Newbie 682 - Mayhem in Umore - Game Over, Scum Win!

[nureins]

Hi all
Thanks to the mod
I am Ready !

[nureins]

Not a random vote.

MINI 487: Mirth is town. A player votes the mod. Mirth votes that player in her first post indicating she does not like mod-votes.
OPEN 92: Mirth is scum. Mirth votes the Mod in her first post.

NEWBIE 682 (this one): Mirth's first post.

Mod: can I vote you for being scum yet? Since I know you are?

Vote: Mirth

A good topic to start with, isnt it ? Give me your opinion about it, please...

[nureins]

It seems like Nureins could be onto something.

Vote: Mirth

Newbie game, 3 posts. L-2. No no...

Unvote

Dejkha jumped in the wagon but stated very clearly it was another's case. Do you think my case was so important as to risk a lynch in first page ? especially taking into account this is a newbie game...

FOS: Dejkha

[nureins]

@all: my vote on Mirth was nothing relevant, obviously. Its only purpose was to generate debate.

ChuckNorris answered the natural way.
Dej answered in a suspicious way.

However, we need to disentangle if Dej is simply a total noob. Notice that he is suggesting in his answer that Day 1 is gonna finish quickly with random votes' stage...

@Experienced Mirth: Why do you find me suspicious for setting a trap to launch discussion ? I immediately unvoted you and fossed dej which gives a clear message of how stupid I considered my first "case" on you.

@cute: L-2 means only 2 more votes to be lynched

[nureins]

@caf: I found very interesting Mirth's question about your non-vote. When you answer, please answer also the following related point:

- your post was simply a theory discussion.
- you didnt discuss on Mirth wagon
- you didnt discuss on Dej wagon

Why didnt you vote/asked other person if none of these wagons was interesting for you ?

[nureins]

So, for the record, my suspicion was aroused by your vote for Mirth followed by chastising someone else for doing the same. I happen to think that dejkha's behaviour can be at least partially excused by his status as a fresh n00b. So, it seemed slightly like you were setting him up.

Yes, I "provoked" it. Indeed, I declared it openly later. Cannot see how this can be bad. Im not pursuing any lynching of Dej. Just testing how people behave...

Indeed, before you, I interpreted his words as noob and therefore, partially lowering my mild suspicion for casting a third vote on a row.

With respect to your behavior, you were too much theoretical for my taste in a first post, I expect more seeking/hunting but obviously just a first post, so nothing relevant. Now it is clear, and obviously, my bad with Dej's wagon, you couldnt obviously comment something that hadent happened.

[nureins]

The use of meta is what is suspicious here.

I dont like either random votes. So I use any excuse to vote and provoke debate. It has been so in the two previous games I have played in mafiascum, it has been so in this one, it will be so in all I play...

If I had said "Joke vote due to this meta !!", i wouldnt have appeared as suspicious, but I wouldnt have gotten any debate or traps.

My objective was not to accuse you, but to provoke debate/trap. The couple of examples I found were enough and I didnt find the other ones you are mentioning. But if I had done, I would not have used them in any case, since I was not building a case on you...

Clearly, I prefer to analyze you with lot of time and pages and even in this case, I guess Ill not obtain many reads. This is what newbie games are for, suppose.

[nureins]

This bothers me. Why are you concerned about appearing suspicious?

I dont. So I voted you and provoked the debate/trap.

[nureins]

This could be one of 2 things--1) Very Nervous Scum trying to get the townies to befriend him.
2) Nervous Town trying not to look like scum.

If you talk of me, you forgot 3: An active (town) player.

Question: What do you mean by natural and suspicious way?

natural townie way: relativize and put in perspective. analyze, scrutinize, make it rational...

suspicious way: use it for wagoning without a serious reflection, voting, moving to L-2 in first page...

----

Now a question for chuck. If my first vote game made two wagons to appear, and two persons to wagon so quickly inspiring for suspicions (one of them noted by myself immediately), which part of my behavior is suspicious? how can be my attitude not pro-town?

I like the Nureins/Dej/MrAvacado vs Mirth/Caf/chuck game you have proposed. So quick, so fast, so nice. Even with RED-BLUE colours (obviously, adding that suspicions are very mild blablabla). Sounds quite dichotomic to me, and dichotomy is a synonimous of simplification, and for page 2, this is really a synonimous of not pro-town tell...

[nureins]

If you are asking how can your attitude not be pro town, I didn't say that.
In reply to you other question, Your suspicious action was how yuo voted for Mirth and then when someone else did the same, you immediately started suspecting them. That is a slight scumtell for me. Even if it was to be at L-1 it still probably was a newbie not realising the dnager of that vote.

The newbie put Mirth at L-2, not L-1.

- You voted for Mirth randomly.
- I voted for Mirth just to generate discussion and seeing reactions.
- Dej voted for Mirth on the basis of a not-very-serious analysis putting her at L-2.

Once Dej casted his vote, the objectives of my vote were achieved, and the suspicious thing would have been to mantain the vote at the (weak) risk of quicklynch present.

Also the 3v3 was totally unintended. Also I can't help if 2 people are lurking and I can't have an opinion on someone who hasn't said anything. The Red, Blue colours was nothing to do with Tactics. Was just to make it look better.

These are the irrelevant parts of my comment. The relevant one is that you built so quickly two categories (mafia vs non-mafia) and you included people there without almost anything as a basis. Indeed, you are saying now that Dej is probably a townie, so hardly he can be in your mafia list. He has only done one thing (putting Mirth at L-2) and you are explaining it as a newbie thing, thus, no relevant suspicion.

Not very serious suspicions but very elaborated categories (bad vs good) serious words (mafia, non-mafia) and ornamental framing (colours, remarking the difference)...

[nureins]

@ Chucky

You havent answered a question, maybe because I didnt formulate it precisely. So, let me do it properly.

...it still probably was a newbie not realising the dnager of that vote.

1. Why did you include Dej in your list of mafia if you have this opinion ?

And now I have a couple of extra questions. Among all your words, I only found this explanation of why my attitude could be scummy (if I am mistaken, please tell me where else I can find you signalling my scumminess)

This could be one of 2 things--1) Very Nervous Scum trying to get the townies to befriend him.
2) Nervous Town trying not to look like scum.

So,

2. Which is the way in which I tried to get the townies to befriend me ?? Scumhunting ? This can only be good for town...
So, at the end, the question is why my behavior was suspicious of being scummy. Can you explain it ? I need to understand which scumtell you have in mind...[/u]

[nureins]

If I unvote, I'll be right back to a mostly random vote. If someone else gives me a reason to suspect them, then I'll change my vote, but until then I won't.

So essentially:

- The initial post was nothing (a provoking post simply, a kind of joke vote).
- The person who wrote it is telling that this post meant nothing, and that there is nothing scummy in Mirth voting the mod.
- Mirth answered adequately.

Therefore, you have nothing on Mirth and basically, you are random-voting her. But you prefer to mantain the vote and not change it to anyone else.
Are you really saying that you havent read anything minimally suspicious in these two pages? According to your words, whatever minimally suspicious is better than a random-vote for you...

[nureins]

...

I would call that OMGUS suspicion.

I didnt lure "you" onto anything. You entered yourself alone, I wasnt thinking in you particularly. other people didnt enter (for instance chucky). And though minimally, this entrance was a signal of suspicion. Indeed, from the people who is suspecting of you, I am more inclined to think you are newbie (and therefore your action less suspicious) than other people.

If you are a townie, I really suggest you to read a bit WIKI about OMGUS...and then come back and read the game with a fresh air...

[nureins]

Wow!
Let's put some pressure.
For noob-townies, this is a very simple exercise to start practicing. Read carefully and extract your own conclusions. I want to re-read again to think a bit more about Seb's attitude, but this is the scummiest thing seen up to the moment.

Up to now:

0. Not reading carefully

- Not a very relevant thing yet, but scummies tend to read less than townies, as they dont need to find the scum.

1. Wagoning where most people is smelling just to be part of the mass.

- Wagons Mirth
- When he sees it is a mistake, wagons me

2. Justifying by lieing

- When he defends in front of Mirth accusation, he says that he agrees with the points made my people.
- But obviously, he voted for Mirth without reading the thread and jumped over her. Only after reading the thread he realized there was some smelling over me and jumped again. Just to be with the crowd, as he said, not because he agreed with the reasons !!

3. Justifying by simplifying the accusation

- He simplifies Mirth's accusation by saying she is voting him due to a mistake and only due to that.
- That is obviously a lie, since Mirth is voting her due to what I wrote in 1 (and some 0) basically.

4. OMGUS reaction to Mirth.

- He fosses her as a consequence of her accusations, which are quite fair.
- The Fos is based on the false defense (3).

5. Playing the newbie card

- He claims loudly that he is a newbie to defend his situation (compare to Dej, who I interpreted as a newbie, but he didnt use it in his post...)
- Try to count the number of times he used the newbie-defense...I can only count one-digit numbers and my fingers ended up...

6. Appealing to emotion

- He tries to defend by crying loudly that he is a townie instead of addressing the points of the attack.
- He repeatedly tries to present the situation as "Mirth is a bad person for doing me so". Uses words as "a mistake is not a crime !!" and things like that.

7. Claims without the need of a claim

- He claims to be vanilla townie (without power roles) without significant pressure on him. If he is a townie, he is not helping the town with such a claim so quick...

vote: Seb456

@mega-noob townies (this is my third game ever, so hardly im something else than a newbie. But Id have liked advices in first game, so here it goes): You can now see that serious reasons start to appear. explore, smell, hunt...pressure a bit if you want, but dont rush, we are in no hurry of lynching anybody. Try to find your own reasons, do not panic to cast votes on people you find suspicious. IMO, this guy needs a bit of shaking to explore how scummy he is. L-2 is more than justified. Probably Mirth is a more experienced voice, but if the guy does some other responses in the same direction, L-1 is too...and then, let's see...we are yet in page 3, and we have lot of time...

[nureins]

i am the VI and i know it.

What does this mean ? Can you explain it better ?

[nureins]

@serous: are you there ?

@cute: Id appreciate your analysis, as basic as it can be...

@Dej: You did some of the mistakes that seb is making now. Do you want to go over my list of "scumtells" and try to think what you did, how you did, what not, and which are the differences with seb ? Id appreciate if you make this analysis...

[nureins]

@seb: announcing your own suicide is only a scumtell. If you were town, you would never, never vote yourself or ask mod for killing you. You would try to defend and try to explain how a townie (in that case, you) played as he did. Suiciding yourself would only help to the mafia...

So another scumtell to your list. Autovote (in this case, announcing suicide or asking mod to kill you)...

Can you explain to me how you would help town by suiciding yourself ?
You are at L-2, and avacado vote was correct IMO. We are pressuring you and observing your reactions, and yet you have to do your townie task...we are waiting...

[nureins]

I've read everything so far. It was mostly because a lot of it was directed at me, at least at first anyway.

Good. Correct and You dont hide that youve read mainly coz it is about you...

I didn't do it just because Mirth wasn't "popular" though.

But not far away...what you did was partially scummy, though you already admitted your point somehow and reacted more or less properly. But notice how much you have waited for unvoting...this is not positive and yet I have you up in my list.

It seems to me like Mirth is having the OMGUS reaction. No offense Mirth, but you do seem to get pretty angry anytime anyone votes for you (and anytime someone so much as responds to something you say), whether its with a reason or not.

I also have this impression. But seems to me is something about her personality. I would need to meta her a lot for that, but given I have not scum vibes from her, Ill just park it now...

I seem to recall hearing we don't have to vote. Is that true, because I think I'll skip it this time around.

Only scummies and very very noob ones ask for no-lynch in first round...
Im yet trying to decide what you are, but the fact that you ask for a no-lynch when seb456 is showing his scumness so openly is very suspicious to me...


Mantain my vote and my Fos. But want to hear the lurkers a bit before conforming a serious idea...

