Mafia Reunion Day 6

[snfaulkner]

@Johnny_Bravo

That bit does, yes. He’s decided to categorically ignore me, though, despite having a vote on me. That is scummy.

I’m glad you’re back and playing. I know there’s a lot to go back and read over, so I’ll summarize.

Sachertorte refused to entertain the notion that there was any circumstance in which a 3P cult could conceivably harm town. His stance was that there was no likely scenario in which the cult, as described, would ever throw the game to either scum team. I found this disingenuous and pushed him on it. That was the core of our argument, and why I ended up voting for him. I repeatedly, over multiple Days, said that I would drop the pressure on the cult if more of them would claim - that would have gone a long way towards easing any worries that they were scum running a con.

Inner’s first vote on me was with no explanation whatsoever. When I prodded him, he said it was for advocating a cultist lynch. As has been pointed out by more players than me, this was in no way a real representation of my argument. Votes like that are scummy.

Having a bad case is one thing, but Inner has said that he refuses to go back and do a read on me. He disagrees with one of my stances, says it’s scummy, and when I pressed him to back up his case with more details he told me that he would not. That is scummy.

I would find him more credible if he claimed cultist, yes. But again, he’s ignoring the votes on him. He’s ignoring requests for more information. He’s ignoring direct questions. All of that is scummy.

Plus, he’s edited at least five posts over the course of the game. I stopped counting after a while during my reread.

I’m on board for an Inner lynch if Khameleon doesn’t gain any traction. But post editing isn’t bothering me.

[Captain_Klutz]

@TexCat

So, here’s my game so far.

1. I thought Colby’s odd wording meant he was scum. He seemed to confirm that with his posts, or lack of posts, the rest of Day 1.
2. I thought that the Brewha lynch was a travesty. Brewha had originally offered to sacrifice herself for the good of town. And I thought that to characterize her statement as a LIE was wrong. And I still think that Crys’s claim made no sense. But it was hard to discuss because of all the people who thought that we should be hunting scum and leave LUTHA alone. And that anyone even talking about 3rd parties is scum. I let Paul get under my skin with his insistence that Brewha lied and we should let Crys be, and then his ridiculous theories about hunting mafia over wolves.
3. I thought ProfP was scum until he had red and orange people voting him. Then I didn’t.
4. I thought Ender made a good case on Boozy and voted there. Unfortunately, Ender seems to have gone quiet since.

Somewhere in there I’ve halfway given up on the game. It seems like it’s just too big to get a handle on, and that makes it easy for people to grab hold of a simple statement like Brewha “lied” and run with it. Or like Inner Stickler just did: JohnnyB talked about lynching LUTHA; he must be scum. And what’s worse, we’re letting them get away with it.

All this to say, that if you can’t identify with me, then good on you. Because I’m feeling a little bit hopeless this game.

I do like this defence from TexCat. And the frustration at the end feels very real. (I’ve been feeling a bit overwhelmed and exhausted myself, hence the dropoff in posting. Apologies for this.)

Texcat’s vote record makes sense. The worst one was on Day 2, keeping the vote on Crys when she was very likely third party. But she did not move to the easily justifiable brewha wagon, instead defending his lie in Day 2.986. This does not look like the actions of scum.

Unvote TexCat

[Biotop]

Okay, after reading the case against Inner Stickler, I think that the whole matter could be resolved if** Inner Stickler** simply tells us all why he thinks **Johnny Bravo **is so “incredibly scummy.” So let’s have it, Inner Stickler. Do you really have any case? If you really think **JB **is Scum why are you not responding?

You can now add me to those who interpret this silence from **IS ** as that of a Scum player with a fear of digging a deeper hole.

[snfaulkner]

@Biotop

Okay, after reading the case against Inner Stickler, I think that the whole matter could be resolved if** Inner Stickler** simply tells us all why he thinks **Johnny Bravo **is so “incredibly scummy.” So let’s have it, Inner Stickler. Do you really have any case? If you really think **JB **is Scum why are you not responding?

