Newbie 888 - Game Over!

[almightybob]

Hello

Reading through now.

[almightybob]

Mkay.

Such as Walrus right now, I feel like he's just lurking so I would prefer to change my vote to him but I believe my vote for the time being is good enough

Note - MT's "vote for the time being" was on Kyiv, "because she's the person posting above me".

the scum however I don't a clue on hower I do suspect Walrus has a chance of being scum

... eh?

if I think someone is the mafia I vote for them

How does this scan with the Walrus debacle?

I said I felt like he was lurking not that I was 100% sure.
[...]
I prefer to be sure about this things and find more about the current situation instead of changing my mind every few posts.
[...]
as I just said I wanted to be sure before I changed my vote.

My vote for Lastsuriver ws because I think he's scum, no, I am not 100% sure and I'm certain I never will be howvere I am sure enough to vote. It seems to me like you think my opinions and thoughts abotu this game are set in stone, when they're not.

So... you want to be 100% sure someone is lurking before you vote for them. But you vote for whoever you think is scum. But you don't need to be 100% sure someone is scum to vote for them, and you never will be 100% sure. But you thought Walrus had a good chance of being scum. But you didn't vote for him.

Vote: Magic Trainer

Also guys,

please

use the preview button to check your post before you submit it. If your quote tags are broken, it will be very obvious and you can fix it before posting.

[almightybob]

Some of us are still learning, including me since this is my first game, but that doesn't prevent from trying to find scum.

Agreed. Being a newbie doesn't excuse you from having to scumhunt.

Because I didn't know if he was lurking. If I would have voted for him I would have been voting him for a false reason. Which is why I felt it was better to wait and see if that reason turned out to be true. I voted for LS because I thought he was scum, in this scenario I actualy know my reasons as to why he's scum. In the Walrus scenario I do not know if my reason is true or false.

This is a better explanation, I see more where you're coming from now.


I also agree that L-1 is unnecessary this early in the game. L-1 is where you put someone when you want them to roleclaim. I wouldn't put someone at L-1 unless I was happy with them being that day's lynch. By all means state your inclination to vote for Medix or lay down a FoS so we all know where your vote

would

be, but better safe than sorry - I would like one of you to unvote Medix please.

[almightybob]

I don't like taking the steam out of a good bandwagon. Merely stating your caution, as well as others doing the same, is a good enough ward against any quicklynches. Medix is at L-2, I don't think an unvote is necessary, unless we see some form of defense or a better candidate.

Anyways:

FoS: Patriot

If he's at L-2 I'm fine with that. No need for more unvotes if that's the case.
And I see your point about steam, but if you let it steamroll on unchecked you get an accidental lynch. The fact that several people thought Medix was at L-1 when he wasn't is perfect illustration of how easy it is to lose track of the current votecount. In this case we counted one too high, but we could just have easily counted one too low and lynched him within 6 pages.

That's

why I don't like someone being at L-1 this early.

Anyway, the point is moot now, let's move on.

Mod, can we get an official votecount to set us straight please?

[almightybob]

almightybob, I know you just replaced in, but can you please pay a bit more attention to the thread? The explanation you found convincing had IMO already been given in post #109.

I still didn't fully follow 109. Now that I more clearly understand MT's position, looking back I can make more sense of it.

You were the only one who got confused about Medix' vote count. In post #123, Patriots clearly stated that Medix was currenly at L-2, and would be put on L-1 by Patriots if he didn't post a defense soon.

My humblest apologies, I saw this sentence:

By putting him to L-1 I am not ending D1. I know that random scum or newb could come in and lynch him, but I think of my vote as a little added pressure rather than the vote that "ended D1".

And took the use of present tense to indicate a current state of affairs.
Read the above sentence from Patriot again and tell me it doesn't say "I am currently voting for Medix, and I have just put him at L-1".

I don't like how hard some people are arguing against putting Medix at L-1 right now. Pressure to get someone to contribute works best when there is a significant chance of that player being lynched.

It's Page 6. We're barely a week in. There's no need to actually put him at L-1 this early. L-2 with others prepared to vote is plenty of pressure.
There's no way that, in 6 pages,

anyone

should be convinced enough to put Medix at L-1. We just haven't had enough information to give that strong a read on anyone yet.

L-1 is where you put someone when you want them to roleclaim. Wanting a claim is what you do when you're completely happy with that person being the lynch choice. It's essentially a double-check that you're not about to lynch a power role.

That last paragraph was more for the benefit of newbies, I assume our IC would know this. Indeed, the fact that our IC is the one I'm responding to raises my eyebrow.

_ ^
o.O


Medix, you're not impressing me here. Answer the questions please.

1) What did you mean by "I see RandomMaster didn't counter my vote, that makes me more suspicious."?
2) If your vote for him was purely random like you said, why did you expect him to counter it? It's not like there's much to defend against if you get chosen randomly.
3) What did you expect him to do while countering your vote? What reaction were you looking for?
4) Who do you think is likely to be scum just now?

