I'm really not sure what you're getting at here, Bardy, and to be honest, I'm starting to look sideways at you. Your supposed 'off' points about my arguments are really paper-thin.

- You don't think responding to a simple question with a case and a vote counts as "exploding" ?

- You call BS on a vote that the voter himself thought might be regarded as an OMGUS vote, and then rattle off talking about Damuna? What? You do remember that Stoic's first long post with the vote was in response to a post about Xzyem, right?

- How does calling Stoic out on misattributing posts weaken my case? I pushed it because, frankly, I was exasperated by the incredibly flippant response of two words: "my bad". He put together a contradiction from posts belonging to two players whose names (and current avatars) don't remotely resemble mine. Who looks like they're propping up a case here?*

- *Headdesk* Ye gods. I have NOT pushed the Damuna piece of evidence. I responded "before it gets out of hand" and in doing so proved to others (and myself) that it was a bad point. I say again, I AGREE, it's flimsy and badly constructed. In fact it's by far the WORST piece of evidence.

- #871: my reasoning is that taking a pot-shot on N1 is not a pro-town move, since the odds of hitting a townie instead are pretty damn high. Therefore I think it's more likely to be an SK. I'm sticking to this idea for the moment, because without some initial assumptions we're going nowhere fast (see D1...), but I'm prepared to be persuaded otherwise. It also doesn't particularly affect my play, since it just means one more anti-town to hunt out. Basically it's an assumption that doesn't hurt, and that has actually rattled a couple of people: baz and yourself.

--

I agree with Baz, Quad, that's an odd reason for not voting, particularly since stoic's L-4 and I'm L-5 (i.e. relatively far from the danger zone)

Stoic, could you please respond to this part of Ye Olde Original Case:
Reference post: #911]http://www.gog.com/en/forum/general/gog_forum_mafia_11_the_goghammer_festival/post911]#911
[/url]


In other news, we should go back over D2 and see who's been lurking and killing discussions. This is a slow, slow game...

* I appreciate mistakes happen, Stoic, and if you really are town please don't think I'm judging you personally here. It's just that currently I think you're scum trying to get me lynched. :)

I think a condensed case CAN be useful because it forces you to condense the whole to the strongest points. With a lot of people who write big posts, sometimes it's needed to get down to the real meat of the argument.

At the time, I wanted to clarify that my vote was not on you because you voted for me. In fact, you were voting for me for awhile BEFORE I put my vote on you. It was only after the Xzyem stuff that I finally voted for ya. I got one minor point wrong about your attitude. You corrected me, and I haven't mentioned it sense.

If this is the way it's going to work then you need to answer the questions about my so-called "obsession" with Damuna. Again, how is answering your questions about Damuna evidence of "obsession"? Why did you accuse me of "padding" when you were the one pushing the issue? Ok, I'm glad you're admitting it, but really, it's not bad evidence it's no evidence at all. If anything, it's actually evidence against you,

Another post coming in 10 minutes. I don't want to mess up the post format.. lol.

This was the answer I expected. But I did not expect it to take a week; I know you said you were busy, but you did find enough time to throw together #1015. It's such a simple point to make, you see, unless you had to make sure you've thought things through first.
I have no idea. You were going in circles, I was trying to make you break out of that pattern. Didn't work. And yes, of course the simplification would distort the case to some extent, but the original discussion would still be available for reference, wouldn't it?

I'm not switching my vote, Frenchie. Your behaviour is extremely scummy in this game (not just recently; remember Vitek named you his main suspect way back in #118, and I fully agreed when reading through the thread to catch up). The massive chip you're carrying on your shoulder doesn't feel like you at all. I feel there's something very wrong about you, and I've learned to trust my instincts recently (after the infamous nmillar case of #9).

Do the remaining players really have nothing at all to say to this?

Well, it was my birthday this weekend, and RL has not been easy recently (I was home in England for Easter holidays and basically went completely offline; now I'm back in France and I REALLY wish I wasn't). And yes I wanted to make sure I wasn't trying to automatically defend a stupid point (like I've already done in this game so far.) I think if I'd posted back more or less instantly saying the same thing, you'd still have found it suspicious ("clearly you were just making stuff up to see if it would fly!").

And another thing: you keep saying people could refer to the original discussion, but as I understand it, part of the reason you asked us to sum up was that the original discussion was too convoluted to read.

Additionally, I'm beginning to wonder what made it so awkward to read. I know I was in the thick of it, so my perception is skewed, but... Long posts, yes, but there have been PLENTY of arguments in other games, some much longer and more complex than that...

