Lady Clarent's Calamity - A Game of Mafia - The Something Awful Forums

The Something Awful Forums > Discussion > Traditional Games > The Game Room > Lady Clarent's Calamity - A Game of Mafia

«‹›46 »

Iseult: Apr 21, 2010; hoc est bellum; Hell Gem

WalrusWhiskers posted:

Please consider lynching Merk or wins tomorrow.

Considering Walrus posted this I feel pretty good about merk and wins.

Or maybe that's what he wanted us to think??

Read his posts again quickly, I don't feel like he was engaged enough to be part of some big plan.

# ? Jul 15, 2015 00:15

Adbot: ADBOT LOVES YOU

# ? Apr 18, 2024 23:52

zzyzx: Mar 2, 2004

If I'm reading the votes correctly, Hal, merk, Gamer, and zzyzx all have the early votes before the momentum starts to pile on, so I think those people are likely talented and handsome townies. Especially the last one.

# ? Jul 15, 2015 00:16

Iseult: Apr 21, 2010; hoc est bellum; Hell Gem

QuoProQuid posted:

oh wow look at all those footnotes. i bet qpq is town. scum would never put that much effort into their posts.

Haha

# ? Jul 15, 2015 00:21

Iseult: Apr 21, 2010; hoc est bellum; Hell Gem

QPQ was pushing serious cases on Gamer yesterday so I think Gamer is probably town.

QuoProQuid posted:

After reviewing his post history, I have to say that there is no sense of engagement in Gamer's posting. In fact, I see a lot of his content as useless white noise that looks helpful but adds little to discussion. His set-up post shows this issue very well. While players are deciding how to respond to Keane's request, either by obliging Keane or rejecting the matter, Gamer ignores the issue altogether. Squiggly is right to point out that speculation posts are not always made by scum (1), but I find the post suspicious based on its timing and context. Why is Gamer ignoring a discussion that has already swallowed up a quarter of a page, and why is he doing so with something as toothless as set-up speculation? He reads to me like someone that wants to distract away from the issue, but doesn't know what to distract it with. As I previously mentioned, Gamer should know better than to do this kind of thing (1), (2). That he immediately jumps back on the people who point this out "joking-not-joking" accusations (1), (2) does very little to dissuade this idea.

He then lays in wait for the opportunity to attack the first person who called him out (3). It's opportunistic play, at best, and a lazy vote at worst. It's not even a suspicion that he's particularly attached to. The moment someone calls him out (4), Gamer jumps back in and unvotes because he's "Hmm... rereading" (5) It's weird, inconsistent play. I don't get the sense that he's engaged or scumhunting so much as he is trying to provide the illusion of content. There's no serious reads, except for his one post about Max that he immediately drops (6). It should be noted that Gamer does EVENTUALLY respond to gambit/lie detector/whatever (7), but that's after the whole issue has been made moot and people seem unwilling to continue discussing it (8).

His latest few posts are less transparently scummy, but there is still some residual weirdness around them. His post responding to Squiggly basically says nothing but "I thought Max was weird... now I don't know! Maybe both are suspicious?" (9), which is not so much a position as it is avoiding commitment to any cause. His next post (10), which I admittedly had some trouble reading, is a defense against Quin that seems to do very little to address her objections.

In short, I don't think Gamer is playing the game. I get the sense that he's posting to post and that he doesn't have any real thoughts to share. I neglected to look at him because of the Max/Keane debate, but after a second look he really does look bad.

##Vote: Gamer

Eh. I don't like a lot of Gamer's content, but I'll defend him on this issue. The post you are quoting (11) doesn't read like a scum player caught in a bind and trying to escape. It reads like a player who genuinely doesn't understand the accusation (12). It's a null tell that indicates confusion more than anything. I don't get the sense that Gamer is trying to exploit the situation and gain information about Keane.

QuoProQuid posted:

What are your opinions on Gamergate? His last two posts (1), (2) strike me as opportunistic.

