NETA: If I were scum, wouldn’t one my scum partners have taken up my case on Natlaw? Or do you think they are bussing me at lylo???
I believe the question that is asked here, is “What force drives 4 pondies to agree on a vote, at this state in the game.”
If I can turn your snipped statement as such, let me continue.
I would have to think, obviously, that, that force is “Truth”, in as much as “truth” for pond would mean a successful lynch.
All of that to say this ::
If this current vote on you is not in truth, I can only imagine what other force would have to be in effect to have people agreeing with me.
That’s a scary thought. If it is not true.
Wow, that one took some work for me to type out. I hope you guys understand me.
NETA :
That’s a scary thought. If that ““Force”” is not truth.
I am quite sure that 4 pondies have not agreed to lyse me whatever the force.
Where are the scum votes? Where is the scum bandwagon? It’s on me!
Where are USCDiver’s and amrussell’s votes? If they are scum with you they might still pick it up.
For there to be a scum bandwagon on you, Rysto and/or Oredigger have to be scum - meaning they both bussed scum before. We haven’t heard from, Oredigger latelt either.
For scum to vote to win (if at lynch or lose) they require two town votes on town (or gamble with Spawn/tie votes), either way they would probably wait until the last minute to (switch) vote.
You and Rysto have only bussed Kelly when the evidence was overwhelming. Oredigger, oddly, did not vote Kelly, but did vote Alka.
No, I wasn’t talking about Summer Four. Rysto voted Kelly Summer Three and Oredigger voted Alka Summer Five. Summer Four but he voted as well, but Alka wasn’t really in danger of a lynch then - although he might have been if Kelly hadn’t fumbled his claim.
I haven’t had much to say. Looking over the Texcat lyse the case seems pretty flimsy but with half the town voting for her at this point in the Day it seems pretty much over. I’m not sure that a scum bandwagon is really happening just due to timing.
If we are at LYLO then the scum would want to wait and pile on any townie vote for a townie at the end of the Day so that the town doesn’t have time to react and counter the vote. Building a wagon early give town to realize what’s going on and pick one of the people on the wagon as the consensus vote. Especially since Meeko in on this wagon there really isn’t much room for this to be a scum driven lyse.
Of course it’s likely that there is at least one scum out of those three but at this point in the game that could be said of any group of three. I think enough people have seen that there is something fishy with Sach so it’s a good place to jump to if you’re worried about being on a scum driven wagon.
Unvote: Natlaw
Vote: sachertorte
Last ditch attempt at a self-defense vote.
NETA Last ditch effort not only for me, but for the pond.
Pondies, wake up! I am a plankton. I am not scum!
I’ve read back over the last several Days and I maintain my suspicion of Rysto based mostly on the voting at the end of Day 3. The fact that several other now-confirmed Town players shared that suspicion at the time is encouraging. But I recognize that his lynch unlikely to happen Today. So I also looked over the TexCat case and can see that it has some merits. The problem is that Rysto seems to be one of the players leading that case. I believe that Scum will always take an opportunity to bus another Scum in the right situation, but it seems to me that at the Endgame it would be much easier to just lynch a Townie.
That being said, I always prefer votes to be placed on the player you think is most scummy and not the one you think it most likely to be lynched.
Vote Rysto
I’m really stuck. I can see the case for TexCat (although I’m not convinced by sach’s argument about a Vig-proof role) but I’m just very nervous about committing. I also don’t have much time. However, I’ve got to at some point quite soon so…
on Natlaw:
My recent exchange with him got me thinking:
-
He disagrees with me about (one of) my reasons for leaning town on sach, but doesn’t say himself what his opinion of sach is. From reading it once, you might think he disagreed with my conclusion as well as my reasoning, but he doesn’t actually say that. The effect is to raise some doubt about sach’s status without ever committing him to an opinion. It’s a very subtle way of smudging.
-
In fact, it smacks of exactly what we’re talking about in that discussion - using arguments against cases to shape the debate without actually committing. It’s a little funny that he’s been so quick to jump on this as a good scum tactic, and then does it himself. Maybe he’s peculiarly aware of just how good a tactic it is.
-
I did a (quick) review. Natlaw made a case against Mahaloth (partly based on mine) but other than that I don’t think he’s taken the lead on anybody. He has criticised cases quite a lot though - he was defending Alka on Day 5, but he’s also critiqued Rysto’s case against Diggit (before yesterDay) and he’s spent a bit of time arguing with Meeko about his cases/positions. What is interesting is that of the two genuine town powerrole claims we’ve had, he’s been skeptical about both, voting for Diggit and only not voting for story because he mistimed his vote. But my main impression is that he’s led a very blameless life. There’s a lot of posts that are interesting discussions about cases or strategy, but which don’t really lead anywhere.
Oh, and
vote spawn
At this point, I don’t think I will move my vote.
If I’m wrong, then at least I will be par for the course. Still do not understand the Diggit lynch, and I feel like I never will. The sad thing is, everyone will say, that, that is my problem, and not the town players who voted for him. I also feel like I will never get that, either.
Further, for the above and other reasons, I remain at a point where I’m not sure I understand or enjoy Mafia anymore. I frankly wanted out 3 weeks or so ago.
Or I could be right.
Obligatory “What would Scum say now to get a last minute unvote” type comments.
Obligatory “But you didn’t show any change in vote to Diggit” type comment.
Obligatory longer comment that you guys pretend to read, and pretend to understand. If Meeko is lucky.
Meeko, You VOTED for Diggit!!