If you are confused, go back to when it happened and reread to refresh your memory.

[almightybob]

3. I still can't really read a response, so I hope he gave a response that can be seen by another player to hit back.

That's not what I asked. I want you to tell me what response you were expecting from him.

4. I have no idea. I should wait to day 2 and keep more focus in the arguments.

That's not good enough. You can't sit out the rest of Day 1 and not contribute anything. 6 pages is not very much. If you're this lost, go back and reread the whole thread. It shouldn't take long.
Also, you seem very confident that you'll still be alive on Day 2. Why?

[almightybob]

Quick note:

and he tried to change the debate focus to me, which is worked

Pot, meet kettle.

[almightybob]

Sorry guys, had an unexpected and involuntary V/LA there. Back now, will get some thoughts up tomorrow.

[almightybob]

Also, please note that I disagree with you about when exactly you should ask for a claim. Asking for a claim shouldn't happen just because someone is at L-1. Asking for a claim should happen because someone is willing to place the hammer. Putting someone at L-1 is IMO just a step of added pressure over L-2. It shows a certain willingness to lynch, but it does not end the day and therefore doesn't have to be final.

I didn't mean that L-1 -> ask for claim. I meant that the way I see it, you decide who you want to lynch while they're still at L-2, by other people stating their intention to vote. Then you get the claim as a last-minute check once you're happy with that person being the lynch. Then if the claim isn't game-changing you go ahead with the lynch. I guess it's just different playstyles though, and it's not really a fruitful point of discussion anymore, so let's agree to disagree.

We have been asking him to come up with a case for a couple of pages now. When he finally does a bit of attacking, you attack him for attacking someone? Seriously?

I'm not attacking him for attacking someone. Were he to present a semi-impressive case on Magic Trainer, I'd be fine with that. But considering he's avoided my post 148 and instead just thrown out a better-than-random vote, it just seems like he's doing exactly what he accused MT of - desperately trying to shift the focus.

@Medix - please respond to post 148.

Bob, would you rather lynch Magic Trainer over Medix?

No. MT responded well to my questioning, I'm fairly happy with the answers he gave. He is lower on my scumlist than Medix.

If Medix does turn up to be scum I think it's a slight possibility his partner gave up on him and could be voting him out to clear his innocence. Is this something that has happened in other games that could be a scum tell?

Yes, it's a fairly common scum tactic called bussing. Its reliability as a scumtell varies in my eyes, but usually I look at the last few people on a scum wagon, as that's a common time for the scumbuddy to think "My partner's going to die anyway, I need to get on the wagon to look more Town". If someone wagonhops late with poor reasoning, they could well be bussing.

[almightybob]

Also, almightybob and PatriotsDynasty09, are you guys still sticking to your votes towards Magic Trainer and Kyiv respectively, and why?

Not really. As I said, he's answered my questions satisfactorily. My serious vote right now would be on Medix, but he's at L-1 and I'm not ready for the day to end. I just haven't bothered to unvote MT.

[almightybob]

Unvote

Vote: PatriotsDynasty09

I've said this before. You have been saying several times now that you wanted discussion to continue. However, you have made no attempt whatsoever to actually discuss anything. Rather, it seems that you have been waiting till you could hammer him without drawing too much suspicion. Especially you asking if we are ready to end the day is suspicious in this context.

Besides that, the feeling of the Medix wagon changed suddenly. Kunkstar's and RandomMasters replies to LastSurvivors questions imply that they want to lynch him not because they believe he is scum, but because they believe he is not helping the town. Lynching for that reason is, in my experience, the biggest cause of mislynches.

Correct me with I'm wrong, but in my eyes there's a contradiction here.
In the second paragraph you effectively say that lynching because someone is being unhelpful leads to mislynches - and yet you vote PD09 because he's being unhelpful by not contributing.

[almightybob]

Medix is Town.

What's the point of this? Everyone will say that about themselves. Why are you surprised that kunkstar responded sarcastically to such a pointless statement? I would have too.

You are incorrect when it comes to my reason for voting Patriots. I'm voting him because Patriots words don't match his behaviour. He says that he wants more discussion, but makes no attempts to actually get that discussion. This makes me believe that he is not sincere when he says that he wants more discussion. That is a different accusation then "you are being unhelpful".

So voting him for not making attempts to start discussion would be bad, but voting him for not making attempts to start discussion while trying to prompt it from others is good?

[almightybob]

RandomMaster has good points about Kunk in 242, although I think he and Gayle are making too big a deal of Kunk's reaction to Gayle's "Medix is Town" spoiler thing.
If you're going to claim, just do it. Don't softclaim Town without giving a real role (like where he later claims Townie), and don't put it in spoiler tags, and don't say it about your replacee.