[nureins]

@seb: the pressure on you is not because you "had to vote". Most players here have already voted. Read my case on you, there you can find many reasons that probably Mirth and Avacado share right now...

[nureins]

@serous

All THIS happened in your absence and you do not try even to analyze it ?
do you have some opinion on the game ?

@seb

Nureins, I cant help but feel that u both OMGUSed me and WAGONed me as well.

I built a reasoned case on you and then voted you. No OMGUS.
It was the second vote on you, and as you can see in my case, you have been the scummiest, so 2 votes is not a lot. No mass-quick-wagon but hunting-wagon.

I don't think you are mafia but i don't want to change my vote again, its just gonna get me to L-1, or worse.

voting someone you think is town is not gonna help the town.

Anyway I wanna know why you don't want me to suicide but to just be lynched. I really don't wanna die by lynch, because that would mean i had no say in the matter.

If we arrive to lynch you, it is better to lynch you in a regular way that with you suiciding (autovoting or whichever form you might think of). If you are mafia or town, in any case we can learn a lot about who tried to push your lynch, how they did, how serious they were in the lynch, etc.

-----------

Right now, Ill stop my pressure on you to see how other people puts pressure on you if they think you are scum, but my vote is by now on you clearly...

If you are townie, re-read my case on you, think why you have been pressured, think how a townie should act, and proceed to act like one, because if you are townie, you are not helping us a lot.

[nureins]

Nur 70: you need to meta me? Please tell me you're not one of those heavily-relying on meta people? sigh...I think from now on it will be my crusade to make newbies pay attention to current games and not meta.

Some people is more deffensive than others. They feel attacked and react before others. To disentangle if somebody is scum or not, this can help. This does not mean Im a fan of meta. Surely it takes too much time and dunno if so profitable. I already said that since I dont suspect you by the moment, I skip the "deffensive issue". In any case, it was not relevant.

This part bothers me. First, he said not voting, not non lynching. Voting upon joining the game is optional. see my exchange with Caf. Keeping a vote on someone the whole time is also optional which is obviously what he's referring to, since he didn't vote someone after unvoting me. So here you're putting words into his mouth.

Um, you are probably right. Surely is a misunderstanding on my side due to so much "im gonna suicide suicide suicide kill kill kill etc etc etc" by seb. So when I read this part from dej and how seb used it for a stupid defence I probably misinterpreted...

I also don't like your use of the word lurkers. Game has barely begun. Yes, there's a large backlog, but that doesn't mean people who haven't posted yet are lurking. And I think that people on this site rely too heavily on using lurking as a scumtell instead of actually looking for real ones.

As you clearly see, I built a case on someone, have some minor reads on another one, and while other people debate the possible scumminess of seb, I pointed out to these persons not posting. I want to see if they are scum-lurkers, passive-townies-lurkers or they are simply not posting for whichever reason. Lurker does not necessarily mean scum in my mind. Dunno which is the exact definition of this term and indeed, you can skip a theory debate if you want to instruct me how to use the term. For me, it means just no-info no-post very irregular players...I want to explore everyone before starting to think more seriously about people...

Nur, 76: while I agree with the content of this post whole-heartedly, the closing remarks feel very very off. Maybe you're like Muerrto and give absolute newbies too much leeway with the coaching I also see here. Also never step off an attack if you think it is worth attacking.

I dont know Muerrto, so I cannot talk about this player. My only doubt right now has to do with a detail in seb's profile that makes him substantially different to me and provokes me doubts about how much of the game this guy can understand. So my opinion on seb is clear. And I prefer to observe a bit from the distance and probably, transmit my last "hey noob, react" message. You also told several times "react, play, blabla". This is perfectly compatible with having a serious case on him, that I mantain fully.

[nureins]

Nur, I object to you using the term lurkers in the first place

Come on, I didnt use it to attack anyone in particular. My case is firmly done up to now. Now read post 85 by seb and let him enjoy his sweet and discovering he can sniff around...lets see what he does once he has been fed. This cannot hurt the town for sure...While so, Ill take a look around too.

[nureins]

Nur, you still are missing my point. Someone can't be lurking if there has not been a long enough window of oppurtunity to occur. If you asked "lurkers" to post 10 days after game start, it would make sense. Not exactly 2.

I didnt miss your point. I understand your point. I agree with your point. At the same time, I also want to give space to other people to discuss about seb. It is not good if only one or two persons handle a wagon, as there could be people hidden around. So Ill be taking a look to other players and to these people who are not posting yet to see what they do or what they are...simply that...

Given that seb has signalled us as the "home owners", Ill be receiving other guests that will come or have recently come to see who they are...the guests already in the living room or you if you want to shake him a bit more can entertain seb for sure...
(that is a metaphore, and you can skip it obviously...do not want a big debate about a joke/metaphore !!)

[nureins]

I do not understand your metaphor.

Our guest Seb has thought that buddying up he can solve his problems (so he started to please us accepting our points, unvoting, unfossing and saying ill be a good guy, i promise !! let me be in the party !! oh you two are the masters of the universe, the ones organizing the party....)

For me, it is just one more signal. Buddying...

But I want other players to analyze seb before having a more serious opinion. I do not want to be tunnelvisioned, and therefore adding some external view is ok. Ill talk and analyze other players and remain observing how seb goes on falling and falling....

[nureins]

Dej, I'm aggressive about everything, pretty much. This is not a town tell. This is a matter of playstyle. So don't count me out just yet.

Seb, or you could just try playing. What do you think of the active posters so far? Do you find anyone scummy? Also, shutting up is never a good thing, so Chuck, don't listen to him.

Hey Mirth, that sounds very much like a coaching...

Seb has done his first and unique relevant comment during the game. Chuck was too melodramatic with his mail, MFOS -- FOS -- HOS -- blablablabla, repeating arguments previously done by us and later on asking to the ICs (so basically you, due to your activity) if a vote was ok or not. I didnt comment on your first advice coz you could say is an IC answer, but that was enough...this second advice is not anymore an IC advice. And, it is very relevant. And Seb has noted it...

Seb maybe said to chuck "shut up" but the essence of his post was "hey rat, dont jump over my wagon just repeating what everybody said and so ceremoniously..."

If I interpreted correctly, please Chuck explain your behaviour. Notice also how this is correlated to the colourful dramatic interpretation of Mafia vs Town that chucky interpreted already...at the end, the town needs new arguments. If you just buy the arguments of another person, quote that person and say QFT or say which one exactly you buy (i enumerate them to allow so, indeed)

[nureins]

If I hadn't been at school when you said it I would have been able to point out your scumminess. Also If I had pointed ot these facts, before you were at L-2 I would have voted you. Believe me when I say I want to vote you, but the Mafia could hammer if I put you at L-1.

If you think he is mafia, how would the mafia hammer him?
Do you think he is mafia ? how much ? Can you compare him to others ?

[quote"mirth"]
I'm also not liking Mr. A's post. Comes off as very superficial.
[/quote]

I do not agree with that either. Mr. A maybe can provide more. But his arguments are his own. He has pointed also irregularity and continuous changes by Seb, something that very vaguely had been commented. So I would only cheer mr. A to provide more stuff...


@seb. you did a couple of very minimal good comments. But you go on with stupidities about who should lynch you etc. I allow myself this coaching because if I had to decide, Id be very close to lynch you.
do you find chuck suspicious ?

@chuck: if serous/cute find seb difficult to read or townie, would you change your mind ? or would u find him scummy yet ? because if the later is true, I do not understand your attitude.

[nureins]

I didn't understand nurs last post.

summary:
Chuck is not only careful about voting seb. He is also trying to appear careful.
The fact that Mirth coaches him and criticizes the noob player that solidly votes for seb (you) are important details to be noted.

This doesnt mean I consider Mirth scum. Chuck is probably close to a Fos, but right now and among the people who have participated, I would lynch seb without hesitation...

@mr. A: you will never have certainty about suspects. Do not relax ever, go on scumhunting around...make a list for your own with your view on everyone and how scummy they are...

[nureins]

I think that mirth chuck and seb are all being suspicious and that dej is just plain stupid!

Can you explain carefully why these four judgements ?

[nureins]

@Mr. A: If you have not understood what coaching was, why do you think Mirth is suspicious for that ?

@all: is there anyone out there having a personal opinion on something (Mirth, you do not need to answer). Whatever, different, not commented...please give it and explain yourself...!!!

[nureins]

@Mod: Might you explain to some of these young guys what the game is about and the mechanics of the forum ? I am afraid some of them fail to distinguish mafiascum and msn...

[nureins]

Dej, nothing else you want to comment on?

unvote:Seb

for the time being. I want everyone here first.

As to agreeing, that depends on how you go about doing it.

If you consider L-1 risky and bad for town, why dont you suspect of chuck ? some Fos, some....

Taking into account that you IC-adviced him to a level that is almost a coaching, it is surprise that he puts him in L-1, you unvote without "coaching or IC-advicing" chuck about the bad this might be for town...

[nureins]

I don't think Chuck deserves an FOS yet, but I am not happy with his action.

Also, Nur, what do you make of me admitting to coaching Seb, since you're focusing so much on coaching?

I never talked of you coaching seb. I talked of you coaching chucky, which seems to me very interesting. That you dont even Fos him for something you perceive bad for us is just another connection to be noted...

I agree with you that L-1 is risky. And chuck has not discussed his own view adequately (especially for an L-1). FOS: chucky
Im also waiting for other people to connect/post/comment before advancing...

[nureins]

You misunderstand my question. I am saying straight out that I was also coaching Seb. With all your emphasis on coaching, why are you ignoring that connection?

That is obvious. Seb is on top of your scum list. you are voting for him (or almost voting for him now), and your comments scrutinized. He is behaving immaturely, and you "coach" him in things that could be distracting. But yet you catched up his scumtells and participate in his wagon...perfect.

But you havent fossed chucky, you havent suspected of him. Yet he has done already several suspicious things and you were coaching him...that connection is interesting to me, and I note it. Not very relevant, but to take into account this things is my task...

[nureins]

a) Simplifying and making a show of your first analysis (already discussed)
b) Trying to appear careful to Mirth and me, or to everyone. Your post with hundred of fosses but no new piece of information about seb...
c) After all your careful show, you vote for seb. So at the end you were not careful, but with all your previous show, you can say later "i got tired, i was careful but at the end I got tired...". Indeed, youve said something like that. Dont like.
d) I dont think L-1 is a disaster, but we have to wait for other players to participate. Right now there are at least 2 from which we have no reads...
e) No good scumhunter forgets his targets. I was your target number 1. Maybe for stupid reasons, but I was. You didnt put me down in your suspicions (I havent read it), but now you are treating me as town.
f) Related to e), you have forgotten your other targets to join the Seb wagon. Not that you cant, obviously, but you have totally forgotten the others (a scum smelling the blood of seb would forget the others, right?)

You can see that they are not clear reads, as in the case of Seb. Therefore, just a Fos and a careful observation follows...feel free to comment them...

[nureins]

B) With my post, since I had missed quite alot, as I was at school, everyone else had already taken out all the scumminess of Seb's posts. So when I found him scummy, it was impossible to find anything new about him.
e) I suppose that does look scummy, but as the main posters are me, you and Mirth, and I don't find you or Mirth scummy, I haven't really got much of a tell on everyone else. If they were to post a little more then maybe I would have more targets.

b) You dont need to "appear" as townie. You have to be one. The rest follows. Repeating others just makes the thread ful of the same things. Stating your opinion and going on with your own scumhunting is more profitable for the town.

e) It does. Seb is also a main poster, and you can see how he looks like scummy. You can provoke reads on other people by asking them interesting things...

[nureins]

@Dej:

1. You jumped over Mirth's wagon with almost no reason for. (already discussed)
2. You were very reluctant to abbandon Mirth's vote.

