Volcanic Mafia 2015 - Game Over

[Sky_Paladin]

I'll be here for phase end but I'm done for today.  I'm not super keen on a new wagon at deadline tbh particularly as I haven't had any real interactions with Oarfish and no time to review his ISO. 

[Sky_Paladin]

As in I'm going to sleep.  Zzzzz will I dream of electronic Bard's.

[Elieson]

HOLY CRAP PHASE IS ALMOST OVER I'M HERE I PROMISE

[O4rfish]

If you're going to sheep Bard's case on me, please explain it to me so I can rebut it.

[SB]

also @SB and Refa: we've been playing EM for an hour and you guys have been around SF mafia Skypechat for long and yet you're doing nothing? No way, step it up

You underestimate my ability to be lazy.

Reading.

[Dormio Ergo Sum]

Huh, phase ends in the morning tomorrow and I need to go out.
I guess I could sheep the O4rfish case, but I think I'd rather see Sky Palladium lynched.
Like I said earlier, I think that Sky Palladium was a little too overexcited about his Serela case and he latched onto some random bs that he came up with and rolled with it.
It's just that Sky Palladium's train of thought is super special and I guess it seemed like a slam dunk case to him even though it just looks stupid to me.
Whatever.

[Serela]

I'm townreading SkyPal now because of this by the way, looks genuine

Really begrudgingly admitting this, but dear god it's hard to not want to lynch SkyPal right now.

##Unvote ##Vote O4rfish
FINE

[Serela]

As I said before, SkyPal doing this as town is pretty normal. I just really don't want to believe. ;_;

[Elieson]

I don't really see what's so fishy about fish. Anybody wanna tl;dr me because i'm not feeling it mr krabs

I would feel more comfortable with a SkyPaladin lynch because robots have no souls and are therefore unable to be gay and cannot be allowed to participate in mafia his casing->bickering towards selery looks rather forced. Dormio, I would consolidate on, but i don't think we'd get that much in terms of associative reads regarding dormio's wagon and such if he was lynched (he? she? idk anything anymore).
-Back to a reply to SkyPaladin's #101: The fact is that you had no reason to say "i'm not 100% sure X is scum". It's a statement that I interpret at being /overly cautious/. You can argue until you're blue in the face that what you said is just how you felt, but that doesn't change the fact that you said something as if you were backed up against a wall in a panic, when town should have no reason to behave in such a manner, especially in early game. Also your #Meta against Selery is a crappy foundation for a case backtrack and an even crappier foundation for a day 1 scumread. you've given reasons, which automatically makes it not RVS.

Who's BT again? If all else fails I'd %%Vote this chump for his lame attempt at contribution which amounted to sheeping and nothing else

Rawr's #96 seems really disconnected from the game, reads as active lurking

[Bardiche]

Care to provide your definition of cheerleading, and the reason why it is scummy?

Cheerleading is what it says on the tin. If you're voicing tacit support for something without getting your fingers dirty ("Bard is suspiciously tolerant", and then leave it at that, for example!), but also first line here. Noting a specific behaviour but attaching no conclusion to it is providing for those who want to vote Dormio/Serela without doing anything yourself. Goading, perhaps?

It's scummy because you're manipulating people while keeping a low profile; scum like it when town make a lot of noise and detract from them. You've got presence, but it's forgetful and most of it is tiny jabs here and there without any conviction nor strength.

Like I said earlier, I think that Sky Palladium was a little too overexcited about his Serela case and he latched onto some random bs that he came up with and rolled with it.
It's just that Sky Palladium's train of thought is super special and I guess it seemed like a slam dunk case to him even though it just looks stupid to me.

I am now perfectly willing to lynch Dormio.

[SB]

Cases on me:
"Bard isn't as zealous as normal!"
This is a lazy stance to take. Also an incredibly easy stance. Mostly lazy though, but also opportunistic because it's impossible to defend against. If I suddenly launched into hyper-activity, I'd probably get shit flung my way about suddenly being too aggressive or whatever.

This is only part of the case, but at the same time the response is probably fair. Also the point you made about Serela's refuge in audacity is pretty solid too.

@SB: You said that you see nothing wrong with Serela's reads, yet Serela has no original reads. How does that affect (or not) your read on him?
Also it'd be cool if you could specify which Serela meta you're townreading him for

It doesn't because it's Day 1. I don't think Serela is incapable of bullshitting something (even if it's a weak read) so if he's scum I feel like he's just trying to replicate his town play atm instead of pushing scum's agenda. I also feel like his rage reaction to Sky is fairly similar to how I felt in the mafiascum game so uh... yeah.