I think the reason Kunk responded sarcastically is because all you said was "Medix is Town", as if we're supposed to just accept your word and move on. Especially the way you phrased it makes it seem as if you're talking about someone other than yourself.

I think I might iso a few people and see if I see anything.

[almightybob]

Thing is, I wasn't trying to claim at all.

Then why did you post it? And why did you then say-

But fact is he

[Medix]

is a townie that was put at L-1/[.quote]

Because the way you're phrasing it both times makes it seem like it's an evaluation of another player, not yourself. And the latter is a softclaim if ever there was one.
Did nobody else find this strange?

Personally I call that "look how town I am" though.

Ah OK, I think I see where you're coming from now.

Well the Medix wagon seems to be dying out since Gayle is contributing far more. In retrospect Medix may have just lacked knowledge of how to defend himself.
I'm going to iso PD and see what comes up, some good points have been raised against him.

[almightybob]

Gah, stupid tags. The one time I don't preview.

[almightybob]

Because I'm not as serious about the game as you seem to be.

I dislike any defence based on "it was a joke/not serious", it's a very weak cop-out.

It was not a softclaim. When I claim I'll make sure you know it is a claim.

Stating that your replacee is Town/a townie is a softclaim in my book. The fact that you didn't make it explicit - "I am a Vanilla Townie" style - is why it's a

soft

claim.

And it

was

another player.

You and Medix have the same role. By asserting that he is Town/a Townie, you are asserting that you are. For the purposes of asserting roles, Medix = Gayle, Flareonage = MT, almightybob = walrus helmet. Hence the softclaim problem.

A No Lynch is a horribly bad idea.

Agreed. Rereading PD just now, but off the top of my head I can't say he's struck me as hugely Town so I'll probably be OK with his lynch today.

[almightybob]

OK is there a summary of the case against PD somewhere? Because I'm not seeing anything hugely scummy from that iso. It could be because there isn't a lot there, but he doesn't seem particularly scummy from that.

[almightybob]

Good points have been raised against PD which I have yet to see an adequate defence of, and a no lynch is bad times for Town, so

Unvote, Vote: PatriotsDynasty09

.

I'm still going back looking for more scum, but I would much rather lynch PD than nobody.

[almightybob]

Mkay, here's how I see it:

If PD is telling the truth

- he has just rendered himself useless. If there is no Doc, he will be NKed tonight. If there is a Doc, that would mean the Mafia have a Roleblocker, and so he will be roleblocked and get no investigation results.

If PD is lying

- we might have a cop, who will be considering whether to counterclaim right now. Even though you know he is scum, I would say to that cop do not counterclaim.


Frankly, the claim seems implausible. To me the unprompted cop claim complete with OMGUS does seem like a scum reaction. Especially the no-lynch recommendation does not sit well with me.
A no-lynch is

emphatically

not the correct Town play, even if we 'choose' it. This is a matter of maths, not opinion.

Assuming all mislynches, D1 lynch

-
D1 mislynch (6 Townies, 2 scum left)
N1 kill (5 Townies, 2 scum left)
D2 mislynch (4 Townies, 2 scum left)
N2 kill (3 Townies, 2 scum left)
D3 we are in LyLo.

Assuming all mislynches, D1 no lynch

-
D1 no lynch (7 Townies, 2 scum left)
N1 kill (6 Townies, 2 scum left)
D2 mislynch (5 Townies, 2 scum left)
N2 kill (4 Townies, 2 scum left)
D3 we are in LyLo, but with one extra Townie which means a 33% chance of lynching correctly instead of a 40% chance in the above situation.

So you see, we gain nothing from no-lynching. In a Newbie game it can

only

hurt Town.

I'm not buying it. Vote stays.

[almightybob]

AB just is going with the flow with no reasons to input, just that he is agreeing with "all" of the reasons against me.

Only one person can be the first to point out a reason. Several people have raised good points against you. All I can do with issues already raised by someone else is either:
a) say "I agree with your points", or
b) reiterate them in my own words.

No doubt if I did the latter you would be accusing me of rewording someone else's argument to appear pro-Town.

My reasons for voting you at the time were as follows:
- A no-lynch is very bad for Town. It wastes an opportunity to kill a potential scum. I would frankly rather lynch anyone than no-one if it came to that.
- Several people have raised good points against you. You have not, in my opinion, defended against them sufficiently well to dispel the suspicion they raise.
- You are therefore a better-than-average choice for today's lynch, and as such I am happy to put you at L-2. This close to deadline, those reasons are good enough for me to be happy to hammer you.

[almightybob]

*No Comment*

Just hope we can win this one Kyiv.

Why Kyiv?
If you've just outed your scumbuddy and ruined this game I'm going to be incredibly pissed off.

[almightybob]

You vindictive little bastard.

[almightybob]

Too late kunk, the game was over as of post 309. I've PMed pablito letting him know PD has ruined the game.