- You even said " I'm gonna take even the smallest lead I can get. If I unvote, I'll be right back to a mostly random vote. "
- You entered several discussions about Mirth, even if it was pretty clear that Mirth's case was a kind of joke.

3. But if you are gonna use anything to base your cases, because you dont want to randomize, why havent you even considered Seb?

Please, save an answer of the kind "because I dont want to risk...he is at L-2..." or something like that...because Im not talking of a vote. Im talking also of a suspicion, comments, investigation, etc...there is nothing.

[nureins]

(simplifying. Sorry if i misunderstood seb's msg) Chuck was coached much more than me

wow!
This guy is able to make analysis.
A point for him. I fully agree that both coachings cannot be compared at all. Chucky's one was much more important and this is very substantial given my point that no Fos-suspicion has been done between Mirth and Chucky.

Seb however is unable to interpret the importance of this type of coaching. He thinks Mirth would be using Seb's example to incriminate him. Not at all...If Mirth-chucky were the scum, Mirth would be using Seb's example to show that coaching is her playstyle and that is not related to chucky. She would be shouting " Noooooo chucky and I are not scum !!!!!!!!)"

But they are vague impressions, and as people is saying, the 4 people talking are Seb-chuck-mirth-me essentially, so obviously these vague minor impressions cannot be considered serious scumtells.


The last part "If I die, I want you to lynch chuck" is more shit...
Seb is a good candidate for the moment...

[nureins]

@caf

Your post was really interesting and Im wishing to read the rest of opinions.

However, Im not so sure about Seb vs chuck. I can think about other motivations for him to attack chuck and be so dramatic with the "I want chuck to die if Im revealed town". He knows for sure what he is going to be revealed, right ? hehe...

Seb attacked Mirth correctly with the coaching before I expanded this view. But maybe this is part of the Chuck obsession in his words...

[nureins]

Post 190: I find this slightly scummy. Only because it seemed like on page 6 you and Seb were buddies(not scumbuddies) and were, rather annoyingly, talking about nothing to do with the game. I don't find that scummy about either of you. But suddenly when it really looks like we're gonna lynch Seb you suddenly start being, not unkind or anything like that, but rather you are maybe distancing yourself from your possible scumbuddy?

MFoS:Mr A

On page 6, Mr. A was already voting for seb, who had 3 votes on him and all chances to be lynched. I dont think we are now in a position where he has avoided lynch, but I cannot perceive how different is now from page 6. So your argument cannot apply.

Also, if Mr. A and seb are scum, they are very inexperienced scum. It is difficult to understand A's quick vote on seb. And even if he voted for him, he would have used any excuse (some nice words about seb, any) to unvote him. So this pair is rather strange.

Yet dunno how to interpret A's msg about Seb, given that both of them were obviously not helping the reading in page 6...

[nureins]

@Caf: I can't remember if you heav told us what you think on my idioctic behaviour, ie: Putting Seb at L-1.

Chuck has been behaving extremely passive with this issue.

- He accepted very easily that he did a bad vote.
- He buddied most of players with the acceptance of his bad action.

And now this sounds quite fake. It is hard to imagine such a townie reaction, enjoying to read how bad he did. As much as to ask other players about it. Especially Caf, that given how he is giving serious and valuable opinions, may also think that chuck's action was risky. So why do you ask him about it chuck ?

To me, it sounds like pleasing the active posters with submissive attitude.

[nureins]

Patience is a virtue, please be patient.

Why havent you noted, after a couple of "be patient" posts, that such impatience sounds scummy? An impatient townie would be the kind of bad irreflexive player (for instance, seb, if he were townie) that does not understand the game and desires action...and Chuck is not bad irreflexive (he accepts so well our critiques on him !!). To me sounds more like impatient newbie scum trying to put his HEAVY VOTE (it is so hard to decide who to vote, huh ?) on someone and get calmed.

While replacements come, some pressure for him, though yet he is a bit below seb.

UNVOTE. VOTE: CHUCKY

Mild fos for the coaching: Mirth.

[nureins]

I threw one or two your way earlier and some at Seb.

I havent shown any impatiente along the game. Can you clarify to me what you are talking about ?

About Seb, I already pointed out that a seb-coaching is much different to a chuck-coaching, as you clearly signalling seb's scumtells and attacking him, but not so openly about chuck.

[nureins]

When you were mentioning the "lurkers," I made it a point to mention that it was too early to throw that term around. Think what you will about coaching, but this right here isn't it.

And I answered back to you that you were wrong. As you can clearly seen, my fos, vote, suspicions are on active players yet. Seb, Chuck (minor on dej and mr. A, very minor on you, almost nothing on caf). I said that i would turn my look to non-active players (lurkers or call them as you want). Not that I think they are suspicious yes, but I wanted to see them participating to have reads on them.

This is not impatience at all. It is a very rational attitude not to close eyes or to focus on a particular player...patience is about feeling dissatisfaction for the evolution of the game, something I never shown and I dont think Ill show. We have lot of info in this game, people make comments, etc, the rythm is more than ok...having a read on everyone is however useful
and calling impatience to that sounds to me strange. Sounds like

"i want to behave as a frozen-nonemotional-player, to show this all the time because this is townie", so I interpret any other person's attitude as hot-emotional-scummy (as impatience). So this is for me something mildly scummy.

[nureins]

Note how I stopped making these comments to you when you stopped misrepresenting inactivity. The issue here is that you are trying to find something that isn't there in my latest comments at Chuck. While impatience can be scummy, ignoring the rules in regards to waiting turns into a non-game issue and whining.

My argument is that I never misrepresented inactivity. Turning my attention to lurkers does not imply assuming the reasons for their lurking play are scummy. And neither imply impatience of any kind. Just meant I want to see about them to complete my read on everyone.

I cannot understand the construction of the second sentence, and I cannot either understand which rules you refer to, so hardly I can answer...

[nureins]

Precisely.

The fact that you interpret Chuck extreme impatience (as he forgets all rules and behave extremely anxious even not being as childish as other players) without any suspicion and calm him down sounds quite coaching to me.

Also, the fact that you put at a similar level the patience comment to Chuck to one or two you sent me before (which in my opinion are totally inaccurate as I claim no impatience of any kind in me) seems, with the best of the interpretations, excessively benevolent with chuck.

[nureins]

@Nur- I can understand your point but are you saying that my actions are more scummy than those of Seb? If so I really can't see how.

No, i said you are a bit below seb, i.e., you are less suspicious than him. Just while the other two players enter, I felt a bit of pressure on you is ok, as you are not far away from seb...once I have reads from everyone, and how seb and you react, Ill decide more seriously. Also, other players could be even scummier, so lets see...

I do also see this. Could Nur possibly be scum trying to get 2 townies(possibly) as scumbuddies, therefore lynched?

Which of my opinions is a scumtell ? In order to raise suspicions over me, please use an argument about which of my posts is scummy and why.

Which are the 2 scumbuddies I am trying to lynch ?
Right now, my eyes are especially on Seb and you. I thought you consider Seb townie. I guess you refer to Mirth and you. That you fail to see how my suspicions on you have appeared and buddy this way to Mirth only reinforces my suspicions.

[nureins]

No. I was just stating the possibility of Me and you being townies. I didn't say we were, I said IF we were.

As I thought. So then, where have you read I want to lynch Mirth? You tie yourself too much to her, dont you think ?

[nureins]

Ah, the bitter smell of irony that drifts from this thread as you all completely stop posting. =[

After I put suspicions on Chuck.
Which raises my suspicions on him and Mirth, though very mildly yet.

There were 4 ppl posting lot of times every day. And two of them were little kids that easily get tired with diversions...umm, and the other two ? hehe...

lets see

[nureins]

@chuck: you are refusing to answer. And you again tight yourself to Mirth in your post. Please answer.

Where do I try to lynch Mirth ?
Which of my opinions is a scumtell ?
Can you answer my post without asking for Mirth's protection? Id like to see it...it is time for you to leave the nest, fly fly...

Indeed, I hardly try to lynch you, as my first objective is yet Seb. But you are running fast to approach him...

[nureins]

@chuck: you are refusing to answer. And you again tight yourself to Mirth in your post. Please answer.

Where do I try to lynch Mirth ?
Which of my opinions is a scumtell ?
Can you answer my post without asking for Mirth's protection? Id like to see it...it is time for you to leave the nest, fly fly...

Indeed, I hardly try to lynch you, as my first objective is yet Seb. But you are running fast to approach him...

Here is my answer.

Ah, the bitter smell of irony that drifts from this thread as you all completely stop posting. =[

After I put suspicions on Chuck.
Which raises my suspicions on him and Mirth, though very mildly yet.

There were 4 ppl posting lot of times every day. And two of them were little kids that easily get tired with diversions...umm, and the other two ? hehe...

lets see

I enjoy ppl panicking...
Add OMGUS vote to your case.
Now please answer my questions.
And please, describe your case on me. We have 10 pages of game, and you surely have lot of information to build it.



Seriously. Your using Craplogic Nur.

Unvote

Vote:Nur

For using craplogic.

[nureins]

EBWOP

I enjoy...

...build it.

is my response to his post.

[nureins]

In this case craplogic is a synonym of "i want to avoid your questions"...

[nureins]

If i vote you maybe youll stop attacking me, so I can avoid your questions

Which in any case and at the end is an anti-town tell...Im not gonna stop analyzing his play coz i consider it quite suspicious. And he has the only chance to answer me. The rest is anti-townie...

[nureins]

Unvote

. I was voting to see if any reaction came from Nuriens. It seemed not. So, imo I think he is likely to be town.

1. There is a reaction. More pressure.
2. More scum points to you. It sounds a fake.
3. Now that you think I am more likely town, please answer my questions.
4. You can add the following question. Is there any relationship between Mirth's critique to you and your unvote ? Has you perceived your vote and attitude as incorrect due to Mirth comment ? Or...

Also you found Mirth scummy a page or so back, saying that her apparantly "coaching" me was scummy.

You said that I wanted to lynch you and Mirth. Please show me where I found Mirth very scummy. If you want information, go for post 206, this is my MAJOR attack to mirth. And it was a mild fos for him. And a vote for you...so obviously, you HAVE NOT answered where I wanted to LYNCH Mirth and you.

And this is far from being finished. We have just started. I think we need some action around, as people is quite silent.






I'd like to hear from everone else. How do you find my actions on Nur? Did nur use craplogic?[/quote]

[nureins]

EBWOP: I forgot to add my comment to the last point.

He backtracks and considers me most likely townie when he feels the pressure and IMO, he sees Mirth critique (independently he is buddying her, hidding behind her, or is her scummate, i dont mind very much now, the scummy attitude is clearly on Chuck). However, he uses his magic word craplogic to ask for help to the outside world...

BTW,

a) Which reactions were you looking for ?
b) which reaction would have you expected not to consider me townie ?
My reaction is to consider you scummier for what you did. If this makes me townie, it must be because you did something bad that pushes you in suspicions.
c) what was this scummy thing you have done that makes a townie (me) to raise suspicions on you ?

Now please, address my points. The previous, and all these. If you want, I can collect all of them in a post, but I am sure you can look for them.

[nureins]

Also, and most importantly, answer to the following logical question:

Chucky's sentences:

Post 224. I want to find out if Seb is Scum as his very scummy actions make him almost certainly scum.

Post 235. (vote nur) For using craplogic.

Post 242. I was voting to see if any reaction came from Nuriens. It seemed not. So, imo I think he is likely to be town.

Mirth already noted about 224, I guess. She asked you if you consider your reasons to vote me more important that Seb's. Did you ? Because Seb was ALMOST CERTAINLY SCUM.
But now, according to 235 and 242, you are contradicting. Or you lied in 235. Did you lie to set a trap for me ? or which is the real reason ? craplogic ? to see reactions ?

[nureins]

You are obviously not reading what I posted. I did not say you wanted to

lynch

both of us, I was merely saying that you were saying that me and Mirth were scumbuddies. There is a difference.