# ? Jul 15, 2015 00:28

Max: Nov 30, 2002

QuoProQuid posted:

Uuuughhh, that ended up taking me longer than I thought.

Can someone briefly summarize the issue with Walrus?

I don't see anything particularly egregious in the posts Quin just made about Quidnose (1). I'm never really good at meta, but there's nothing too exciting about his content imho.

QuoProQuid posted:

##Vote: Gamer

QuoProQuid posted:

okay. fair enough.

What do you think of the other players, like Walrus? Beyond his "maybe both sides are wrong" post (1), nothing about Walrus really sticks out to me.

What are your opinions on Gamergate? His last two posts (1), (2) strike me as opportunistic.

I would like to point out some of the opinions that QPQ posted, since he wasn't under a lot of heat and was kinda trying to save Walrus right up until the end.

From his rather constant push on Gamer, I feel confident that he's town. Gamer would have been the easy target for day 1, so I doubt any busing actually happened there.

I put that first one in there because he mentions Quinquereme in a positive light, but I don't remember Quin actually saying anything incendiary, and that link he has in the quote just leads to a reply window. What was he talking about there?

# ? Jul 15, 2015 00:29

Max: Nov 30, 2002

God damnit Quin.

# ? Jul 15, 2015 00:29

zzyzx: Mar 2, 2004

From a quick read through, I'd take a closer look at Spoonsy and Nth Doctor today. Maybe Puntification.

# ? Jul 15, 2015 00:33

Quidthulhu: Dec 17, 2003; Stand down, men! It's only smooching!

zzyzx posted:

If I'm reading the votes correctly, Hal, merk, Gamer, and zzyzx all have the early votes before the momentum starts to pile on, so I think those people are likely talented and handsome townies. Especially the last one.

This is a super weird jump to make and clear four people based on their being early votes. Scum could be bussing.

# ? Jul 15, 2015 00:35

Max: Nov 30, 2002

zzyzx posted:

From a quick read through, I'd take a closer look at Spoonsy and Nth Doctor today. Maybe Puntification.

I was going to say, Punt looks a little strange with their interactions in thread with other scum.

# ? Jul 15, 2015 00:36

zzyzx: Mar 2, 2004

Re: Quid

Yes, but merk latches on like a crazy person in a way that reads genuine, Gamer is the target lynch if Walrus survives and gets into it with QPQ, Hal is an early-adopter where he could've easily gone for Gamer instead, and zzyzx is just generally awesome.

# ? Jul 15, 2015 00:38

Max: Nov 30, 2002

zzyzx I saw that ninja.

# ? Jul 15, 2015 00:40

Puntification: Nov 4, 2009; Black Orthodontromancy
The most British Magic; Fun Shoe

Max posted:

I was going to say, Punt looks a little strange with their interactions in thread with other scum.

I didn't interact with scum at all what are you talking about? That's just a link to everything I posted and doesn't back up your statement in the slightest. (For the posthumous record Qpq pinged me but I failed to mention it and I was on the fence about walrus up until his flip). At least argue I'm trying to fly under the radar or something actually supported by my posting.

# ? Jul 15, 2015 00:46

Iseult: Apr 21, 2010; hoc est bellum; Hell Gem

QPQ jumped on Max with Keane early:

QuoProQuid posted:

Weird self-conscious post.

##vote: Max

QuoProQuid posted:

You're being awkward and self-conscious about the whole thing. It's not so much about posting the statement, as much as it is about you avoiding an issue that could have been really easily resolved for no apparent reason.

Then he backs off and goes after Gamer instead:

QuoProQuid posted:

##unvote for the time being. I agree with wins (1) that Max's reaction is too obstinate to be scum. After several pages of back and forth, I don't feel comfortable with my original read on him.

I'll take another look at Gamer. Part of my reluctance to focus on him was because of my feelings about Max.

Defends Max:

QuoProQuid posted:

If Max is scum, I don't know why he would constantly refute Keane's points. You say that the alternative is having people accuse him of backing down too easily, but I don't know if anyone could argue this in good faith at any point in their six page argument (1) (2).

