Newbie 917 - Game over.

[Civil Scum]

vote: andrius

Hello! Sorry I haven't gotten around to this. I've never been an IC before. I've played a few games and know some stuff, but there are far far more knowledgable players on this site. But I will try to do my best to answer any questions or explain things. And to steer us away from a no-lynch if we're ever approaching one

I'm an SE, which is like an IC, only with less superpowers

When do I get them??? I read the wiki article on 'Being a good IC' and I had a hard time understanding it...


I think exilon was apologizing for being gone for a relativey short time. Is this accurate? At that point, what did you think you were apologizing for?

I can't think of a reason he would be lying about that right now. Making a distinction or clear choice between an OMGUS vote or a random vote is more interesting.

[Civil Scum]

When do you believe the RVS (Random Voting Stage) ends? Do you see it as a post based thing, where the first page or two is considered RVS, do you see it as a time based thing, like the first 48 hours of a game or so, or do you see it as an action based thing, that people post RVS votes until someone posts a scummy looking vote?

It's definitely not based on the length of the game or the number of posts. It generally ends when the voting (or a single person's vote) is no longer random. Eventually someone sees something they think is scummy (or that person looks like they're trying to hard to find something- someone does't need a 'good' reason per se this early, in fact you can't usually have a real good one, but it also shouldn't look "made up") or otherwise makes a less than joking attempt at pressuring somebody. Voting that is serious to some degree typically ends the RVS, as does an early BW, or a heated disscussion. Any of those thing end the RVS in my opinion. Suspicions and people's reactions or opinions on who looks the better or the worse for the early action generally lead from there.

I disagree that it's silly. Sure, the difference between a literal random vote and an OMGUS random vote is trivial, but there's still a thought process behind it worth analyzing.

And I find it suspicious that you're attempting to dissuade a debate this early.
Unvote, Vote: MMM

I pretty much agree with all of this. And mmm, if you think it's silly, would that make you wary of mega pimp at all at this point?

Exilon's response is decent, I don't think it's much to go after either, but I definitely wouldn't call it silly.

[Civil Scum]

Me too

unvote

Vote hopping is a toughie. Many people are not very fond of it and think it's scummy. I personally don't think it's a scum tell in and of itself. Different people may play the game very differently, or their voting being more a matter of style or personality rather than alignment. If someone has vote-hopped consistently/frequently in a way that appears really opportunistic, it becomes more of a tell. It might be difficult, or impossible, to tell if pimp has well-intentioned enthuisiam or mis-lynch intentions. I'd expect the later (as in those he's prodded would be mis-lynches) instead of some sort of early bus attmepts/framework- a 'just in case' type of thing.

But I think you're right, quintastic, that switching targets often does "cheapen" a player's accusations and people might not place as much faith in them, or the person making them.


Mega Pimp: Would you have liked a 3 or 4 person BW to happen on any of your targets? Do you think a very early BW can be a good thing or a bad thing, why?

It's funny, I kind of thought after your first post 'Well, if mustilicor IS scum, then YOU are probably

the

scum buddy'


Which reminds me, I meant to adress this:

Vote: thatguy00

I'd add Antifinity in there too, if I could. While others have been quite silly with the reasoning for their votes so far (which I gather is normal in this stage of the game), you two are the only ones who've posted entirely contentless votes. So what's up with that, guys?

I can see where a newbie (not meant as a deragatory term on this site , just a statement about experience, not even neccesarily so as people often have played irl or somewhere else) might notice something like that. But it's not really a scum tell. I'm not defending them exactly (as there is really nothing to defend OR attack), but lot's of people simply vote a person and that's all in their first post of the game.

That said, I would like to hear posts from thatguy, antifinity, and andrius in the near future (next day or so). Lurking does make me a sad panda. Obviously none of them could even remotely be called lurkers, but I just mean that one post a piece and then nothing for 4 or 5 days would make me worry that we are going to have some inactive players which is always negative for a game.

I'll go and get it out of the way and say that I don't think that lurking is all that good a scum-tell either. Will be debated perhaps, if it becomes an issue- mmm, quintastic?


It's also unlikely for two scum to exhibit identical behaviors (I suppose a newbie scum might parrot or repeat things a more experienced partner had said/done), but more associative tells (connecting players to a known scum) are quite a bit different than that. Hopefully we bag a scum before the game's over and then we can talk about associative tells. I'm rather new to some of the more popular ones myself.

Anyways, anyone feel free to let me know if they disagree with any of my understanding of the game (or tell me that I am wrong . Again, I'm kind of unsure about what lengths I should go to, "to IC", and please believe that almost nothing I say is a fact or unskewed by my own opinions, style, and experiences with the game.

[Civil Scum]

I'm watching the conversation, and since I have nothing worthwhile to post then I don't bother.

Andrius, you don't have to post "good" stuff or even post constructively. Posting nearly any of your thoughts about any of players allows other people to get a read off of you and know where you stand. If you are a townie, then simply posting any thoughts or information benefits those players. Later in the game, relevant/good content is preferable to poor content posts (the former looks townish, the latter scummy), but posting (generally in and of itself) is pro-town, not posting for whatever reason is anti-town.

And we are in a newbie game anyways , so hopefully everyone will be nicer and more forgiving in that regard. Don't be afraid to just put things/thoughts out there, it can only help your teammates. Unless of course, you are a scum who intends to lurk, stay off the radar, and introduce uncertainty in the town...in which case, DIE!

I can understand the psychology of not wanting to post much when you are brand new, learning, and not really sure what to do or say. But I'm wondering if you felt comfortable in being more upfront about this because of some of the discussion about lurking=/=scummy...


Still waiting to hear from thatguy and antifinity.


Mustilicor: It's not often that someone slips up entirely. First day mislynches are quite common in newbie games (seems almost like the "newbie game curse" to me) because many things considered classic scum behaviors are easily done by newbie non-scums on accident. And it's not uncommon during D-1 for a newbie-townie to end up looking way scummier than any of the actual scum if they have played well at all. As for what the town ends up with to go on, well it really just depends. Every game is different, although it's practically guaranteed that we will end up with SOMETHING to work with. Quintastic offered a couple good examples of things to look for. And which, invariably, are generated in the course of discussion.


Exilon: quote="name"

You have a good point, and explained it quite well. Mega pimp deserves some leeway with it though. What you're talking about is very much the case later in the game. If someone is supposedly 'serious' or believes they have a case on someone, and then jumps away and goes after someone else, then I agree that they have basically said that their last set of reasons for voting the first player were weaker than what they are after the second player for. This early though, you can't expect anyone to have really solid reasons for voting or suspecitng. So abandoning an earlier stance doesn't have to be based purely on that. It can be the result of satisfaction and merely moving onto someone else to gauge reactions or get information, which looks to me like what mega pimp is trying to do.

But yes, later in the game, when someone switches quickly, it can often lead to people scrathcing their heads a little like, "Hey, weren't you jsut after so-and-so...um what happened to that?" and often, the hopper can arouse suspicion themself. But at this stage in the game, it's not purely a "value of the accusations" assessment in those terms.

Exilon's reaction wasn't scummy, I don't have a read on MMM's reaction yet though.

I said earlier how such and such things weren't scummy (exilon, andrius, thatguy) but mmm called mega pimp's "investigation" of exilon's thought process, 'silly'. Which I largely disagree with. Nearly any behavior which seems unusual or out of the ordinary is worth a look in the early stages of the game. Doesn't mean it is scummy or a strong accusation, just that if something is odd it can (and should be) . I think mmm should have said he didn't think it was 'bad' for exilon, not that the line of discussion was silly or useless. In that way, I think it does serve to dissaude discussion, tries to erode mega pimp's credibility, and to dismiss the earliest (non-rvs viable) questioning.

And the best place for my vote atm is:

vote: mmm

[Civil Scum]

EBWOP:

...is odd, it can (and should be) looked at. I think mmm should...

[Civil Scum]

Damn, you guys really got to work!
Gotta catch up a little.

The Quintastic-unvoting thing being some sort of pressure-releiving ploy would only make sense if his partner was in danger, or had some hanging left-over random votes. There wasn't a player with this trouble or in any danger related to unintentional votes at that point. So I can't see this being a real concern about his play or his unvote. However, I think there are a couple other concerns...

Vote: Super Awesome Mega Pimp! so I'm not the only one at L3 and I'll stop feeling lonely up here.

OMGUS vote is OMGUS.

It does look that way but interestingly enough it's one of the only reactions I would accept from mmm given the circumstances. I accused mmm of trying to dismiss the discussion, but if it was more based around a "read" or feeling about samp's motivations, then what mmm said about it being silly is excusable. In that, it verifies what he said about samp's point, not about the situation in total. So it does look like OMGUS, but it wasn't out of the blue, and again probably the only acceptable reaction from mmm to this imo.

This also explains any potential confusion in the related chronology that quintastic thought reflected poorly on mmm.

which could indicate either an attempt at villifying others to draw attention away from himself

Ironically, or not so ironically, by trying to villify others early, he is ensuring that he attracts attention. Maybe 'suspicion' is the better desciption for this type of behavior (the scummy angle) - Trying to cast/create suspicion on others before it falls on himself first.

His/her? point-type system is an interesting way of quantifying the situation, with the cumulative points based on whether or not the behaviors are null, scummy, townie. I haven't seen a point-system done exactly like that. I mostly agree with the conclusion, though I can't say that mmm is altogether very scummy atm. But there does seem to be the difficulty that develops there when you try to assign "values" to different types of behaviors. 'Is the value of such and such a townie behavior equal to the scummy value of this type of behavior?' for example.
But it does look to me that mustilicor is attempting to figure things out.

I also like the questions he/she is asking in that same post.


While easily coincidence, I wasn't particularly keen on andrius admitting to lurking after several lurking=/=scummy sentiments had been posted. The
congratulation of his "interagator" also seems a little out of place. And his response to mustilicor's question left something to be desired.

But even if we count the "null" as mafia alignments, then MMM still gets the noose...
Hmm...

I'm not sure what you mean. Why would you consider null aspects of an argument to be scummy?

Either way, I think voting someone because they debated whether to OMGUS or RVS, and then voting someone when they don't agree with you is kinda scummy.

It is kind of OMGUS'y in a way. As the primary basis for samp's vote for you seemed to be that you disagreed with what he was voting someone else for.

Although I find the parallels funny that you voted for me for voting for you during RVS, and then you voted for SAMP when he voted for you after RVS. It's just an amusing self defense mechanism you seem to use.

Before you said that mmm's OMGUS was the scummiest thing he'd done, but here is sounds as if you have decided it's merely a defensive mechanism?

When you've already stated that you're having trouble deciding who is scummier between samp and mmm (where to place your vote as I understand it), it's somewhat troubling to hear you ask me for my opinion on mustilicor's reasoning, when it obviously looks like you intend to use it/cite some of it to base your vote on.

Between samp and mmm only, my votes still on mmm. Currently, in those relative terms, I still think it is the best choice, though due in part to my personal feelings on samp's early behaviors. We have only one post form thatguy so far :/

But, I'm really getting a bad vibe from how quintastic is playing, however it would mean that if quintastic is looking for a way to legitimize his vote on either samp or mmm before placing it, it's probably because neither one is going to be a good
lynch for town. I'm not quite comfortable accepting that just yet, so I'm not switching. But it sounds to me like quintastic is trying to build up and support whichever vote he intends to make later, while citing other people's opinions heavily to distance himself from a mistake.

[Civil Scum]

Sorry guys, been really busy with work.

A lot of posts to look at already...

Nice quick replacement with McGriddles.

We seem to have several newbies who show a pretty good grasp/knack for the game and are already starting to get their heads around it. Got lucky with this game

Or unlucky if anybody could be playing a decent first game as scum...

...but I think I've developed a sense to tell newbies from scum. I'm going with my gut.

Wow. I definitely wish I had this sense. It's often a difficult part of games in the newbie forum to distinguish between newbie-antics and scum-antics. General consensus is usually when someone (in this case antifinity) does something which could go either way, you try not to focus on it at that point in the game, or try to ignore it and "file" it away for later as it were, and wait to see if it persists or is part of a pattern of play.

Um, is this sense

all

gut? Could you possibly expand on this in any detail?

Will catch up fully and post later today.

[Civil Scum]

Wow, really short work made of MMM there :/

I personally can't get a fix on antifinity atm. Exilon made some good points about how he would have had time before the game to discuss with his partner game strategy and theory, which makes him bringing up those insane questions (sane questions but insane to be asking) maybe not as bad. Though it is mostly WIFOM.
Antifinty is very obviously a newb-scum or a newb-town

I'd be a little more suspicious of people who made it a huge issue. I mean, I realize how strange a lot of his comments are, but to make it a HUGE-SCUMMY issue. I'd have to read back again in the next day or two, but no one was really guilty of that, though Quintastic used MMM's defense of Antifinty against MMM, and voiced his suspicion of a MMM-Antifinity scum link several times. Now that I think about it, with atttention going Antifinity's way for some bad/strange behavior, it would have been a pretty risky move on MMM's part to stick his neck out like that. And it probably would have costed them the game, were they the scum.

And BTW: I have no problems hammering Triple M at this point since I still subscribe to the possibility of a MMM/Anti scumteam. I can take the heat of a hammer. All I've been waiting on is McGriddle.