You can now add me to those who interpret this silence from **IS ** as that of a Scum player with a fear of digging a deeper hole.

Scum over lutha? I can see either. Not town tho.

[snfaulkner]

So, totally OOG, god damn if Tom fuckin Jones isn’t hanging out at my local bar! I texted the wifey and she is on her way from across town to give him her bra.

[Biotop]

@snfaulkner

Scum over lutha? I can see either. Not town tho.

Maybe LUTHA. You’d think LUTHA might still try and make a case, though.

[Biotop]

SNF, do you see merit in my case against Zeriel? Why would he forget/misrepresent the reason he changed his mind and voted for Professor Pepperwinkle?

[snfaulkner]

@Biotop

SNF, do you see merit in my case against Zeriel? Why would he forget/misrepresent the reason he changed his mind and voted for Professor Pepperwinkle?

It seemed like good case yesterday when you posted it, but I was focused on kameleon and inner and texcat. I’d need to investigate zerial a bit more myself. He hasn’t really left an impression on me yet this game. Wifey n Co just arrived at the bar, so I guess I need to be a part of this ensuing madness. I’ll try and be back on a bit later tho.

[snfaulkner]

Fyi, Tom Jones drinks Newcastle.

[Johnny_Bravo]

@snfaulkner

Fyi, Tom Jones drinks Newcastle.

That’s not unusual.

[TexCat]

ack! ack! earworm!

[Inner_Stickler]

If you read D5 #296 and the ensuing conversation and don’t come away with the sensation that Johnny Bravo is scum, then I don’t know what to say because it reeks to me.

@Inner_Stickler

Once we get a few scum kills on the board, I may be more amenable to cutting sach up and seeing if he’s filled with almonds or lies.

Turns out I wasn’t. But now Johnny Bravo is trying to cast it as some sort of hard rule that I intimated. Tsk, tsk.
I wasn’t aware there was a rule that we had to formally acknowledge people voting for us.

Texcat, Johnny Bravo, HookerChemical and Raventhief, you are formally recognized as voting for me. And I forgive you.

[Johnny_Bravo]

@Inner_Stickler

If you read D5 #296 and the ensuing conversation and don’t come away with the sensation that Johnny Bravo is scum, then I don’t know what to say because it reeks to me.

You’re the only one with a vote on me, so maybe you should try and make it more clear.

@Inner_Stickler

Turns out I wasn’t. But now Johnny Bravo is trying to cast it as some sort of hard rule that I intimated. Tsk, tsk.

What changed your mind?

@Inner_Stickler

I wasn’t aware there was a rule that we had to formally acknowledge people voting for us.

There are very few rules in this game. Responding to people who are talking to you is a much broader guideline.

[Zeriel]

@Biotop

I would like to be able to let this go, so Zeriel can you kindly explain why you voted for Professor Pepperwinkle on Day 4 when your stated reason for that vote had not occurred yet?

I’ll put my vote here while waiting for an answer.

Vote Zeriel

So I actually had to go back and read over the day to see what I was seeing at that point. And really it boiled down to the transition that Prof made between “fluffy poster” and pointedly saying “this confirmed-because-dead townie who defended me is dead, woe is me for I am surely next”. Then too, the “lynch cult first” strategy was not fully pro-scum but gets scummier every day, and finally (the thing I’d mostly forgotten about) was that he posted in D4.25 about wanting to look for historically strong players who were inexplicably to him still alive.

So that all piled up in my head, because I was reading but not formulating posts, and here we sit. When I got to the point where I absolutely needed to vote, Prof and Diggit were tied for second, and it had stuck in my head that the anti-Prof cases from the beginning of D4 seemed more substantial than they had on D3. So I picked Prof since I’ve been on record the whole game as a proponent of lynch as much as possible, and Boozy was already well in the bag.