I know people tend to go quiet when it kicks off between two players, but we've both run out of steam now. People need to get in there and start picking, not only at the argument but at the discussion it generated. Personally (and for obvious reasons) I really don't like the way Baz and TB have dealt with it. But I'm kind of at the limit of what I can get out of it now, since it's starting to concern me directly. I'll be re-reading though.

The feeling is mutual I'm afraid. I'm not sure what this chip is that you're referring to. I know your instincts can be absolutely spot on. And here, you're 100% wrong.

No, I genuinely expected that response.
To understand, not to read. I have read it anyway, and understood it too, I think (eventually).
Full agreement from me.
Personally (and for obvious reasons) I really don't like the way Baz and TB have dealt with it. But I'm kind of at the limit of what I can get out of it now, since it's starting to concern me directly. I'll be re-reading though.
I mean the "soft attack -- (riposte) -- hard attack -- (counter-attack) -- totally overblown defence" pattern you've got going there (the parentheses are actions of the other party of the discussion, if that's understandable).

EBWOP: The paragraph starting with "Personally" is just NFY's quote I forgot to delete, not part of my post.

Happy birthday NFY!

I agree with you. So don't get me wrong, I agree - NFY seems the most scummy, so my vote will stay on her for now.

Now I may be over-thinking again, but there is ONE thing that is giving me some pause.

If you step back from this game and pretend to be a third party, what would mafia be doing in this game?

Consider that we have about 50% of our players either inactive or contributing VERY little.

As best as I can figure, if I was mafia in this game, I would be posting as little as possible. Let the random lynch come, it's likely to go in mafia's favor, anyway. As long as they don't needlessly expose themselves at this point, they're going to win this one, right?

By contrast, NFY is posting quite a bit. Maybe she is scummy as I suspect and trying to push the lynch on me to be sure that a random lynch doesn't take out a buddy, but I'm not sure that would be the best strategy for mafia at this point.

The one problem with this is that if we go after someone else, there may always be a concern that either NFY or myself is mafia because of our conflict.

What do you all think?

I agree with most of this.
It would make the most sense for the mafia to hide among the absent players.
However, I am not convinced NFY is scum.
I certainly can't build a case I'd be happy to call a case!

The problem you're referring to is the reason why there is a policy called "Lynch All Lurkers". It's very much a double-edged sword, however. Some people are natural born lurkers and are very, very quiet even when town aligned (on this forum, Orryyrro was rather famous for that, if you want to read some older games -- M5 or M8 are good examples here), and on the other hand, some mafiosi prefer to be extremely talkative. Basically, the policy is most useful around the mid-game, to weed out lurkers before the finale; lurkers are hard to get a read on, which muddies up the waters a lot when there are just a few people left. But in the early stages, it's just not very reliable, and more or less equivalent to a random lynch. Particularly considering how many lurkers we have here.

So Damnation, is it possible we can get some more prodding action going on?

The call that we should look to the lurkers...especially now, is suspect. While I agree that the people who are quiet shouldn't be given a free ride...I'm hesitant to push this myself. It's a dangerous chance that we might hit mafia, or a town power role that's trying to hide until they turn up more information.

That's not to say I'm not suspicious of those who are being extremely quiet, it's just I have too many odd feelings about even the folks who are vocal.

Still, I don't think we have enough votes to make a day lynch unless people become more active.

Here's the way I see it: There aren't enough active players at the Moment to get any proper discussion going. Sure, we can have these little one on one fights, but they Are hardly going to solve anything without the weight of the entire Playerbase contributing to them. So we either lynch whoever is looking the most suspicious, or we hope that damn's prodding will eventually have some results.

I Find stoic and robbeasy to be scummy. Once robbeasy gets replaced, everything Is going to be that much more confusing, At least for me (since I go mostly on my gut feeling and my impressions of people's behavior). We could just go ahead and lynch him like we did with damuna--as a way to avoid having to find a replacement.

In Stoic's case, I'm also going on gut feeling. In the argument between him and nfy, he came across as the most scummy to me. However, I also seem to have a weak spot for nfy, so perhaps I'm not going to be able to read her very well. At the moment, I'm going to unvote with a strong fos stoic. I Kinda want to lynch robbeasy--especially since he's still my #1 suspect. However, I'm still something of a mafia newbie, so I'd like to hear some feedback before I propose this as the way to go.