[almightybob]

The mod didn't say that the game was over. He hasn't read my PM yet. But if a player outs their scumbuddy, the game would usually be abandoned.

There's two possible outcomes here.

1. PD is, in fact, scum. This means the game must be abandoned, whether or not Kyiv is his scumbuddy.
If Kyiv is his scumbuddy, we need to abandon for obvious reasons.
If Kyiv is not his scumbuddy, continuing the game would effectively leave Kyiv cleared as Town by the mod, which would be very unfair on the real scumbuddy. So we would need to abandon anyway in that situation.

2. PD is Town. Then he's just a twat, and we can continue.


But note that if PD is scum, he ruined this game the moment he outed himself and fingered Kyiv as his scumbuddy,

whether it was "a strategy" or not

. Whether or not he is telling the truth about that aspect, if he is scum we need to abandonthis game. So it's not me that ruined it in any way.



If PD is Town, then we can continue this game, apologies to the mod for breaking the Twilight-posting rule, and PD is the first person to make my personal blacklist.

[almightybob]

Vote: Kyiv

Hollow victory is hollow.

[almightybob]

Really? Even with the mod using phrases like "going through the motions"?

Fine, I'll play along.

Unvote

So Kyiv, tell us why PD didn't just name his scumbuddy to ruin the game.

If I am the cop, I investigated Gayle last night.

Keeping the scum guessing. Clever.

I do agree with the other part though. If we have a cop, they can be assured that we also have a living doc, and therefore if they have

any

useful result right now they should step forward. Even an innocent result on someone will narrow the pool of potential scum.

If I am the cop, I investigated Gayle last night.

[almightybob]

Apologies guys, I've been pretty distracted recently. Consider me

V/LA

for the next couple of days, as I won't have much time to spare for this game. Hopefully I should be a bit more sorted by then.

[almightybob]

Responding to prod.

Sorry guys, been bizzay with stuff as I mentioned in my last post. Apologies to you all, catching up now.

[almightybob]

MS's 349 makes good sense to me. I can't argue with his logic for narrowing down the suspect pool, and the "If I am the cop" thing was a clever way to test for cops without necessarily having to out a cop who didn't have any useful information.

The rest of the Town should note, though, that 349 is from MS's perspective. Obviously he does not include himself in his own potential-scum list, but that does not mean everyone else should eliminate him. I'm going to go back and reread his D1 play to see if anything pops out regarding PD09.

MS's triple-posted case in 350/351/352 I like very much. This is what Town need to be doing when you lynch scum - go back and comb the previous interactions for clues. It can often be much easier to spot a scumbuddy when you reread the early stages of the game knowing one of them.


Kunk is trying to defend himself 353-372, and some of his arguments are good, but I have to say the meat of it is left undefended. Particularly the placement of his vote being perfect scum-timing, and him saying "I'm leaning Town on Medix" while still advocating his lynch.

One thing I'd have to say regarding Kunk's defence:

Point conceded. I think this is just going to be WIFOM, but with such blatant pointing it out:

And inb4 "now he just trying to distance himself away from his partner"

I really don't think that was what he was looking for. This statement implies that he did not want to be seen like he was distancing from his partner, so I doubt that he was trying to get town to believe that he was distancing himself from me.

Given PD's late-game attempt to sabotage things with fake-outing Kyiv, I don't think he would be above fake-preempting distancing to induce confusion here either. The fact remains, he put you on his scumlist for no reason, and then later fulfilled the

exact

behaviour MS mentioned he would in his case - he points to it and says "Look, I was suspicious of Kunk!".

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

Enter boberz

Quick dealing with things boberz says aimed at me:

almighty bob, #140. severa'l show me several, in fact show me more than 2

This is dealt with at some point over the next few pages, I was mistaken here. I assume you realised this as you read on.

Bob in on gayle was bad, i sense gayle a touchy towny

I assume this means you think my dislike of Gayle's softclaim was bad. Why? Am I really the only one that thinks saying "My replacee is Town" is disingenuous?

ok bob doesnt get on that PD wagon, but asks others to check it out, actually towny so no shouting is necessary

Where do I ask other people to check out the PD wagon?

Bob I am now shouting at you that was awfull bussing 283 you are now top of my scum list at this point.

Not really bussing. As I say later, only one person can be the first to make each point in a case. Other people had already built the case on PD. It's fairly obvious that I read this case and agreed with it - I say as much in 283.

bob also mentions no lynch dont be silly, ludicrous man, your scum

Lolwut? The only times I mention no lynch, it's to point out how bad an idea it is, and how detrimental to Town it is. This is a ridiculous point to make against me. Read my posts about no-lynch again, particularly 299.

bob doesnt think he can win... even if i were a mafia kyiv i would give it a go, i thnk bob doesnt want a loss on record.