I have read your posts.

I do also see this. Could Nur possibly be scum trying to get 2 townies(possibly) as scumbuddies, therefore lynched?

Can you see the end of the sentence ?
Another lie. You are lieing too much lately. Pressure is not good for you.

[nureins]

a) I was looking to see if you got angr at me voting you. You didn't so I found you townie-y. Also I didn't say that you were the most likely town. You are twisting my words. Please don't.

You exactly said "I think he is likely to be town." This perfectly fits with my questioning. Do not move to a semantic level...

b)You getting really angry. You immediately saying that "becuase I voted you, I must be scum." Kinda thing.

1. I am not angry at all. I am getting info. I am happy.
2. Your vote on me was just some extra points. You are ruining your position more and more.

c)Hmmm. If I think abou it, me putting Seb at L-1, looks quite scummy, me being impatient looks scummy also.

In the same post, you think Im attacking you incorrectly (emotionally, angry, irrationally...) and correctly (rationally, coz you did scummy things).
You are in the corner. And you have no way to escape.

I do not know other people. I am ready to ask Chucky for a claim. But I want to hear from the non-participants (lurkers, or whatever). So, now is time for me to read carefully all his answers and build a case. I promise to make a summary with a nice description, so you can decide when all the players have participated seriously. Also, if anybody wants to play the advocate's devil role in a serious way, he/she is welcome at this moment.

@mod

: What do we know about the other players and your prodding rules ? could they be just avoiding to post ? or they are not here...please inform us.

[nureins]

EBWOP: the sentence "in the same post....things)." is a mistake on my side. This was not a mistake on the large list of Chucky's mistakes.
I will come soon with a summary. Enjoy the little chucky in the corner...

[nureins]

oh Re-vote

Fascinating.
I thought you considered me LIKELY townie 30 minutes ago !!!
This is gonna be a great day...

I go to sleep with a happy smile. Questions to come in a formal way.

[nureins]

And funnily, your only excuse is a mistake on my side that I POINTED OUT BEFORE YOU POSTED !!!

I am delighted. Very delighted.

[nureins]

FOS: Chuck

I don't know if you two resolved that yet, but if not, why don't you take the time to answer them all in a single post to sort this out.

Please clarify to me:

- You do not know if WE resolved that because you are lost or
- You are not interested in OUR one-to-one debate.

If it is the first, you can ask and Im planning to do a summary, as I announced.
If it is the second, why ?

[nureins]

FOS: Chuck

I don't know if you two resolved that yet, but if not, why don't you take the time to answer them all in a single post to sort this out.

Please clarify to me:

- You do not know if WE resolved that because you are lost or
- You are not interested in OUR one-to-one debate.

If it is the first, you can ask and Im planning to do a summary, as I announced.
If it is the second, why ?

[nureins]

FOS: Chuck

I don't know if you two resolved that yet, but if not, why don't you take the time to answer them all in a single post to sort this out.

Please clarify to me:

- You do not know if WE resolved that because you are lost or
- You are not interested in OUR one-to-one debate.

If it is the first, you can ask and Im planning to do a summary, as I announced.
If it is the second, why ?

[nureins]

Also, my comment on posts 254 and 256.

254. SEB: Which is your position on Chuck now ? What do you think of my case ? What do you think of Chucky's reactions ?

256. Chucky's buddying is incredible. He immediately forgets everything about Seb and finds him scum no more !! Moreover, he takes a step back, but he yet finds me scum. Where is the step back ??

Which words of you have I twisted ? How am I provoking you into looking like scum ? I will accumulate all the questions in a list for my summary, if you prefer to avoid them again.

[nureins]

I give up.

Unote:Nur

,

Vote: ChuckNorris

- I'm scum. Hurry up and lynch me. I want to be in a new game.

who is your mate ?
so we can finish the game and start a new one...

[nureins]

Chuck, I have been working in my questions to you. Please be considerate. Either answer all my points or tell me who is your mate and justify how this is possible...we have you, already, and we are close to your mate, dont you think ???

------------------------------------------

Summary of my questions. I first say where it was formulated.
Later, I make a brief SUMMARY (S) of the situation, for you not to need a whole reading (you are invited to go and read if you have doubts). Then I formulate clearly the QUESTION (Q). Then I formulate my brief OPINION (O). Finally, I make a summary of his ANSWERS (A). Except one question, there are no answers for any of them.

QUESTION 1. Formulated in POST 205.

S: You qualify your own behavior putting Seb at L-1.
Q: Why did you ask Caf about his thoughts on your idiotic behavior putting Seb at L-1?
O: Up to better view, buddying.
A: no answer.

QUESTION 2. Formulated in POST 227.

S: I point out your buddying. I point out your coaching game with Mirth. I vote you. I mild fos Mirth. You say "Could Nur possibly be scum trying to get 2 townies(possibly) as scumbuddies, therefore lynched?".
Q: Which of my opinions before Post 227 is scummy and why?
O: Up to better view, OMGUS.
A: no answer.

QUESTION 3. Formulated in POST 228.

S: The same than in 2.
Q: Where have I said I want to lynch vote Mirth and you ?
O: Up to better view, hidding in Mirth, looking for help.
A: 233. FIRST ANSWER "making me and mirth look in everyone else's eyes scummy". Not an answer. It is just a repetition of the argument.
235. SECOND ANSWER (he says it is an answer) "Seriously. Your using Craplogic Nur. Unvote Vote:Nur". Not an answer. Just labelling my words as craplogic. Avoids to answer. And votes me. More OMGUS.
244. THIRD ANSWER. "I did not say you wanted to lynch both of us, I was merely saying that you were saying that me and Mirth were scumbuddies."
This is not an answer, as he is saying that he didnt say something that he said. If you accept this as an answer, however, another question appears. WHY DID YOU LIE? You can either answer Question 3 or this new question, that i formulated in POST

QUESTION 4. Formulated in POST 243.

S: Mirth criticizes Chuck somehow in two ways (is it so, Mirth?) First, craplogic is not explained. Second, how I am more suspicious than Seb suddenly. Chuck immediately unvotes me and finds me likely townie.
Q: Is there any relation between Mirth critique and your unvote?
O: Up to better view, he reacted to Mirth's opinion by pleasing her, as he feels protected by her (whatever Mirth is, town or scum).
A: no answer

QUESTION 5. Formulated in POST 243.

S: The same than in 4.
Q: Did you perceive your attitude (cralogic + vote) incorrect because of Mirth's post?
O: Up to better view, he didnt accept because later insisted revoting. Just he was pleasing Mirth, see 4.
A: no answer.

QUESTION 6. Formulated in POST 247.

S: You catalogued Seb before as "almost certainly scum".
Q: Did you consider your reasons before your first vote to me scummier than those of Seb before ? If so, How much that "almost certainly scum"?
O: Up to a better view, he was pushing Seb's lynch. When attention came to him, he reacted OMGUS and voted me. He just used any excuse to consider me scummy. Basically, that I was attacking him and pointing out his incoherences.
A: No answer.

QUESTION 7. Formulated in POST 247.

S: You argued that my vote was for using CRAPLOGIC. Later you argued that my vote was to find out some reaction on my side.
Q: Did you set up a trap for me ? Which is the main reason for your first vote on me?
O: Up to better view, as people pointed out that Craplogic was not a good reason, he invented other. Quite quite scummy.
A: no answer

QUESTION 8. Formulated in POST 263.

S: Chuck argues repeatedly that I am twisting his words. That I am provoking him to appear scummy.
Q: Which words of you have I twisted? How am I provoking you ?
O: Up to better view, he just argues that because no answer to all my points.
A: no answer.

[nureins]

Chuck, we are not gonna lynch you quickly. We want to find your mate now and lynching you quickly is of no help.

[nureins]

Worse for you.

1. Nobody is gonna believe you.
2. We are gonna debate a lot to find your mate.
3. They are gonna ask me lot of things.
4. I am gonna answer with endlessly posts.
5. Day 1 is gonna be extremely long.
6. You will not be able to start another game for lot of time.

[nureins]

@mirth: CANCELLING THE GAME? haha

no no
Chuck's mate is you.
We are going to lynch him today.
We are going to lynch you tomorrow.

[nureins]

If Chuck is scum (I will be voting him in a bit as I will not risk this situation, I just don't want to end the day 2 players short), whoever his partner is should not have to suffer his childishness. If Chuck announces his scumpartner, this game will be called off. Just so you all know

The whole game is about scum-mates giving hints on their scumminess and the scumminess of their mates. After a correct lynch, everybody goes to read for the previous day to see connections. The task of any good scum is to present himself/herself as a villager, to hide, not to give hints, not to show who the mate is, etc. Even when pressure comes. Even when they are completely pressured. That you point out this advice to avoid people putting pressure on Chuck is EXTREMELY SCUMMY. It simply confirms to me that IF CHUCK WAS SCUM, YOU WERE A GOOD CANDIDATE TO BE HIS PARTNER.

This game is really nice. How some people falls down with pressure is also incredibly nice.

[nureins]

Nur, you can lynch me right now, if you want. Regardless of whether you're Chuck's partner or I'm Chuck's partner or one of the other 6 people here is Chuck's partner, this game is pretty much ruined.

Are you claiming scum too ?
This is gonna be really really really EASY.
This game is won because we discovered the mafia.

Seb's post has been really useful talking about the emotional aspects of the pressing situation. And I am sure that he has learnt a lot from this Chucky's experience. Am i right, pal ?
Caf's posts have been extremely useful pressing more and more.
Dej's contribution has been useful to provoke the final fall of chucky.
It is a pity that Mr. A did not participate in this final part of the game, for him to feel satisfied.
And I have contributed too.

So this town has collaborated a lot to discover Chucky.
And also to discover you, Mirth, because I guess you are the second one.
Chucky was feeling more and more lonely with your soft distancing. You had to lynch him much before, as he was risky for you. So it is a mistake in your side, too. Both mafia played badly.

Not 100 per cent sure yet, obviously, because many things are strange, but if so, congratulations mates...TOWN DID AN INCREDIBLE WORK IN THIS GAME !!!

[nureins]

Just a note. I have claimed scum, because of Nureins. He has been such an asshole. He twisted my post, also he kept on adding snyde remarks. Also

@Mirth- Why would I reveal who my scumbuddy is?

haha, great !!!
Look MIRTH, you panicked more than chucky did. He was not going to tell us that you were his mate !!!


@chuck: because SHE KNOWS that you are scum. Because SHE IS YOUR PARTNER. Because SHE PANICKED.

[nureins]

push for my lynch. lets laugh a bit

[nureins]

Nur: right now, I ask you to continue to do what you are doing. Do not confirm nor deny.

I continue.
hiyaaaaaaaaaaa

LETS LYNCH SCUM !!
(just a bit of fun. Im not giving jumps. It is just a game).

Then, Mirth.

And hiyaaaaaaaaaaaaaaa

Mirth is not going to NK me tonight !!!
Because she wants to lynch me in day 2 !!!!!!!!

hiyaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaa
I want to lynch Mirth too in day 2.

(this is again fun, ill do a serious reflection after day 1, but I doubt something can change my view of this game a lot)

I PMed the mod. I am considering PMing Flay as well.

If you are serious with this, now I have a critique for you. I ask you to make things openly using the thread. So all the players can see it and understand how mafia is so angry with their lynch.

If you dont do it openly in the thread, I think is a strategy to avoid your lynch in day 2. Useless in my opinion.

[nureins]

Nur, this isn't a case of strategy. This is a case of possible game breaking. Games have been called off for this in the past. This is a case of the Mod needs to look into this.

Do you really think a mod decision can change the satisfaction of finding both scums in day 1 so clearly ?
It cannot.

Mafia panicked. Town won. Mods call it as they want. You call it as you want. Right now, everybody knows the truth. And I congratulate the town for playing so well. I congratulate you too, because you had a difficult mate to play with. I am sorry. You could have done it better too, probably. But was a difficult play.