So Quintastic thought very ill of Antifinity for his antics, but used it mostly against MMM. Although he was voting for Antifinity if I remember correctly. BUT NOT FOR MMM. While saying he was alright with MMM's hammer. I find that pretty odd since before, when the discussion was revolving around Samp and MMM, he was going around asking for advice about which one of them to vote for. Which I also disliked greatly at the time.

I think samp's points on andrius are quite good.

Quintastic: Do you suggest that we dismiss all of Samp's arguments on the basis that he was wrong one time? Or the time before?

I find that highly suspect of you as well.

Therefore, when you consider the vote on Triple M, but not just the vote but the tunneling of the vote, the attack on Andrius for the same newbie scum reasons that he defends Antifinity from, and Andrius' case against McGriddle proving that he did not know that McGriddle was going to be targeted, I feel a SAMP/Anti scumteam is far more likely at this point, and SAMP being a far more dangerous threat to the town.

You're an SE so, I'm not gonna go so lightly on you

First off, tunneling isn't a scum tell. And unless I'm horribly mistaken, neither is someone's first target flipping town. A case built (or got built on MMM). Obviously Samp got us started in that direction, and their early tangle is where it began building. But you can't blame the person who started a wagon (especially one which may have been meant to end the RVS- as in good-intentioned) for the lynch anymore than you can blame it ALL on the hammerer.

Secondly, I completely fail to comprehend, considering Samp's last couple posts...in fact considering the entirety of the game, how you are equating Antifinity's play to Andrius' play. I think that's a pretty crazy reach for a defense/attack.

Thirdly, I don't think Andrius' case on McGriddles really proves anything. Meaning I don't think it 'proves that andrius isn't scum.' That might hold some water if he had gone that way or posted that D-1. But even then, if he had "suspected" someone hard, that just makes the NK good in that sense. And there's nothing to say he didn't write that up during night time at the suggestion of his scum partner. Yes?
Shouldn't he go after the other "hammerer", or the replacer who BW'd with him? Those two looked the worse for the quick-pile. And like Andrius says, he knows he's not one of the stoofer's so... A decent strategy then to claim you were going after the other guy who looked bad for the lynch, when you were the other one?

I don't know how you can be so certain that it wasn't a calculated move. If he had come up with it yesterday and had done it all on his own wits his first game, well that's something else. But this easily could have been fabricated with a little help in two days.

For this to prove he's not scum, you'd first have to trust that he honestly spent the time writing up the case on McGriddles, only to be dismayed when he found out he had died. Surely Quintastic, you can see why him saying he did this 'this and that way' is totally unverifiable and doesn't help anyone? It basically equals saying "I'm a townie. See, here's why" ...unless I've missed something, which is possible.

So...until further notice

vote: The quintastic one

-For citing other people's reasoning too heavily in making up your mind on MMM.
For being too concerned with people's opinions about it than your own feelings.

-For further distancing yourself from it by never voting for him the entire day while voicing some level of suspicion of him throughout

-And for your attacks on Samp now, which I think there are SEVERAL problems with.

-For being certain that Andrius is a townie for having a case on the NK'd townie. Which really doesn't make any sense to me unless you can explain better why you'd think that.

If Samp is a townie too, that makes your earlier indecisiveness about which to lynch even more suspect.

And yes, if MMM flipped town, I was coming after you first. I already felt pretty good about Samp, so did MMM incidentally although we didn't get to hear too much about why, just his personal read.

So:

and SAMP's immediate jumping on [Andrius] for Day 2,

And actually I meant to jump on him a bit to. I'm hesitiant to draw a link from my suspicions of you for the defense (cause scum defend townies all the time), but Samps raised several good points imo. There's a second person you're defending with less obviousness. (there was a time I had in my notes where you changed Antifinity's wording a little and rephrased it to make something he said 'legible' and 'pro-town', but I will find it later)

But Andrius, back to Andrius. I totally missed how strange it was for Andrius' "reasoning" to include so much doubt about MMM's alignment and thoughts around him being town. A good catch imo, and absolutley ridiculous when you say in the same breath that you think that person is scum. If he really had that much doubt about him being scum, then why would he want to hammer so bad. He basically says he's withholding his vote to hammer, he ensures that McGriddles vote is correct as to be counted, and then he hammers....full of doubt?
It does look like he knew it was a miss. Just like Quintastic probably knew both Samp and MMM were misses.

Granted many of us were echoing 'it's okay to hammer', and I might have as well if I had been in at that time, but it's pretty crazy how andrius said he wanted to and corrected the vote before his.

Anways, what I didn't miss or what DID strike me when I read andrius' post was the list

titled "reasoning"

and how it didn't quite match up with "reasons to vote MMM". I didn't take note of how much it mentioned MMM=townie -.-

It looks like a newbie-scum error to me. And part of the reason I think his writing up that case in conjunction with a partner is a possiblity. It really looked like he was coached to do that. Told something like 'don't worry about voting or hammering, as long as you give some reasons.' I know that's what I would have told my scum partner. Except, maybe he didn't quite do it right.

It really struck me as strange, a lot like someone suggested this to him, or if I can put it that way, "coached" him to do something like this. Except he talks about MMM as townie and doesn't give too many reasons for why he's voting (hammering).

Which again, aslo makes sense that if he is scum, him and his partner knew/realized he would get in hot water over this, so there's definitely a motive for this whole case-on-McGriddles thing.

I agree with him that McGriddle's analysis was pretty skeletal AND opportunistic (go for the top BW, offer little information, etc) but he's dead and the only reason to bring it up is to clear himself now (which is an okay reason I guess...but in no way a convincing one...Quintastic!)

..since Mustilicor said that my fate hangs in the balance of this lynching.

I'm going to have to go back and look at his again. Mustilicor did suggest a MMM=town then Andrius=scum, or more likely scum, causality in her reasoning. I'll have to go back and take a specific look at this. I'm pretty wary of setups in general, or links like that D-1, ESPECIALLY after the other person flips town. The flip in and of itself is going to reflect on some people one way or another, but I want to look at her reasoning about this and see if it's suspicious. If mustilicor is right that andrius has exaggerated it greatly, its yet another thing that looks bad for him. And of course if he's right, it's suspicious for mustilicor to have said that if she doesn't explain why.

I am after Quintastic hard, but I'm a little concerned that D-1 revolved around MMM and Samp, then Antifinity for weird shit, and then back to MMM. A total of 3 good looks at different palyers...in a 9 player game...Blast this infernal deadline!

Though I've generally gotten a good feeling from Samp (another part of the reason I don't like Quintastic using a mistake in a case). I can understand the thing TQO said about not revealing your town reads cause it helps the mafia choose strategies and NK's, and I've heard that before, but I generally disagree with it. A theory discussion for some other place maybe. I also think exilon is solidly town (this can change) for a couple reasons. And mustilicor to a lesser degree.

She has this sort of impassioned/emotional or 'cheeky' style ("my pride is bucking against this") which some players like, though I don't really care for and pricks me a little, but at the same time her posts sound genuine. If she's town, she is playing a great game, and if she's scum she's up for an oscar. Her and Exilon's considerations regarding the MMM lynch both sounded very reasonable too. I doubt either of them could be playing so well and convincingly as scum, or atleast think that's much much less likely for them to be able to do, than if they were townies, which would only take a certain amount of intelligence and attention (not some crazy-innate knack for the game). Too much gut maybe, and will definitely look closer at the parts I had to catch up on. Another mislynch that they (Mustilicor and Samp) have their hands on would shake these reads badly, but for now I feel pretty comfortable listening to them.

And I think Samp's points on Andrius are spot on, and MILES away from attacking him for something Antifinity was also doing....Quintastic!

Oh and there was this:

It came down to you and Anti, and you're the bigger threat, ruling out the fact that I could OMGUS for Civil Scum because he doesn't like me. So it came down to voting for you.

I'm not sure where I said I didn't like you...but that's beside the point. It would have only been OMGUS? Couldn't you have any reason for suspecting me? I guess what I'm asking is, could you have a real reason to suspect anyone is scum??? This was about mid-day mind you.

Alright, last thing this post has been atrocious

Now, if we take Stoofer's crazy-ass law and apply it here, two of us four are mafia. Naturally, we'll all claim that we're town. Though I'm willing to bet that at least one of us four is a scum. I know that I'm not one, and the only way to prove that I'm innocent is for me to die, or for the Sheriff to investigate me and claim and prove my innocence; which isn't going to happen.

Calling Stoofer's here is also a little crazy to me. I can't say I subscribe to this law, which says that probably BOTH scum were on the wagon. I will say that I've never seen a newbie-game D-1 townie lynch that didn't have ATLEAST 1 scum on the wagon. I think it's ridiculous to presume overarcingly that both scum were. But yes, almost always, one of the scum is/was here. Which, naturally to Andrius, leaves the 3 remaining players that voted.

I have also noticed that Andrius' play seems to have improved consideraby over night...

And Andrius, if you're serious about following that law, or wanting to, then you have to be after me, Mustilicor, and Samp, in a pairing of two of us amongst three.


It also should be noted that the law loses reliability if the scum are playign well, or townies are playing bad. Either case it'd be tough to judge at this point. Though I'd probably hang Quintastic in a second if his answers are as scummy as some of his play has been.

I don't know, for how scummy McGriddles could have been made to look, that seems like a rather odd NK to me. Unless there was a motive or something to be gained. Thoughts anyone?


Consider that an

Fos: Andrius

And I should probably thrrow my two cents in on the false Pr-claim from a townie. It's not really the correct move imo. It can cause WAY bigger problems than your death. Namely that, if you claim cop, and you have a cop, they might claim depending on what day it is. Which would be disastrous if it wasn't a good time for them to come out. You still die if they come out and claim, and then they die.

Also, they don't even have to counter-claim to become exposed. Unless they had a really strong town read on you and thought you were decoying, or lying as a townie, then they are probably going to vote for you, or atleast jump on your case. And if someone hasn't suspected yuo up until then, but then switches to you after you claim cop, well the scum could figure out who to kill that night too. It can be good, in the sense that you;re increasing your random lynch odds for that one day, but it can also end disatrously.

Well, sorry this was such a mess... I don't like falling behind in my games -.- and hopefully it made some sense.

[Civil Scum]

Okay, wow that post was big, just kept going

I promise that won't happen again XD

[Civil Scum]

... but he's dead and the only reason to bring it up is to clear himself now ...

I asked him to, unless you're referring to where he mentioned its existence in the first place.

True you asked him, but that was after he mentioned its existence, and after he said something like 'if anyone wants to see it just ask.' You happened to be the first person to ask, but as Samp already has said, it would have been pretty stupid for him to mention it and not have it.

Alright, good. Considering the speed of that response (and the fact that it apparently had Word artifacts messing up the bbcode, which even I'm not paranoid enough to venture as possibly intentional), I'm comfortable believing you did in fact already have it prepared.

This baffles me a little. Did you think he would have written it up in the forum when it was locked? Obviously it was prepared. And it only takes losing one or two big posts before many peple start writing them up in a processor first.

I just really don't think that him having this case, whenever he wrote it, proves anything.

And yes, if MMM flipped town, I was coming after you first. I already felt pretty good about Samp, so did MMM incidentally although we didn't get to hear too much about why, just his personal read.

Uhh, might want to double check that. He backed off of SAMP for a bit, but his final post still lists him as suspected scum.

My mistake. I incorrectly or disproportionately remembered him as feeling alright about Samp. Because of this:

I'm beginning to go off of SAMP now. He's been pretty consistent in his reasoning so far.

Looking more closely at Andrius. He's been bandwagoning a far bit.

Which was partly in response to Samp's post 121, which I also approved of when reading.

He does go on to still list Samp along with Andrius as his two top suspects in his final post.

As for Andrius, it would have been unlikely for him to have bussed MMM like he did. And he is arguably BW'er #1. But I mean, anyone BW'ing can look guilty if the person flips. And, Mustilicor, unless none of the scum were on the wagon (which would be a great strategy for scum in a newbie game now that I think about it), then there is probably atleast 1 scum between you, me, Samp, and Andrius.

Therefore, when you consider the vote on Triple M, but not just the vote but the tunneling of the vote, the attack on Andrius for the same newbie scum reasons that he defends Antifinity from, and Andrius' case against McGriddle proving that he did not know that McGriddle was going to be targeted, I feel a SAMP/Anti scumteam is far more likely at this point, and SAMP being a far more dangerous threat to the town.

Shocked What makes you say my attack on Andrius is for the same reasons as my defense of Antifinity?

Seriously, I can't understand why he said that. Or why he thought he could get away with a statement like that ????


Will address Andrius's post and Quintastic's when I get back from work.

Yeah it was way too long for one post, Quintastic, but I gave a summary of the main points directly after the vote, for 'ease of understanding' or 'simplicity in expression', which may or may not have failed -.-

[Civil Scum]

unvote

Way too quick and too much craziness going on.

Some people think AtE and/or the martyr-card are scummy, but it really just depends on whether or not you believe them. It can be genuine frustration or resignation, or it can be scum with nothing better to defend themself with.

Quintastic: A fair number of my issues with your play thus far have to do with your vote on Samp. It was as quick as his voting for Andrius, and I felt like a lot of your reasons were not good.

I can kind of see what you're saying about Andrius and Antifinity, but I think you're way over-generalizing it.

