Trust me, you don’t look “bandwagony”. You posted a credible post with evidence and quotes for your case. If you had just chimed in with a vote for Mahaloth after a few others voted for him, THEN you’d be jumping to the wagon.
Thanks for the reassurance. It just feels like I’m doing exactly what Hooker Chemical was saying above that made him think I was scum…
:smack:
I’m not sure I understand the theory about peaking in the middle. Why would that be?
Current Vote Count:
Mahaloth 4 (DeadCat #500, TexCat #516, Hooker Chemical #518, ME #519)
Octarine 2 (Sub Plank #503, Dante G #504)
Biotop 1 (Mahaloth #495)
SNFaulkner 1 (Biotop #511)
Not voted yet:
Octarine
IRConfused
Please make corrections if you see errors.
I’m not quite sure I understand it either, but I fit in it 3 times now so far.
…or at least twice, possible a third.
It’s a pretty loose theory, but the first vote isn’t much of a threat and doesn’t really indicate scum trying to drive a mislynch. The next vote is a little more suspicions. Votes that put a player into the lead or give a majority make me :dubious:. But piling on after the majority is less hinky since the player is going to be lynched anyway. The first is a little hinky because it could be scum making sure somebody doesn’t unvote and prevent the lynch.
There are plenty of questions to ask associated with this. Looking back at the first day, we could have asked if a (not actually) scummy Sario was voting (actually scummy) Prof P to make a scum v scum vote pair that would “exonerate” one scum later. I think it was Dead Cat’s vote that put Sario into the lead, so was that the vote of scum saving Prof P from the lynch? Continuing from Dead Cat’s, in considering my vote yesterday, I suspected WFT’s vote was scum piling on in case somebody defected from Sario to Prof P. My vote really put things away, and Mahaloth’s vote (the 8th and last on Sario) was merely a formality.
At least that’s my theory. The fact that Astral and WF Tomba were near the middle of the votes on Sario doesn’t help my theory.
You’re a distant fourth in my book, behind Mahaloth, Dante G, and IRConfused. But your voting record is as bad as mine, which is horrible.
No! Boo! I’m hardly lurkery. I want to live, dammit!
Stop the wagon! No! No! Whoa, nelly!
Not sure what to do. These things tend to get rolling on their own. I’m Town and playing a very Townie game. Not much more to say than that.
**Official vote count:
Mahaloth - 4 vote: (Dead Cat 500) (TexCat 516)(HookerChemical 518)(snfaulkner 519)
Octarine - 2 vote: (Suburban Plankton 503) (Dante G 504)
Biotop - 1 vote: (MAhaloth 495)
Snfaulkner 1 vote: (Biotop 511)**
Sorry to be away for a day, but I spent Wednesday in Richmond with my wife. It is rare for us both to have the same day off, and she made me promise “No Mafia.”
I see that a lot has gone on and there are many posts to digest. I will add my thoughts after work tonight when I have done more than just skimming.
However, Mahaloth, though you have been on my case all game, if you are Town we need you. Saying “whoa” and claiming Town is not giving anyone a reason not to send a vote your way. Please respond in more detail to some of the charges laid at your door.
Hello? Unvote me and vote Biotop! Unvote anyone else, too! Don’t let me die just so it isn’t you!
Charges? I’m not sure if I get them.
-
I stand by my vote for you and think you are scum.
-
I haven’t lurked, if that is a charge. I’m active.
Is there something else I have not answered?
Could you explain your vote for Hooker yesterday?
Well, this is certainly a compelling argument. :dubious:
The problem is, a vote on ‘you’ is nearly always preferable to a vote on ‘me’, because I know I’m not Scum, but I’m not so sure about you. It’s the same argument that applies to self-preservation votes.
In **Mahaloth’s **‘defense’, his playstyle is often rather laissez-faire, so his apparent apathy here isn’t out of character for him. The tone of his last few posts (“No! Boo!”, “Hello?”) *does *seem out of character…but I’m not so sure a Scum Mahaloth would do that…
I can’t tell if this is well-meaning but way off-base, or if it’s deliberately designed to be malicious.
We’re in Day 3. So far, the Scum have had 2 kills. On Night 1 they killed Astral, who also falls into your ‘experienced player’ bucket. On Night 2 they did kill a ‘less experienced’ player, yes. But that player also happened to be the Town Doc. Now, that may have been blind luck on their part, or someone may have spotted a breadcrumb someplace, or the Scum might even have a Role Cop of their own.
But in any case, it’s quite a bit too early to start calling people out simply for not being dead yet.
I managed to get through this effort last night, but just didn’t have the energy to write anything up when I was done. Even now I don’t seem to have it in me to produce a wall of text on each player, so I’m just going to hit the highlights.
I’m leaning Town on Dead Cat. Quite a bit of this lean comes from just one part of a single post from Day 1
It’s not so much that the statement is accurate (because it very much isn’t), but just the fact that it was made. I just don’t see Scum making a statement like that so early in the game. Add to that the fact that Dead Cat later cast the vote that put Sario ahead of Prof P. for the lynch, and I have a very hard time seeing Scum putting that big of a target on their back.
I’m not happy with HookerChemical’s voting history. On Day 1 it looked like he was trying to rack up miles on his ‘Frequent Voter’ card, but most of them were not all that consequential. He voted for Sario very early (the second vote of the Day), then switched to make the first vote on WF Tomba. Later he placed the only vote (at the time) on Dead Cat, then voted for IRConfused when the rest of the Town was engaged in the Sario-Prof P. debate. And then just near the end finally added to the Sario train, putting it pretty much out of reach. So, a lot of voting, but almost none of it having any real effect on the game at all.
Day 2, Hooker spent most of the Day with a vote on Dante G, then switched late to WF Tomba, again pretty much assuring that the gap was too large to close.
I’m leaning Scum here.
I was very firmly in the ‘Biotop is Town’ camp before I did my reread. Now I haven’t exactly changed that position, but I’m not sure why I felt it so strongly to begin with. the biggest thing I got out of my reread was that Biotop must have been a cheerleader in a previous life:
He did keep his vote on Prof P. on Day 1, and he’s done a lot of in-fdepth analysis, and that’s what’s helping to counteract the sickeningly sweet taste from his “rah, rah!” posts.
I’m struggling to find a read on snfaulkner. He voted for Prof P. on Day 1, but was almost begging people to give him a reason not to. when he finally got one, he switched to Sario. I didn’t come across anything else that really stands out to me, so I’m calling this one ‘incomplete’.
I am not apathetic and haven’t been in other games.
However, I am scum in this game, so good work, folks!
I don’t think it’s good as the sole basis for a vote, but it might be worth considering in the case where you’re on the fence between two people. Even if you think it’s a bad idea today, it grows more reasonable by the Day.
If we’re off on the number of scum, we mat be at lynch or lose (given a vigilante misfire tonight). That’s unlikely (assumes higher than expected number of scum, vigilante has use of ability and kills town), but we can’t be certain we have much game left.
Yes, as the game progresses, it becomes a more viable basis for a vote. I just think you’re a Day or two early in this case.
I disagree on it being a ‘tie-breaker’, though. I prefer to base decisions on in-game actions rather than ‘how experienced’ a player may or may not be…though I will admit that I do consider ‘past performance’ vs. ‘current play’ (as with Mahaloth, just a few posts ago), so I guess I can’t say that a player’s experience is *completely *irrelevant
But in any case it’s a personal decision, so I won’t say “You’re wrong”, just “I disagree”.
And if we’re currently at Lynch-or-Lose, it’s a moot point.