[nureins]

May I ask why you aren't lynching me???

You are lynched already. And Mirth is lynched day 2. And if I am wrong in day 2, I am lynched day 3. We are just playing all these days now. And concluding the game for all of us

[nureins]

Why don't you all finish day 1 now?

people is not connected. they will connect in couple of days and youll see the result...do not rush, is a game...

[nureins]

Yeah, I meant that I was lost. It kind of confused me since, from what I remember, Chuck kept saying he already answered and you were misreading his posts. But you kept saying he didn't answer. I didn't realized you said you would make a summary, but that should help clear things up for me

yes, he tried to insist and insist, to generate confusion. The task of a good townie is not believe anyone, go over the thread and discover it by yourself.
Today has been a long day here. I already did the summary. Post 267.

And Mirth appears to be freaking out over the possibility of Chucks scumbuddy being revealed (even though it can ruin the game).

And you are very correct here.

[nureins]

i cant tell if u were sarcastic but yea, i hav learnt sum stuff like dont wagon for a first post, read ALL pages. Dont claim town, even if you are, and probs other stuff ill remember later.

No. I was not being sarcastic.

Funnily, you are not going to be lynched day 1. Learn, because you are not helping the town if you let yourself be lynched in day 1 so easily...

[nureins]

Nur 249: I strongly disagree with you. It is too early to be asking anyone for a claim. I also don't like how you assume that everyone will vote from Chuck. The only reason to ask for a claim is L-1. We're still two players short. This really really really bothers me.


I really really really don't like Nur asking outright who Chuck's buddy is. First of all, we do not know for a fact if Chuck is scum, or if he is pulling a Kuribo ala 617, where Kuribo lied to get himself out of the most painful game in existence.

I did a refresh before posting this, and I see Chuck has claimed a scum partner. I do not know whether to buy this or not, but I will be asking the mod to look into canceling this game. Thank you Chuck, you quite possibly ruined it for the rest of us. I hope you are happy.

Thank you, Chuck

1. To the first paragraph, I said I was ready for a claim. I had a clear case, my conviction was quite high. It seems I was right.

2. To the second paragraph, are you going to defend Chucky is townie ? Please do it.

3. To the third paragraph, you are inconsistent. You said in the second that maybe chuck is not scum. You say in the third that maybe-not-scum chuck claiming his maybe-not-partner would ruin the game. How is so ? At the end, he could be faking all his claims, couldnt he ? UNLESS YOU KNOW FOR SURE THAT HE IS SCUM. WHICH OBVIOUSLY, IT IS THE CASE.

That makes us wonder also, why dont you vote him ? Waiting for other players really ? hehe

Dej fossed him, Caf expressed a clear opinion that he was scum, Seb did the same. You, well, we are waiting for your vote. You know, maybe when you vote for him the rest of players will also vote and finish the torture...

[nureins]

I see you're trying to set me up for the next lynch, and I really don't mind. As long as I first get a promise from everyone here after Chuck is lynched and I am lynched, that you are lynched.

Why would you like this promise ?
Do you consider me 100 per cent scum as to sacrifice yourself in day 2 with the condition of lynching me on day 3 ??

Also, people is free to take their best options during the game. I doubt people want to agree with you on such a promise. Of course, in case the violent crowd of townies would decide to lynch me on day 2, I would build a very very very clear case for them to suggest a day 3 lynch of you, as I am quite sure now that you are chuck's mate. But I would not play promise-games with the rest of players, as these promises have no meaning and no way to be applied later.

Also, given that you consider me so able to drive people's mind to the insane state in which they believe that you are scum when you are not, maybe in day 3 I am able to fool them. So if you were a townie, you would fight to the last moment to lynch me in day 2. Just in case.

This is what I plan to do with you, just in case. Not that I consider people stupid or you able to convince them in day 3, but the sooner, the better to avoid any circumstance/manipulation/confusion.

And Seb, there's still no reason to swear at people.

I COMPLETELY AGREE.

[nureins]

Chuck called you his scum partner. We cannot be sure if he was lying or not but if he turns up scum, can we absolutely under no circumstances ignore it.

I am not ignoring it. I have a clear view of who his partner is. If you dont, shouldnt you trying to extract information from him ?

Oh, I guess this is conditional on you being townie...ushhh, my logic is flawed. Yes, as you are scum, you do not need to put more pressure on him. And you dont, and you didnt, at any step of the process.

Now the mod talked. Do you need something else to vote for chucky ?
Ah...please add your reasons and how your view of him has evolved, as your mild and soft connection with him is a bit foggy

[nureins]

So great, I hope to really see day 2. My case on you is quite open and clear if chucky is scum (that is pretty obvious to me). It is not going to be conditional anymore, and therefore secondary. It is going to be PRIMARY. And given how you panicked, well, also OBVIOUS.

If I die tonight, do not let Mirth to escape. You have one scum. She is the best bet, almost sure. Do not let you be misguided by any claim/manipulation/trick. If any of you have serious doubts that she is scum and you want to debate it, you are welcome. But I guess it is pretty obvious now.

If you want to hear comments on Mirth, do not hammer chucky yet and ask me.
If you are pretty sure, you can hammer if you want.

[nureins]

It makes perfect sense Seb. You can express it better, but it makes perfect sense.
Chuck is mafia. Confidence: 99 per cent or above.
Mirth is his partner. Confidence: 95 per cent or above.

The way Mirth looks for possible scum partners of chucky is funny.

First, she argues it is me. That is the less credible accusation over the earth. I turned attention to Mirth. I pushed Chuck's wagon to the limit. I built all the accusation. Chuck blundered to me. Ridiculous. Otherwise, chucky would know that I was his mate and wouldnt have blundered. Ah, if you think that he is faking his blunder, it is going to be a great laughable continuation of the game.

Now she asks dejkha about Seb being chuck's partner. Not very credible. Chucky attacked and pushed seb to the limit. So much than his scummate (Mirth) disauthorized him by unvoting Seb at L-1. It was sooooooo clear that Chucky was rushing !!

Who is the next one ? Hunt hunt, it is quite funny.

[nureins]

In the event that Mirth isn't scum, and you're still alive, you'll turn to number one on my list.

I agree with this view. But bet you something this is not gonna happen

[nureins]

Just in case you want to know my answers too...

Dej, let me try reframing my question. You think I am scum because of my supposed connection to Chuck, yes? Namely early coaching and my reaction to his claim. This is correct, yes?

Probably NOT. Once Chucky is revealed scum, an important factor is also how Chucky treated you all along the game .

but do you think that poor play from both of them is enough to connect them as partners? Do you see any other links, like you see with me and Chuck, that makes you think they're scum together?

He already answered that Seb is not his target, but you. Your attempt to find allies or deviate attention is soooo desperate...
And the answer is NO. All links point out to you. Chucky put seb at L-1 even at the cost of being suspicious, and with very good excuses not to do (couple of players remaining to comment). This makes their connection, especially considering they are very noobs, almost impossible.

[nureins]

Nur, why don't you let Dej answer for himself.

Why should I ? My task as a town is discover scum. I point out what I consider relevant for this task.

Did I coach Chuck? yes

Now you admit it ?

I am saying that when you lynch me, the next logical step is *not* Seb, as Dej suggests. It is you.

If you think so...but according to your argument, you will not be around to comment or to lynch me in day 3. So better if you discuss your case against me, as currently nobody seems to see it. Go go and build the case. I want to laugh a little bit.

[nureins]

Yawn. I played a bad game. Hey anyone, can you tell me what I need to do better at being Mafia? Also how to play better as a townie?

Read how Mirth played. She did it much better than you. For a townie, read caf, he played very well too.

[nureins]

For a townie, read caf, he played very well too.

Did I?

Of course, game's not over just yet so we can't make final judgments with total confidence. I'm eager to get on with things, though.

Yes, you did. You had eyes open and made reasoned comments that help other townies to conform good views.

Of course, maybe we are wrong. Not today, almost sure. Not tomorrow, with high confidence. But even being like that, before any lynching in day 2 ill revise the game densely.

[nureins]

Since Mirth is quite scummy, I will answer your post first.

Well I've read up and here's my analysis. While I admit it would be foolish not to rid ourselves of chuck after his scumclaim, my FOS is currently on Nur.

Can you describe which of my attacks to chucky is a scumtell ?
Can you describe which of my attacks to Mirth is a scumtell?
Thanks.

I don't like his tactics at all. From the start of the game he has been twisting words, asking unneccesary questions and generally creating an atmosphere of confusion.

Chuck and Mirth were using the fact that Seb was a very inexperienced player. Especially the second. Please tell me which of my questions are unnecessary and where is the confusion. I drove my own wagon to Chuck. Chuck is scum. CONFUSION ? ha

Recently he also seems to be a little too sure of the guilt of mirth and chuck. As a fairly experienced player he should know that after day 1 theres no way he can know for sure of someones guilt yet he's talking as if he does.

My confidence on Chuck is 99 per cent. And I guess that for everybody around is above 90 per cent. If you have a different opinion, please share it with us. Comment my case, defend chucky and so on and so forth.

Second, my confidence on Mirth is 95 per cent. And I guess that for most people around is quite high. Maybe not as much as mine. But it was me, remember, who built the major part of the case against chucky, and directed my attack. My attack was based in weakening him separating him from Mirth, since chucky acted as if Mirth was his master. Master and doggie. First you take the doggie and you separate it from the master. You lynch the doggie. Then you lynch the master as the doggie has left enough information to recognize who the master is.

I will write my view at the very moment of starting day 2. Just in case I die, my suspicions are open and clear. And the basics of my case have been also commented. Mirth reaction panicking with how Chucky was giving information is more information.

The fact that I have a fair confidence in this case is because I analyzed deeply the case and found lot of symptoms. I am not SURE. I am just pretty confident, with very very very high probability. If you are not, please share with us WHY, and in WHICH POINTS of my analysis I am wrong. Ill be delighted to discuss them.

While I admire Nur's analysis and his commitment I wish he were doing something more useful with it.

Such as what ?? Again, you have not given any point to support this view.

Regardless of whether he is mafia or not I find his input counter-intuitive and definitely not pro-town.

Now, it is you who is not waiting for day 1. Lets see if chucky is scum. Then tell me about. Again, I did a clear case. Go and answer it if you want to defend chucky, instead of "attacking the attacker", which is clearly not pro-town.

[nureins]

I told clearly that I would ask first the townie. Now the scum

First and foremost, Chuck's claim. He claimed Nur and then backtracked.

Ridiculous. He included a smile when putting my name. He was just avoiding to provide info about his partner, which is typical when you are pressured. However, he is giving info in any case with his attitude...

Now he is avoiding you. After we signalled how he was your doggie, now he is avoiding to mention you. More signals. I am more and more confident with my observation.

While it is possible he claimed this because Nur was on his back, and not just because he gave up and tried to ruin the game (some people have outted their scum partners without reservations), it is very possible that he is telling the truth that Nur is in fact his partner.

hahaha really ? If you want to convince us of this idea, explain first why I outed him so openly. Second, why his reaction is as it is. Notice how HE CHANGED HIS WAY. He told us he felt unable to defend more and told us he was scum due to MY PRESSURE. Later, he is again "playing", trying to confound us and giving hints and blabla, you know, that is called WIFOM.

Additionally, look at Nur's early attacks on him. Nur's attacks on Chuck at the beginning are trying to link him to me.

False, I was not trying to link you. He was playing behind you. He was a very noob scum being protected by his master. And we are gonna see it soon.

Furthermore, Nur's early "case" against me never sat well. He said it was to start discussion, but I don't think I buy this. He admitted not getting a complete mod-voting meta on me after I questioned him about it, but he also said even if he had, he wouldn't have used all of it, just the parts he cited.