And I really didn't like how you withheld your vote on both MMM and Samp D-1.

Antifinity has gone quiet, and while that may be due to irl issues, it could be other things. He's only popped in here D-2 once to agree with me and vote you. He was much more active early in the game, and when he had eyes looking his way. And that could be due to irl issues sure, but there's a pretty remarkable change in his behavior in and out of the spotlight there otherwise.

Wouldn't you agree though, that if Antifinity were newb-scum, he would of gotten his vote in on MMM? I mean, even if you are claiming that Andrius and Antifinity look similar to you, Andrius was the one who voted - rather crazily - and second guessed himself in the hammer post. Antifinity sounded scummy, but hasn't acted scummy I guess is the difference that can be seen even in a generalized comparison.

But I also don't like Antifinity quieting down so much after people are done talking about him.

NICE! Good work there, Exilon! Wow. I've dug my own grave. XD Hurry up and throw me in! I'll add another body to the townie side, and the mafia'll kill another tonight, so then it'll be 3 v 2; still doable. So go ahead, you've still got room for error.

It was a pretty involved theory (although the scum may have just been PR hunting, or eliminating an experienced player coming in with a fresh perspective)
and a possible theory. But I don't understand this quote. Are you agreeing with Exilon here? Are you saying he's right? Is this sarcasm? Then at the end you call your lynch an error? Can you explain what was going through your head when you wrote this?

[Civil Scum]

The Quintastic One seems to be switching back and forth between trying to use me as an excuse to not lynch Andrius, and trying to throw suspicion on me every time Andrius is suggested as a serious lynch target.

This is a good point. Quintastic also voted for you D-1 as being suspicious, using it to cast suspicion on MMM without actually putting his name on the voting list.

I don't really want all the pressure to come off of him :/, but I would rather not have such a speedy lynch this time.

[Civil Scum]

Mustilicor, you are struck by Andrius giving up on defending himself? Are you more inclined to believe him? Or is it more that you feel sorry for him?

The latter, while not scummy or even very reprehensible, is not exactly sound play. Play to meet your win condition...all other considerations secondary, as you said. If someone screws up and gets caught, they might get down on it, but they'll bounce back. If you let a scum go based on this sort of internal trouble, it's just not playing to meet you condition. Then again, this comes form someone who's stepped on a few toes

But it should come down to winning, not everyone feeling great all the time. Like you said yourself.

I was all prepared to come in, guns blazing at McGriddle. And then that got taken away, so I'm just in utter loss. And you all are going to lynch me anyways, so yeah. Just utter loss...

Well, your case was pretty solid. I suspect that McGriddles would have been lambasted by several players if he had survived.

And you seemed quite capable in putting it together, and noticing the right things. Which confuses me greatly to hear that you have nothing now. Surely you should be able to do this again? Or atleast something approximating scumhunting?

It's strange to have seen you do it once, and then hear you claim that now you have nothing and are at an utter loss.

[Civil Scum]

Frustration at being a top lynch candidate encourages scum to try even harder to get out of their situation, not to just accept it.

I think that depends on their personality. I'm definitely of that first type, but I've seen resignation, (self-hammering), and dramatic AtE's by scum twice in my time here. And many times irl. I don't even think you would call it a gambit. More of personality or mood.

I'm not sure if I buy it, but obviously if everyone else feels differently there's not much I can do about that. Which is largely why AtE and 'giving up'/martyrom are generally ignored. As Mustilicor was already aware, they can't be argued.

[Civil Scum]

Actually, I'm a little concerned to see people skipping ship on Andrius after an AtE. Although I will reserve judgement until I hear what Samp has to say.

I mean, just because that's a consistency of Andrius's doesn't mean it's a town tell. Atleast not for me. And even if he was worried that he would become a target after the lynch, that could be a scum reaction as well. And it would reasonably explain the fireworks with the ghost-case and McGriddles Nk.


Oh also Mustilicor, just to clarify and so people aren't confused by you later
L-2 = two more votes for a lynch
L-1 = one more vote for a lynch

[Civil Scum]

I was being sarcastic, yet I thought that my death would most benefit the town, so I congratulated him on getting me to L1. Sarcasm, yes. I thought, at the time, that my death would benefit the town, so I said it.

Alright, so you were congratulating a person you feel is town on putting you (a fellow townie) at L-1. Because you were thinking that proving yourself as a townie by dying would help your team. (?)

I gotta hand it to you, that sounds a little fuckin crazy

...though SAMP! more for his unvoting of me, which was made to seem gracious on his part, like a lord sparing his servant from execution. Or so I took it.

I'm not sure that I understand this last part, but definitely scum can use a [insert not very good reason] to jump off a wagon, (a not very good reason like AtE).

And sure, Samp, Andrius was "prepared" to vote himself, but did he?
It seems like if you were really serious about doing it (as opposed to actually caring if you died, more of a scum-response/mentality in this situation), you would just go ahead and vote yourself, not caring whether or not it would count or if it would lynch you.

I find it rather intersting that he asked first if it would count, instead of just doing it and finding out.

Antifinity does seem to be developing a habit of popping in just long enough to clear suspicion from his name. I'd say this could be busy townie as much as lurking scum, but he posted right after Civil Scum mentioned him earlier in this page, pointing to active lurking. Something to consider.

True. Also worthy of note that before when he was posting he was getting a LOT of attention for it. Perhaps some of the "electrified cupcake" response.

Sidenote: 'The Wiggum Method' lol

But I knew by saying that going into it that you would possibly be painted as a nightkill target by the Mafia, call it manipulative, but it's apart of my plan. (wink)

Okay, call me over-pragmatic, but the most realistic/likely plan/outcome this would be a part of would be getting Mustilicor NK'd? Um, right? Or trying to sing her praises as a townie and then seeing if she doesn't die?

Where's the wink if you were trying to "root" out scum like that?

You seem pretty inconsistent (and unreasonable) about your views on Andrius vs Antifinity. And I am still at a loss as to how you came to such an immediate and certain conclusion on Andrius being town for having that case.

And I don't know about Antifinty being "obvscum" but I think it's either you and Andrius or you and Antifinity.

vote: Quintastic

Let's atleat get a claim before this hammer please.

[Civil Scum]

EBWOP:

...though SAMP! more for his unvoting of me, which was made to seem gracious on his part, like a lord sparing his servant from execution. Or so I took it.

I'm not sure that I understand this last part, but definitely scum can use a [insert not very good reason] to jump off a wagon, (a not very good reason like AtE).

I meant to add here, that this did kind of bother me, but since Samp is voting for my top suspect and Mustilicor is vacillitating between my top suspect and the person she jumped from, I don't have much of a problem ignoring this for the time being.


And also, this vote from Antifinity could easily be bussing.

[Civil Scum]

As for my TQO vote, at this point, it just seems really obvious, I will defend my vote and so on, but, come on, seriously? Andrius might just be some sort of secondary scapegoat, in theory, but The Quintastic One just seems like a certain scum. Of course, to be certain you have to know that I'm town, or that Andrius/TQO is scum, so you all can't be certain yet.

More like, could easily be

hardcore bussing.

[Civil Scum]

There'd be no reason for a scum to counterclaim this. So if there is a counterclaim
then Quintastic is scum. And obviously if she turned up the doctor at that point, we'd know the counter claim was a scum.

unvote

Bah

I thought I had a pretty good handle on him, but I might have been wrong :/
Again

Just trying to get my head around this for a minute.

While claiming a PR in a rough spot (especially claiming doctor instead of cop for some reason) is fairly common play for a scum, Quitastic was helping to create the Mustilicor=townie image and hasn't used it to attack her for not dying (which would probably be too WIFOMy to use anyways). So Quintastic would have been doing that D-1 to set up this "false" plan and in setting up a false-claim later.

I think that would have been an interesting although unlikely strategy for him to have used. I'm inclined to believe the claim without a counterclaim, and we probably shouldn't lynch Quintastic if no one else is claiming doctor.

If he's the doc it's likely he'll either get NKed or make a save. If not, he's more likely to be scum. I trust this sort of "hard" evidence much more than my own psychological guessing abilities

At the same time, it kind of puts us at LyLo right now. If we decide to trust his claim for now, and eliminate Quintastic (and I'll say Mustilicor out of consensus for the purpose of this argument) from the lynch canidates, we're all left choosing from the other 5 players. And, if we miss then, assuming that Quintastic is telling the truth, all the scum have to do is gamble on the NK and leave Quintastic alive. Which becomes the sort of "hard evidence" that would damn him to a quick lynch.

I mention this as a possibility cause I actually did this once as scum, and it went off without a hitch.

Even though I agree that we probably shouldn't lynch an uncounterclaimed Doc, it's kind of tough because we'd almost have to lynch him D-3 if he's alive for the simple case/possibility that he is just a scum who took a shot at claiming a PR.

But again, I find it unlikely that this was some strategy he had begun D-1 to set up a false claim.

I'd probably say Antifinity at this point, although I've obviously been quite off this game. Or Exilon for posting a lot of content, but not very productive content. And he seems to be buddying up to everyone a little excessively. Maybe a little gut on this one.

I was pretty set on having caught Quintastic, but I can't discard the claim at this point.

So I guess Antifinity. Has said many times recently that he's sure/certain that Quintastic is scum, and if he's not then it's just something that Antifinity thinks is "good" to say. But I was essentially saying that too.

[Civil Scum]

It is, however, common practice for all townies to suspect everyone in the game at ALL points in time. That means Andrius was not thinking of Mcgridle as scum until the night. That’s… a pretty lame error for a townie, and could also mean he was a bad mafia goon for forgetting to think like a townie.

A townie doesn't need to suspect everyone equally to be a townie, if that's what you are suggesting. But they must have genuine suspicions if they are a townie. Being suspicious of everyone is a natural resposne of not knowing anything, but people often feel like they have a handle on things, even if it is to a degree that is impossible (cite: religion), and no one is required to be equally suspicious of all players. Relative suspicion is all you have to go on.

For someone who believes that you must suspect everyone, you haven't done much voting. In fact, a quick ISO reveals that you've voted twice. Your first RVS, which you left in place throughout all of D-1 (a little comfortable/content with letting townie players fight and lynch perhaps). And your only other vote was for Andrius at the beginning of D-2.

Now if you are suspecting everyone, or looking at everyone, who is your

prime

suspect at the moment. Do you have one? Can you explain why?

Why have you witheld your vote so often?

I'm got a bad feeling about some of Exilon's posting, but I don't think it puts him above Antifinity or Andrius on my list. Which would be terrible if he were scum as last game my gut reads were the only times I was right the whole game and I didn't act on them. And they would have been fantastic if I did

It looks at first glance as if you’ve just posted a series of accusations and analysis of my play,

That's defnitely the overall tone I got from it. But he seems to be thinking you are town at the same time:

Thankfully, no one has hammered Quintastic. I guess we can trust everyone now to not do anything like that, so I’m thankful...

Obvious

First, because of your development of a certain playstyle which you follow meticulously; as stated sometimes during day 1 and which represented the basis for your vote on Samp!.

The lack of considering your scummy motivations is absent from the entire post.

But I have to disagree with you. Even if you follow your rules strictly, you’re bound to not only make mistakes but also fail to grasp the situation completely; this has kinda happened one or two times and is one of the reasons you were put at such a dangerous position, forcing you to roleclaim

Telling Quintastic that he didn't attract attention for being scummy, but for reasoning faliciously. Or not comprehending her own fallability (?) And blaming him for having to claim. Which is fuckin downright odd to say the least.

How am I supposed to believe you if your reasoning is based on “intuition”, as some would put it?

I would say, at this point in the game, for a townie the issue now is whether or not to believe Quintastic's claim, not whether or not to believe all of his arguments, which I haven't personally. But Exilon says this is trusting his intuitions about other players, which I feel is mischaracterizing the sum of Quintastic's play...with some indiscernible intent )

Anyways, my point is from reading the post, it doesn't seem to contain any attack on Quintastic's "townieness". Which, coupled with Exilon's total 2 votes, seems very out of place to me, for a 'townie who is suspecting everyone'.

And Samp!, you’re jumping and counter-questioning so much you’re giving me goosebumps.

I realize this is just a statement, but if you had to add to it, so as to make it NOT-AMBIGUOUS and NOT buddy-like, what would you add?

Interestingly enough, Samp, I don't remember you commenting on Exilon much yourself.

Even if I agree with Exilon about any of it, I've been arguing somewhat with Quintastic in that way to see if he'll "correct" how he's reading some people's actions, to get him to understand why I don't agree with him, and to explain to him where me and Samp are coming from; I don't know what Exilon hopes to accomplish with this. It could be soley in the interest of making Quintastic look bad.

I do agree, that earlier before all of this, I thought that some of Quintastic's "certainties" were completely uncalled for, and scummy in that sense.

But Exilon appears to be taking some sort of different theoretical or philosophical attack to him

while

saying Quintastic is probably a townie.



Okay, I have to say I was cracking up a bit when I read your last post. Pretty funny. Not that it's off-point, just how riled up you seem to be.