Dan forgetting about the game probably means he's town, although reasons for uh... any of his reads would be helpful. I'm also starting to lean town on Sky as of #144 even though it feels like he's operating using moon logic as usual. NNR kind of reads like apathetic scum but I'm not sure yet.

##Unvote
##Vote: Dormio

I don't feel like Dormio's really doing anything beyond pushing an easy case on Sky Paladin. It doesn't even feel like he's adding anything to it from earlier in the day either, so he's just restating his old content and not really making an attempt to find out anything new.

I'm so-so on the Oarfish wagon because if feels like does this stuff every game and gut townread is still there. I'd lynch him before Sky though.

[O4rfish]

I invite people to read the previous posts and draw their own conclusions.  This is usually because I see something as intriguing, but am not entirely sure of what it means.
Would you prefer I refer to previous action and tell you which conclusion to make?  That seems wrong.

Declaring yourself amenable to someone's lynch without voting them, how is that different from cheerleading?

[SB]

Bard's new avatar makes me think that he's crying every time he writes a mafia post.

[Elieson]

@Bard; Are you basing your dormio vote on what you think is a bus? I'm not following your lack of logic here at all just so you know

Also @Bard; Fish is voting for dormio. You're either missing something here or prioritizing your case here kinda weirdish

[Elieson]

ffs bard just changed his avatar now it's some dumb league thing (as opposed to a cool league thing)

@O4rfish; since you're a leading wagon, can you give a simple list of your top three scumreads and a simple reason as to why?

[Bardiche]

Bard's new avatar makes me think that he's crying every time he writes a mafia post.

In the interest of people not assuming I'm some jerk, I have thus changed my avatar to something that better represents my feelings.

I invite people to read the previous posts and draw their own conclusions.  This is usually because I see something as intriguing, but am not entirely sure of what it means.
Would you prefer I refer to previous action and tell you which conclusion to make?  That seems wrong.

Declaring yourself amenable to someone's lynch without voting them, how is that different from cheerleading?

Refer to previous actions, and then tell us your conclusions. We're not playing this game so someone can comment from the sidelanes as if they're some spectator.

It's different because I am very solidly and very loudly voicing my support, which is different from commenting, "Bard is suspiciously tolerant" but not making clear whether you think I'm scummy or not, and whether there's grounds for voting me. "Suspiciously tolerant" does not necessarily equal "scum".

@Bard; Are you basing your dormio vote on what you think is a bus? I'm not following your lack of logic here at all just so you know

Also @Bard; Fish is voting for dormio. You're either missing something here or prioritizing your case here kinda weirdish

I don't have a Dormio vote, and it's nothing to do with a bus. It's to do with a shitty case.

I don't understand why my priorities are wrong, did O4rfish already flip scum?

[Serela]

Also @Bard; Fish is voting for dormio.

I always get confused when people are like "But the person you're voting is also voting the other person you'd like to vote." as if that actually means something. I mean, I see this get brought up a lot :S

(if you actually meant this has to do with bard's case against o4rfish though that's different)

[Elieson]

I am now perfectly willing to lynch Dormio.

This is what I was referring to, your potential dormio vote, mybad. But to be sure I understand, you're basing your vote on what you think is the dismissal of an "eh" case->becoming what appears to be a townread?

Noting a specific behaviour but attaching no conclusion to it is providing for those who want to vote Dormio/Serela without doing anything yourself.

if he's attaching no conclusion, why did he vote for, and maintain his vote, on dormio?

[Elieson]

(if you actually meant this has to do with bard's case against o4rfish though that's different)

No i literally mean "you're calling somebody out for just making jabs and not following through with any form of conviction; i'll just ignore that you're currently actually voting for the person you're making what i feel is a weak case at."

Like, this is what i see bard's case against o4rfish as.

[Bardiche]

if he's attaching no conclusion, why did he vote for, and maintain his vote, on dormio?

Because this is his vote on Dormio. Now for a mental exercise, you go through his posts and tell me why he's voting for Dormio and maintaining his vote. Here's a hint:

Yknow what's scummy to me? Claiming scum, then disappearing! Everyone feel free to vote Dormio along with me.

That's it. RVS shenanigans and no further attempt to say anything about anything Dormio's posted afterwards, or much of an opinion on anyone else. Did he attach a conclusion to noting both Dormio and Serela claimed scum? No, he noted they both did x, but never said why Dormio is worse than Serela, or what he thinks of Serela for (allegedly) doing it.

