Dexter Mafia S2. Fires Snuffed: Endgame Town and Dexter Win

[jonty125]

vote count

Chapcrap (2)-chuck, LSUtiger
Vodean (2)-aage, edoc
/ (1)-epitaph
Chuck (1)-bgthebrain
Lsutigerjosh (1)-/
aage (1) - vodean
iron butterfly (1)-chapcrap
Bgthebrain(1)-safariguy
Edocsil (2)-jonty, chap
Safariguy
Jonty
Epitaph (1)-Shaggydan
Shaggydan (infinity)-mod vote
Not the mod - iron butterfly

with 13 alive, 7 to lynch.

About 4 days left until deadline.

Surely shaggy should be lynched as infinity is greater than 7

4 days left... Time to get serious. I have no leads on anyone as of now, because not much has happened...

unvote

There has been nothing of note. We need to decide if we want to RL or if we just want to deadline. Deadline has my favor, with what, 2?, 3? pages of votes and jokes there isn't even enough to justify a quasi-random lynch.

unvote I agree we need to get serious with deadline approaching. And lets admit all posts are fluff.

We could lynch the inactive I suppose, I have done a post count for every player (only posts after the first scene have been counted), apologies if their are slight errors. They are sorted with the player with the most posts at the top.

show: Posts Per Player

So we have four players on one post: /, Epitaph1, safariguy5 and thechuck51. Now, / is gone until Wednesday (see vacation thread), so pressuring /, is not going to get a reply until about 48 hours to deadline, I don't think that is ideal. Leaving us with: Epitaph1, safariguy5 and thechuck51. I can't think of a way to tie-break these three. But if we do decide to lynch one of these. We are lynching them for posting the LEAST amount of fluff, so surely that's a good thing (not posting fluff) .

I'm unsure where to go from here, I think we realistically want at least one claim from today, but no lynch looks quite compelling, especially when we have nearly no substance to go on. Thoughts?

[edocsil]

Not saf. I cannot in good faith suggest a random lynch against someone that is a good player and likely town (statistical odds, nothing to do with posts in this game) Perhaps Epitaph would not be a loss if a RL fell flat, but still that's pretty cold. This is his first game isn't it? That would be a serious dick move. Chuck isn't as good as saf (yet) but still, no one wants to axe good players for crappy reasons.

Beyond that, all players besides chap you and me have 2 posts or less. That would more or less be a crap shot in a game of 8-ball. Sure you might sink something, but it had nothing to do with skill.

Also, look at the top 3 posters, we are all scummy vowels, so I think you are looking at this the wrong way, we should really be hanging those with 5 posts. Those dirty posters are the ones distracting us from the scum hunting with their spam. Jokes aside there is not enough data even for the method you have presented. IMO you were just fishing for a lynch candidate in a fashion that you could easily remove blame from yourself. You haven't advocated anything, you're just providing the rope for someone else to use.

FOS Jonty.

Naw, f*k that.
Unvote Vote Jonty

[thechuck51]

Sorry for my inactivity. Football practices are underway and they are monopolizing my time. I will give my thoughts in a real post tonight. If I'm unable to post in the future due to football I will ask to be replaced.

[LSU Tiger Josh]

There has been nothing of note. We need to decide if we want to RL or if we just want to deadline. Deadline has my favor, with what, 2?, 3? pages of votes and jokes there isn't even enough to justify a quasi-random lynch.

I am also in favor of deadlining but want at least one claim done.

[safariguy5]

I appreciate the vote of confidence edoc. It's not epitaph's first game, Nightmare before Christmas Mafia I think was his first.

I remember last game there was a poisoner as well as the regular killer. I'm going to assume that given only 13 players, kills will probably be limited to one at a time for mafia.