You also aren't considering the ever popular "bug out of the thread" option. Max was never obligated to continue to responding and could have broken off their argument at any time by simply disappearing. With any hope, the tensions would have died down and the town's attention would have shifted elsewhere. It's a low risk option and seems in line with the scum's general motivation: avoiding as much attention as possible.

Their argument has gone on pointlessly long. I would have preferred Max jumping on board, but Max's continued engagement with Keane just makes me agree with wins. I think he's just being stubborn.

Defends Walrus too while pushing Gamer:

QuoProQuid posted:

okay. fair enough.

What do you think of the other players, like Walrus? Beyond his "maybe both sides are wrong" post (1), nothing about Walrus really sticks out to me.

What are your opinions on Gamergate? His last two posts (1), (2) strike me as opportunistic.

Seeing as he defended one confirmed scum I feel pretty suspicious of Max.

# ? Jul 15, 2015 00:48

Gamerofthegame: Oct 28, 2010; Could at least flip one or two, maybe.

Well, everyone who I thought was scum is dead now. I still have suspicions over Quidnose, but that's a lot of gut and not a lot of hard, quotable reads. Lot of random busing dialog tho. I'll look into it later.

That all said, I am going to appeal to lurkers here; we have a few posters in here who haven't been really part of the active discussion, even excluding the two replacements. Madness, Amoeba, Fiery and Spoonsy, who all didn't do much in D1 except pile in on Walrus near the end, if that.

zzyzx posted:

If I'm reading the votes correctly, Hal, merk, Gamer, and zzyzx all have the early votes before the momentum starts to pile on, so I think those people are likely talented and handsome townies. Especially the last one.

I agree. Everyone involved had their own, separate case in some way or another, so baring anything particularly egregious later I think we can safely assume they're town. Also I'm town, so go figure!

Why yuming, tho? She didn't do to much.

# ? Jul 15, 2015 00:49

Iseult: Apr 21, 2010; hoc est bellum; Hell Gem

This is Max on merk pointing out the waffly both sides post by Walrus:

Max posted:

What are your issues with it? I had my own at the time, but I'd like to hear other people's opinions on it.

Pretty hedgy. Doesn't vote Walrus.

Max posted:

I buy the Walrus Argument too. He kinda contributed during our big fight on Friday without actually like, contributing.

Still doesn't vote him.

Finally removes his vote on Gamer to vote Walrus a few hours before hammer when it was pretty much a foregone conclusion.

Max posted:

My perspective on this is skewed, but Win's reasons for backing off on me seem to come from a town mindset of realizing what is going on in an argument. It's possible he's scum and his vote on me was shaky when he made it, but now, eh.

Walrus I still feel pretty strongly about, and now that I think about it:

##unvote
##vote Walrus

And all that time (before changing to Walrus) his vote on Gamer was based on this single post:

Gamerofthegame posted:

alright so the last two games i scumhunted with perfect accuracy

Imma try it again but I dunno even how many scum are gonna be around this time. Six?? What's the ratio for this poo poo I want to keep the streak

Which is pointless speculation but nothing compared to this (and another reminder that Walrus was defending Max too):

WalrusWhiskers posted:

Yea to be honest it's pretty clear what Max is implying. CCKeane is being weird by being insistent that he has to phrase it a certain way, which kind of annoys me.

Being annoying isn't necessarily scummy though, and I like that he's trying to engage people to post.

##vote Max

# ? Jul 15, 2015 00:58

Iseult: Apr 21, 2010; hoc est bellum; Hell Gem

All right I actually have to do work at work now so I won't be around for another 10 hours probably, bye guys :banjo:

# ? Jul 15, 2015 01:01

wins32767: Mar 16, 2007

Quidnose posted:

I actually think that is a legit possibility. There's very little way that merk could have gleaned scum from the SINGLE walrus post that was awkward, have been that convicted about it with little proof to back it up (because walrus did not post much yesterday), and now be gloating about his awesome scumhunting. That didn't actually happen?