... you're basically BEGGING the Mafia to counterclaim me with any reason they can come up with so you can have an excuse to lynch me

There would be practically no reason for them to falsely-coutnerclaim. And yes, I would "beg" them to do it. You're probably dead anyways if you're telling the truth, and we catch a scum cold-100%-dead if they do this. So yes, I am begging someone to counter-claim, it means we get one dead scum no matter what, right now. No matter which one of you is telling the truth. And for the fact it would be such a senseless bonehead move, I would believe their claim. Beacuse otherwise they had just committed suicide. I can see how this might bother you if you were the real doc, but me and Samp are reasoning about this correctly.

1) From Day 1 paint Mustilicor as confirmed town.

2) But instead of targeting the confirmed town, we kill the fresh replacement McGriddle, who did nothing in this game of value beyond aid in the lynch of Triple M.

3) Prepare an argument as to why we believe McGriddle to be scum, despite the fact that we know going into the second Day that McGriddle should be dead.

4) Prepare a false protective roleclaim ASSUMING that I am going to reach L-1 and have time to counter claim.

1) This one was also generally agreed upon, you did throw stuff out there, but you can't paint a person townie all by yourself. But after you revealed this, it is obvious that it's what you were tying to do.

2 & 3) I've been in disagreement with you on these because Andrius was going to look bad after that lynch, and this was a very clever way of CLEARING him for it. I think the motive is there, and the payoff could be big enough that it equals the strangeness/involvment in it. I think it's unwise to ASSUME it wasn't planned.

Also,

...rather than just giving up and saying “go ahead, lynch me” like most newb scum would do. And if he were scum, I would be dead by now. There is no way in the blue blazes of hell that Andrius is scum and let me live. If that's not the most obvious town tell in the history of ever then I don't know what is.

yeah he could have hammered you true. But again, I think you're going too far sayign there's 'no way he wouldn't have.' He was clearly worried that his first hammer was going to get him killed. Him being suspect #2 and hammering what he knows is another townie? You think he'd be worried that would get him lynched? You're damn right.. Again, I think you're taking things beyond what they can actually say when it comes to Andrius. To say he's complettely cleared for these thigns just doesn't jive with me.

That said, you may be right about Antifinity. The lurking and only popping in in the interest of self-preservation is pretty scummy. And his crazy remarks throughout the early part of the game were scummy, though arguably some WIFOM. Saying they aren't scummy is WIFOM only.


Voting Andrius does require one to assume that the McGriddles case was planned. This is one of the things that made me think you were a prime canidate for a scum partner. And failing that, I would say it would be Samp. Just because you two have played some, it would seem more likely that you would be involved/come up with a strategy like that. Problem is, I don't find Samp all that scummy and I believe your claim, so...I don't mean to be rude, just an observation, I don't think the scum could be Andrius/Antifinity. That's basically the one pair I can't see coming up with the McGriddles kill/case.

I think either Exilon or Mustilicor could also be capable of playing like that as scum.

Incidentally, Quintastic, what do you think of Mustilicor and Samp using Andrius's AtE to drop their suspicions and leap over to your wagon?


I think that Antifinity=scum would clear Andrius becasue of the case, it would just be too mind-boggling incredible for them to have come up with that. And then completely unrealistic/fantasy on the level Quintastic apparently thinks it is now.

vote: antifinity

I'm sure that will get a response. I'm having difficulty naming anything I'd like him to specifically answer to. Why do you always post after you are adressed, or suspected? I guess is the main one I could come up with.

I think it's a good shot for a lynch. And if he flips scum, then I believe it goes a looooong way towards clearing Andrius.

Fos: Exilon

For the time being, and if Antifinity flips scum.

Fos: Andrius

Really not sure if I buy the self-hammering threat when he asked before trying it out/doing it. But only in the event that Antifinity flips town.

Will wait to see if Quintastic dies or not before attemtping to push that case again.

Would like to keep an open mind on Samp and Mustilicor.

Some of the thigns Quintastic mentioned about her are the same things I have to look at.

I like listing my reads so

1. Antifinity
2. Andrius
3. Exilon
4. Samp
5. Mustilicor

-Quintastic cannot be placed until D-3 or coutnerclaim. I should also say for Quintastic that I meant an immediate counter-claim (like one that probably would have happened by now). I know that, atleast for me, a counterclaim of doc from someone else after they get to L-1, is not going to have the same effect on me. Obviously.

[Civil Scum]

EBWOP:

...rather than just giving up and saying “go ahead, lynch me” like most newb scum would do.

Um, isn't that like exactly what he said? What you're talking about is martydom, or the "martyr-card."

Okay, well correct me if I'm wrong... 'Kill me. Throw my body down in with the others and add another townie to the dead. XD'

Would like to keep an open mind on Samp and Mustilicor...

But

some of the thigns Quintastic mentioned about her are the same things I have to look at.


Yeah, Andrius definitely said 'go ahead and kill me, I'm ready to die'. Maybe he has been "recovering" or trying to recover, which is part of the reason I wanted to give a chance. I mean, I asked him to talk more about his suspects or present another a case. Because it is truly awkward to hear someone say they have nothing and can't do it immediately after they just proved themselves able. Really awkward, especially if he didn't have any help or no one else prodded him in that direction with McGriddles.

Also SIMUL:

I agree setting up a later claim would be a good-move, especially if you can try to reverse-paint a lynch target in the mean time. Quintastic's obvscum-read on Antifinity might not be too flattering either if Antifiinity flips town. Again something which would suggest Quintastic/Andrius.

There's no way to totally confirm a claim without some deaths, unfortunately. But Quintastic's claim is decent (a lot better/more believable than some I've seen) and it's probably best to trust it. And if Quintastic is town, then it doesn't take much imagination to see why he would be telling us all how crazy and fantastical these ideas sound.

Obviously, if Quintastic is around D-3, then something is up, and that's when we're better off going after him, not now D-2. But if he survives to D-3, even that is not for certain. But at that point his claim will need a SERIOUS SERIOUS look, to see if anything he's ever said or done this game could possibly contradict or weaken the claim.

In short, it's widely considered better play to accept the claim for now, because having him survive to D-3 should set off sirens.

And of course, you are obliged to disagree with this if you see fit.

[Civil Scum]

It could be Exilon trying to poke holes in your pursuit of an Antifinity lynch, if everyone were to think it's solely about your intuition, or all of our intuition (?)

[Civil Scum]

Sorry last one:

I say, more believeable than others I've heard... which may not be the greatest metric for weighing claims in mafia, but one I use instinctively.

Another useful option for verifying his claim (which may or may not be as helpful here if he doesn't have more than a couple games) is to meta him and see if he likes to false-Pr claim as scum, to see if he's done it, if he talks about it, how he does it, and how he sounds when he does it.

A meta-read on a true claim could also be used to make up your mind.

[Civil Scum]

I'm glad that you're taking the time to do a little research, although it's obviously unclear why you would no longer want to hear an explanation or my opinion on it.

I half-expected this to come up if I made it any length into the game.

Unfortunately I'm due at work... SHORTLY! Ahhhh!

[Civil Scum]

It’s in the Meta. If you’d like to do a little research on me. I get VERY riled up as town.

I've been a little busy at work, and I'll probably not take the time to do this unless you have survived to D-3. In which case, I'll probably read the whole games.

And my point wasn't so much whether you still find Samp scummy, you can't find anything that Mustilicor has done to be questionable?

This is going to sound a little WIFOMy, but you do realize that I mentioned the current situation being kind of a LyLo now, and I also brought up the possibility of scum leaving a real doc alive for this purpose. And if you read carefully, it's more of a cautionary note I meant to make. You can tell me I'm setting up to do this while I caution the town that it's possible...but yeah, you'd also see D-3 that I'd want us to be careful about it. And certainly you can imagine that if that were a scum plan of mine, there would have been several different/better ways for me to intend to get you lynched D-3. Like keeping quiet, and running it through when the opportunity is there. WIFOMy sure, but give me some credit here.

My vote remains on Antifinity. Because I believe we get the most information out of his lynch over you. There is no way that I am believing that both Antifinity AND Andrius are scum.

I also made these arguments. I don't know, it's just kinda funny for me to see you agree with me so much in one post and attack me in the same post. For trying to play reasonably at that.

So if Anti flips town, Andrius HAS to be scum. If he flips scum, then it heavily implicates everyone who was ignoring my warning that Anti was obvscum. Especially SAMP who has openly admitted that he has been defending Antifinity since Day 1.

I definitely forgot to take note that defending Antifinity from D-1 was how Samp chose to characterize his behavior. He didn't use the word 'defending', but he did stress that he had thought he was town from D-1.

I guess I haven't. I never really found [Exilon] suspicious.

Alright, but do you only converse with people you find suspicious?

Mustilicor: Alright, well if you're not going to pursue me for it atm, then there's not a lot of reason for me to get into it right now. I will say quickly that my range of play is fairly wide, and sometimes I like to change gears and sit back a little more. I'll also say briefly that I've played a 5 or 6 newbie games, but I've never IC. And even though that's not much of a factor at this stage in the game, it's definitely in the back of mind sometimes. I've had some trouble being myself, especially early, and don't think I'd be setting a "good" example if I went about scum hunting by mocking people. making fun of their name, "yelling", calling people lying "scum shits who are full of shit", and telling people their logic is "fucking retarded".
But yeah, after playing in this game I think it'd be pretty hard to IC a game as scum. I'm not totally sure how you could really give good advice and tell the truth about things that come up without trying/having to skew them for my own benefit or preservation.

Okay, well there's quite a bit more I could say, although you seem to have resolved it, but I'd say that beyond palying differently some games, it is my first game trying to be "some type of example". I do realize that's a pretty conveinent answer for meta-questions, but the truth.

Personally, I think meta can be very useful, although yes it is very time consuming, and can be a very boring method of scum hunting.


Exilon: I can see how you might deserve some leiniency on some of the voting, as D-1 MMM was rather quick, and a lot of people went after Quintastic quickly too, so you voting probably would have lynched them. But certainly you can see how ironic it is that you would be so aware of how little certainty one can truly have , yet you require a high degree of certainty before you vote.

Antifinity: I see a lot of conflict avoidance, and easy agreement with previously stated ideas. I also have not seen much of the whimsy in your heart as of late.

[Civil Scum]

SIMUL:

You have a very powerful tool in a confirmed town player, regardless if my ability is useless at Night. I basically become a confirmed Vanilla Townie that the Mafia HAS to either roleblock or kill to get rid of for good.

Sorry if this is going to piss you off, but you are in no way a confirmed townie right now.

He also says that you suggested the strategy of scum leaving a PR-claim alive. This could indicate some thread skimming. As, I was the one who mentioned this possibility first.

Antifinity knowing there is a role-blocker????

[Civil Scum]

Mustilicor, you're actually starting to get on my nerves. XD Its like you're beating on me for being emotional.

Not really for being emotional, more for sounding anxious.

My vote lies for SAMP!, so naturally, I'm keeping it there

4 days (2 posts) later

Unvote

I feel better about SAMP!, though he still bothers me with his... idk. Persona...

Which was in response to this from Mustilicor

You currently suspect SAMP. Why? The only recent reasoning I've seen from you is confirmation bias.

It's the first time I remember Andrius being outright challeneged on his suspects and he does backdown from his vote immeditaely. I also agree that there's a rather startling change of heart in these two posts without much explanation or anything inbetween.

And "My vote is for SAMP, so naturally I'm leaving it there" - I have no idea what's natural about leaving a vote wherever you've put it, or 'just because you've voted someone'??? That sounds a lot like you don't want to appear vote-jumpy.

I think Civil and Mustilicor are good lil' townies.

So, I'm not willing to lable SAMP! as town. I'm not willing to label Musti and Civil as townies.

What do you think the difference is from "labeling people townies", and this other statement of yours?

So, I think that, in order of my "suspicion levels" are:
Anti > TQO > SAMP! > Exilon

AKA- the town's top suspects, with which your suspicions have been spot-on consistent.

Idk. I think I need to go back and reread the last pages, and see what's up. I feel that we're moving towards an Anti/TQO/Me lynch.

Again, [the town] is leaning towards towards a group of people (So those are my suspects, becasue I don't really have any of my own).

And a self-vote...haha. Do you really think that's a good idea, Andrius?


And obviously that quote from Antifinity about not knowing there were 2 scum is ridiculous, and sort of bolsters the idea that the "cluelessness" or "obvious questions" were intentional misdirection.


I'd be fine with lynching either of these two right now. If Antifinity is scum, I think that Exilon and SAMP are both decent possibilities. And if Andrius is scum and Quintastic is around the next day, then I think Andrius/Quintastic is a strong possibility. Definite chainsawing from Quintastic on Andrius's behalf, with SAMP for not suspecting Antifinity like he suspected Andrius. Which was still completely off in my opinion. And for championing the idea right after nighttime that the McGriddles NK and Andrius's associated case cleared him "completely."

[Civil Scum]

Andrius, you're at L-2 by my count.

My votes on Antifinity still, but I think they're both pretty scummy.

[Civil Scum]

Well, many of us seem to be getting a little frustrated.

Quintastic, anything you want to add here, again hahaha

[Civil Scum]

Quintastic: your top suspect is finally at L-1. I'd think that you would be thrilled about that

Exilon: I'm a little surprised that you're asking/acting like Antifinity is just confused or didn't read the Mod's instuctions. Pretty inocuous, unassuming question I think. I mean, obviously the two most likely possibilities are that he's scum and this has been a method of his defense. Or that he is a townie who hasn't paid very much attention...AT ALL.