Hahaha, nice try. Read my wiki page for a comprehensive list of all my losses on record. Also note on that list Newbie 788 where my dead scumbuddy replacee outed me and ruined the game. This may go some way towards explaining why I was so angry at this - it's not the first time it's happened to me.

Almighty Bob, reading this game ii had no idea you were IC. I had a massive scum read on you in the second half of the game. on page 11 you went in on gayle in a bad way i think. As I read #283 I cringed i had predicted it earlier, i jst really thought you were scum here. Bob first to mention no lynch, but read a second time slightly towny, crumbing it in for patriots, he took the bait. fair play. I think bob has been brilliant scum, but read as i did concentrating and hard i think he can be found. Bob explain the giving up, and explain why you thought it was defo kyiv.

*checks* huh. I had no idea I was IC either. I replaced into a newbie slot. It's true that I do fulfil the IC requirements though, so maybe the mod just wrote me in as IC anyway.
I was not, in fact, the first to mention no lynch. The first time I mention it is 283. Look at the post immediately before that - the mod warns us that as it stands we will no lynch.

That

is why I talk about it. If anyone crumbed the NL idea for PD, it was the mod.
What are you trying to do, flatter me into confessing by calling me brilliant scum? It sounds quite like the Too Townie fallacy.
As I've said, this isn't the first game of mine where bitter scum has deliberately ruined the game for the other players. That game was abandoned, and so I assumed this one would be too. Looking back, it was mostly anger speaking.



Right, I'm going back to reread MS's interactions with PD on D1, just to make sure he's not sly scum pulling a fast one by taking charge (this is what smart scum would do D2 having lost their roleblocker - step up and start steering the Town, hoping people trust you for it).

[almightybob]

Right, I'm going back to reread MS's interactions with PD on D1, just to make sure he's not sly scum pulling a fast one by taking charge (this is what smart scum would do D2 having lost their roleblocker - step up and start steering the Town, hoping people trust you for it).

Done. MS was the first to vote PD, and was the driving force behind the whole wagon on him. I consider him cleared, and if he

is

scum, he's a heartless, cruel scumbuddy and I feel sorry for PD.

Following on from my previous post, Kunk is my top scumpick for today.

Vote: Kunkstar7

. That's L-1 folks.

[almightybob]

No he does not use it in the way MS mentioned. That situation only carries through if I am lynched and turn up scum, and PD09 had been alive to be there for it. That technique refers to him "clearing" himself as town because he was suspicious of scum. Going along with this and seeing that I'm at L-1, my role is Vanilla Townie. Due to this, he can't have been using it for this reason.

Meh, six and half a dozen.
MS's scenario was that, when challenged on D2 to produce evidence of suspicion, PD would say "look I called Kunk 3rd scummiest".
The actual scenario was that, when challenged on D1 to produce evidence of any acknowledgement, PD said "look I called Kunk 3rd scummiest".

Same difference.

----------

boberz, please lay out your posts more clearly. The way that one's laid out, I'm having to guess which part refers to what. I'm just going to assume that each paragraph is a response to the paragraphs from my post 389.

Anyway, rebuttals:

i didnt read it as a claim, more a statement.

EXACTLY. He stated that his role was Town, but phrased it so it didn't look like a claim. That's what a softclaim

is

. I don't like the underhand approach. It's like he's subtly trying to push this as an accepted position. Especially by talking about his replacee, it makes him seem detached from the statement, so it seems more like an analysis of another player when he's really talking about himself.

Anyway, I was clearly the only one who thought there was something odd about that, and it proved to be true anyway. I don't see much value in going through this again, it basically boils down to Mafia Theory and your opinion of softclaims.

#279

Read 279 again. I'm not asking other people to check out the wagon, I'm asking if there's a summary of the case against PD. Read Gayle's response to it, where he directs me to his previous post. Hopefully that will make it clear what I was saying - I'm asking for information for myself, not telling any other player what to do.

no you said you found nothing on PD after rereading, two posts later you are suddenly convinvced. I didnt like it i suppose proximity to deadline is a factor i didnt consider much but even so.

I didn't say I found nothing, I said I didn't see anything hugely scummy. He didn't seem particularly Town either. From that reread, he seemed fairly neutral.
Then when I read through Gayle's points, I went back and looked at the instances he was talking about, in context this time. That, combined with the impending deadline and the fact we would no-lynch if someone didn't change their vote, gave me enough justification to vote for PD.

How do your previous losses detract from your will not to lose this one. But you did explain your anger. But only anger at someone trying that play, not proof you are not scum.

You said I wanted to avoid having a loss on record. I showed you my record. Clearly I do not have a problem with recording my losses as well as my defeats. So this point is invalid.
And the only

proof

I'm not scum will be when I die and flip, or when a cop investigates me. Even the latter could be lying scum. This game is not really about proof.

mentioning it is bad

This is silly. To even

mention

a no-lynch is bad? That's ridiculous. It's only bad to advocate a no-lynch, which I emphatically did not do. And in any event, I only talk about no-lynch

after

the mod has already mentioned it. I'm glad you've realised that this is a non-point.