Of course, because it was not a case against you but a way to start discussion and generate vote movement and scum shaking. NOTICE HOW MY CASE ON YOU IS TOTALLY UNRELATED TO THIS POINT, BECAUSE THIS WAS NOT A CASE ON YOU. And how my random vote immediately moved to a dej vote for his easy-wagon on you.

As is his current attempt to buddy up to Caf, who, to be honest, isn't putting forth an obvtownie game. He is not being scummy, yes, but my no means obv.townie.

No buddying. I already said you are 95 per cent scum. I am very confident and do not need extra scumhunting. If anyone else provides something significantly different that make me change my opinion, do not worry, I will do and start my scumhunting again. Who did start the wagon on Chuck ? who has pressured him ? you ? no hehe...not you....but me. So do not worry, I will hunt if needed. But i am so convinced now that no need...

Lastly, look at the way that he has been responding to me since Chuck's claim. He is twisting my words around. Even though you clearly understood what I meant by my questions about Seb and Chuck (especially since I spelled it out that I highly doubt they are partners before questioning you), he is trying to assert that I am trying to get Seb lynched instead of myself. This is out and out lying. I have stated time and again that it's between me and him for day 2, not Seb. So I ask you to read over his play again.

False. You were just ambiguously discussing on other players to try to make pressure out of you in day 2.

It is gonna be very easy if the decision is between you and me. You helped mafia, I outed mafia. Not a bit. I was aggressive and clearly against mafia. Say whatever you want. I have also a case against you if chuck is mafia. You have no connection of chuck with me...oh yes, you have one connection, I outed him !

[nureins]

Ok thanks. But untill then you didn't really suspect me?

I have to think about it. I am not sure if Mirth hide you well, or you played better at the beginning. But of course, you started to rush with time, and you were too close to your mafia mate...

[nureins]

\ If you're so sure on Mirths guiltyness, why do you need me as a bounceback?

In this game you have never certainties. By scumtells received:

Chuck 99
Mirth 95 if chuck scum.

But then there is a 5-10 per cent of probability that we fail somehow...if this is the case, that I consider very rare...from scummiest to less...

Seb
Dej
(the other player)
mr. A
fancy
caf

This does not mean that I consider you scummy. And I dont think there is a need of day 3, as I am mostly convinced of mirth. But I share my opinions to people. Think a bit, imagine Chuck and I are scum. Then I would know that you are townie. Mirth was wagoning you and I could just let her convince Mr. A and others that you were scum and lynch you. And I decided to drive the wagon to chuck ??? what for ?? to kill my mate and try to resist 2 or 3 more rounds alone with the possibility of a cop investigating or a doc saving my victims ?? Do you really think so ?? Think about it...

[nureins]

nur 341; this is not typical. i have seen cases of people giving up their partners because they are immature newbies, so i will not discount this off hand.

Especially when people is suspicious of them. OH, but here, people was wagoning Seb...curious...it must be I am not the partner but a townie with interest in discovering scum

You, however, were a very experienced player that did not notice the scumminess of chucky, even when was so related to you ...

also, you can say that chuck is following me all you want, but can you please refrain from calling him my doggie. i find this degrading and insulting.

Chucky perfectly understands the way in which I use the term doggie. He indeed ask us about how not to play mafia next time, and the idea is useful for him. He played very close to his experienced mate (you), behaving a servant doggie...

The analogy is just an informal way that he and all of us can understand. I doubt he feels bad for it. If he does, Id apologize without any problem. It is not a personal statement but something about this game.

your use of meta, as someone who should know better, and you yourself act like you know better, here is flawed. it bothers me, especially since the games you mentioned werent even in order. there were games between them where there was a different meta.

You continue confounding the town. My case on you is totally unrelated to the meta issue. This was a way to launch debate in the very beginning, lead to a Fos on Dej that evolved in a natural way once the random phase disappeared. My case on you is related to the scumminess of Chuck and your connection to him. It is obvious and direct, and other players have noticed it.

again, after i am lynched, i just ask that you are. you, i think, are smart enough to bus.

After you r lynched, the game finishes. The End.

dej; pressuring scum does not an automatic innocent make. more experienced players have been known to try to get rid of a partner when it looks like that partner is dead weight. sometimes, if one partner is the pinnacle of uselessness its better to just get them killed early on so you get brownie points and they cant screw you up later.

Again, the "dead" player could be Seb. Chucky was more hidden and not especially suspicious. So your argument is totally flawed. He was not under attack or pressure of any kind, and suspicions on him were not much more relevant than in other players. Especially, he was not the top suspect at this moment (SEB), and I drove a very energical wagon on Chucky, moving all the attention to him when this was not needed.

In all this process of chuck's wagoning, you defended him, and you did not notice how scummy he was even if he was acting scummy very close to you. You should have been the first one noticing it....but curiously, you only protected him, and panicked when he started to speak too much. You are scum, and it is very obvious to me...

[nureins]

as to chuck, i think seb was scummier up until chuck outted himself.

- Might you explain to us when exactly Chuck OUTTED HIMSELF ?
- Is that Outting process conditioned by my attack on chuck ?
- Was my attack on Chuck previous or posterior to Chucky outting himself?
- When did you perceive him scummier than Seb?
- When did you start to participate in Chucky's wagon?

Thanks.

my case on you is related to the meta issue. It is another example of your word twisting. you say the game will finish. are you positive of this?

If your case on me is based on the meta issue, your case one me is nothing. My case on you is based on your game behaviour, Chucky's guiltiness (which I guess is pretty obvious), and your connections to him.
Solid things, especially after Chucky is found guilty.

Your case, on the contrary, is related to the meta issue and my solid and leadering interest in hanging mafia, i.e., a breaking-up-debate issue that dissappeared with random stage and a townie behavior (even if you apply WIFOM to it). Great !! your scumhunting is privileged. One newbie player who had lot to learn (Seb) and one person who found mafia (me) and to whom you react in an Omgus way. Great...really scummy...

With respect to the end of game, I already signalled my beliefs on you being scum. Very high, around 90 per cent, which is high for a mafia game. Simply that. There are no certainties in a game.

[nureins]

My case on you is not based solely on the meta issue. the meta issue is just one more instance of you twisting around words. like you are doing now. that is all

Your case on me is ridiculous.

According to you, Chuck was only suspicious after he outed. I do not say I was his only attacker, but surely you can perceive I was the main factor, when you and chucky were on seb...

Why would I attack so fiercely and provoke the outing of my scummate in a situation in which the scummate is not suspicious even for the ICs in a newbie game

Im really waiting to see your case against me structured...it promises lot of laughs....

Also, I agree with moving to day 2 already...

[nureins]

Vote: Mirth

I had a clear view. The re-read has only confirmed by view. The probability I attach to Mirth being scum is over 90 per cent. I will make a summary of all my general perceptions. I have commented most of these things along the game, and repeating myself is a thing I do a lot.

---

Chuck is confirmed mafia.

1. SEB-wagon

Initially, I didnt find anything suspicious in Mirth attacking Seb. Indeed, I found Seb suspicious, re-read profusely on him and did a case on him (post 55, a very elaborated one). Mr. A joined very easily the wagon, but taking into account his noobish and young player way of behaving, I found/find it natural.
Then Chuck was extremely suspicious in his way of joining the wagon. Seb noted also. I turned my attention to Chuck and created a wagon/attack on him.
When Chuck put Seb at L-1, Mirth immediately unvoted, but as you will read in my section of connections, she never considered chucky suspicious for these things...
Also, Seb started to write more decent posts. He found a couple of incoherent attitudes by Chuck, and pointed them out. They were very useful for me, because I thought that Seb perceiving them meant there was independent confirmation of my observations, especially from a very different player to me like Seb is. Mirth didnt react to these observations and never turned her attention to chuck...


2. CHUCK-wagon.

As you very well know, my suspicions on Chuck appeared from 2 special things.
i) Chuck following all advices and paths signalled by Mirth.
ii) Chuck´s attack on Seb.

Therefore, my attack strategy consisted on separating him from Mirth. Indeed, I pointed out repeatedly how I was interested in voting/lynching him, but not voting/lynching Mirth. That she was clearly secondary (she was, without confirmation of Chuck´s guiltiness). I wanted him to answer alone to all questions and explain his behavior individually and without following Mirth´s steps, as he had been doing all along the game. Notice especially how there were 3 young players (at least). Mr. A and Seb were playing a bit chaotically, sometimes excited, sometimes out of the game, always very individually...but Chuck, even if also excited, always tied himself to Mirth in all actions. The strategy was good, and Chuck blundered.

I have to note that nobody was attacking chuck at the moment I did and construct my case. I doubt any mafia would do this stupid thing. Especially knowing that chuck was roleblocker and therefore 2 powerroles might be present in the game. The cop would investigate Mirth night 1, and if she was innocent, I would have been investigated night 2. That strategy is totally STUPID. And the fact that you are discussing it in a minimal serious way is ridiculous to my eyes.

Dej, Caf and Seb sounded townies with open eyes. Noticing the growing Chuck incoherences, but not bandwagoning in a rush. I perceived them like that.
Mirth never joined the wagon. She voted for Chuck after everything was so obvious. And when she did, she was even reluctant. But she panicked about the possibility of chuck giving more hints about her. Have few things to say about the new players.


Connections to Chuck.

3. I clearly see the connections between Chuck and Mirth.

It is especially wonderful to read how many times Mirth criticized chuck. But she never even fossed him. Read.

Also, it is especially wonderful how she tried to defend from my point on coaching. She insisted 3 or 4 times about the fact that she was coaching SEB also !!!
She was very interested in justifying her coach, as much as to admit she had been coaching other players...a strange attitude, isnt it ?

The final part of the lynch is almos surrealistic. She blundered...

[nureins]

Frankly, I didn't expect the mafia to kill mr. fancy since he wasn't really town or scum per se (with only 3 posts!) so either it is a random kill or perhaps done to frame Nur (WIFOM?).

Fancy was an inexistent player. I am sure that most of us didnt even notice his presence.

As for my current take on the game, it seems that we are going to end up polarized into either lynch Nur or Mir for today. (no particular order, just alphabetical).

Alphabetical order is Mirth-Nur
A case on me is based on a mafia that attacks his mate when nobody attacks him. A mafia that attacks his roleblocker mate when nobody attacks him. A mafia that attacks fiercely his roleblocker mate when nobody attacks him. A mafia that attacks fiercely to the point of lynching his roleblocker mate when nobody attacks him. The fact that this is possible doesnt mean is likely. It is not. It is hardly likely. It is almost ridiculous. It cannot explain either how:

- Chuck blundered. Because if I was gonna use this strategy to distance from my mate, I would tell him before the game how it is and how it goes.

- How is my plan to win, knowing that my mate is a roleblocker...

Please, address these points or stop being ridiculous. I havent seen in your posts anything that suggests I am mafia. Anything but a stupid strategy which is unlikely and that you havent justified.

[nureins]

-looking at who Chuck was attacking before he outted himself I get less and less convinced of Seb's scumminess as the day progressed.

Agree completely.

-I kinda thought the NK was gonna go to one of the more silent players. especially since we have Nurs and Mirth going at each other.

Agree completely.

nurs: Aggressive in his scumhunting. Was suspicious of chuck rather early and kept going after him as chuck made more and more mistakes.

Agree completely.

This could be a sign of a very competent Townie or a Scum trying to cut what he sees as dead weight from his team.

The first. Agree modestly. The second. Remember Chuck was not suspicious for people. Disagree completely.

Chuck also pointed to nurs as his scumbuddy when asked. I don't know if this was out of retribution from a childish player who wasn't enjoying a townie ripping through his arguments or a partner who was pissed at his scumbuddy for throwing him under the bus.

The first. Agree completely. The second. It has no sense. And notice that later he started to play again tricky games to "confound" people. I think someone already pointed it out.

Also when chuck fingered him as his scumbuddy he started building a case against mirth.

