact, I haven't seen you really agree with anyone else either...

But I digress, I maintain that I meant something different from what you're saying and was not lying/ making a mistake.

My thoughts about Ferret is that he's been pretty concise but I guess that little comment makes me look like scum....

This game collects people who blather together.
If I can say something in 5 words, I do.
Usually people misinterpret those 5 words though.
Or think I'm cryptic.

@ferrett - it's a game of deduction through communication.

Succinctness is pro-town, but so is communicating your thoughts clearly.

What's your read on Rusty right now though? Him hopping off of me actually put him back into risk for being lynched. He's lurking out on making a case on Mordoskull which is annoying, but I'm wondering why scumRusty would bother opening himself up to risk like that instead of trying to push my lynch through.

WARORK93 wrote:But I digress, I maintain that I meant something different from what you're saying and was not lying/ making a mistake.

1. You said Drk_O said something that, in fact, you said.
2. I pointed out how Drk_O hadn't said what you said.
3. ?
4. Profit.

It's the whole "he didn't say that" conversation from me and the "yah he did" conversation from you. Drk_O never said my case was nothing but he's lurking, he said my case was nothing but 'Thor says vote for Drk_O' which suggest Drk_O felt the need to either downplay my case by making it look totally random, and/or he felt like I was onto something by calling him on his lurking and/or he was just being silly and forgot I ever presented a reason for the vote.

You shouldn't support him for something like that unless you have your own facts straight.

How am I lurking? It's been a day. I was unable to post anymore yesterday as I was in the hopsital getting a prescription for Shingles.

I'm currently voting for Mordoskul because:
1) His comments from before my vote don't make any sense (at least to me). I want him to explain them.
2) He's been too quiet all game. I'd classify it more as lurking than observing as he's hasn't been all that forthcoming with observations.
3) I don't like some of your arguments Thor, especially not the ones you lynched Stynier with, but you have been vocal. I'm still not sure about your defense of ferrett, but I did defend Stynier.
4) I'm not sure about ferrett. He could just be really bad at the game. Regardless, pressure hasn't seemed to shake anything loose from either Thor or ferrett.
5)Mordoskul didn't even make a meaningful response to my complaints against his case. Making a gibberish post could be a scum trying to appear active when they wish to do nothing but lurk more. Note that Mordoskul didn't really add anything more to the conversation, he just went with one of the two closest to death.

Since I know that WARORK93 isn't my partner in crime, I don't see why he would try to save me unless he is pro-town.

WARORK93 wrote:But I digress, I maintain that I meant something different from what you're saying and was not lying/ making a mistake.
1. You said Drk_O said something that, in fact, you said.
2. I pointed out how Drk_O hadn't said what you said.
3. ?
4. Profit.

It's the whole "he didn't say that" conversation from me and the "yah he did" conversation from you. Drk_O never said my case was nothing but he's lurking, he said my case was nothing but 'Thor says vote for Drk_O' which suggest Drk_O felt the need to either downplay my case by making it look totally random, and/or he felt like I was onto something by calling him on his lurking and/or he was just being silly and forgot I ever presented a reason for the vote.

You shouldn't support him for something like that unless you have your own facts straight.

If you really want an answer to this, why don't you ask Drk what he really meant? I'm still convinced we were saying the same thing.

Whats the point in arguing it? Its not like I won anyone over with that argument anyway....

Since I know that WARORK93 isn't my partner in crime, I don't see why he would try to save me unless he is pro-town.

thanks for that but unless some people change around their votes, its gonna be in vain....

@RustyKnight

Apologies for the gibberish, I'm new at this and just getting into the part. I'll be more articulate next time.

@Rusty - my big issue with it was just that you seemed to come out of nowhere with the Mordoskull case. Literally thus far today it was vote Thor - badmouth ferrett but don't vote him, continue to vote Thor and badmouth ferrett...BAM - Mordoskull! Was there anything prior to Mordoskull's vote of tyou where you outlined suspicion/issue with Mordoskull? Because I can't recall it if it exits. Do you agree or disagree that the shift is sudden?

WARORK93 wrote:I'm still convinced we were saying the same thing.

WARORK93 wrote:Whats the point in arguing it? Its not like I won anyone over with that argument anyway....

WARORK93 wrote:thanks for that but unless some people change around their votes, its gonna be in vain....

Facepalm explanations:
1. No, you weren't. After I pointed out my case on him Drk-O acted surprised and flat out admitted he'd forgotten that part.
2. Because I was making a point to Rusty about lies in scum cases, as I already said. Also, I'm anal retentive about actually making sure the truth is what the conversation is about.
3. So I take it you're now 100% on Rusty being town? Previous to this post you didn't seem to be thinking that way.

Unvote: RustyKnight
I'm starting to become convinced that a Rusty lynch is not a good idea. I'll be back late tonight or tomorrow with either a Drk_O or WARORK vote, I want to read some of their actions again and see if brilliance strikes. I am still against a Thor lynch