Except he's using it this time (not as a general defense) but to explain what could have been a slip. Except that he's cleary posted thoughts and reasoning around/about two scum. quote= "Quintastic One/Andrius

link

"

He also said that he "figured" it would be a miss, cause other times he's played there's only been killer. So he can't even use the further excuse that it was some natural inured-thought process for him, that happened quickly, sub-conciously, or by habit. He said he was "figuring" there was only one. Pretty bad choice of words considering that before he clearly understood that there are two scums.

And he probably knows this. And some of his early questions like, 'Isn't this what I should do to not appear scummy' He was right about most of his comments, even as he was saying them.

And obviously if we believe him that he REALLY thought there was only one mafia, then he couldn't be scum cause he would know there were two...

[Civil Scum]

...if he was scum, like you said in your last sentence, he wouldn't even have made the assumption there was only one killer, and wouldn't have made that "slip up".

Yes, but I meant that it's more of an obvious and lousy excuse.

[Civil Scum]

The initial slip-up makes sense if his scum partner is someone who's not in danger or who hasn't been suspected yet. His comment makes the most sense if Quintastic was the second scum, as Antifinity would have seen that we've ruled out lynching Quintastic today. But that's rather unlikely from how he's been after Antifinity.

[Civil Scum]

As for bussing, it would be too dangerous for CS to do that

ORLY? Well, Andrius or Antifinity? Seriously, let's lynch one of them SOON!

SAMP is basically below my radar under Civil since CS's post where he says that I'm basically tomorrows Lynch if Mafia leaves me alive makes me believe that is exactly what Civil Scum plans to do.

I know you've voiced this nebulous suspicion of me quite a few times, but I think it boils down to

paranoia

.

I don't believe this late in the game that CS being our IC should have any bearing as to whether or not you feel comfortable challenging anything he says that may be suspicious.

I agree! Though you seem to have agreed with me on many things (don't feel it's necessary to find them right now), at any rate you haven't debated with me in any length things you've disagreed with me about. You can disagree and ignore things I think, but that doesn't mean you have challenged them.

Because if Andrius was scum when I was at L-1 he would of hammered me to eliminate another town player. And get the Mafia into night phase.

Well, I've already given my opinion on this. And disagreed on reasonable grounds imo. Though you seem to have ignored it, or atleast have no interest in discussing it.

That would be bad IC play if he were leaning on his usefulness as an experienced player in order to keep him alive.

I agree! Now, if you could dig up an example or two of me using my IC-status to give myself some sort of advantage, then I could treat your suspicion as something more than paranoia.

And "My vote is for SAMP, so naturally I'm leaving it there" - I have no idea what's natural about leaving a vote wherever you've put it, or 'just because you've voted someone'??? That sounds a lot like you don't want to appear vote-jumpy.

Well Civil, I'm looking scummy if I jump, I'm looking scummy if I sit on a vote for too long without Mustilicor-approved reasoning. So yeah, I unvoted. And I look scummy for unvoting.

It's not the unvote that makes you look scummy. It's the "zero-fuss" with which you unvoted as soon as your vote came under scrutiny. When just before that, you were naturally going to leave your vote there. I mean, voting (and unvoting), should be about whether or not you find Samp suspicious? Right? Not about what's going to make you look suspicious?

So would you say, that you had decided to be more stable, or leave your vote on people, exactly because of the attention you had gotten earlier?

civil scum wrote:
The initial slip-up makes sense if his scum partner is someone who's not in danger or who hasn't been suspected yet.

I don't think I quite undertsand this. Could you please explain how the initial slip-up makes sense, according to what you said?

Samp pointed out that Antifinity was assuming we would lynch a townie. Antifinity admitted to this and said it was because he wasn't thinking 'thoroughly' (?) and was posting under a temporary impression that there was only one scum. If that explanation is a lie, the other explanations for such an assumption would be that Quintastic and Antifinity are the scum. Or Antifinity's scum partner is someone who wasn't likely to be lynched anyway, hence the assumption that a different lynch we would pick would likely be a townie.

For starters, I found it interesting (albeit unecessary) that [Antifinity] provided a read of [himself].

Note that Exilon has clarified that for him, words like "odd" and "strange" also mean suspicious. And I don't think it's "interesting" at all. Although, interesting may have no 'suspicion-value' attached to it... I'd have a hard time believeing that, as interesting in this context means the same thing as 'odd', 'strange', or 'unusual.'

Also, I was asked why I provided a read on myself. It is because I copied the read list off the voting tally, and I included myself to make sure I didn't miss anyone. Then I left myself on just to be silly. I'm sorry if that seems scummy to you, but in my mind, thats a bit of a reach.

This was one of the few times I've agreed with Antifinity.

I could see Quintastic wanting to hammer, and over-blowing a "contradiction" to add to the case, or wanting to "seal the deal" on a lynch he's frustrated hasn't happened. I don't think it's scummy considering the circumstances. True though, that that doesn't make it a good point.

Also Quintastic, the "hammer-gambit" doesn't work very well if you say that's what you're doing XD

Well, let's see what happens when I do this

vote: Andrius

Fos: Exilon

The fluff-style of posting, having a good grasp of the game yet almost always -trying- to sound lost/confused, only voting for two people when "suspicious of everyone".

[Civil Scum]

I haven't had as much time for this game as I'd like, but I should be around more often now. After nothing is happening :/


Let's just have a quick look at what Exilon's been doing shall we?

ISO 9

Anitfinity, glad you could make an appearance. However... You have just made yourself look the scummiest player I have ever seen. O_o And that's... just wow.

Atifinity attracts attention for some far-out/scummy comments. Exilon is quick to join in the investigation/accusations.

Exilon's ISO 11 through 14 is a good read. This is were he was aksing people to unvote. This is basically all/only what he says in 3 mid-sized posts.

Discussing MMM vs Samp from D-1/

But I haven’t come to much of a conclusion..., I have resigned myself to the fact that, even with more information, nothing will happen that will majorly tip the scales. Still, they are tipped in one particular direction… And, interestingly enough (or ironically), everyone seems them tipped in that same direction.

Agrees again with the town without directly voting or pushing MMM's wagon. He says a couple times that he finds things he likes and dislikes about both of them, but wafflingly points out MMM, but never votes for him.

Coming into D-2 he votes for Andrius, for hammering essentially. Something he definitely could have predicted would be popular, or an easy/likely target.

I don’t really have a “prime” suspect per se, I have some theories / possibilities and some pairings I believe make more sense than others. Since the day begun, I have been more keen on the Quintastic / Andrius / Samp! trio

Now, correct me if I'm wrong, but this makes it sound like you do suspect Quintastic. Or would like the town to suspect him.

But after the claim and your post kinda bashing Quintastic's playing methods, you had this to say:

However, Quintastic has fallen a bit on my ranking. Indeed, my post was not to accuse Quintastic of being a scum...

So was it just the claim that made you no longer suspect him? What about a claim from a fairly scummy individual at L-1 makes you think he's town?

Antifinity,you keep burying yourself in your own words. I've never seen anyone that seems to "slip up" so much. <<
I'm getting more and more weirded out.
*adds Antinifty to a higher spot in his list*

Again, as soon as Antifinity is coming under fire again (who Quintastic adamantly attacked while/after claiming, and who Mustilicor and myself fingered/put on the spot for lurking), as soon as people turn Antifinity's way, Exilon is right there to add to it...without voting. A pattern yes.

And now there's also Antifinity. Of course, he is outright suspicious; in fact, he is so suspicious that it seems too obvious that he's scum.

Again, fueling an "investigation" without doing much legwork and without voting. He has a pretty visible habit of pushing wagons without voting and without being as direct as he could be in that way.

These things too, when he does talk about "the town's" suspects, they don't recur very often. Like he'll pick up on one, and he won't really mention it again the next post or down the road, the next post is usually a discussion of theory or some minorly related, tangential idea. Not about the person he was calling scummy the post before without the inclination of voting or pushing for their lynch. In facy, he seems to prefer to "call-off" lynches and ask for unvotes.

Exilon has been mostly around my #2 #3 spots, but for the time being I think I'll upgrade him to first-class, aka

major FoS

And for the record, I don't think that Andrius/Exilon is a very likely scum-pair. I explained some of my thoughts on that earlier.


There's really no way I can defend myself against that Samp. So um, I guess if you think both Andrius and Antifinity are townies because you like the sound of their posting/defenses/AtE's, that's mostly your problem.

Does that have anything to do with me dropping Antifinity from my last suspects ???

Yeah I don't know, Quintastic has voiced guy-suspicion of me several times as well, and I really just don't know what I can do about that.

[Civil Scum]

EBWOP: guy-suspicion = gut-suspicion

That was one letter away from being really funny ^^

[Civil Scum]

Civil Scum: What was your reasoning for moving your vote? I can't say I have issues with the place you put it, but the way you did it seems peculiar.

I'm going to decline commenting on this for now.

I believe that vote puts Andrius at L-1.

A votecount would be nice.

[Civil Scum]

...but you're not really committing to a lynch or pushing for who you believe to be scummy.

I'm pretty sure that I've said I want to lynch Antifinity or Andrius. A couple times. I thought I'd made that quite clear.

I've also voted for both of them. If by comitting you mean going all out... I really don't know what you're talking about. Although I agree with this statement more as it relates to Mustilicor and Exilon<---especially.

So with your recent pressure on Exilon, and SAMP's gutread on you, let me get this straight. All throughout Day 2 all we have accomplished this entire game is the fact that we believe everyone,

If I may borrow a page from Exilon...
<execute analysis>
Checking Grammar...... Check
Checking punctuation..... Check
Checking Spelling..... Check
Checking Sentence for Continuity.... Error
Checking Idea for Continuity..... Error

EndWhile thought is incongruous and sentence makes no sense
<End>

I've been consistent in claiming [Quintastic] scum, I just moved my vote over to Andrius because I can't convince anyone yet.

He was at L-1 earlier, so some of us were convinced. But in light of the doctor claim we're shelving him/putting it on the back burner. You have been by and large the only person unaffected by the claim. Why is this? Have you talked about Quintastic's claim at all?!

Oh, boy, this is going to be hard to explain. “Odd”, “strange” and “peculiar” are different from suspicious; but COULD be grounds for suspicion. Conversely, Suspicion implies, most of the time, that we found something “odd” about the way someone acted, assuming of course that person is town. In some cases, there’s stuff that aren’t odd but make sense if seen by a scummy point of view.

Alright, so the words are completely ambiguous in terms of amount of "suspicion"
tied to each one. So we just need to ask, and you will go back and tell us what they meant in each case? That's conveinent. It wouldn't bother so much if I could get a good idea of where you stand on different players at different times from your posts and behavior, but it's "odd" how difficult that seems to be when reading you.

You seem to be repeating yourself

I find that I have to do that a lot. Is it better to say things once and trust that everyone heard it, remembers it, got it? Also, many times I do this because I feel like people aren't listening. That's not the case here with the "fluff" comment, but I digress. That observation (which is not only mine) is true and easily verifiable by reading the game.

Also a matter worth repeating I think, I find it very "odd" that you make these comments about how people could be scum, or seem scummy, and then 3 posts later you've dropped discussing them and it looks like you've forgot about them.

How can you state I’m “trying” to sound lost/confused? You’re not myself, so how can you state what I’m trying to do or not? If I sound lost/confused, it’s because I am. On the same note, how can you say I have a “good grasp of the game”? If you’re a townie, you’re as uninformed as me, and can’t be in any position to make that kind of judgement.

So, unless there’s something you know, that I don’t, there’s no way you can say that.

You haven't been wandering around going, 'Oh gee, who do I vote for, I'm so confused, I'm so lost...etc' But your posts are wandering. Sure you stick with a suspect (the one person you vote for each day?), but you don't push your wagons at all or try to further the arguments very much, outside of throwing in shots at new targets. And also specifically in regards to your comments about not being able to be sure, but then saying you wanted to be certain, but you weren't sure enough, etc. The way you sound, maybe lost/confused were the wrong words, but it's like YOU don't know who YOU want to go after. Or maybe you just aren't vocal/votical about it...

The bolded part is a pretty wild conclusion to come to based on what I had said. Very wild for you.

Also, what the heck? I have already provided my reasoning for only voting two people while keeping my attention up on what’s surrounding me.

I must have missed that. What was your reasoning again? Preferably off the top of your head.

Answer me this: if I suspect everyone, should I vote for everyone or for my top suspect? Therefore, that reasoning makes no real sense.

Um, except you didn't do either.... <--- !
Was thatguy00 your number 1 suspect for being inactive? He wasn't even lurking. He just didn't play.

And after that, you didn't unvote during or after the replacement. So then, McGriddles must have been a suspect of yours. Even though you were confused internally about who looked better between Samp and MMM. ??

He was close to a lynch, and I wasn’t positive any of them would be scum. Hence “the scales are tipped”. As even MMM stated “ Are you willing to lynch me for that 10% today?” (to Mustilicor). No, I wasn’t willing to, and so I didn’t.

Again, so rather than condemn the lynch on those grounds, you left your vote on McGriddles.

"Hi McGriddles"
"Thank you McGriddles"
'Pardon me while my vote stays on you McGriddles'

And correct you I shall. I said “since the day began, I have been more keen on the following trio”, not only on each one of them individually. I also explained why each one of them was suspicious and the pros and cons of it.