On Rysto:
The main points of Rysto have been well-rehearsed -
- The “PIS” vote against special ed
- The late vote for Kelly on Day 3
Looking over his posts, I also note that:
- He was the one who pushed the fluid lynch on Day Two. It was quite an extensive post, and in fact it came at a time when Kelly was lynch leader. Could be an honest case, could be an attempt to put a new name in front of the town
- The other obvious fact is that he was pushing Diggit consistently since about Day Three. That could be monomania, but it could also be identifying a weak and plausible target and focusing on that.
- He defended Alka on Day Five.
The vote for Kelly is the big issue here, I think. I originally didn’t like the case around this when it was presented as simple matter of elimination. The question is, what was he trying to get out of it? He created a tie and he put Kelly at risk. In fact, what made people suspect Alka was his last-minute effort to put Kelly back into a tie after Cookies made Kelly the leader. So it’s a vote that ultimately put not one but two scum at risk. Was he doing it for credibility? Such a late vote would tend not to win cred, even if it didn’t raise suspicion.
I’m suspicious of sachertorte mainly for his Mahaloth vote and that’s why I listed him as one of my runner ups. If I wasn’t clear in my response to you: I think him criticizing cases (and vocally stating his opinions and reasons as he likes to point out) is pro-town but it isn’t really anti-scum downside either. So more a null tell with regard to his alignment.
He didn’t vote Diggit, but I (obviously) didn’t agree with his reasoning that there must have been another town power role.
It follows more from what I said earlier: making cases (especially on things not mentioned) before is harder that reacting to existing cases - both for scum and town - because that’s own experience.
I’ve got to place a vote.
I’m going to use yesterDay as my touchstone. Scum had a clear motive to vote for Digger, once he’d made his claim. If they didn’t lyse him, they’d never get rid of him. Some people already had votes on him - if scum, they’d be happy to leave them there. Three people voted after the original claim - Natlaw (who said he’d guessed Scotsman from the redacted version), Diver and TexCat. Even as I write that I’m asking myself why Natlaw came out and said it. sach and I had the same guess, but were being careful not to say because public revelation would make Diggit effectively powerless if we were right. Natlaw seemed to have no such qualms. It could be an attempt to signal fellow scum - but would it need to be done immediately? You’d think it could wait for Winter, but arguably this was the best opportunity scum had. If Diggit had survived the Winter, would he have got a majority toDay?
**
vote Natlaw**
I realise we have to co-ordinate, so if this end’s up being a one-off vote that might give scum cover to make a last-minute play, I’ll move my vote.
Hi. Still busy here.
Quick scan shows little reason for me to move my vote at this time.
If you need me to move my vote, please use a big font to catch my eye with explicit instructions on what to do. It would be best if Meeko did this (if possible). I have a meeting this afternoon so I may not be able to check in again, but I will try.
The Spawn votes Oredigger and sachertorte
Final vote count:
Spawn 8
TexCat 4
sachertorte 3
Rysto 1
Natlaw 1
Oredigger77 1
[del]1: special_ed[/del]
[del]2: ComeToTheDarkSideWeHaveCookies[/del]
[del]3: Drain Bead[/del]
4: Oredigger77 – Sachertorte (1913), Spawn (1913)
[del]5: storyteller0910 [/del]
6: Meeko – Spawn (1887), [del]amrussell[/del] (1921-1942), TexCat (1942)
[del]7: Mahaloth [/del]
[del]8: Freudian Slit[/del]
9: USCDiver – Spawn (1890), Rysto (1971)
[del]10: Alka Seltzer[/del]
[del]11: peekercpa[/del]
12: Natlaw – Spawn (1893), TexCat (1957)
[del]13: Zeriel[/del]
[del]14: DiggitCamara[/del]
15: amrussell – Spawn (1972), Natlaw (1977)
[del]16: KellyCriterion[/del]
[del]17: Red Skeezix[/del]
18: sachertorte – TexCat (1918), Spawn (1918)
[del]19: fluiddruid[/del]
20: TexCat – Spawn (1905), [del]Natlaw[/del] (1946-1969), sachertorte (1969)
21: Rysto – TexCat (1911), Spawn (1911)
Over the past Summer, much of the discussion in the Pond centered on the question of whether this was their last chance to attack the Scum.
It was.
TexCat, a Plankton, is dead
With TexCat’s death, the already-precarious ecological balance of the Pond finally collapsed entirely, and the few remaining native denizens were no longer able to put up any resistance to the intruders.
Meeko, a Communal Organism, is dead
USCDiver, a Plankton, is dead
Natlaw, a Plankton, is dead
sachertorte, and Encysted Spore, is dead
Oredigger77, amrussell, and Rysto each retired to a separate corner of the Pond. Although the devastated Pond is now almost devoid of life, that will change soon enough, as they Spawn again and again to refill the environment.
Scum wins!
Argh, stupid Daylight savings in America though I had another hour :(.
A Scotsman also is a passive power (Diggit implied he actively used it every Winter), typically survives a lynch as well and can get confirmed on a failed attempt. Why would Scum want to lynch a role like that and confirm him or at least prove his power? Not really, although if Rysto and/or sachertorte is scum it could have been to derail their possible lynch.
If he had wanted it hidden he should have kept it hidden (longer); IIRC he claimed when the vote was tied.
Diggit eventual claim was completely untestable, so I don’t see how him surviving a Winter would change that WiFoM. If he would get a majority no way to know for sure. He got one last Summer - including from you. And you own speculation was no reason to unvote for you either.