I tend towards you being scum, so you only lose (if you lose as scum) because of replacements which is unlucky.

Eh? How would scum-me lose because of replacements?
And it does sound like the Too Townie fallacy. Too Townie = "He seems so Town, he must be scum". Your fallacy = "Nobody seems to suspect him, he must be scum".

So it wasnt definately kyiv??? sorry i still dont accept this.

Seriously, you really need to be more clear with what you're referring to.
Do I now think the other scum is definitely Kyiv? No.
Did I at the time think the other scum was definitely Kyiv? Yes, because of the parallels this situation had with my other game.




Basically your points boil down to:

1) Fairly irrelevant Mafia Theory argument
2) Incorrectly reading my post 279
3) Disliking my "sudden convincing"
4) Incorrect (and irrelevant) speculation about my win/loss record-keeping
5) Incorrectly reading the no-lynch talk
6) WIFOMy speculation about nobody suspecting me
7) Some point about Kyiv that I don't get, presumably relating to my anger (which you already said I'd explained) at the end of D1


It's a very weak case, and a very weak vote.

[almightybob]

I'm quoting things you say so that it's clear to everyone which parts of your post I'm responding to at any one time. It's a helpful way to reply to a post. I won't do it for this one, and hopefully you'll realise that it's much harder to follow what I'm referring to if I don't include any references.
Also, I wasn't just referring to formatting. Just double-checking your spelling and grammar would help a lot. It's not a big deal, it just interrupts the flow and sometimes makes it hard to figure out what you're referring to.

If you think a softclaim isn't scummy, fine. I do. It's a difference of opinion in a Mafia Theory discussion, and is best kept to the relevant forum. Although I'm surprised to see you say "it has to be done deliberately". Are you saying Gayle accidentally typed "Medix is Town"?

Yes. Yes, you do. You claimed in 378 that I was asking other people to examine the PD wagon. All I do is ask "is there a summary of the case anywhere". This is me looking for a summary. At no point in this post do I ask other people to examine the PD wagon. If you think I do ask others, you can't read. If you don't think I ask others, you're lying about it just now.

But that's

not

how I phrased it. I said "I'm not seeing anything hugely scummy from that iso" and "he doesn't seem particularly scummy". Those were my exact words. That is very, very different from what you're claiming I said. I'm basically saying that, from this iso, I don't see why other people think he is so very scummy. On rereading in context with Gayle's case at hand, I saw what they were getting at.

You're right, that does sound pompous. Incidentally, how is what you're doing here different from "encouraging people to look at the wagon" that you accused me of earlier?

This is a very poor point. To suggest that I would rather write this game off than record a loss,

when I have shown I

voluntarily

record

all

my losses as well as defeats

, is absurd. You're right, I don't want to lose this game. But I would rather lose than have it abandoned, no question.

Well if you "just don't like the look of it", that's a gut reaction. I can't defend myself against your feelings. But gut is not something you should expect to convince anyone other than yourself, and so far the only half-decent reasons you've given to justify your vote on me are gut reasons. That makes it a weak case, and I highly doubt it'll convince anyone else.

1) I find it hard to see how typing "Medix is Town" and then blacking it out could possibly be 'a simple error'.
2) How can you

possibly

predict anything when you replace in

after

the events in question have occured?
3) This is your only semi-tenable point, and it's a gut read
4) Ridiculous point
5) Don't include bullshit misrepresentations to make your case seem stronger than it is, and I won't call you on it
6) Another weak point
7) In the heat of the moment, I was sure PD had ruined the game, because it's happened to me before. After a few days I calmed down, and realised that the game was not neccessarily ruined, and that Kyiv was not neccessarily scum. And no, none of your other points are strong.


Why are you trying to put words into flare's mouth by saying "an agressive start you must admit"? Why ask the question if you pre-empt the answer?
Also, is it easier to understand without the echo, or shall I go back to quoting the parts I'm replying to?

@Rest of Town: I would like to hear your evaluation of the strength of boberz's case on me please.

[almightybob]

boberz:

Fine, I'll break 279 down sentence by sentence for you, since you don't seem to get that at no point do I ask anyone else to read a case.

OK is there a summary of the case against PD somewhere? Because I'm not seeing anything hugely scummy from that iso. It could be because there isn't a lot there, but he doesn't seem particularly scummy from that.

First sentence - I ask if there is a short summary. Not asking anyone to read a case, just asking where it can be found.
Second sentence - I report that I didn't see anything that made me think "PD is really scummy" when I read his posts in isolation. Clearly not asking anyone to do anything here.
Third sentence - I suggest that it may be because he hasn't contributed or posted much, and reiterate that nothing jumps out as very scummy from my iso reread. Again, clearly no instructions to other players.

