[M-1,7,15,18] PikMafia - The End! Scum Wins!

[Kirbyoshi]

I think we should get more Greenstreet votes Swiss. Why are you so anxious to call it a day?

 

[Swiss]

That post doesn't literally mean 'end the day' I was remarking on the insane inactivity.

Not sure on the Green lynch.

 

[Tandora]

Did an ISO on Greenstreet

Post 9 - Confirmed
Post 20 - Inbeforekirbystart
Post 30 - RVS kirbyoshi
Post 39 - Vote Vanderzant
Post 67 - Answers Jungle's RQS, no other information
Post 87 - Deflects suspicion off Swiss.
Post 91 - Paraphrase "Convince me of a Swiss pressure wagon"
Post 114 - "I want to lynch an active player"
Post 116 - "I want to lynch an active player. If I wanted to answer with a name I would have. For now, it'll suffice to let scum know that they can't just post their way out of being lynched.

I don't want anyone to be safe."
Post 120 - Unvote
Post 125 - Paraphrase "I want to lynch actives and two other players want to lynch inactives. This creates a danged if you do, danged if you don't situation."
Post 128 - Seems particularly contradictory. "If everyone wanted to lynch an active, I would go after the inactives. I just want a cross section of suspicion. " This is after several posts of wanting to get an active? Yet still claims scum would sweet talk their way out of a lynch.
Post 138 - Refutes Vand's wagon attempt on self with gopher gif.
Post 143 - Claims to have already answered a question from Kat.
Post 154 - Reinforces wants to scumhunt all players.

Greenstreet has a good number of posts. Yet it feels that all his posts are the same material "We must scum hunt all players regardless of activity." He never gives any input on who he suspects is scum or really question other players on their motives. The only player interaction he's done is defend Swiss in what I consider WIFOM argument.

I believe after research, I approve of a Greenstreet bandwagon.

Vote greenstreet

 

[Riddle]

Vote: Greenstreet

I'm down for a wagon

 

[vanderzant]

Shall we just give scum the win through inactivity and call it a day then?

Never!

@Mod: Request vote count please!

 

[vanderzant]

Also, Kirby/Riddle/Tom/anyone I've missed, I'd still like to at least here your thoughts (if you have any) on the Swiss/Kat/Myself thing. Don't forget this.

 

[Swiss]

And if you don't have any thoughts on it, can you explain why not. Fanks.

I still want to lynch an inactive.

Green needs post soon, out of the people active in the thread, almost everyone has votes him. L-3 if my maths is correct.

 

[Greenstreet]

wow there are alot of votes on me.

@kirbyoshi - how was that a setup, i posted my view and vand disagreed.

I'm fine with being wagoned, but good reason would be lovely.

 

[Riddle]

On the Kat/Swiss thing

The whole basis of the argument was mostly unimportant, but I didn't actually see anything scummy from either people.

I refuse to speculate as to his direct motivations - they do not affect the probability of him being scum.

This is WRONG. Motivation is everything in mafia.

 

[Swiss]

I clarified what I meant soon after, as Kat misunderstood as well (my bad wording, not your fault).

 

[Riddle]

Oh, I guess I missed that :o

 

[Xivii]

Way too much inactivity in this game. Jungle has disappeared and tom hasn't posted even after being prodded. Ermac has been absent as usual, but I guess he has some kind of excuse? Vi is being replaced. Tanny and Kirbyoshi are posting more, but I'd still like to see more from Kirby Yoshi.

Based on all the inactivity, I'd really like some pressure on inactives.

The only other person that I can see as lynchable is Greenstreet, but I'd much rather go after an inactive. Greenstreet's play so far does seem weird to me especially after looking at tanny's ISO. But seriously the inactivity is going to be huge problem in this game if we don't fix it now.

Vote: Jungle

Answer my questions yo.

 

[Kataefi]

@Zensei: I think we should wagon someone like Tom or Riddle if we're to go the inactive route... especially considering they've been playing in other games. Though Riddle's more active. Also because Jungle's V/LA. And partly because:

http://www.smashboards.com/showpost.php?p=10516670&postcount=725

^so we can assume Tom has stopped caring about the game?

Also, if Swiss wagon isn't happening:

unvote
vote: Greenstreet

@Mod: votecount!

Tanny put it best - it's the "I want everyone to be suspicious" view that gets me. Plus partly because of the defence on Swiss, though in this case I'd much rather go Swiss first then Greenstreet. Did you hear about Twilight? Everyone found everyone suspicious there on the first few Days, so me and xonar had so much NK control as the two scummies who would have been stuck otherwise. I see your cross-section of suspicion as a means of recreating this bad situation for town. Also, If you want an active lynch and considering it's 3 days away from the deadline, why aren't you really pushing for one? I don't see a sense of urgency in your posts.