##vote merk

I can buy that level of skill from merk. Walrus twigged my gut a bit too, but it was just a hunch.

# ? Jul 15, 2015 01:03

Iseult: Apr 21, 2010; hoc est bellum; Hell Gem

Max posted:

I would like to point out some of the opinions that QPQ posted, since he wasn't under a lot of heat and was kinda trying to save Walrus right up until the end.

From his rather constant push on Gamer, I feel confident that he's town. Gamer would have been the easy target for day 1, so I doubt any busing actually happened there.

I put that first one in there because he mentions Quinquereme in a positive light, but I don't remember Quin actually saying anything incendiary, and that link he has in the quote just leads to a reply window. What was he talking about there?

Sorry, didn't see this - QPQ was talking about this case I made on Quidnose. Basically pointing out that he said nothing of value then voted yuming out of nowhere.

And now I'm really gone

# ? Jul 15, 2015 01:04

wins32767: Mar 16, 2007

QuoProQuid posted:

Weird self-conscious post.

##vote: Max

I think this makes Max look better.

# ? Jul 15, 2015 01:09

WHICH WAY MADNESS: Apr 28, 2009; You recall this living nightmare, you take comfort in its familiar pain. You smell fermentation and can hear a dull, unending beeping. Someone shouts in a language you do not know.
You love your family. YOU. LOVE. THEM.
Welcome to Red Lobster. Come see what's fresh. Today.

Gamerofthegame posted:

That all said, I am going to appeal to lurkers here; we have a few posters in here who haven't been really part of the active discussion, even excluding the two replacements. Madness...

I've been ill all week, sorry. Will try to post more in the AM.

# ? Jul 15, 2015 01:11

Nth Doctor: Sep 7, 2010; Darkrai used Dream Eater!
It's super effective!

I want to call back to this series of posts:

Quidnose posted:

I am not scum, and neither is yuming.

WalrusWhiskers posted:

I am not scum, nor is yuming (I hope).

WalrusWhiskers posted:

Woa, that was kinda weird, haha. Are you me???

... Time Passes ...

Quidnose posted:

##vote yuming

yuming posted:

Hi

##vote Quinquereme

Quidnose posted:

I was voting Yuming purely to see how she would react to it, and she reacted OK, I guess.

##unvote

I'm trying a new thing this game where I try to take it less seriously, I guess?

Quidnose, I was suspecting you (and yuming) of being scum based on your same-minutepost with Walrus.
I also think it's really interesting that after you tried to claim yuming was town, you voted for her anyway.

Now you're banging a bussing drum pretty hard (I suppose that's when scum votes to lynch scum in order to look town?). This seems a little weird and somewhat defensive to me.
Obviously I was wrong with suspecting yuming, why might I be wrong with suspecting you?

# ? Jul 15, 2015 01:14

wins32767: Mar 16, 2007

WHICH WAY MADNESS posted:

I've been ill all week, sorry. Will try to post more in the AM.

It's all the tourists going down route 3. That always made me sick.

# ? Jul 15, 2015 01:16

Nth Doctor: Sep 7, 2010; Darkrai used Dream Eater!
It's super effective!

Nth Doctor posted:

Quidnose, I was suspecting you (and yuming) of being scum based on your same-minutepost with Walrus.

When I say this, let me give you my reasoning: I was thinking that maybe the three (two?) of you were attempting to build up some chain-of-trust type claims in the scumdoc and you and/or Walrus hosed up and both posted at the same time with the same second person.

# ? Jul 15, 2015 01:17

Max: Nov 30, 2002

Quin is wrong.

Also:

QuoProQuid posted:

I am not scum, nor is fiery_valkyrie

Found this also. FV hasn't actually posted at all since confirming, so this is the most tenuous of connections.

# ? Jul 15, 2015 01:18

Gamerofthegame: Oct 28, 2010; Could at least flip one or two, maybe.

I don't think scum would actually point out other scum doing that.

If anything I'd argue that makes FV safe.

# ? Jul 15, 2015 01:19

Max: Nov 30, 2002

QuoProQuid posted:

Weird self-conscious post.