Disagree completely. My case on Mirth was based on connections to chuck that I already pointed out before. Obviously, before I only mild-fossed Mirth because conditional accusations without having clear who mafia is are bad for town. When I had confirmation on who mafia was, my suspicions on Mirth were more than justified.

[nureins]

i still say that chuck's case on seb was warranted

Chuck´s case on seb was a clear example of wagoning a townie player by inexperienced scum. It was a clear signal. Seb noted it. I did. I guess other players did. He put in L-1, you found this bad to unvote, but not bad as to take a look at chuck.

to attacking the roleblocker mate, your discussion does not take into account chuck's immaturity.

It is not my discussion that has to prove anything. It is yours if you consider this theory credible. I find it so ridiculous that only very bad players would buy it. Im really surprised that some people is buying it. But anyway, whoever want to ask, Im open to answer...

There is another theory. Chucky was abducted by an extraterrestrial. Is it possible ? well, in theory it is. Which is the likelihood ? this is a different question. You want to deliberately avoid the issue of likelihood because you know your connections to chuck are so blatant that any way to escape is delightful...

I believed the theory was stupid. But when Chuck appeared as roleblocker, it went down to surrealist...

[nureins]

However, I am just wondering if you might be tunneling...

- Chuck outed himself and claimed Scum
- a few posts go by, and then Mir posts on how this is unfair to us as a game, etc.
- you then state that Mir is the scum buddy and she panicked, etc.
- at this point, it seems like you go back and do a PBPA to prove that she is scum to back up your feeling that she is scum.

As I told you, my attack strategy to Chuck consisted in separating him from Mirth. I had suspicions already on Mirth, but they were mostly CONDITIONAL on chuck being mafia. When Chuck was mafia, Mirth went up a lot. Her reaction was only another push up...

Now I think we all play by feeling, hunch, intuition, etc. but if Mirth hadn't said ANYTHING about Mod checking fairness, outing scum, etc. would you have leaped on to her as being Chuck's scum buddy?

Clearly YES. Not 90 per cent of confidence, maybe only around 70 or so. But she was my target clearly IF CHUCKY WAS DECLARED MAFIA, AS IT HAPPENED.

I mean, what if she IS town and her actions were all just done in the interest of game fairness, learning, etc.

Then she would have suspected of Chuck after buddying her so much.
Then she would have not played so asymmetrically between seb and chuck.
Then she would have came to vote Chuck much before.
Then so many other things...

If I am wrong and Mirth is town and 10 per cent of probability that she is, you perfectly know that this game is like that.

I think if you could present your position without ONLY using 'reverse' logic of Mirth being scum and thus she does this, it would vastly improve it from being subjective to being objective and then we wouldn't be polarized and can try to lynch the right player.

I described Mirth's actions. And from my point of view, they indicate that highly likely she is mafia. You are welcome to give another interpretation of her actions, and I am open to discuss them. This is what the game is about.

About polarization. It only comes from Mirth trying to simulate I am scum. Can you look for some actions in which I am scummy ? some actions in which I am connected to Chuck ?

If this was true, he would also not need to polarize us against Mirth since he could 'play it safe' and let us figure it out since he would be least suspicious for outing and lynching chuck.

I had not even realized about that (it is wifom, but obviously, I was not worried about defending myself so I havent thought about it...). But it is clearly a very credible and smart point.

I guess all we can hope is that one of you *IS* scum and I could outline the exact posts I am thinking of but I do think Mirth is more scummy to me than Nur...

I do not like at all this piece of your post. You have not found ANYTHING in my play which is suspicious. You discuss polarization in a rational way. You tend to vote for Mirth as suggesting she is scum. Yet, you give for granted my future lynch. Id appreciate you told me in which basis...

[nureins]

instead of using all the posts of "Chuck, who is your scumbuddy?", "Mirth is your scum buddy", etc.

This was not my case at all. This was just the final rocketfire with Chuck. My case on Chuck was well elaborated (you have lot of posts about it). My case on Mirth is diseminated along day 1 and my post on day 2 voting her. But essentially, it is out there well elaborated. The fact that I went down to Chuck´s field to provoke and get information from him does not mean my case on Mirth is that.

If you had presented your case better in day 1, we wouldn't be having this conversation and we would be lynching Mirth. It is the lack of tact that is anti-town.

Day 1 lynch: Chuck. Roleblocker. A bit of discussion in day 1 can help, but essentially, day 2 we debate on day 2. And I do not mind to debate...
As far as I can read, we (you and I) are lynching Mirth. So I do not see your point...

Not your fault, but the player you replaced (and from which you inherit some suspicions, etc) didnt do much, right ? I could just say, If you (him) had presented ANY CASE in day 1, or had collaborated in day 1, blabla, we wouldnt be blabla...

I hardly think that he(you) did better in day 1. Right ? So if this is an argument to consider me scummy, you(him) are scummier. Not an argument that consider very relevant. It gives very few information.
Of course I was aggressive. I told you why. And it worked...

If Mirth was... 'sneakier' she could have easily squashed you since you have points but polarizing statements mixed in. Because of the polarizing statements Zeppo, Dej, etc. actually seem like they are likely to hang you instead of Mirth despite your points.

This is a very incorrect statement. Zeppo yes. Dej no. And there is no ETC who had posted.

You end by saying I have found nothing in your play which is suspicious... well, we could quibble as I don't think you are scummy or that suspicious and such.... but the way you act and present your arguments (polarizing) is anti-town and is suspicious and I am trying to HELP you present your case better since the way you are doing it is making you either first or 2nd on people's scum list.

Can you provide quotes about the polarization issue and say why they are antitown ? thanks.

Check Zeppo and Dej's posts. You are listed first/near the top or after Mirth. What have you done that is suspicious? Where is your scumminess? Well, You polarized us.

That argument is totally illogical. If you want to express polarization as antitownie, go for quotes, post them and justify why this creates polarization.

But to say

a) You polarized us.
b) I see it because you are up in 2 ppl list.
c) you are up in 2 ppl list coz you polarized.

is a circular reasoning that has no sustain.

I have a different impression. I know that I was aggressive. I know that this was good to make chuck blunder. I know that this can be used, as Mirth did. I know however that, as you did, a cold analysis of the situation makes my likelihood to be scum very low. I also know that some ppl have the bias of thinking in the worst scenario (nureins playing so brilliantly fooling all of us, destroying his partner when nobody was looking at him, eliminating his roleblocker mate, exposing himself to lookings and cop inspections, etc etc etc and winning us !!! I cant accept it, maybe nureins is bad...). But rationally, this argument is not valid. And time passing, people reflects, analyzes, and comes to well formed opinions.

Instead of being a near confirmed town from this, you are almost certainly going to be lynched tomorrow if it isn't Mirth. That is a bad play.

So i am fairly sure to me, that you aren't scum, and Mirth saying it is Nur is scummy to me, but if you present such extremeness/polarizing, then it isn't going to accomplish what you want.

And suggesting again that my lynch is something to be done when you have not done any case against me and you are fairly sure that i am townie is again scummy.

Almost certainly ?? you think im a townie. You will be less polarized and rational. You will avoid my lynch...it is your townie-duty

I also think it is interesting that you *don't think* you are polarizing. It is either we agree with you or we disagree with you. You are focused on Mir, so it is do we think Mir is scum or not. You have forced the issue to be polarized on this so that in the end, we have to consider which of you is more likely to be scum.

Sorry ??? you are really generating polarization with this point. I built my case and explained my reasons to vote for mirth. You are the one who

- votes for mirth
- considers me townie
- talks about my lynch and polarization, diseminating the word 100 times.

Dej and zeppo can have their opinions suspecting of me. It is ok. I will respond. This is a game. Im not polarizing anything. I just find very imaginative a theory of a scum me, and I point it out. They are welcome to insist discussing it.

The problem is, you aren't a confirmed cop or townie. This method of trying to get Mirth lynched isn't the most tactful way to kill a person.

Which method ?
I did my case. I set my vote.

but I can't really build a case and go after someone else since the issue is always going to be brought back to Mir/Nur.

Look again. It is not me. It is you. I am open to discuss the connections of every other player to chuck.
You have, apart from mirth and me, 5 more players. Choose one. Re-read and comment. Ill be delighted to comment with you. And to update my probability of Mirth upwards or downwards, as this new case suggests...
You very well know that chuck info is very valuable once we know he is mafia. Go and read any other player and come with impressions.

If I went after Seb for his early game, he will defend, and you may even defend him as well in order to focus the issue on Mir.

Not if the case is solid. Do you think seb is suspicious given the fact that Chuck is roleblocker ?
please ellaborate. Ill discuss.

If I did something else, you would ask me about your posts and evidence against Mir and how come her scum-tells aren't more glaring and important to me than Sebs, etc. etc. ad infin.

I think you are wrong. The fact that I think Mirth is 90 per cent mafia does not preclude other players looking for suspicions and my rational comments on them. The more information, the better.
If you think Mirth is not so clearly mafia, you are doing bad voting for her, joining this wagon and stopping your search.

[nureins]

cor; you're forgetting how my main issue with nur is that chuck claimed that theyre scum buddies.

Nothing to add. You are right. This is your MAIN issue. And is easy to interpret.

nur 398; i dont understand the part after the second quote. please restate.

The points concern corvuus suggesting that "IF NUREINS HAD STATED BETTER MY CASE ON YOU IN DAY 1, WE WOULD HAVE FINISHED ALREADY"

Connections in Day 1 are secondary, as there is not yet anyone confirmed. Hence, hardly I could state "better" my case on you. My case was on Chuck.

The second part comments that not stating better the case is not anything related to my scumminess. The person he replaces did nothing. And I dont consider this very scummy. I created the wagon that lead to lynch mafia roleblocker and suggested many implications with another player that in my current view, is very likely scum. Everything can be done better. But this is not an argument.

[nureins]

I still find myself coming back and thinking that Chuck and Seb were scumbuddies. look at pages 2-5 read Seb's posts (this is basically where his game starts imploding and he starts whining about wanting to suicide). Then look at post 93 by Chuck where he has his escalating

FOS

. I see this as Chuck blatantly trying to escape what he sees as a sinking ship of a scum partner.

(newbie) Scum blatantly trying to escape from shinking boat.

i) magnifying his attack on Seb.
ii) acting decidedly and quickly.

(newbie) Scum trying to lynch a wagoned innocent.

i) magnifying his attack on seb.
ii) entering the wagon in the softest possible way.

POST 102.

@Mirth- I won't. Also do you think putting him at L-1 is justified yet. I was hoping to hear from Serous(or now his replacement?) to see what they think on the subject?

POST 104

Ok. I would also like to hear from cute.without.e. What are your thoughts on seb? Btw I'm not pushing you for anything cute.

POST 106

I want to hear from cute.without.e, and serous before I decide to vote. I honestly think that we should lynch you but as a town we should all decide together if you should be lynched.

POST 147

Ok Vote:Seb for all the reasons I have posted before, I know that everyone else said these but they pratically took everting scummy about him and posted about it.

Question to IC's- In other Mafia games, is it scummy to agree with people?

Also seb, I think is trying to buddy with Mr. A, he seems the most likely target, and try to get someone to not vote him/ find him scummy.

I think much more likely option 2 than 1.

Just as a byproduct, the last words suggest that Mr. A. was townie.

[nureins]

By saying things like lynch Mir, then lynch me afterwards if I am wrong, that is already 100% polarizing and is always anti-town!!!

Do not fall in the trap. I havent said that. (Mirth said it in the inverse way). If I had said that, I would admit that you are right and I was excessive in my observations to mirth. You were more correct in your answer to Mirth. I am 90 per cent about mirth. I push a lot...

About discussing, most of your words sound quite coherent and rational. So for me is fine. I also understand the basic intuition of your point towards polarization. In essence, even if I do think Mirth pursued it, I was aggressive towards chuck and, being convinced that he was mafia, I was not very worried about this "polarization" being created...so obviously I do understand your point.