The trio = THOSE THREE PEOPLE INDIVIDUALLY

I don't think you should be thinking about it any other way.

The thing is that it seems unconceivable to me that a scum would deliberately do something day-1 as anticipation for day 2; even more something as specific as Quintastic did.

Well as someone has mentioned, it is not inconceivable. A scum carefully and thoughtfully setting up a later false-PR claim is a good strategy. And more likely imo than you seem to think.

It was specific, but also could have had other uses.

Why do you keep implying I’m “manipulating” the players?

I'm not sure what you mean exactly by my implying that you are manipulating people, but it does look to me like you give new wagons this little nudge and then watch and discuss and waffle as they pick up speed.

[Civil Scum]

I have a “good grasp of the game”?

Okay so I misunderstood that you misunderstood.

I meant a good grasp of the game of Mafia, not a good grasp of this particular game -Newbie 917.

[Civil Scum]

I am not the cop.

I would not accept a cop claim, even a good one, at this point. A cop claim with some results yesterday I could trust, and could have been verified in one way or another. But it would be EXTREMELY difficult for me to believe Antifinity or Exilon are the cop (or anyone else for that matter, though neither of you two are claiming). I agree it's uses don't extend beyond those probability adjustments/likliehoods, though I'd never thought of them like that.

Knowing that an out-of-the-blue cop-claim at LyLo is essentially worthless compared to a D-2 claim here, why did you wait to bring it up?

Of particular interest:

Quintastic, NOOOO!

Ahhhhhh noooo okay fine.

This is just bat-shit crazy to me. Exilon had his vote on Andrius the entire day, said he thought he was scummy several times, yet tries to 'play-call-off' Quintastic's hammer? Before the flip? I mean, if he didn't want Andrius lynched, why didn't he ever unvote or defend him? Why didn't he unvote before this if he would have this sort of reaction to an unexpeced hammer. And besides, it wasn't totally unexpected, Mustilicor was talking about hammering Andrius for like 3 straight posts.

The same goes for Mustilicor. It's a crazy response to an unexpected hammer.

No, I'm fretting because I hate surprises and because I don't understand your motivation at all.

I don't understand, um at ALL, what Quintastic's motivations for voting would have to do with whether or not you wanted Andrius lynched or thought Andrius was scum.

The way Quintastic hammered was pretty poor, and difficult to understand from any reasonably logical perspective, but both your's and Exilon's reactions to this are in no way consistent with your actions.

I'd almost hate to admit, after he had been wrong about so many of his bad arguments and acting anti-town, that I agree with Quintastic before he died. This is just friggin crazy for you two to be acting like that when you both were voting, or going to vote. If you thought Andrius scum, neither one of you should have had as much of a problem with Quintastic's vote as you seemed to have. BEFORE THE FLIP, OF ALL THINGS!


Oh, and we now know that Exilon voted for two townies at the start of each day and left his vote there while discussing everything else that came up (in a very inert way I should add). I'm not saying that I've played a great game or been onto anything or even right so far (Quintastic was scum!), but yeah, Exilon has been worse than wrong. I don't think he's tried at all to root out the scum.


Gonna finish my re-read and Exilon's responses that I didn't get around to before Quintastic's "I think you're a townie, but I'm going to lynch you anyways" hammer.
But those posts by Mustilicor and Exilon in twilight seem really scummy to me.

[Civil Scum]

Doh, it was unexpected, hence the reaction. I think you need to do a re-read. Mustilicor asked if someone had any objections, I said I had one: I wanted to end that discussion with you.

Wow, okay, so the two posts before that you did mention this desire of yours.

Sorry I guess for not deprehending this properly from a following post which ended with this:

Civil had stated he was okay with the lynch, but I would have liked to hear his say before the twilight... Oh, well.

Which certainly reads as missing the pronoun/preposition '...his say on it' which would be '...his say on the lynch'. I suppose it could be a language difference, but when you mention me talking about the lynch and then repeat something similar, it's generally understood that there you are also talking about that group of thoughts (say about the lynch) not what I would have to say about our discussion.

Though I didn't have a chance to post, and Quintastic was wrong that play-style is a useless discussion, especially when it's not just about play-style.


And Mustilicor, as well, I didn't notice that it was a SIMUL so your explanation holds for that first quote, but you do talk with a very similar sentiment in subsequent posts.

...Civil scum, you're taking my 'nooo' out of context. I objected to Quintastic hammering like that, but that wasn't what that particular post was about - it was playfully being exasperated there was something I needed to wait on. Quintastic posted at the same time as me and I hadn't seen his hammer at that point. Pay attention and please do not misquote me in the future.

Something which this explanation does not cover. In fact, you're basically misrepresenting my mistake of not noticing the times of a SIMUL as a defense of what I am saying, when it doesn't entirely.

I still think it's a valid point with your "fretting" posts, though obviously not with the first post.

And Exilon, I'm not sure I believe that your 'NOOOOO' was about getting a reply from me to your post, and not about the hammer of Andrius.

I've been building a case since last day on someone.

Really, was that before or after I called you out for not being serious about any of your suspects?

[Civil's] focus on Exilon disturbs me a little consider Exilon is the only strong town read I've had all game

That's all well and good. But both you and Exilon seem to be riding Samp's heels already D-3, and he's my strongest town read.

Asking for the claim now, when it was pretty simple to assume there isn't a cop, does give the appearance of trying to score a few townie-points. But as a single thing, and not a gross pattern or tendency of his this game, I don't think it says a whole lot.

The reason I point it out is because I have a hard time understanding going with an evidenceless gut vote in light of a slip-up that took being challenged twice to get an explanation satisfactory at face value.

I could see with your other point, that Samp would feel he had been wrong 3 times, if he at all went to operating under Quintastic=Doctor. That apparent trouble he had with Antifinity's dismal hopes for a successful lynch is still bothersome, as he does turn around and accept Antifinity's 1-scum explanation a super-mega easily.

It's not just that Antifinity's explanation is satisfactory at face value, it's that he didn't answer with the typical scum motives: dishonestly avoiding suspicion or flinging it back at someone else. Instead Anti accepted it, which is usually the last thing scum wants to do.

It was satisfactorily ridiculous. I have to say again, that those "motive's", more accurately->inclinations, are more personality based than alignment based. I think I had offered this opinion of mine earlier as well. Sure he accepted that he had made a mental error, but it would have been difficult to deny. You really expected him as scum to go, "Nuh-uuuh!"? What he did do was accept it and then try to answer it. I don't think that goes very far in this case saying if the explanation is a lie or not.

Decent observations raised about Samp, but his early play still sounds pretty solid to me, and compared to Exilon's 2-day fluff-game, Antifinity's fumbling, and your questionable twilight behavior...yeah, right now compared to that, nevermind.

It obviously made the scum think it was now unclear who Quintastic (more on Quintastic's Case later) was going to protect, which IS why he would be the smartest and safest Noght kill out of everyone else.

Anyone feel free to call WIFOM on this, but doesn't the above point from Exilon sort of clear Mustilicor? Or do you think it's possible that Exilon is mentioning this for that purpose?

I am totally lost at this point.

All things considered, this is a reasonable place for me to believe you are at. Though, as perhaps Mustilicor can understand, I'm fairly uneasy that you are the third person 'suspicious' of Samp. 3 total, and you are the third.

Exilon, I am assuming Samp is your case you mentioned.

Yeah, because I wasn’t the one who posted half a page of reasoning/theory to vote Andrius without any kind of reasoned counter-argument. You were. /sarcasm

You're right, I posted more than a half page with an FoS. Citing things like his hammering doubt, his list of reasoning which wasn't really made up of reasons to think MMM was scum, and his apparent change in pllay-style overnight.

I'll freely admit that the hammer may have tipped me off or pulled me in that direction. I'm not about to deny that, nor should there be any reason for me to. Yet you're saying that the hammer wasn't a main reason for you looking at Andrius. Which is a pretty ridiculous thing to say.

I was going to discuss your answers here, many of which I have issues with and aren't prepared to accept, but this post has already taken a while, and I'm due at work shortly. But I'll finish up when I get home.

[Civil Scum]

I've had to rethink that actually.

I think it's reasonable to believe that the sudden uncertainty about who Quintastic would protect was a factor in the scum's decision to kill him. None of us even can be certain of how serious Quintatsic was, and that he wasn't just setting up a "surprise" 2nd protection of MUstilicor. They obviously knew right away whether or not there was a cop, and if there was they would have just RB'd Quintastic and killed someone else (otherwise they'd be forfeting a chance to kill the cop). With Quintastic turning on Mustilicor, and that getting mixed up, the uncertainty about his protection would make Quintastic a more likely target for the NK than before.

I was thinking it meant that Mustilicor is a townie, otherwise why would the scum be worried about it that way. Although after considering it further, it equally can mean that Mustilicor was a scum who couldn't reliably expect Quintastic to protect her again either.

I think it was a good observation by Exilon, and it could also just be him "innocently" talking about exactly what he and his partner had been thinking.

[Civil Scum]

I had to downgrade the twilight comments by Mustilicor and Exilon. Because I mistook the timing and nature of the cries of 'Nooo', it's not really "bat-shit crazy" anymore. I've downgraded the impression to "unseemly".

Not sure I follow. Look at my posts immediately after the hammer. First is the simul (which has no reason to be capslocked considering it is not an acronym, mister...!), la la la don't even notice the hammer at this point. Then I notice and basically say 'um that was pretty weird considering Exilon just asked me to wait.' Then I realize maybe I was wrong about Exilon's request to lengthen the day, and sort of take part of my objection back. Then I begin openly doubting myself because no matter how many times I roll it over in my mind, I just can't think of a good town reason for Quintastic to have done this. And since as far as scum reasoning goes, bussing a teammate while saying you don't suspect them would be stupidly ineffective, so it led to the possibility that he was scum reasoning trying to get a town kill over with to make sure it went through. So yeah, my evaluation of situation was very much thrown into doubt by that hammer.

Although, this is actually a really good answer ^^

If you're worried about getting "auto-lynched" then wouldn't it be to your advantage to have more knowledge come out today, rather than going into tomorrow with a death sentence?

This was a good point Antifinity made in twilight. I thought it was likely that Quintastic would survive, either as scum or townie. His constant concern, which he must have said 5 times, that the scum would leave him alive seemed kind of suspicious to me as well, as if he were overcompensating, or consistently re-convering his bases as he knew he would survive. Which is part of the reason I think his twilight argument with Mustilicor factored into his selection for a night kill and part of the reason I think Mustilicor's explanation of her 'fretting' the hammer of her suspect is the truth.

Exilon, of course, is maintaining that his fretting was about our discussion getting cut short, not about the hammer, despite the fact that his post reads like the other way around.

Excuse me? Furthering my arguments? There hasn’t been a need to further any of my arguments as they are mostly uncountered…

Yes, excuse you. There has also never been a need for you to switch votes apparently. When your arguments aren't being furthered, or you are not adding to them, it's highly suspect that NOTHING else that comes along that day makes you question your earlier suspicions, or your vote, or makes you think that your vote might be better placed somewhere else. So your cases/reads/suspicions don't appear to change, develop, grow, or get stronger over time, they just are what they are and nothing that happens over the course of the day causes you to doubt them, get fired up about them, or change them. What I mean is that, while you comment and talk about new developments, they never seem to affect your voting or your play in any considerbale way.

And just because a reason to vote someone isn't countered (not all of them can be btw), doesn't mean that better reasons don't come along to vote someone else. Which is what you appear to be suggesting...which happens to be complete bull shit.

I don’t feel the need to make other people vote or convince them to vote as I did – they will do if their own reasoning goes that way and if they agree with me.

Here's the deal, here's why it's so scummy. You SHOULD want to convince other people. If you actually believe someone is scum, the most common and natural behavior is to want other people to vote them as well. I mean that practically goes without saying.

Add to that, that your uncountered reasoning is anything but dead-lock, and a lot of it (relating to Andrius) was theory that only existed in your head (and which we now know was incorrect. My thoughts on the matter were also incorrect, but they were atleast based on actual things in Andrius's play), so if you don't feel the need to add all you can to it, and you don't feel the need to explain it to other people and convince them of it, and you're not willing to give up on your reasons when better, or simply -other, ones are presented, then you've basically admitted that you are not scum-hunting.

I usually point out what I found wrong, or what I have been looking out for, and see if there’s anything to be said about it. Usually no one adds much to it so it kinda seems to be laid off in a corner.

And here you are just describing how you've played, and I'm telling ya, it's scummy.

You cannot expect words to be completely clear and non-ambiguous.

Obviously. And you can't have a definite graduation between terms, but you can say things like "slightly-suspicious", "super-scummy" or anything else. My problem was not that you don't have some exact system for assigning suspicion levels to different words, and to different topicsw in the game thus far, my problem was with other words (that after pressed to explain how you felt about someone) you explained that tthese words (odd, strange, etc) also mean suspicious. Sometimes they do... other times they don't. Which allows you to explain them at a later time in whatever way will benefit you, and like I've said before, trying to determine where you stand on different players, and how you actually feel about different things and peiople's arguments is INCREDIBLY difficult to pin down when reading your ISO. Althgouh, we can be fairly certain that your thoughts about Andrius at the start of D-2 were stronger in suspicion than you had about everything else that anyone said or did for the rest of the day :/

On the top of my head is this hat. In this hat there are 2 notes: one saying “reread” and the other saying the following:
“As for Antifinity, read below the next quote. As for Andrius, I provided a reasoning / argumentation which has stood untouched up to now, and he still seems the best lynch to me, which makes me maintain my vote on him. That does not mean I can’t stop paying attention to all other players; and I have been faithful to this.”