##vote: Max

Also, Quins, I think QuoProQuid just saw me as an easy lynch for what I was doing and got on me early because I was an easy target. I don't think anyone really thought that argument would go the way it did though, which caused him to shift gears.

# ? Jul 15, 2015 01:20

Max: Nov 30, 2002

Gamerofthegame posted:

I don't think scum would actually point out other scum doing that.

If anything I'd argue that makes FV safe.

I think it is diddly squat but a connection is a connection.

# ? Jul 15, 2015 01:20

merk: May 20, 2003; ##interact

wins32767 posted:

I can buy that level of skill from merk. Walrus twigged my gut a bit too, but it was just a hunch.

Thanks. I hope you're town so this is genuine.

# ? Jul 15, 2015 01:24

Max: Nov 30, 2002

Quinquereme posted:

Sorry, didn't see this - QPQ was talking about this case I made on Quidnose. Basically pointing out that he said nothing of value then voted yuming out of nowhere.

And now I'm really gone

I read that back and forth with QPQ, you, and invovling Quidnose. Now I understand it, and it paints Quidnose in a worse light.

# ? Jul 15, 2015 01:34

Gamerofthegame: Oct 28, 2010; Could at least flip one or two, maybe.

I think Quid is scum. I'll come up with a bodacious argument as to why later.

But I felt like that'd be good to share.

# ? Jul 15, 2015 01:35

Amoeba102: Jan 22, 2010

Yeah someone's got to come up witha good argument against Quid or I'm going to actually start playing the game and forming opinions on the players accusing him. I reckon it's way too bold for scum to come in firing at merk following WW's flip because you're not going to convince anyone - just see the response he got. That would be the response you would expect. Quid's got genuine paranoia, definitely town.

# ? Jul 15, 2015 01:38

Gamerofthegame: Oct 28, 2010; Could at least flip one or two, maybe.

Quidnose is scum.

I have a twinge saying that Amoeba or Max are his buddies, but outside of minor suspicion I've got nothing really going for either of them.

Yuming and Keane were town.

D1, Quidnose is very stand offish and not interested through most of the days, loudly proclaiming that he isn't reading our trash. Now, this comes off on me in two ways; first, a scum is naturally going to want to be rather invested in the game, keeping an eye on things. They post as a result. Quid could have easily not posted, as most of the thread hadn't, but he felt the need to. This comes off as suspicious to me. Second, his proclamation meant he had backing of why he wasn't getting involved in the discussion, guarding him against allegations of basically being a lurker due to the thread being "annoying." Once again, scummy.

Quidnose posted:

Do I need to read this Max & Keane interchange, because this is insufferable.

Did Max eventually figure out / was he told that Keane is clearly setting up posts to be lie detected and that "Yeah, sure" won't work with a lie detector submission.

Quidnose posted:

I just went back to try and read it and yeah, I'm not reading that.

Someone fill me in on what that poo poo was.

Quidnose posted:

Can someone quote the weirdness with Gamer?

Is there anything else happening?

Can we get rid of both Keane AND Max today?

Quidnose posted:

There was a big ole slapfight between Keane & Max that I haven't read. And I guess Gamer did something odd I also haven't read.

I'm playing Isaac and watching The Office, summer is nice~

Now, Quid is also the only one to engage Yuming in any meaningful matter, while Yuming didn't do anything this game. To say Yuming is a veteran is an understatement. Quid randomly voted Yuming after a weak vote, claimed it was a reaction test and then let it go. I feel as though he would have pushed a case onto her if she reacted differently. However, despite this it took him just shy of twenty four hours to unvote.

yuming posted:

Hi

##vote Quinquereme

Quidnose posted:

##vote yuming

Quidnose posted:

I was voting Yuming purely to see how she would react to it, and she reacted OK, I guess.

##unvote

I'm trying a new thing this game where I try to take it less seriously, I guess?

Now, basically the rest of Quid's posting is him engaging Keane over the Max-Keane dispute. Not quoting all of that.