Now please tell me which of those three sentences you think contains a secret subliminal message instructing other players to read the PD case.


Not a backwards way of saying it at all. It's basic logic. If I say that something is not yellow, that does not mean I am saying it is red. Similarly if I say someone is not hugely scummy, that does not mean I am saying he is Town. My read on players is not black-and-white, it's a range, a spectrum.

I was not eager to stop the game. I did not want the game to be abandoned. I thought that PD had outed his scumbuddy, so I thought that standard modding practice would be to abandon the game, as happened the last time someone did this in a game of mine. As I have said, I would rather lose a game than abandon it, every time. My win-loss record is testament to this. I've hardly won any Mafia games, but I've never sought to ruin them to avoid it going on my record.

1) Agreed.
2) So you claim. It's pointless to say you predicted it, because for all we know you went back and edited it in to your "chronological" post. It's fine for you, but it's not admissible evidence for anyone else in the game.
3) It wasn't

that

quick a turnaround. Look at the timestamps - my "turnaround" post came some 20 hours after asking for the summary. Don't you think that's enough time to reread a case and change your mind about it?
4) I didn't message the mod saying "abandon the game". I said "I think PD has ruined the game, you should check it out". I didn't give the mod any instructions of how to handle it in my PM, I was merely alerting him to the situation.
5) Fair enough. Dropped.
6) Fair enough.
7) As far as I can remember, your original point was that scum-me was trying to force the game to be abandoned to avoid a loss on record. If that's what you mean, then yes. My anger combined with my clear record-keeping of all losses completely negates this.



boberz, look at how MS has presented the case. That's what I meant when I asked you to present it more clearly.
Through the impersonal medium of the internet this reads as if I'm having a dig at you. I'm not, I'm just trying to help here. Sorry if it seems like I'm being rude about this, it's not my intention. Tone doesn't convey well through text.

-----------

MS:

Why are you calling flareon scum, when almost all of your posts show suspicion of almightybob, and you later vote him?

This is a good point. I'd forgotten about this. Needs answering.

1. You overreacted to Gayle's "medix is town" comment: I understand why you believed that Gayle softclaimed vanilla townie. What you should realize, though, is that a lot of players use town, or even townie, as synonymous with "pro-town". I personally believe that Gayle's comment was a joke which he could have made as a powerrole or scum too. This is also how Gayle explained it. You probably should have dropped the topic earlier. However, I don't think you as scum would gain an advantage from that behaviour, so it's not a scumtell for me.

I understand that people use "Town" as shorthand for pro-Town. I do it myself. I have absolutely no problem with any player referring to another player as Town in this way. My problem arises when Gayle makes it seem like he's referring to a different player when he's actually referring to himself.
But anyway, I think you're right, this should have been dropped earlier. I think it was a softclaim, some people don't. Let's agree to disagree on this point, because we're just going in circles.

2. Your behaviour towards Patriots was suspicious and likely bussing: Before I reread for post #349, you were my top suspect, for exactly this. Originally, you were questioning my attack on Patriots. Then in post #269, you suddenly mentioned that good points had been raised, without actually explaining what they were. You seemed to go back to not understanding the wagon in #279, to go to voting him in #283. This behaviour felt strange and not genuine. It could indeed have easily been setting up a bus. The explanations you have given recently are acceptable to me though.

Hm. Reading through it again, I can see how it could be interpreted as bussing. In hindsight I should have said specifically what I agreed with about Gayle's summary case. As I said in 302, there's only so much I can do with points already raised, and I didn't see much value in reiterating what Gayle had written. That was probably a mistake, as it now looks like I didn't really agree with the case.

All I can really offer against this is that bussing usually takes place when the partner's lynch is inevitable. Between my posts 279 and 283, nothing much happened to indicate that PD's lynch would be inevitable. He was only on 2 votes, and would not have been lynched at deadline. The fact that we stood in a NL position was the deciding factor in my decision to vote for him. If anything I would say that my vote

made

his lynch inevitable by putting him into a deadline lynch position.

3. You wanted the game to be abandoned to prevent a loss: I have to agree with boberz that you were very quick to state that the game would be abandoned. Allthough this is likely a result of previous experiences, I can't rule out the possibility that you actually wanted the game to be abandoned because with the roleblocker lynched, you felt it had become very difficult for you to win.

I don't want the game to be abandoned. I don't want any game I'm in to be abandoned.
While it will indeed be hard for the remaining scum to win with their roleblocker lynched, I can provide a counterexample to this accusation. In Newbie 841 I was lynched on D2 as the Mafia Roleblocker after a cop investigated my slot on N1. Obviously this meant there was definitely a doc, which meant it would be VERY difficult for my partner to win the game.
If I were the kind of player who sabotaged games or forced them to be abandoned rather than lose, I would have done so in Newbie 841. After the cop claimed against me, I could have named my scumbuddy and forced the game to be abandoned. It's almost the exact same situation as this game. But I'm not like that, and I've never tried to ruin any game I've ever been in.