[thechuck51]

Is "deadlining" essentially the same as a no lynch? I am generally not a fan of no-lynching and there really hasn't been much to go on however I am inclined to agree with Edoc. Jonty has accused one person to be a day vig, another to be a survivor. I know it can be explained away as jokes but the joke stage can also provide cover for scummy actions so vote jonty

[Iron Butterfly]

So jonty why would you post meaningless drivel like a post count on a 6 page game where the first 5 show nothing but confirms and joke votes? So you are basically random lynching under the guise of who posts the least fluff?

I prefer Edocsils approach.

vote jonty

[chapcrap]

Is "deadlining" essentially the same as a no lynch? I am generally not a fan of no-lynching and there really hasn't been much to go on however I am inclined to agree with Edoc. Jonty has accused one person to be a day vig, another to be a survivor. I know it can be explained away as jokes but the joke stage can also provide cover for scummy actions so vote jonty

I seriously doubt that anyone is trying to hide things in the joke votes... Are you Yomiel's multi?

I do think that lynching an inactive is appropriate on Day 1 if nothing to go on. However, I wouldn't try to base inactivity on the joke stage. People not posting during jokes generally means nothing. Now, if we any continued inactivity now that that we put our serious faces on, then I can go along with something. Consider this a call out to everyone. Don't be inactive!!

Also, edoc kind of had a strong reaction to jonty I feel like with the vote, but if we aren't going for an inactive (which is inherently impossible at this point), then a random vote for claiming purposes is fine with me. However, this wasn't done a random vote, it was different.


FASTPOSTED by Silver Caterpillar.

[ShaggyDan]

I am also in favor of deadlining but want at least one claim done.

I can't quite put my finger on it but this post rubs me the wrong way. Saying you're in favour of just going to a deadline but also want a claim seems a bit contradictory. If you openly say you won't follow through on pressure you place then why pressure in the first place?

Unvote and vote to put my money where my mouth is.

Though honestly I don't see us have enough time to cohesively agree on something with how close the deadline is...

[ShaggyDan]

Ebwop: Vote Josh

[jonty125]

Not saf. I cannot in good faith suggest a random lynch against someone that is a good player and likely town (statistical odds, nothing to do with posts in this game)

What if saf was scum, and I don't see how saf is statistically more likely to be scum than epi or chuck?

Jonty has accused one person to be a day vig, another to be a survivor. I know it can be explained away as jokes but the joke stage can also provide cover for scummy actions so vote jonty

So, you are voting me for (jokingly) accusing edoc of been a day killer, and when I (jokingly) accused Shaggy of been a survivor. vote thechuck51 for poor reasons to vote. On a WIFOM front, he seems to be trying to join the bandwagon but hiding that he is, by finding a new reason for voting me.

[Epitaph1]

At the risk of being the random lynchee, seeing how I am (or was) on the short list of possible sacrifices, I'm of the philosophy that it's better to have a D1 lynch rather than a no lynch even when there aren't many scumtells flying around. It's the only guaranteed weapon the town has to kill a mafia/SK and it can get some good information.

That said, the reasons to lynch jonty have been specious at best. His posts were during the joke stage and it's hard to draw any solid inferences during that time unless someone were to make a major slip or really go over the top--neither of which jonty did, as far as I can tell.

I'm actually more interested in Shaggy's point on LSU. As stated above, I'm not a fan of just letting the deadline pass. It would be hard to pressure someone enough to claim when we act like we don't care if we get a lynch today or not.

unvote Vote LSU

[BGtheBrain]

*****

[jonty125]

Clearly everyone has the same chance of being scum,

My thoughts exactly. So why does edoc say this?

Not saf ... is a good player and likely town (statistical odds, nothing to do with posts in this game)

[strike wolf]

vote count

Chapcrap (2)-chuck, LSUtiger
Vodean (2)-aage, edoc
/ (1)-epitaph
Chuck (1)-Jonty
Lsutigerjosh (3)-/, Shaggydan, Epitaph
aage (1) - vodean
iron butterfly
Bgthebrain(1)-safariguy
Edocsil
Safariguy
Jonty (4)-Edocsil, Chuck, Iron butterfly, BGthebrain
Epitaph
Shaggydan

with 13 alive, 7 to lynch.