Quidnose posted:

##vote Keane I just played on a scumteam with Keane and I feel like this sort of locked-on-don't-give-a-gently caress attitude is indicative of his scum game.

I think Quid was actually worried the reverse would happen, as Keane referenced the game in question in his casing on me. In fact, I don't really recall this sort of attitude from Keane in the Earthbound game, while Quid played relatively aloof as he is now.

He engaged Keane and tried to get him to look at the rest of the game, which he steadfast refused to. This went back and forth, with Quidnose throwing mud at him and discrediting. This could be seen as defending Max, but I don't think Quidnose would play that way. Instead, I think Keane was merely the easy target, which he was at the time.

Quidnose posted:

While this is currently true, I've never said "I REFUSE TO LOOK AT ANYTHING ELSE UNTIL I AM PROVEN CORRECT OR INCORRECT."

If you would start scumhunting, I would potentially change my opinion of you. Until then, I will do my own scum hunting as soon as I finish this paper~

what scum hunting, friend

Another content avoidance post.

Quidnose posted:

Did Keane tell you he was going to lightly bus you in the scumdoc and thus you rushed over here to comment on it?

The start of his chain of busing comments.

Quidnose posted:

Because what I thought was you being earnest was, as far as I could tell from your actions now, you being obnoxious in order to excuse yourself from having to focus on anyone else D1. See me against GG in Earthboundfia, I did the same thing. Tunneling is an effective scumtactic.

And he's doing much the same here, even tunneling against Keane. But it's not like a scum would go out and say his tactic I mean that'd be dumb - Nah Quid totally would, just as a defense.

Quidnose posted:

Yeah, that Walrus post is incredibly awkward considering he has zero content. I can buy it.

##unvote

##vote Walrus

Quid only jumped on the Walrus train at the very end, when it was potentially hammer. Up to that point he completely ignored Walrus and all cases against him, solely focused on Keane and, to a lesser extent, myself.

Quidnose posted:

Nice catch, merk, UNLESS IT WAS A BUS

Quidnose posted:

This is a super weird jump to make and clear four people based on their being early votes. Scum could be bussing.

Lastly, Quidnose feeds into this bussing narrative, trying to discredit the Good and Wholesome Mafia players who took Walrus out as potentially being scum themselves and thus not being cleared for their efforts. This strikes me as extra suspicious, as bussing is actually a poor scum tactic; at the end of the game they have to have the majority of the vote, so removing scum means their game gets that much harder.

All Quidnose has done is dodge the need to post content and cases on other players, tunneled against easy-target Keane and then thrown around the idea of bussing.

Quidnose is scum.

##vote Quidnose

that's a lot of loving quotes

# ? Jul 15, 2015 02:09

wins32767: Mar 16, 2007

Gamerofthegame posted:

Quidnose is scum.

I have a twinge saying that Amoeba or Max are his buddies, but outside of minor suspicion I've got nothing really going for either of them.

Yuming and Keane were town.

D1, Quidnose is very stand offish and not interested through most of the days, loudly proclaiming that he isn't reading our trash. Now, this comes off on me in two ways; first, a scum is naturally going to want to be rather invested in the game, keeping an eye on things. They post as a result. Quid could have easily not posted, as most of the thread hadn't, but he felt the need to. This comes off as suspicious to me. Second, his proclamation meant he had backing of why he wasn't getting involved in the discussion, guarding him against allegations of basically being a lurker due to the thread being "annoying." Once again, scummy.

Now, Quid is also the only one to engage Yuming in any meaningful matter, while Yuming didn't do anything this game. To say Yuming is a veteran is an understatement. Quid randomly voted Yuming after a weak vote, claimed it was a reaction test and then let it go. I feel as though he would have pushed a case onto her if she reacted differently. However, despite this it took him just shy of twenty four hours to unvote.

Now, basically the rest of Quid's posting is him engaging Keane over the Max-Keane dispute. Not quoting all of that.