First note: I want the reasons you supplied for this earlier to match, without you having to go back and look. It wasn't about my rereading. And whatever you had said then anyways, doesn't in my mind excuse you from only voting for two people. Especially the absent player, and McGriddles, who you said you were going to unvote soon, after he gave his up-to-speed analysis. Which still means that you had no good reason to still have your vote there at that point.

And it's nice that you didn't do it off the top of your head.

I’m sorry, but I am indeed thinking about it in another way. When I said the trio, I was referring to the possible pairings that were inside the three: Samp! / Andrius , Samp! / Quintastic , and Quintastic / Andrius. Andrius is one of the most recurring and probable links, (even outside that trio) and that is why my vote resides there.

This one still really bothers me. You said the trio you were most suspicious of, and then right after that you say you're not really suspicious of Quintastic. The trio was who was being talked about primarily, but it's still comprised of 3 individual players. Even if you're talking pairings, I don't see why you would most "keen" on a pairing which included someone you weren't suspicious of.

I mean that you sometimes state things that seem to mean I am doing “this” or “that” to make the town proceed in a certain way.

True. When I think someone's scum, I want the town to lynch them.

[Civil Scum]

I'm assuming he misread and misanswered. AGAIN.

Yeah, I thought he was talking about me, or trying to accuse me of that.

Hmm, I hope you're insinuating that invalidates everything else I've said.

[Civil Scum]

Why bother yanking the reins on that MMM lynch like he did instead of just lying low while it happened and protest afterwards? He could have gotten away with that easily, I think.

This is true. BUT:

1) He got away with it either way. As in, he didn't get much attention after calling for the unvotes and asking for everyone to slow down, not to hammer, etc. Antifinity seems to have had the biggest problem with it.

2) Stallin' Defense (wiki):
"The general form of the Stallin' Defense is "a player who attempts to stall a major wagon or a lynch, especially by calling for additional discussion, and especially on a wagon that led or will clearly lead to a lynch, is very probably scum."

EDIT: Further investigation has indicated to Tarhalindur that this is a null tell and should not be trusted."

Regardless that it's not believed that his can be trusted anymore, that's not the point. My point is there is skill to playing as scum, knowing who to go after and when, and when to sound like a concerned townie, etc. You can't deny that there is the appeal of townie cred for scums to do things that run completely opposite to their own interests. If a scum openly and consistently played with only their own interests in mind, they would be easy to spot.

3) He talks about trying to slow the lynch down for about 3 posts, but ends with this one, which I have already discussed briefly.

But I haven’t come to much of a conclusion..., I have resigned myself to the fact that, even with more information, nothing will happen that will majorly tip the scales.

Still, they are tipped in one particular direction… And, interestingly enough (or ironically), everyone seems them tipped in that same direction.

Samp! does give some fair reasoning, and there isn’t much one can say about his arguments, even if they’re mostly based on counter-questioning. Truth be told, there’s some instances where a simple defense would have sufficed and instead Samp! counter-attacks. (It is not a truly bad thing, though. After all, the more information, the better and asking questions is the ‘only real way to get answers’). MMM, on the other hand, misunderstands some things that have been said, the worst one being the reason why Samp! voted for him even though it had been stated before. In fact, this seems to be the trigger for most of the discussion between them, and it wasn’t until Page 4-5 that Samp! finally explained it in a way that MMM was able to understand. There were still one or two lingering questions, and then MMM stated he was coming off of Samp!, and now leaning on Andrius; because he has been doing some bandwagoning.

He doesn't take a strong stance on the lynch, or either of its canidates, but you can see he very weakly/cautiously gives support to an MMM lynch over a Samp lynch.


If I'm right in thinking that Samp is a townie, then both scums are leaning that way, and the one of you that is town is already going along for the ride. Although Antifinity said he was most suspicious of Samp, and then immediately after said he wasn't really suspicious of him "anymore". Wtf?

And if Samp thinks you and Antifinity are townies, then he must suspect that the scum are me and Exilon. Though, I haven't heard him talk about this yet D-3.

[Civil Scum]

What I mean is that, if Person A had been instrumental in getting Person B lynched when it wasn't necessary, and when Person B was not in previous danger, and Person B flips scum. Then it's more likely than not that Person A was not bussing (unless it's too obvious that they knew where to look or were working on thread-bare evidence).

But just because Person A had ways of playing that better served his scummy purposes, in any number of situiations, doesn't mean that he would have played that way if he were scum. It would get to the point where they were playign a bad game just becuase they were so obviously playing against the town's interest.

[Civil Scum]

In this instance, the "scummy purpose/interest" of laying low and not attracting attention, which I think Exilon had managed to do by other means.

[Civil Scum]

Well, I'm pretty sure it's Exilon and Mustilicor. It's beyond amazing to me that no one can see the blatant errors in Exilon's last post. And you're going to talk about mis-quoting?!

The Andrius lynch was a "speedy" lynch?! A little out of touch with reality it appears.

You'd think that someone who solidly and consistently suspected someone for that long would have been antsy, impatient, and anxious to have the lynch. That is, if they were actually suspicious of the person you would expect them to feel like that.

Speedy lynch? Haha God, you have got to be kidding me.

It'd be even more fuckin amazing for no one to see anything wrong in there, if one other player wasn't simply ignore them XD

Good lord, Exilon. XD Good stuff; thanks for requesting the expansion on that answer by CS. I kept forgetting to do that.

So, you both go after Samp. I raise what I think are several valid points concerning Exilon, Mustilicor feigns agreement, re-reads and says she 'just can't see it', citing one thing you didn't do that a scum -could- have, then she compeltely backs your attack on me while ignoring all of it's faults.

You two couldn't be working better together if you tried!

I'm sure you're itching for a reply Exilon. Should have it in a day. Probably won't take me to long since it's so obvious to me now.

[Civil Scum]

Post up soon.

Is everyone waiting for me and Exilon?

Samp, don't you think we're both scum? And we're obviously cannabalizing?

[Civil Scum]

Ummm, because you've said recently that you don't think Mustilicor is scum, and you still believe Antifinity is noob-town.

That doesn't leave a whole lot of other options, unless you're not actually thinking about it.

[Civil Scum]

The Andrius lynch was a "speedy" lynch?! A little out of touch with reality it appears.

You'd think that someone who solidly and consistently suspected someone for that long would have been antsy, impatient, and anxious to have the lynch.

I'll stand by this quote until the day I die. You would never expect someone who had suspected someone for that long to not get impatient, and to have ANY sort of problem with them finally getting lynched.

This is so obvious to me, I'm really not understanding how no one else gets it.

And it should have been obvious to you, Exilon, which lynch I was referring to, as I quoted "speedy" and you were the one who called Andrius's lynch speedy right before that.

You knew which lynch I was referring to, so why even say that?

My nooo was about not getting the reply and because of the speedy lynch.

Again we have you admitting that you 'mock-called off' a lynch you'd wanted the entire day.

When I said “I would have liked to hear his say…” I was referring to both answers: the one to my post, and what you had to say about Andrius being at L1. Yes, you can deprehend that I was talking about your say to the lynch, and I was; and you can also deprehend, indirectly because it had already been stated, that I would have liked to hear your response.

This is useless. Though it makes me wonder, was one more important to you than the other? Which was more important, or bothered you more? Not hearing from me about either thing, or Quintastic's hammer-vote?

I just learned about breadcrumbing the other day =D When I did that post about Samp!, you hadn’t said anything yet, and funny thing is I actually predicted you would say that.

Funny thing is? I thought it was pretty obvious, after the bit you quoted of yourself below this, that Samp was who your case was about. There was nothing to predict, you essentially already revealed it.

The real funny thing is you try to cast sideways doubt on my posts and intentions about 3 times in this one post. For no other purpose than trying to make me look bad or damage my credibility, without actually referencing anything I've done that's scummy.

Not sure why you'd feel the need to do that.

So, and as to avoid any accusations directed at me (“now that’s convenient, you say you have a case on someone and then you can just choose it as you seem fit”)

Again, I thought I was just stating the obvious. I never meant to use it in the form of this type of accusation. Although it's nice to see you on your heels, even if you're trying real hard to pretend that you are not.

Really, was that before or after I called you out for not being serious about any of your suspects?

Funny how you manage to imply on this sentence that I wasn’t being serious about my suspicions. I’ll just leave that to be noted.

I would hope that I could manage to imply something I've been stating directly.

Funny to see you try to paint it otherwise. It's tough to insinuate/imply something that you've said outright like 4 times.

Yes, as it should be obvious now, my case is on you.

Really, this is great. But didn't you say it was about Samp, and weren't you just talking about how you breadcrumbed your wanting to make a case on him?

Alright, but I can understand why you would try to make a case on me as well, now anyways.

specially considering your play (basically some of the things you tell me and base your fos on me for can be applied to you as well).

Way to toss this out there and never elaborate on it.

My suspicions, theories and the like did grow, and I do remember stating at several points why Andrius WAS STILL on the top of the list. Of course better reasons could come and make me change my vote, but in Day 2 (and to a lesser degree) day 1, they ended up not coming.

Like Antifinity is too scummy to be scum... after you post twice calling him scummy, even in one of those posts going so far as to tell him 'he's burying himself with his own words.'

I do know that you provided reasoning about it, but what I am saying is that I don't think the theories and reasoning you claimed to have behind your voting
for Andrius were good enough to exclude the possibility in your mind of anyone else being "vote-worthy." I don't "know" if you were actually comparing people's scumminess and trying to make the right decision. And I don't think you were.

Civil Scum: What was your reasoning for moving your vote? I can't say I have issues with the place you put it, but the way you did it seems peculiar.

I wanted to lynch either Andrius or Antifinity, but was a little expecting Quintastic to survive the night.

I was half-pulling a hammer gambit (like Quintastic's), and also wanted to see if Quintastic would notice that, and how he would react to it. It wasn't exactly clear what Quintastic was thinking, though he really wanted Antifinity dead, that much we know! haha

Now that isn’t a very nice thing to say, besides being wrong. You bring up your perspective, with the objective of dismissing my own reasoning as “not good enough”. “based on actual things on Andrius’ play”? Let’s see here: we were both wrong. My reasoning was based mainly on McGridle’s NK (which didn’t, by any means, exist only on my head. And if you think so, why is it that your only comment to it was “pretty involved theory” and “mostly WIFOM”, if I recall correctly. If you believed it meant nothing at all, why didn’t you say so right away?). Your reasoning was based on several things you found suspicious in Andrius’ play – but even those can be seen from a townie point of view now that he is dead; therefore, it also means there was theory-constructing involved, just like me. In both cases, the theories are based on someone’s possible scum-play.

This was mostly in response to your sarcastic comment about me not posting reasoning about my vote for Andrius, which wasn't even true(!), and you posting a half/page for yours. Which atleast here, you admit was largely theoretical. And that seems to be better evidence than anything else that came along (your words, not mine).

In both cases, the theories are based on someone’s possible scum-play.

I still think there is a clear difference.

Usually people play by pointing out what they found wrong in other people’s posts. I fail to see how a thing everyone does can be seen as scummy.

Interesting contention... you play exactly how everyone else plays? I'll just note this one and move on.

In an older post when I first asked you about this, you "clarify" that you didn't mean all three of those people individually.

And correct you I shall. I said “since the day began, I have been more keen on the following trio”, not only on each one of them individually

After which, I tell you how ridiculous it is to include someone you don't suspect individually in a 'likely scum pairing'.

And now you've changed it again:

“Since the beginning of the day, I have been more keen on the following trio”
I don’t think there’s anything else I need to add.

So you were talking about past suspicions? That's what you're saying now. That this was totally and completely about past suspicions at that point?
I'd like to add that "since" can indicate "up to and including now". But not if you say it doesn't.

And by misanswering the statement, you evaded to actually comment on it.

The statement, when read correctly, didn't really warrant commenting.

And it's pretty obvious that I did misread that part of the post. I'm not sure how that equates to "evasion." In fact, I'm sure it doesn't.

And one of the times I "misanswered", it was because you had misunderstood what I was saying before that.

So, ACTUALLY, my question was avoided. Are you trying to suggest that everything else I've said is invalid because I've been confused about what you were saying a couple times?

Oh boy, the rest of this post is such garbage. Jeez.

Oh, so you’re relying on the wiki now? And to quote a “null” tell? Well, then:

It is absolutely precisely clear what I was using this for. And my argument holds I believe. Mustilicor gave one example of something you wouldn't have done as scum. I already argued this effectively imo, that that one thing should in no way clear you in Mustilicor's mind. Referencing this tell was to argue that. I never suggested that you were scum on the basis of this tell. And the fact that it's null is immaterial, it wasn't always null, and it's a clear (and clearly documented) instance of scum doing things which apparently go against their overall interests. I did not intend to "use" this tell in a case against you. Just to argue why it was so stupid for Mustilicor to claim that your actions around the MMM wagon cleared you of being scum.

Way to MIS-QUOTE me!