About 3 days left.

[jonty125]

Sorry for double post

At the very least I wouldve expanded the list to include 2 posts. Whats the real difference considering none of the posts had anything useful anyways.

Then we'd have about 10 players on the lynch list, absolute no good, lets lynch any of these 10, with little evidence to go on.

[BGtheBrain]

*****

[strike wolf]

The debates are always so fascinating when you don't have to participate directly.

[edocsil]

Jonty, there are fewer scum then town in the game. Odds are that any random player is more likely to be town.

[jonty125]

Jonty, there are fewer scum then town in the game. Odds are that any random player is more likely to be town.

I read the post as saying, don't lynch saf, because, statistically he is more likely to be town than the other 2 candidates.

[aage]

Jonty, there are fewer scum then town in the game. Odds are that any random player is more likely to be town.

So why mention it?

I was with you until you mentioned that he was less likely to be town. Why did you mention it? Did you just need more than one argument in order to seem more convincing? That sounds scummy to me, and I don't really trust you on this because of it.

On the other hand, I do agree that stronger arguments are needed to lynch a player that is considered "good", so I will hold off my vote for now and probably let the deadline hit. With thirteen players we have more leeway with a no-lynch, however much I usually dislike it. Both wagons that seem to be forming appear to be aimed in the wrong direction, but I don't know what the right direction would be since there are so few posts. Sorry for being so unhelpful.

[chapcrap]

What is all this craziness?

Do you guys think people are actually acting scummy? Because I see nothing still. The scummiest thing to people is people trying to paint others as scummy when nothing is actually happening.

I mean, let's look at aage's post above mine. He quotes edoc and then directly contradicts the quote in his second sentence.

Jonty, there are fewer scum then town in the game. Odds are that any random player is more likely to be town.

So why mention it?

I was with you until you mentioned that he was less likely to be town. Why did you mention it? Did you just need more than one argument in order to seem more convincing? That sounds scummy to me, and I don't really trust you on this because of it.

On the other hand, I do agree that stronger arguments are needed to lynch a player that is considered "good", so I will hold off my vote for now and probably let the deadline hit. With thirteen players we have more leeway with a no-lynch, however much I usually dislike it. Both wagons that seem to be forming appear to be aimed in the wrong direction, but I don't know what the right direction would be since there are so few posts. Sorry for being so unhelpful.

It seems like people are trying to make mountains out of molehills. And by molehills, I mean flat ground. If you want to randomly go after someone, fine. You want to pressure an inactive? Ok. But attempting to paint someone as scummy when they haven't really done anything is scummy itself, IMO.

[aage]

What is all this craziness?

Do you guys think people are actually acting scummy? Because I see nothing still. The scummiest thing to people is people trying to paint others as scummy when nothing is actually happening.

[/wifom]

I mean, let's look at aage's post above mine. He quotes edoc and then directly contradicts the quote in his second sentence.

Jonty, there are fewer scum then town in the game. Odds are that any random player is more likely to be town.

So why mention it?

I was with you until you mentioned that he was less likely to be town. Why did you mention it? Did you just need more than one argument in order to seem more convincing? That sounds scummy to me, and I don't really trust you on this because of it.

On the other hand, I do agree that stronger arguments are needed to lynch a player that is considered "good", so I will hold off my vote for now and probably let the deadline hit. With thirteen players we have more leeway with a no-lynch, however much I usually dislike it. Both wagons that seem to be forming appear to be aimed in the wrong direction, but I don't know what the right direction would be since there are so few posts. Sorry for being so unhelpful.

It seems like people are trying to make mountains out of molehills. And by molehills, I mean flat ground. If you want to randomly go after someone, fine. You want to pressure an inactive? Ok. But attempting to paint someone as scummy when they haven't really done anything is scummy itself, IMO.