I think Quid was actually worried the reverse would happen, as Keane referenced the game in question in his casing on me. In fact, I don't really recall this sort of attitude from Keane in the Earthbound game, while Quid played relatively aloof as he is now.

He engaged Keane and tried to get him to look at the rest of the game, which he steadfast refused to. This went back and forth, with Quidnose throwing mud at him and discrediting. This could be seen as defending Max, but I don't think Quidnose would play that way. Instead, I think Keane was merely the easy target, which he was at the time.

what scum hunting, friend

Another content avoidance post.

The start of his chain of busing comments.

And he's doing much the same here, even tunneling against Keane. But it's not like a scum would go out and say his tactic I mean that'd be dumb - Nah Quid totally would, just as a defense.

Quid only jumped on the Walrus train at the very end, when it was potentially hammer. Up to that point he completely ignored Walrus and all cases against him, solely focused on Keane and, to a lesser extent, myself.

Lastly, Quidnose feeds into this bussing narrative, trying to discredit the Good and Wholesome Mafia players who took Walrus out as potentially being scum themselves and thus not being cleared for their efforts. This strikes me as extra suspicious, as bussing is actually a poor scum tactic; at the end of the game they have to have the majority of the vote, so removing scum means their game gets that much harder.

All Quidnose has done is dodge the need to post content and cases on other players, tunneled against easy-target Keane and then thrown around the idea of bussing.

Quidnose is scum.

##vote Quidnose

that's a lot of loving quotes

I like the effort here, but I don't like the reasoning. It doesn't tell a cohesive story of why Quid is scum, it's listing some stuff Quid did viewed through a suspicious lens.

# ? Jul 15, 2015 02:49

Hal Incandenza: Feb 12, 2004

I tend to agree with Amoeba, coming in with that merk case isn't a play I would see from scum, and Quid's posting really isn't pinging me at all.

# ? Jul 15, 2015 03:27

Amoeba102: Jan 22, 2010

For some reason I got the impression that more people were piling on Quid, but it seems to be only Gamer strongly and Max weakly.

Gamer, you're using a lot of specious reasoning. Like when you agreed with zzyzx about the first 4 voters being town. I know he started it, but I really don't like you reinforcing the bad logic.

# ? Jul 15, 2015 03:35

zzyzx: Mar 2, 2004

With Spoonsy, it's this post, mostly.

Spoonsy posted:

I don't like the fact that Keane has refused to let up on Max for his refusal to post a sentence. To echo Quid, if Max were to be shot dead this instant and flip town, Keane will have contributed a lot of sound and fury, signifying nothing. And he's taken the time to fight back against everyone who has pointed this fact out, be it Quid, or merk, or anyone really, for continuing his hunt and remaining the sole (after my unvote) person on Max.

Walrus: Uncomfortable as to why anyone would try to push for people to quickly vote for a lynch D1 before the weekend, but not uncomfortable enough to put a vote down
Gamer: Dude don't speculate on game structure the second the game starts. That's unnecessary and weird

It's very non-committal on both of the vote leaders. "I'm suspicious of <X>, but not enough to vote" is a red flag to me, especially on a flipped scum - it creates distance in the event that the person flips scum, avoids responsibility if the person flips town, and in any event adds words without actually moving the chains anywhere. The timing is important, because if Spoonsy does lay down a vote, WW is now in some trouble. The votes at the time of that post are 3 for Gamer (Max, WHICH WAY, QPQ) and 4 for Walrus (merk, Hal, Quin*, Gamer), and a vote for Walrus shoves him into a clear lead.

Instead, he does nothing. Squiggly ties the votes at 4 with a vote for Gamer**, a fearless hero breaks the tie in favor of Walrus, and then the train leaves the station. Max, Nth, and Spoonsy all jump on for Walrus in less than one hour.

Between the time Spoonsy says he doesn't have enough to vote, and the time he's comfortable enough to put a vote down (but "only for the time being"), the only thing that changes is Nth pointing out that Walrus and Quid both included yuming in their jokey "I am not scum" posts. I don't think that's a substantive point that Spoonsy looked at and though, "okay, that's enough to push me over the edge" - I think Walrus was still salvageable when Spoonsy made his first post, was beyond saving when Spoonsy actually voted, and Spoonsy hopped onto the wagon with disingenuous reasoning.