And nice to see you on your heels again. When you read my posts directed at Mustilicor, I think it's rather clear that I'm not calling you scum for that wiki-tell. Sorry if you read it like that...

I’m interpreting that mis-quoting is when you quote something and answer it wrongly (thus having mis-quoted).

Well, interpret it any way you want I guess, but you're compeltely off base/wrong. You interpreted it exaclty so it would serve the purposes of your following argument. Which isn't good Exilon. Not good.

Here's the dead give away for the definition, "Only scum should need to provide false evidence.”

Meaning that it's about knowingly changing what you've quoted (or omitting or doctoring the quotes) to make something that doesn't exist in the way you've presented it. In other words, "mis-quoting" has to be an action that creates "false evidence."

Your interpretation makes no sense.

I will admit that I rely more heavily on memory when playing this game than on re-reading, and sometimes remember things incorrectly, but that's not "mis-quoting" someone. If I'm paraphrasing or quoting someone, I usually make sure to have it correct.

And if I haven't done it heinously or insidiously, I fail to see how it's a scum tell at all.

Anyway, I shouldn’t need to fish up instances when these two occur on your play, since they have already been addressed by at least me and Mustilicor.

You totally should, and then everyone would see that they don't match up to the wiki-scum tell you're supposedly accusing me of after changing it.

Am I really the only goddamn person here who thought that was f-in stupid?

Um, "those two". Are you referring to some other aspect of your invented scum-tell? Or are you talking about this one: “Deliberately avoiding/ giving half-answers to queries from other players.”

Because neither of you, now or in the past, have given any examples of me deliberately avoiding anything. In other words, THIS IS YOU FABRICATING EVIDENCE.

He doesn't take a strong stance on the lynch, or either of its canidates, but you can see he very weakly/cautiously gives support to an MMM lynch over a Samp lynch.

Really? By saying “the scales are tipped in MMM’s direction”?

To correct, you didn't actually say his name in the section I quoted, it had to be inferred from a knowledge of our game

I didn’t realize exposing my thought process and analysis on an important process Day 1 was saying “I am all for lynching MMM today”. Which I didn’t say, or even imply.

I know, I didn't say that you said that.

And Day 2, when you questioned me about that, I said, by quoting MMM himself “Are you going to lynch me for that 10% today?”. My answer still stands: no. Not by 10%.

It's pretty obvious that's not what I said at all. Another fine mis-quote. Would you like to talk about that wiki-tell some more?



I was leaning towards Exilon/Antifinity, but after D-3 so far I stand pretty confidently by this quote as well.

So, you both go after Samp. I raise what I think are several valid points concerning Exilon, Mustilicor feigns agreement, re-reads and says she 'just can't see it', citing one thing you didn't do that a scum -could- have, then she compeltely backs your attack on me while ignoring all of it's faults.

You two couldn't be working better together if you tried!

You can keep trying to paint me scummy, or keep debating, or trying to argue away my concerns, but I still see you as saying you were keen on Quintastic in a pairing when you weren't suspicious of him.

I also think your contradiction of Samp's is hog-wash, but I'll save that for a different post if neccesary; you already seem to be backing off from it.

I almost think I should just vote right now.

[Civil Scum]

Mis-quoting is when you claim that someone said something when they didn't.

You "mis-quote" or incorrectly quote them.

Which could be an innocent mistake, although it's not quite so innocent when you make absurdedly false claims about somehting you're being accused off, to defeat the accusation. That's akin to straw-manning.

Like when Exilon said that I had said (mis-quote) he was 'all for an MMM lynch', to side-step my actual point. (strawman)

[Civil Scum]

Samp: So I went to find the post where you obviously said this...and I actually had read (and remembered) you saying that you

didn't

think Mustilicor was scum because she was bitter about being suspected. Or that you thought her's was a townie-type reaction to being suspected. Not the COMPLETE opposite of that.

To be honest, I've been taking pain medication on 4-hour intervals for about a week straight.

Incidentally, I have to agree with you!

[Civil Scum]

Lordy Exilon, what did you do!?

[Civil Scum]

I don't have the time this moment to give my thoughts on this properly. But for the time being, and judging by that post, I am willing to entertain the idea that there is a GREAT deal of mis-interpretation going on between us.

[Civil Scum]

However I just can't see any scum-pairing that doesn't include Mustilicor. So if someone has any reason I shouldn't vote her, best get it out now.

I was going to say atleast wait for her to defend herself.

I like Mustilcor more as a pair for Exilon, so I'm kind of hesitant to vote for anyone until I straighten it out in my head.

It should be clear that it's not me and Exilon though, since we had ample opportunity to quicklynch between 481 and 484.

Note, 'me AND Exilon". It can still be one of you with one of either Mustilicor or Antifinity.

[Civil Scum]

His silence on the iso point after specifically asking how to do it is worth noting though.

This was a good point.

Exilon made a good point as well about Antifinity and his moments of Clarity.

I'm a little behind, but I think it's possible that scum voted for scum first, Antifinity talked breifly about this?

[Civil Scum]

Convinced Exilon is scum and leaping desperately for something to latch onto?

Hm, personally I didn't think I was being desperate. I thought I had some very valid points, but some of the things I thought I was looking at weren't there. And the times I've thought he changed what he was saying, he was more adding to what he said in a way that is actually pretty consistent.

Exilon still makes me uncomfortable on a few things, but at this point with what's going on, responding and trying again to pick apart his last post might just be distracting for us, and BAD if I am wrong about that suspicion.

The other possibility of course being reaching to paint a case that he knows isn't there.

So regardless of if you'd be 'willing to vote me', which is how I am going to read you being unsure of my case on Exilon (not sure I would call it a case, maybe a "hunt"), or if you think I look the scummier or the townier for our interactions, in either case you think I'm reaching for dust, or desperate to have him lynched.

I don't think that Exilon is innocent of not throwing stuff in there that was fluffy, didn't exist, over the top, or 'desperate' or weak in that sense.

Now, was that your overall impression of it? Or were there specific points of mine that you thought I was reaching on, sounded desperate, or that you disagreed with?


It's fairly obvious by now that one of Antifinity and Mustilicor is scum. Oh boy, the tough calls!

I'm gonna take a look through Antifinity' ISO, which should be a short jaunt, and see if I can come up with anything.

I did the iso thing on Civil Scum and Exilon, but couldn't find anything interesting that hadn't already been brought up.

Commenting and giving your thoughts on things that have already come up is good, not bad. You have always this game had little problem doing it when it was you we were talking about.

[Civil Scum]

I just went off the meds two days ago, wisdom teeth
On both counts haha

Willing to vote you..? Why would you read it like that?

Becasue shortly thereafter you voted for Antifinity. It was a half-joke about a serious line of questioning.

I want to believe your defense of Exilon was well-intended, because it will make MY decision easier ^^ -It is nice to see you actually name some of the problems you had with things I was after him for.

Mustilicor has a considerable amount of depth and thought behind her posting. If she played like this her first game as scum then I'm going to have to hand it to her.

Exilon also has quite a bit of depth in his thoughts, but he seems to drift a lot more than Mustilicor and is more often confused about what he's talking about.

Antifinity's game has been a little strange/lurkish/bare with excuses and explanations I haven't really liked.

With Exilon going limited access, I feel like I should vote soon. If Exilon (though he's saying that Antifinity is again 'itching' him) is the only person to not vote, I think that looks really bad if Antifinity=scum. Though Samp could easily be aware of this with the number of games he's read and cast his vote before Exilon, knowing he's going to be setting him up to take the fall D-4.

Then again, a re-read after a scum flip can be quite illuminating, and we obviously have Samp's gut-read defenses of Antifinity throughout this game. With everyone starting to lean that way (including Samp, apparently on statistical evidence, despite being his number 1 defender prior to this), I think that bussing is more likely than the remaining town all leaning towards Antifinity (which is a losing scenario anyways).

[Civil Scum]

Of course by mentioning that I may have created incentive for either scum or town to vote sooner than the other, and may have just WIFOM'd the whole thing.

I think there's going to be cases to be made for both Anti/Exilon and Anti/Samp.

Exilon is apparently gravitating that way now that Antifinity is again a very serious topic of discussion.

Anyways, I'm going to work until late tonight, and I want to vote...

So

vote: Antifinity

I doubt that anything he is going to say in his defense will change my mind on this.

[Civil Scum]

It proves I'm definitely not scum with you, CS, or Exilon; since in any of those cases I would hammer.

Obviously one possibility excluded from this.

No hammer here.

I should hope you can explain why. I have a pretty good

As for Civil and Anti (the ones who are left), there isn't much I can find that gives them any "townie-ness"

I have been trying to lynch scum, I just havn't done the most successfuly job of it this game :/

Anyways, unless either Exilon or Samp is stalling, I know me and Mustilicor are right. So, when you please.

[Civil Scum]

Samp, you're sticking back to your "guns" now??!

As town, realizing the statistics actually were NOT on [Samp's] side shouldn't have been an 'ugh' moment, but a 'hmm' one [for him].

QFT

...that when SAMP mentioned he was going to go search for those statistics, he was assuming he was correct. He trapped himself into presenting them before he realized they wouldn't support his case.

Oh Snap XD

I would accept the explanation from him that he was going to see if Exilon would withhold his vote thinking that he wouldn't have to bus his partner if Samp wouldn't vote.

I like bringing stuff like that up, cause now he could say, "That's exactly what I was doing!"


Mustilicor has sounded very believable, and her reasoning about scum reads sounds pretty realistic/organic. The only two things I had against her was her defense of Exilon, which I didn't like, but she explained it much better when pressed. And the other thing was her twilight back and forth with Quintastic,, which I partly missed posting times on, and partly misunderstood what she she didn't like about Quintastic's hammer. She also explained that to my satisfaction.

Which again, for me, meant that if Antifinity wasn't scum then we were in a losing scenario anyways, also, THE GAME'S NOT OVER.

I think Anti/Samp sounds way better now than Anti/Exilon, though expecting Mustilicor to die tonight, I still expect a tough decision.

Maybe one of us should double check those games? Although he wouldn't have misrepresented or tweaked the statistics in a way that would trap himself,. he would have changed them the other way. I agree it's more likely that he got into doing and then went "ughh crap." Which also makes a lot of sense that he absolutely would not want Antifinity lynched at this point considering all of Samp's past defenses of him. Primarily on "gut" and "scum tendencies" alone.

[Civil Scum]

SIMUL:

Probably because it still lacked reasonable grounds for you to continue proffessing Antifinity's townie-ness.

[Civil Scum]

Out of "curiosity", how the world does you not being scum with the three of us say anything about whether or not Antifinity is scum.

[Civil Scum]

I would think one's declaration that they're not hammering somebody would be based around that person's alignment, so your "explanation" is not an explanation of that.

Uh...Lot's of things happened.

Exilon has a vote now too from Antifinity, everyone's posted and the games not over, who's the common link here?

It's rather amusing to watch you try and defend yourself and Antifinity as he goes down in flames.

[Civil Scum]

Whoop, Whoop! Mustilcor ftw *high five*

Although I feel they had a slight unfair advantage with Civil Scum being the IC,

I swear I tried not to X|

I will say that I've only once seen an IC that was not scum survive N-2 once and that was because I was planning to get the lynched ^^

Good game, a couple things to note, corrections of myself too.

I was really very impressed by both of you, Mustilicor and Exilon.

[Civil Scum]

Had a post and lost it

:,(

[Civil Scum]

Haha Musti, I thought at first that you just got impatient and were like "Come on! Let's lynch someone, screw it, I'm voting" but it was really well played.

I wasn't really intending to get Samp to vote, I thought that trying to get him to do that openly would sorta contradict how I was going after him at the end there (though that's what the "common link" thing was about), but I'm glad that he did! haha quite a relief. I was hoping to provoke a response from Samp that Exilon wouldn't like, any type of response in that direction.

I wasn't ever going to vote you though I was grouping you in with my case on Exilon because I thought being paired with you like that might reinforce Musti=town for him, even if only subconciously.

You did good fending me off Exilon! I tried to get you lynched, and tried, and tried, and then tried some more! But you held your ground solidly.

Samp- I tried buddying you pretty hard D-2, that's why you were my top town read You were 100% right about Antifinity the whole game. That was actually a little frustrating.

Sorry you had to go early MMM.

[Civil Scum]

Oh, and reinforce Musti=town for Exilon, especially in the case that I was lynched. Which I thought might be a possibility early on D-3. And then going into D-4 I figured you would be confident about having Exilon's vote for the 3rd player.

Friendly/helpful suggestions for Antifinity?

Andrius too, you had some flashes of greatness

Really good/content heavy game!

[Civil Scum]

Oh, and there might have been a couple things I "white-lied" or just didn't bring up that I maybe should correct, but I have to go back and remember what they were.

[Civil Scum]

...don't forget that Quintastic's protection was unclear all in all...

Yeah, I think that actually worked out in our favor. It kinda mixed things up.

Quintastic, we believed your claim! hehe

Haha, I told Mustilicor that I was going to get Quintastic lynched, and then we ran him up to L-1 rather quickly.

Yeah, I thought it was really important to kill Quintastic for fear that you guys would start asking Mustilicor why the fuck she was still alive XD, having not gotten a single vote on her for two str8 days!

Zorblag? You said you had some comments?