I quoted him because I disagreed with him, so I was bound to contradict him eventually. The part you highlighted referred to the earlier post made by Edoc'sil in which he said he didn't want to lynch Safari because he was "less likely to be town (statistical odds, has nothing to do with posts)" (paraphrased). Maybe that's where you got confused.

Also, let me note that I haven't mentioned lynching or even voting Edoc'sil at all. I just gave my view on the current affairs. It's curious how the "accusation" Edoc'sil made doesn't paint anyone scummy but my observation does.

[chapcrap]

What is all this craziness?

Do you guys think people are actually acting scummy? Because I see nothing still. The scummiest thing to people is people trying to paint others as scummy when nothing is actually happening.

[/wifom]

Calling something wifom, doesn't make it true. In what way is that wifom? I was making an observation. There is literally nothing scummy except for people trying make baseless accusations.

I mean, let's look at aage's post above mine. He quotes edoc and then directly contradicts the quote in his second sentence.

Jonty, there are fewer scum then town in the game. Odds are that any random player is more likely to be town.

So why mention it?

I was with you until you mentioned that he was less likely to be town. Why did you mention it? Did you just need more than one argument in order to seem more convincing? That sounds scummy to me, and I don't really trust you on this because of it.

On the other hand, I do agree that stronger arguments are needed to lynch a player that is considered "good", so I will hold off my vote for now and probably let the deadline hit. With thirteen players we have more leeway with a no-lynch, however much I usually dislike it. Both wagons that seem to be forming appear to be aimed in the wrong direction, but I don't know what the right direction would be since there are so few posts. Sorry for being so unhelpful.

It seems like people are trying to make mountains out of molehills. And by molehills, I mean flat ground. If you want to randomly go after someone, fine. You want to pressure an inactive? Ok. But attempting to paint someone as scummy when they haven't really done anything is scummy itself, IMO.

I quoted him because I disagreed with him, so I was bound to contradict him eventually. The part you highlighted referred to the earlier post made by Edoc'sil in which he said he didn't want to lynch Safari because he was "less likely to be town (statistical odds, has nothing to do with posts)" (paraphrased). Maybe that's where you got confused.

Also, let me note that I haven't mentioned lynching or even voting Edoc'sil at all. I just gave my view on the current affairs. It's curious how the "accusation" Edoc'sil made doesn't paint anyone scummy but my observation does.

You disagree so you were going to contradict him? Ok that argument would work if that's what happened. You didn't contradict him or oppose him. You said that he said something completely different than what he actually said. I didn't get confused. Edoc said he was more likely to be town. You keep saying that he said saf was less likely to be town. You've done it twice now.

[/]

Back a bit earlier than I thought.
Hm, rather interesting, edoc is acting oddly. I realize he is, at least in part joking, however this doesn't make me any less suspect of his actions.
1. He suggests a no lynch over a lynch, this is completely bizarre for super aggressive edoc, from what I’ve seen he will, as town, never pass up a single opportunity to kill, he will vig every night, lynch every day.
2.This is, in all likely hood filled to this brim with serial killers, several deaths per night, passing up any opportunity makes even less sense in this game of all games.
3. Your logical is that we shouldn't LYNCH safari, which jonty wasn't even advocating, he clearly said the intent was pressure so we can get some data, he even avoided me for fear of lack of time.
4. There is no reason NOT to pressure safari over anyone else, you said yourself there wasn't enough data to draw conclusions, in fact, I would say this is the ideal time to pressure good players, because the more townies we have alive, the less likely they are to come up with a decent fake-claim.

Based on all these reason, I will vote edoc, and FOS those on the poorly reasoned wagon.

Now as I have said, this is odd play, almost subtly jesterish, so I ask anyone with knowledge of Season Two (I stopped watching at season one unfortunately) Does anyone know of a role who would want to be killed by Town/Dexter/Some Serial Killer? If so, be wary.
(last game I was Tony Tucci expy, and wanted to be targeted by the ice truck killer)

show