But to be sure I understand, you're basing your vote on what you think is the dismissal of an "eh" case->becoming what appears to be a townread?

What? You have to rephrase this, I don't understand what you're saying. Dormio's saying he'd rather lynch Sky Pal over O4rfish, that's fine. Then he describes regular Sky Paladin actions which are just stupid, but not necessarily scummy. He's voting Sky Paladin for being Sky Paladin, which is about as criminal as stealing candy from a baby. And about as easy, too.

I don't understand why you think my beef with O4rfish is weak. He doesn't even have a Dormio case.

[Bardiche]

It's a statement that I interpret at being /overly cautious/

I just want to snipe at this: I think this is a hilarious argument. Sky Paladin has made a lot of noise and everyone's looked at him, and you accuse him of being overly cautious when he airs what everyone else is thinking? No one's 100% convinced they've got their vote on scum. Pretending we are is part of the game, but Sky Paladin's Mafia MMR is like, 500. You're putting a lot of weight on a statement that isn't even a tell at all.

You're portraying a reality where Scum Paladin makes a lot of noise by zealously jumping onto Serela and arguing a lot, and then overly cautiously clarifies he's not 100% convinced. Now, if you say Sky Paladin is backpedalling in a scummy way (note: Townies can wake up with the epiphany that they were wrong), I'll be happy to hear arguments... But at this juncture, if you're going to claim "weak case" in others as significant, you're going to have to put more effort and show me why Sky Paladin is indubitably scum, or more scummy than everyone else.

How does his bickering "seem forced"? Perhaps you can Press a specific statement and show the rest of the gallery what about Sky Paladin's testimony is bogus.

[O4rfish]

Dormio is scummy because he hasn't done anything productive all game except revote Skypal for being "just a little bit overzealous" in his case against Serela. 
Bard, if you want to vote someone who is doing the active lurking thing, switch your vote.

BT usually has more than this.  The game I remember him lurking a ton was Awareness of Color Mafia, in which he was scum.

I don't really have a third strong scumread.  My townreads are pretty much the first four players, and in pretty much that order.

[Serela]

Man, I know I was voting o4rfish for being kinda spectatory/cruisey, but I didn't have the brainpower left last night to actually ISO him and realize how bad it is; which after Bard's post just now, I did. His two comments on Bard being "suspiciously tolerant", mentioning Dormio claiming scum, and saying that "FWIW I think Skypal justified his vote, and he's stuck to it" pretty much constitutes the entirety of his presence in this game.

Suddenly I'm getting more invested with desire for this lynch. Cut by two more posts.

Wait, O4rfish is accusing BT of lurking? He hasn't made a large amount of posts, but the ones he has made are some of the best things in the game.

Whilst I guess saying that you're continuing to vote Dormio because he never got better is sort of understandable, it's not very convincing when you'd never actually commented on or pressed him after he came back making real posts until just now. Just because someone's newer posts don't look good doesn't mean it backs up your vote if you never say anything about it.

[Serela]

Relooked through O4rfish's posts and he never mentions Dormio after Dormio comes back making posts, other than a side comment that Dormio's vote is on SkyPaladin along with mine. That's... not... I mean, there's several things I could say about that, but I can't figure out how to word them right now. :T

[Bardiche]

Dormio is scummy because he hasn't done anything productive all game

How does this not apply to you?

"Don't look at me look at Dormio instead!" is something I regard as a scummy defence, by the way. Trying to cover up your own conduct by making someone else out as a worse offender is pretty bad. I think you're plenty active lurking yourself, so some time in the spotlight will do you good.

If I'm lynching Dormio, it won't be for what he hasn't done, but for what he has done. Which is vote Sky Paladin over being Sky Paladin, and looking for bad play rather than scummy play.

[Serela]

I guess what I'm trying to say here is when the person you're voting for not being around comes back and starts making posts, the last thing that should happen is you ignoring their posts and leaving your vote on them whilst you continue to post about other things. Especially when it turns out, oh, you think their new posts are scummy? Why didn't you ever say that? Pressure and cases are how you get lynches, not apathetically sitting on them whilst they do things you think are scummy but never talk about.

You brought it up now, but only because there's a growing wagon on you over it.

[Bardiche]

Holy shit we've come a long way when Serela starts telling people how to use votes and is making lucid cases.

[Bardiche]

serela which of your scumbuddies just authored your latest post

[Serela]

;_;

[O4rfish]

In this post I was trying to prod Bard into more direct action, while also disagreeing with Mitsuki's case on him.  On rereading his earlier posts, it seems like he was doing well enough as it was.
Today's experiment ... failed.