@Swiss: I didn't even notice that. EBWOP: "bus your [inactive] scum buddies". My statement makes sense now. Also consider my vote still on you.

@YoshiKirby: could you elaborate on how Greenstreet set Vanz up?

@Zensei: could you elaborate on your general reads you hinted at earlier?
_

Let's kill either Swiss/Greenstreet or an inactive toDay! We have 3 Days - No Lynch is unacceptable, though definitely believable considering 2 thirds of this game disappeared. We can't let that happen!

 

[Kataefi]

EBWOP: "I don't want anyone to be safe" as opposed to "I want everyone to be suspicious"

 

[Xivii]

Yeah that makes sense. I didn't know jungle was V/LA. But isn't Tom going to be modkilled since he was prodded?

 

[Xivii]

And who do you want my thoughts on, everyone?

 

[Swiss]

@Swiss: I didn't even notice that. EBWOP: "bus your [inactive] scum buddies". My statement makes sense now. Also consider my vote still on you.

I'll consider it on Green, which it is.

Why do you 'have a vote on me'? What is it which I have not explained to your satisfaction? I see no case, tunnelling ftw?

 

[vanderzant]

wow there are alot of votes on me.

@kirbyoshi - how was that a setup, i posted my view and vand disagreed.

I'm fine with being wagoned, but good reason would be lovely.

You adopted an anti-town playstyle/approach to the game, for the purpose of reminding everyone that "anyone" can be scum. I also think this is some sort of attempt to distance yourself from other players. You're also purposely being vague with a masked intent.

Also, to clarify for everyone else, I'm fine at this point with a Green lynch or an inactive lynch (if they aren't replaced or something by the end of the day).

 

[Tandora]

@ Mod: When can we expect a replacement for V?

1. Dark_Ermac - Inactive (Still V/LA?)
2. Kataefi
3. Kirbyoshi
4. Riddle
5. Vi veri Veniversum Vivus Vici (TPK) - To be replaced
6. Tom - Inactive
7. Junglefever - V/LA for a week
8. Exn
9. Greenstreet - Current lynch wagon
10. Swiss
11. vanderzant
12. Tandora

With two or three scum in the game, it is literally impossible for town to get a lynch at this point.
I still believe that Greenstreet is scum. However, with the deadline coming up and one of the rules is no deadline extensions, we may have to go for an inactive for town to have a chance at voting presence.

Dark Ermac or Junglefever would be good choices. I am leaning towards Dark Ermac.

 

[Xiivi]

Replacements have been contacted
3rd Vote Count!

Junglefever: Senzei (

)
Ermac: Swiss (

)
Greenstreet: Vanderzant, Kirbyoshi, Tandora, Riddle, Kataefi (

)

With 12 Alive, it takes 7 to Lynch!

Olimar checks his oxygen supplies,
You must return to the ship by the last moments of June 23rd, 2010!​

 

[Greenstreet]

if you are going to lynch me, decide quickly then put me at l-1.

Firstly, wasting time is anti town and it will give me a chance to roleclaim. Don't run out of time.

 

[Xivii]

I'm fine with Jungle, Tom, or Ermac. I agree with Green being a good choice, but like I said, the inactives are really going to hurt this game.

 

[Xivii]

Green defend yourself instead of making us put you at a roleclaim position... If you're town, why just sit there....?

 

[Greenstreet]

I've been in an exam today. And as far as I'm concerned I've done nothing anti -town.

KAT
Kat puts my cross-suspicion down to creating a pro-scum situation that she experienced in a previous game. Unfortunately I don't like the logic.

Did you hear about Twilight? Everyone found everyone suspicious there on the first few Days, so me and xonar had so much NK control as the two scummies who would have been stuck otherwise. I see your cross-section of suspicion as a means of recreating this bad situation for town.

I'm not sure how creating an environment where not only inactives are lynched is anti-town. Please elaborate on how this gave you NK control? To be honest, I refuse to see how, assuming everyone is talking regularly, how suspecting everyone creates an anti-town scenario.

Call me on it if I'm wrong, but the roles are randomly assigned, so I won't let pretty words sway me on Day 1, I'll suspect everyone. I apologise if that's poor strategy in a game on unknowns..

KIRBYOSHI
Kirbyoshi leaps from inactivity to wagoning me with the weakest, vaguest reasoning I've seen so far, which I requested he clarify.

Ugh, I'm back, sorry for my probz. I should be ok from now on though.

Vote: Greenstreet
You TOTALLY set Vandy up on the active/inactive thing, and I don't like it.

TANDORA

Greenstreet has a good number of posts. Yet it feels that all his posts are the same material "We must scum hunt all players regardless of activity." He never gives any input on who he suspects is scum or really question other players on their motives. The only player interaction he's done is defend Swiss in what I consider WIFOM argument.