* I forgot about Quin in making my list of votes earlier; I should look at that one some more, too.

** Squiggly's vote sucks too, of course, because it gives Walrus a breath of life by tying it up. The reason I'm less suspicious of that one is that I recall him actually coming out and saying he thought Gamer was scum, where Spoonsy skirts around offering a definitive opinion on either of them.

# ? Jul 15, 2015 03:53

zzyzx: Mar 2, 2004

With Nth, it's these two.

Nth Doctor posted:

merk: You zoned in on Walrus pretty quickly. While it is weird that Walrus didn't react, I don't see what in the post you keep quoting made you think Walrus is scum. I find your reaction angle more compelling though.
Of course now that it's been pointed out so hard and multiple times, any reaction from Walrus would be seen as insincere.

Nth Doctor posted:

This morning I thought about these two posts that hit in the same minute. This looks suspicious enough to me.

## vote Walrus

While Walrus is up by one vote (it's 5-4 at the time of the first post), Nth follows the same general format as Spoonsy. Walrus is weird because of X; however, defense of Walrus that means I'm not going to vote for him right now. He's not town and he's not scum, and there's room to maneuver regardless of what happens.

The only change between the first post and second (it's maybe nine or ten posts in between) is that Max throws down on the side of righteousness and it's clear that WW is getting lynched. I still don't see a townie player looking at the "I am not scum" posts and thinking that's what will push them over the edge - like Spoonsy, I think this is an opportunistic vote that hesitates while Walrus can still be saved and jumps on after it's clear what's going to happen.

# ? Jul 15, 2015 04:19

Gamerofthegame: Oct 28, 2010; Could at least flip one or two, maybe.

Keep in mind this is Nth's first game. I imagine he'll be a little awkward, yeah, especially given the Max-Keane trainwreck that took up most of the day.

wins32767 posted:

I like the effort here, but I don't like the reasoning. It doesn't tell a cohesive story of why Quid is scum, it's listing some stuff Quid did viewed through a suspicious lens.

His entire posting history is, all together, a cohesive story. There are few posts without some agenda of pushing Keane, discrediting practically confirmed townies while dodging the need to do content himself. That's not like Quid, that's like scum Quid.

# ? Jul 15, 2015 04:29

Hal Incandenza: Feb 12, 2004

Spoonsy posted:

Morning everyone (and Hal)

first, re my earlier post: Well yeah, it's to be engaged. I'm reflecting on the events between Friday afternoon and Sunday evening as I hadn't done much/anything with the game prior to that point. So yes, I'm going to reflect on the three major cases in terms of vote leaders going on at that moment.

Nth Doctor: Good catch on the WW posts. I will confess I didn't notice that, especially as he was interested and confused as to how the two posts landed simultaneously with an attempt to laugh it off.

I'm comfortable enough to put this here for the time being ##vote WalrusWhiskers. And yes, if there's a town flip, then all of our efforts will have been for naught CAUSE D1

(and no, Keane, I don't object to Merk)

Spoonsy's only other real post this game, checks in to say "well yeah, I did just post that to look like I was doing something" but still can't elaborate on anything or return to the people he cased earlier.

Ends with a weak vote on WW that he basically reserves the right to move elsewhere if a better vote (i.e. non-scum vote) comes along. Even his reasoning for the vote looks more like buddying up to Nth than actually analyzing anything about WW.

##vote Spoonsy

# ? Jul 15, 2015 04:33

Adbot: ADBOT LOVES YOU

# ? Apr 18, 2024 23:52

zzyzx: Mar 2, 2004

Yeah, I like this one.

##vote Spoonsy

# ? Jul 15, 2015 04:38

The Something Awful Forums > Discussion > Traditional Games > The Game Room > Lady Clarent's Calamity - A Game of Mafia

«‹›46 »