(Posting from a friend's computer since mine is still not working. With some good luck, I might be up and running again tomorrow morning. With some bad luck, it will be much longer.)

If memory serves, Hatmoza requested to be pro-town in the sign up thread, and then the first thing he does is to claim pro-town when the game starts. Fishy.

FoS: Hatmoza

Words of Wisdom seems to be trying to dominate the game right now. That doesn't sit well with me. Leading the town is fine, but the way it is being done just doesn't feel right at the moment. Someone made a good point that any investigations will likely show us WoW's true colors soon enough, so this is on the back burner. But just so this is clear:

FoS: Words of Wisdom

AgreedDisagree. It is perfectly acceptable on Day One to come to the conclusion that there is not enough evidence to lynch someone. Just because someone comes to that conclusion does not mean they are not paying attention, or not playing.Agreed

@several people saying lynching lurkers is a bad tactic.

Last game I was tracking virtually everything there was to track, while I was alive anyway. In that game, the first couple of days my fellow mafia were lurking big time. One was almost completely absent, another two were heavily lurking, and another was only somewhat active. That's not to say that there were not some innocent lurkers too, but almost all the mafia was. That is important. Then there is the fact that lurking townies just give the mafia some place to hide. The less lurkers there are, the more they stick out, the more they feel they need to talk, and that presents more opportunity for them to slip up. This also gives incentive for townies to contribute to finding scum, although I admit that not all contributions are necessarily positive. (The irony of this paragraph is not lost on me.)

By the way, another interesting tidbit from my notes is that the mafia were all really late to jump on bandwagons.

Note that this post is based on a general impression I got from the thread. I read it rather quickly, and I need to get off my friend's computer now.

hatmoza said: @ FF start here http://www.vgchartz.com/forum/thread.php?id=99735&page=6 this is were wow was getting everyone involved after someone voted me. I asked her "wth?" and her mightiness threatened to lynch me. This is when I became bitter because my opinions apparently don't matter and I'm not allowed to ask questions.

I'm still not getting why WoW accusing you is "not including you" in whatever.  What is it, exactly, that you are being excluded from?  Living?  Did you secretly want to be a WoW groupie and his attack on you (excluding you from his supporters) has soured your longing into rage?  Did I read correctly when I saw you say that if WoW had done ... whatever ... to someone else, you would have been OK with it and perhaps even been happy about it?  

Oh, okay, perhaps you mean excluded from getting to have your opinions considered and your questions answered.  I would submit that we have considered your claims and simply find them very questionable, and have answered your questions. Or maybe you even mean that when you ask questions you get jumped on, but that's not really true -- it's just that your behavior is seen as very suspicious (probably including some times when you were asking questions).  

theRepublic said: (Posting from a friend's computer since mine is still not working. With some good luck, I might be up and running again tomorrow morning. With some bad luck, it will be much longer.) If memory serves, Hatmoza requested to be pro-town in the sign up thread, and then the first thing he does is to claim pro-town when the game starts. Fishy. FoS: Hatmoza Words of Wisdom seems to be trying to dominate the game right now. That doesn't sit well with me. Leading the town is fine, but the way it is being done just doesn't feel right at the moment. Someone made a good point that any investigations will likely show us WoW's true colors soon enough, so this is on the back burner. But just so this is clear: FoS: Words of Wisdom The goal in mafia is to see through lies and use logic to catch scum. Scum will play differently than the town because their objective is different so the goal of good townsfolk is to catch scum by watching for their odd behavior, looking for "scum tells," and finally lynching them. After you lynch someone, you look at all their old posts and everyone else's. Look at who they talked to, who they agreed with, who they disagreed with, who defended them, who they defended, and much more. You use those connections to help you hunt for more scum. Agreed The people voting "no lynch" aren't playing mafia. They're not scum hunting. They're not analyzing or bothering to look for suspicious behavior.[...]Just saying "We don't have enough evidence" and voting "No Lynch" isn't how the game is or should be played. Disagree. It is perfectly acceptable on Day One to come to the conclusion that there is not enough evidence to lynch someone. Just because someone comes to that conclusion does not mean they are not paying attention, or not playing. (This is the part in the second quote that I removed.) That stuff doesn't just magically appear but it does come through via discussion. The more we talk, the more we accuse, and the more we pressure people the more likely it becomes that they'll slip up. Agreed @several people saying lynching lurkers is a bad tactic. Last game I was tracking virtually everything there was to track, while I was alive anyway. In that game, the first couple of days my fellow mafia were lurking big time. One was almost completely absent, another two were heavily lurking, and another was only somewhat active. That's not to say that there were not some innocent lurkers too, but almost all the mafia was. That is important. Then there is the fact that lurking townies just give the mafia some place to hide. The less lurkers there are, the more they stick out, the more they feel they need to talk, and that presents more opportunity for them to slip up. This also gives incentive for townies to contribute to finding scum, although I admit that not all contributions are necessarily positive. (The irony of this paragraph is not lost on me.) By the way, another interesting tidbit from my notes is that the mafia were all really late to jump on bandwagons. Note that this post is based on a general impression I got from the thread. I read it rather quickly, and I need to get off my friend's computer now.