I believe after research, I approve of a Greenstreet bandwagon.

Vote greenstreet

I answered a questions directed at me. I defended Swiss because I believe Kat was using poor logic and making a mountain out of a mole hill, which a few people fell for.

I then asserted my view of the game, it was disagreed with so I had to use more posts to explain it. Is that really scummy play?
I didn't name any of my suspicions? Sorry for planning to use caution before placing a vote. If I suspect everyone, I want to be sure I'm making the right choice. I don't like people extracting names from me early, especially when I haven't any in mind yet.

RIDDLE

Just keen for a wagon, after more?

If you want me lynched why? If you just want information from me, carry on.

VANDERZANT

Pretty sure my view just isn't sitting right with him. Is that really that scummy? Lynch worthy?

 

[Greenstreet]

Vote: kirbyoshi

Out of the votes on me, he's taken the least effort in trying to justify his vote on me. It's either laziness, or shameless wagoning, neither of which I'm a fan of.

He hasn't posted since his claimed he'd be more active either.

That's it.

 

[Kirbyoshi]

Clarification on my Green vote: I believe you purposely got Vand to say he was heavily on the side of pressuring inactives, or at least make it sound like that to the "weak-minded." Then, when suspicion was put on you, it enabled you to say something like "but you said..." I, however, am a "Toydarian" of sorts, in that I am not as easily fooled by that. THAT is why I'm voting for you. Going against popular opinion just for the sake of going against popular opinion is never pro-town, but is also very rarely scummy.

 

[M.K]

McCloud Replaces The Paprika Killer (Vi Veri VVV) effective immediately!​

 

[M.K]

Due to inactivity, SwordsRBroken replaces Tom immediately.

Inactivity will not be tolerated in this game. Inactivity is a reason for expulsion because it ruins the fundamentals of Mafia. Thank you for your participation, but inactivity is disgraceful. =)

Olimar finds a spare oxygen tank in the woods!

The deadline has been extended to:

Friday, June 25th, 2010​

 

[Tandora]

Welcome McCloud and SwordsRBroken!

I suppose since we have some extra time, you guys should take a read over and give us of your thoughts. Feel free to post some questions too.

Since two of our inactives have been replaced and one is on (I hope) legit V/LA, we can focus more on player's behavior rather then lack of. =3

I look forward to your posts!

 

[Swiss]

Kirb, you ignored Green saying he wasn't actually making a point with the post you mentioned, so he didn't 'set anyone up'.

Jesus, I feel like I'm either almost buddying or being incredibly slow but wtf is the case on Green? I fail to see a point he hasn't satisfactorily answered.

Going against popular opinion just for the sake of going against popular opinion is never pro-town, but is also very rarely scummy.

Ok...Very rarely scummy.... (Your other point seems null also, if you re-read properly)

All Green has done is to make sure NO PLAYER is safe from a lynch, yet here I see players jumping around screaming their heads off with scumdars tingling. It's a pro town move imo and if anyone can explain to me why not allowing scum to simply post enough to maintain 'activity' yet not contribute to the thread (and as such not be an 'inactive') is a bad thing, I'll be perfectly happy to retract my opinion.

FoS Kat

FoS Kirb (Less skimming plz)

FoS Riddle

Don't like the way these three went about it. Vanz seemed to be actually scumhunting and has followed a case on an active, even if I don't think the case has any merit. Tan seemed more...townie in his vote.

Would be happy to wagon any of these three or an inactive.


@anyone what's the status of Ermac, he V/LA? If not - wagon him.



Unvote vote Kat (Just 'till he explains himself effectively)


Swords 'n Cloud, want to weigh in please? Who do you want to lynch and why?

 

[Swiss]

EBWOP

Edit on this bit:

and if anyone can explain to me why not allowing scum/players to simply post enough to maintain 'activity' yet not contribute to the thread (and as such not be an 'inactive' and a lynch target) is a bad thing, I'll be perfectly happy to retract my opinion.


Summary:
He's stopped scum being able to post a bit and be safe, basically.



Pretty poor time for me to not be as eloquent as usual :/

 

[vanderzant]

and if anyone can explain to me why not allowing scum/players to simply post enough to maintain 'activity' yet not contribute to the thread (and as such not be an 'inactive' and a lynch target) is a bad thing, I'll be perfectly happy to retract my opinion.

Swiss, HOW has Green stopped active players from simply posting to avoid suspicion. He hasn't.

I want to lynch an active player. If I wanted to answer with a name I would have.

He's just been as vague as possible, for little to no reason at all. He's not ACTUALLY being the good guy and telling us why the "active" players in the thread could be scum. No, he's just brushing off everything and not doing any proper scumhunting. His vote is on Kirbyyoshi ffs!