This game is a giant pain in my ass to follow.
Moving on.

Johnny Bravo, one weird question. Your case against Khameleon in D6#29 is just okay, I think, but what jumped out at me is that you have a link that purports to be a “slip about not being worried about a nightkill”, but what you’ve actually linked to is Guiri accusing Khameleon of not worrying about a night kill in the context of a response to a mostly-not-going-anywhere case from you.

So that seems like a LOT of innuendo to pack into a fairly ordinary “I’ll respond to this townie’s case against me when convenient as it’s getting no traction”.

I’m trying very hard not to judge people for doing things at convenient-to-them times, given my own constraints on participation.

Plumpudding, you may have voted for **TexCat **starting on Day Two, but you haven’t voted for her again even in passing until yesterday. Which also kinda makes **Hoopy’s **comment weird, too, since you and he were the only voters on **TexCat **yesterday.

At this point I’m also reading up on other people’s WoWs.

I am NOT willing to accept cultist anything as anything. Without knowing their win condition I refuse to take a position on them beyond “not town, but not scum”.

Despite the case against him, Inner Stickler does have one thing mostly statistically right–late-day vote churn is often an indication that scum is trying to arrange things. The problem with Inner’s assertion is that scum are also not suicidal and since we have two teams each has proportionally a lot less wiggle room to play effective vote games without being super obvious.

[Johnny_Bravo]

@Zeriel

So that seems like a LOT of innuendo to pack into a fairly ordinary “I’ll respond to this townie’s case against me when convenient as it’s getting no traction”.

You could read it that way, but I don’t think it’s unfair to read it as Khameleon not being concerned about a night kill.

I agree that several aspects of the Khameleon case are weak - her case is one where several little things add up.

I think Inner is currently a much better vote.

[ComeToTheDarkSideWeHaveCookies]

Huzzah for 2 days off in a row. Reading…

[LightFoot]

@Inner_Stickler

If you read D5 #296 and the ensuing conversation and don’t come away with the sensation that Johnny Bravo is scum, then I don’t know what to say because it reeks to me.

If you are referring to the exchange with ** Sach ** that this links to, I don’t see it.
or are you referring to an exchange between the two of you- that is not linked?

[Johnny_Bravo]

You know, reading back over the exchange did give me this:

@sachertorte

I’m putting Koldanar and Inner Stickler in my ‘not a cultist’ list.

That makes me feel even better about my vote.

[LightFoot]

@Zeriel

~snip~
Moving on.

Johnny Bravo, one weird question. Your case against Khameleon in D6#29 is just okay, I think, but what jumped out at me is that you have a link that purports to be a “slip about not being worried about a nightkill”, but what you’ve actually linked to is Guiri accusing Khameleon of not worrying about a night kill in the context of a response to a mostly-not-going-anywhere case from you.

see my post # 15 this Day it shows the quote ( is it the same one you are referencing? )

~snip~

I am NOT willing to accept cultist anything as anything. Without knowing their win condition I refuse to take a position on them beyond “not town, but not scum”.

they are warm bodies currently to prevent a Scum win. but that is it for me as well.

Despite the case against him, Inner Stickler does have one thing mostly statistically right–late-day vote churn is often an indication that scum is trying to arrange things. The problem with Inner’s assertion is that scum are also not suicidal and since we have two teams each has proportionally a lot less wiggle room to play effective vote games without being super obvious.

can you parse that last sentence differently? I am not tracking your point here.

[Mahaloth]

**Day 6 Vote Count

Innerstickler(4) - Texcat(55), johnnybravo(81), hookerchemical(84), raventhief(89)

Texcat(3) - Hoopy(24), plumpudding(31), guiri(94)

Khameleon(1) - snfaulkner(6),

Johnnybravo(1) - innerstickler(32)

Totallost(1) - Guiri(40)

Zeriel(1) - Biotop(65)**