@ bolded - thank you, exactly what I was trying to say

zexen_lowe said: Well, I'd say that by voting No Lynch (specially when we've all agreed that we won't No Lynch), you're indirectly defending him and not condemning his behavior

When did "we" agree on anything ?

 

So either i vote someone or am the enemy?

 

You know what zexen you attitude is very different in this game. Back on game 10A u defended Gnizmo when he was acting wired and said "he plays like this all the time"

http://www.vgchartz.com/forum/post.php?post=2814756&page=1&postnum=24

 

You didnt care about his "behavior" at all back then

http://www.vgchartz.com/forum/post.php?post=2815051&page=2&postnum=9

 

hatmoza plays like this in every game, so why sudenly u cant tolerate his behavior?!

 

Maybe its the fact that ur a scum now ?

 

Since i MUST vote for someone...am gonna go with......you

 

Unvote:

Vote:Zexen_lowe

 

Am heading home now

Be back in a couple of hours

I guess that digging through my behavior in Round 9 didn't allow you to read what I said in this round. If you check my posts in the beginning, which I'm too lazy to dig up, I said that I understood that that was how hatmoza always played. But he took it very far, completely ignoring questions and not taking the game seriously, thus the vote

Now he's trying to get the trust back....but he roleclaimed townie. A useless roleclaim that if it's true it only helps the mafia, because they'll have one less possible target during the night, thus if hatmoza is telling the truth, the only thing he did is increase the chance of an important pro-town dying this night. That's how useful hatmoza is to the game, and that's why I'm not going back on my vote

zexen_lowe said: I guess that digging through my behavior in Round 9 didn't allow you to read what I said in this round. If you check my posts in the beginning, which I'm too lazy to dig up, I said that I understood that that was how hatmoza always played. But he took it very far, completely ignoring questions and not taking the game seriously, thus the vote Now he's trying to get the trust back....but he roleclaimed townie. A useless roleclaim that if it's true it only helps the mafia, because they'll have one less possible target during the night, thus if hatmoza is telling the truth, the only thing he did is increase the chance of an important pro-town dying this night. That's how useful hatmoza is to the game, and that's why I'm not going back on my vote

1) townie is a pro town role...has been I think every game?

2) you seem to be saying that you think we should kill hatmoza even if he is a townie?

Also, I'm pretty comfortable lynching Hatmoza now. Role claiming townie first day and there aren't that many votes against you yet. It may seem like a basic role but you gotta understand that townies can be targetted by most roles out there. Any anti-roles now view you as "easy target A". Are you worth defending as apposed to any one else? No. Also, the mafia that may have killed you might consider you a none threat for now and choose to kill you later on and hunt for bigger fish.

Quoting this for SciFiBoy.

YES. We should lynch Hatmoza. 

SciFiBoy said: zexen_lowe said: I guess that digging through my behavior in Round 9 didn't allow you to read what I said in this round. If you check my posts in the beginning, which I'm too lazy to dig up, I said that I understood that that was how hatmoza always played. But he took it very far, completely ignoring questions and not taking the game seriously, thus the vote Now he's trying to get the trust back....but he roleclaimed townie. A useless roleclaim that if it's true it only helps the mafia, because they'll have one less possible target during the night, thus if hatmoza is telling the truth, the only thing he did is increase the chance of an important pro-town dying this night. That's how useful hatmoza is to the game, and that's why I'm not going back on my vote 1) townie is a pro town role...has been I think every game? 2) you seem to be saying that you think we should kill hatmoza even if he is a townie?

No, no, he roleclaimed vanilla townie, sadly, maybe I worded it incorrectly

I never said anything like that, don't put words in my mouth. You lynch whoever you want to, I'm voting for hatmoza, because he's one that has a high likelihood of being mafia, and in the case he's not, he's a useless townie that only helps to give the mafia one less target. I think that unless you find someone that's most assuredly mafia, it's the best option for my vote.

What questions did I ignore? What are you talking about. did I miss anything? I was being talked about and at one point threatened to be lynch because I ask a questoin!

excuse me for not quoting boxes but this is what Zexen said after Dgc voted me early in the game.
"Yes, Dgc, but the way to combat it is not jumping board on anyone and killing him...that's as bad as No Lynch"

again, he's making it seem like a no lynch is a bad thing and everyone who doesn't agree, scum. He wasn't comfortable with the idea of me being bandwagoned but apparently it's ok now because he joined it ...
and as SFB pointed out, he sounds comfortable lynching a town. WOOW! that pretty much contradicts his and WoW's scumhunting idea.