If everyone wanted to lynch an active, I would go after the inactives. I just want a cross section of suspicion.

He's even assuming that everyone else is going to be stupid and ignore the "other side" of the activity spectrum. That's ****. I'm more than competent in scumhunting both active and inactive players. And so is everyone else.

 

[Greenstreet]

I'm not assuming anyone'll do anything. I'm just making people aware anyone can be scum. I want people to look at every side of the 'spectrum'.

Why could active players be scum? Because it's an easy way to hide when people tunnel inactive players on Day 1.
No, I haven't stopped active players from posting to avoid suspicion, but that wasn't my intent.

 

[Swiss]

Swiss, HOW has Green stopped active players from simply posting to avoid suspicion. He hasn't.

What he did was to remove the safe ground (activity wise) which you and I afforded any scum lurking. He didn't want to tunnel active players, merely ensure we didn't GIVE scum a free pass.

He's just been as vague as possible, for little to no reason at all. He's not ACTUALLY being the good guy and telling us why the "active" players in the thread could be scum. No, he's just brushing off everything and not doing any proper scumhunting. His vote is on Kirbyyoshi ffs!

Agreed, but he HAS opened up a new 'case' and stopped us form tunelling inactivity.

He's even assuming that everyone else is going to be stupid and ignore the "other side" of the activity spectrum. That's ****. I'm more than competent in scumhunting both active and inactive players. And so is everyone else.

Look at half these players, no opinions of their own..they ARE just jumping on bandwagons. I see no insult to your scum hunting abilities (much )



ALL HE'S DONE IS ENSURE WE DIDN'T ALLOW SCUM FREE PASSES, he doesn't know if you can play this game well or not, does he? (Actually, does he?)

 

[Swiss]

/ninjad

10char

 

[McCloud]

Hey, I'm in to replace TPK or somebody along those lines. I'll reread tomorrow and post my thoughts.

in b4 mccloud is mafia

 

[vanderzant]

Vote: McFox

Spoiler

badjokeisbad

I'm not assuming anyone'll do anything. I'm just making people aware anyone can be scum. I want people to look at every side of the 'spectrum'.

Why could active players be scum? Because it's an easy way to hide when people tunnel inactive players on Day 1.
No, I haven't stopped active players from posting to avoid suspicion, but that wasn't my intent.

Green, you know I said earlier that I understand what you're actually trying to achieve (if you really are). It's your actions such as not voting and stuff that makes me suspicious of you.

What he did was to remove the safe ground (activity wise) which you and I afforded any scum lurking. He didn't want to tunnel active players, merely ensure we didn't GIVE scum a free pass.

Agreed, but he HAS opened up a new 'case' and stopped us form tunelling inactivity.

Look at half these players, no opinions of their own..they ARE just jumping on bandwagons. I see no insult to your scum hunting abilities (much )

ALL HE'S DONE IS ENSURE WE DIDN'T ALLOW SCUM FREE PASSES, he doesn't know if you can play this game well or not, does he? (Actually, does he?)

Swiss, you're once again getting tunnel vision, and not seeing the big picture.

Right now, I'd label You, Green, Kat and Myself as the most active players, who have parroted the least, etc.

What has Green done to ensure that You, Kat and myself don't get a "free pass" into day 2? Sure, he SAYS that he wants to stop this, but what has he actually DONE. Zip. Nada. Nothing.

THAT'S my main point. Green's not really doing anything. Sure, I don't really like his reasoning for wanting to make everyone unsafe or whatever, and sure, he hasn't really done anything that scummy (it's day 1 after all), BUT he's being vague in accusations, which makes him look like he's doing more than he really is.

Also, stop with the blatantly obvious buddying.

---

@Everyone else, right now as you should all be aware, I'm feeling some scummy vibes come from Green/Swiss. What I think we need to determine is whether this is Scum & Scum, or Scum buddying Town, or if we're totally off. We've got an extension, but everyone PLEASE weigh in.

 

[Greenstreet]

And what have you done to lynch inactives - zip.

 

[vanderzant]

When it's time to lynch inactives, I'll act accordingly. If not, call me out (or anyone else for that matter) on it.

If I'd being trying to lynch Tom (for example) this whole time, that'd be scummy IMO. You can't pressure inactives because they just simply aren't there.

Pressuring =/= Lynching

 

[Kirbyoshi]

@Green: No one is trying to lynch inactives - yet. Their mentions/posts ratio is always significantly higher than actives, simply because we don't want to forget they're there, combined with the fact that they simply don't post much. You want the game to have a balanced perspective? It starts with you. You want to focus on everyone? Focus on everyone. Just dont purposely focus on people who you don't feel are getting attention with no reason.

@Vand: If you are a girl, I want you to have my babies at this moment. If not, a simple man-hug would suffice.