And of course, meanwhile I can analyze other people's opinions on other players. And our discussion on "polarization" will vanish with time, I guess...

[nureins]

At this point what I'm looking for is to not waste a day and give a scummy player a free ride while we focus on Mirth.

And you exploring around is good for all of us. You being devil's advocate, Corvuus completing his view and me testing my strong belief with other arguments sounds nice.

From Nur's posts I don't see him giving up on the Mirth is scum idea until she is lynched and proven to be scum.

Not likely, but this doesnt mean I am opposed to debate. I am not.

[nureins]

Mirth:

I have a question about your meta/want to learn.


So why didn't you claim doc (whether you are townie or mafia)?

Mirth:

I have a question about your meta/want to learn.

1. If she is mafia:

MIRTH claims doc
X counterclaims
The best that Mirth obtains is to be lynched in day 3 after lynching real doc today. Bad for mafia. Bad for Her.

2. If she is doc.

Then obviously she claims doc, because she is gonna be lynched. Good for Town. Good for her.

3. If she is vanilla

Mirth claims doc
X counterclaims
She outs doc and in any case she dies and doc dies. Bad for town. Bad for her.


Conclusion: She is not doc. She is either Mafia or vanilla.

POST 421 ON COP. I agree with you. We should have asked cop to claim and be protected by doc. Twilight is a bit curious, yep.

[nureins]

as for cop claiming, i disagree because the setup could have been a good/rb/townies setup, and it could have allowed scum 2 to get away with a fake claim

I disagree. In the 7 townies setup, whatever mafia-cop does during the game, the best he/she can obtain is last 3 players are 2 blues and the mafia-cop, and it is obvious that there is not a doc.

Reasoning: If I am town A and I think Town B is mafia, then I must be the doc !! absurd.

Therefore, mafia-cop claim reveals false. And mafia dies...(unless some players are not rational, of course). Then mafia shouldnt claim cop...

[nureins]

I wouldnt follow an "uncleared" cop in mylo. At this moment, I would ask the fourth player if he/she is doc. The fourth townie has no reason to lie. The truth reveals and mafia loses.

[nureins]

...

Lets simplify. After RB dies, we can be in setup with cop and doc or in setup without them. Imagine you ask publicly:

Any cop ?

a) if there is a cop and doc, then it goes as u imagine.
b) if there is none, then mirth suggests that mafia could use the chance by claiming cop.

But in case b), this ends up with an easy win for town. If mafia survives until the last day and

i) 3 players. Then it is absurd. The other two players are villagers and not docs, so they can only think that Mafia is mafia and claimed falsely cop.

ii) 4 players. Then, if Mafia tries to lynch an innocent (X), X says, hey, im townie. If you want to lynch me, who is the doc ???? so they realize that Mafia is mafia-cop.

In any case, town wins. So I think your idea was good. Unfortunately, Mafia killed our cop.

[nureins]

I would advise Caf's eventual replacement to avoid this tactic since Caf has got some suspicion on him right now

Caf is likely townie for most players up to now. "some suspicion" on him is a vague term that does not reflect his current position. Moreover, if the only source of suspicion is the fact that he is not writting in day 2, this can be easily explained. Since october 22nd, he has posted only one 2-line post in all mafiascum. Consistently, he is going to be replaced. Therefore, I do not see at all suspicions around him.

[nureins]

I would advise Caf's eventual replacement to avoid this tactic since Caf has got some suspicion on him right now

Caf is likely townie for

most

players up to now. "some suspicion" on him is a vague term that does not reflect his current position. Moreover, if the only source of suspicion is the fact that he is not writting in day 2, this can be easily explained. Since october 22nd, he has posted only one 2-line post in all mafiascum. Consistently, he is going to be replaced. Therefore, I do not see at all suspicions around him.

except you're misrepresenting what i said about caf entirely. he has been rather bleh and fence-sitty in his posts, which is why i think he should be at least watched and not written off like you're doing now. unless you know for a fact he's town.

My words were an answer to zeppo's.
I said Most, not ALL.
Watch him...prepare a case and present it...

[nureins]

One post for each player under discussion:

DEJKHA

- CAF'S comment on 232 and 257 are basically correct. Dej was fence-sitting there.

- Dej's position on me is clearly ambiguous. Dej says that Mirth comments on my suspicions are a reason to consider me something scummy. Ill remember here the reasons of Mirth in that post.

1. the MAIN factor for suspecting me is Chuck's claim that I am his partner. However, Dej says that he doesnt find this as a reason to find me suspicious.

2. A second factor was that Mirth considered me to wish linking her to chuck too much. As far as I can see, Dej is "buying" the argument that Mirth was connected to Chuck in the way I suggested. Caf and Corvuus are reproducing and expanding these connections in their cases. And Dej is accepting this point as the main reason to vote Mirth.

3. Mirth suggested that I twisted her words. Dej has not commented this issue at all.

@Dej: Can you tell me why do you find me suspicious ? Which of Mirth's argument you buy to consider me suspicious?

- Dej agrees too much with Mirth without explaining the reasons. Another recent example happens with Caf. This is suspicious, as he could be setting up new cases for the future, supported by Mirth innocence if this were the case.

I agree. While I do see Caf as a pro-town player, his "fence-sitting" shouldn't be ignored. It would be wise to keep him in mind rather than writing him off as pro-town

Ambiguity again, but remarking the fence-sitting. Might you give references of this fence-sitting ? I will discuss in my next post about my opinion on Caf.

[nureins]

CAF

- Fence-sitting: After re-reading on Caf, I have to admit that I have not such a clear view on him anymore.

Post 202.

Well, firstly, I've never called it idiotic. I don't think it is scummy in itself. You didn't push too hard for the actual lynch, accepting it when Mirth unvoted. What is rather intriguing about you is your lack of confidence however - you often seem to be apologising for stuff and being overly worried about doing the wrong thing (examples: posts 163, 182, 195). Given that you have shown that you are capable of scum hunting (or at least faking it if you happen to be scum) and making decisions, there is no need for this - in fact, it is slightly suspicious as you appear to be constantly seeking approval from others, ensuring that you're always on a 'safe' option and always have someone else to share the blame with if needed. So, no more of that.

Post 261, when Dej already fossed chuck.

Chuck, I'm not sold on you being scum, but you're definitely coming off worse from these recent exchanges. I think you need to take a more objective look at the thread. Why the sudden liability to changing your mind when you seemed like a relatively sensible player before?

So right now, I think both Dej and Caf followed my case at a similar pace and both were similarly fence-sitting. Mirth is yet much higher in that list. Ill try to read on Zeppo when possible.

[nureins]

Seb's claim is just a very bad thing.

Obviously, there is not going to be a counterclaim. Otherwise, we would lynch both doctors one after the other. So basically, no need to lose time interrogating Seb.

Also, it was a pleasure to play with you. If Mirth is not scum and we lynch her, you will die

[nureins]

Wow.....

Well first off

Vote:Seb

Triple WOW

Are you voting a non counterclaimed doctor when you know THERE IS a doctor around?? There is only one mafia left and we have 3 options to lynch yet.

How would he benefit from a fake claim ?? the other doctor counterclaims, we lynch both and win. Ridiculous...
A townie would never fake-claim in this situation...

p.d. If you are counterclaiming with your accusation, COUNTERCLAIM OPENLY now. And stop creating confusion.

[nureins]

If he is telling the truth and is the doc what possible sane reasons does he have for claiming at this point in the game?

None, he is a noob player that probably had a very strange thought.
Now if you are not counterclaiming and nobody is counterclaiming, unvote.
And do not worry, we will wait for all players to have the chance to CC before we lynch Mirth (or another player).

I'd also like to ask Mirth if I was scum what possible reason would I have for sticking my neck out and getting Seb lynched when I could just NK him with no possible repercussions to my townie act?

Maybe Wifomming for later days after Mirth's lynch. Not killing Seb and day 4 claiming doc. Who knows. But your argument to fos/vote Seb are ridiculous.

I ask you all to go back and read how I've had my suspicions about Seb. This unprovoked claim was just the final nail in his coffin for me.

More wifom. He is non counterclaimed doc. Then he is the most cleared person in this game now. Especially given that there is a doc, there is only one mafia and 3 lynches for town.

I'm sure I made a big mistake by jumping on Seb so hard, but I'm gonna stand by my convictions until they are proven wrong.

Are you the doctor ??

[nureins]

I counterclaim.

Quadruple Wow !

unvote

I would appreciate if you dont hammer quickly

[nureins]

@ SEB
@ Corvuus

Please, tell who you saved tonight.
Also, please explain why you did.
Moreover, explain who you thought the scum was when you sent your message.

More questions may come. Thanks.

[nureins]

u forgot to say who you saved (or i didnt read it)

[nureins]

Seb and I die, and the game moves on.

Actually, unless someone else claims Doc, then one of you wont have to die, I dont think.

is this a claim then dej

I think he means that if no more claims then:

a) we lynch mafia: the other doesnt die
b) we lynch doc: the other (assuming is mafia) doesnt die during the night.

We are seeing too many claims today hahaha

[nureins]

I think Ill cast my vote soon. I can perceive only four scenarios with a decent probability:

1. Mirth is mafia. Corvuus is the doc. Everybody is gonna insult seb.
2. Mirth is mafia. Seb is the doc. Everybody is gonna insult Corvuus and criticize Seb.
2. Seb is mafia. Corvuus is the doc. This game is really an example of noob mafia.
3. Corvuus is mafia. Seb is the doc. This game is really an example of noob mafia.

Which reactions would have I expected ?

1. Seb starting to implore about his noobish play and the fact that he did a trick to obtain whatever. Noob and noob words that some people would believe, others not.
But he didnt. Posts 504, 505.

2. Corvuus not going so far away as to explain his night saves so much. Just testing if seb was real doc (dont ask me why, ridiculous). Then withdrawing his claim and so on so forth. Too late now.

3. What I am seeing.

4. What I am seeing. But Seb fighting even more.

Up to now, Im buying 3. But I dont want to vote. Too many noobs around and I want more info for two things:

a) In case the mafia is in between them two, lynching mafia today. Or in any case, establishing clearly the lynch for tomorrow.

b) In case the mafia is out of them, lynching the non-doc today. Lynching the doc would be awful. Not very likely now maybe, but this game is really odd.

[nureins]

I yet want to hear from Seb.

[nureins]

if this is a hammer, stop talking seb.
You cant talk in twillight.

you are dead corvuus...you were against mirth very openly, and you are the doc. IMO. Id suggest you to state your suspicions very openly because you are going to die...

[nureins]

Well...all depends on the definition of "dead". In general mods suppose someone is dead when last vote on him...you are right that rules dont say anything of twillight

Im not certain that u r scum.
But there are two possibilities.

a) Seb is mafia. Game over
b) Seb is town (and almost surely not doc). then blabla...

I act as if we are in b). Case a) is uninteresting to be analyzed. And we all should act in twillight as if b) is the case...

[nureins]

Once a player is lynched, the game enters twilight until I post a death scene; the lynched player may not post during twilight but all other living players may continue to post.

Farside 22
It is the other game I am playing.
I apologize to Seb. Go on talking if you want. I thought it was a general rule and sounds coherent to me.

[nureins]

Vote: Mirth

Nothing relevant enough to change my opinion.

As I saw it even if Seb was telling the truth he just did alot of damage to the towns game, and I felt he needed to be lynched for his anti-townish attitude.

If seb was telling the truth, he was doc. Lynching a townie because it is anti-townish is simply RIDICULOUS.

It's really for you to decide whether or not I'm considered scum to you.

QFT

[nureins]

Good game Dej...only at the very end of the game I started to think that you might be scum. Hardly I would have voted for you having Zeppo around, which means you did a fantastic job.
Congratulations !!

I can hardly understand why mirth insists on my lynch. Such a buss in day 1 would have been too much...Dej could have also NKed Caf very safely, I guess...why did you choose me ?