I want to win, but I don't care if I lose. I play Mafia for fun.

4. You wanted to get a quick mislynch on Kyiv on day 2: You definately were quick to vote Kyiv at the beginning of day 2, and you definately were quick to unvote when I argued against it. You completely dropped the topic after that, even though you showed reluctance when you unvoted. This can indeed be the result of attempting to get an "easy" mislynch, then dropping it when it turned out that there were others strongly opposed to that lynch. However, I think the explanation that you felt Kyiv was obviously scum, then other players convinced you otherwise, is more believable.

Yes, I voted for Kyiv straight away. I was still not entirely convinced at that point that PD was just stirring us up. However, if a wagon had piled up quickly, I would not have been happy about that. Obviously this is hypothetical now, I have no way of proving that I really would have reacted like that. Such is life.

[almightybob]

almightybob prodded

I'm here, still alive, still reading.


boberz, it seems like you have decided I am scum, and then gone back to look for evidence you can twist to support this decision. Other people have said that my so-called "bussing" does not fit with expected bussing timing or the flow of the game at that point, and yet you are saying "ah, but that's why it's so clever!". If you're still convinced, look at the reasons I have given for my decisions, and go back and consider my posts as if those reasons were true. Ask yourself if my actions fit based on the reasons I have given.

Also, I don't see where you're going with post 80. What were you expecting Charlie to see?

And we never got your case on Flareonage. What happened to that?

---------

As it were my vote is still on Lastsurvivor, yet only because of the soft suspicion issue.

This is a weak reason for a vote at this stage. Not gonna sway me away from you if that's all you have.

---------

Welcome Charlie, good enthusiastic entry to the game. However, I think you may be barking up the wrong tree with Kyiv. At this stage of the day anyway, I'm not going to vote for her. There's better options right now.

Usually, a good VT would want to act like a PR in the hopes of throwing off scum. A PR would want to look like a VT to stay hidden from scum.

But if a VT was acting like a power role, they would also throw off their teammates, and perhaps draw protections etc which would be more valuable elsewhere. And if only one or two people are acting like VTs and everyone else is acting like PRs, guess who the real PRs are?
This whole second-guessing-the-scum thing just leads to lots of WIFOM in my experience. It's better to just always play as active pro-Town, regardless of your role.

[almightybob]

The response to post 80 was a good townie response from charlie, I feel no need to push it further.

Response to what? There's not much in post 80 to comment on either way. What would have been a scummy response?

My case on flare is consequently fizzling out, hence no need to post it.

Post it anyway, if only to show you actually had one. Otherwise we have some suspect behaviour from you - big post saying I'm scum, and yet concluding that Flare is scum for no obvious reason, withholding a case for unknown reasons. Setting yourself up for a later "hey look I said I was suspicious of Flare".

I'm more comfortable with a Kunk lynch, atm. I don't want to hammer yet though.

Why not? It's 3 days till deadline. What are you expecting could happen before then that would change things so dramatically?

[almightybob]

Looking forward to hearing it Charlie.

I'm just going out now, so quick reads:

boberz - Slightly Town. He is showing all the signs of tunnel vision I used to sometimes get as a Townie, which I find very difficult to replicate as scum.
Lastsurvivor - likely scum. See MS's reasoning. I will be re-examining LS very closely when I have more time.
Charlie - neutral leaning Town. He has played well, better than his predecessors. I will also be rereading this slot to double-check my read.
Kyiv - Neutral. I think we avoided the issue of Kyiv yesterday because of PD's interference. Needs more examination.

I'll hold off for now, but I'll likely be voting LS today.

[almightybob]

I'm still not all that enthused about Boberz's relentless attack on AB.

Do you mean you think it's scummy? Why?

[almightybob]

Well I feel sheepish. I think I must have got someone's name confused, because it wasn't LastSurvivor I was thinking of after all. On reread, you actually seem pro-Town. I'm not sure who I was thinking of, but it definitely wasn't you. Sorry LS.

As far as I'm concerned, the last scum is either Kyiv or Charlie, by a process of elimination.

I'm fairly confident boberz is Town, because I find it very hard to believe that lone scum would commit themselves to an attack quite as much as boberz has on me. I have never been able to replicate this as scum. Unfortunately, this puts me in a pickle.

boberz has clearly convinced himself that I'm the last scum. So if we lynch incorrectly between Kyiv and Charlie, the scum will take boberz and I to LyLo. And boberz will vote me, giving scum the win.

So I am going to propose a fairly unorthodox solution to this problem.

However, before I post it I'd like Kyiv and Charlie to respond to the questions people have asked.

[almightybob]

Hey guys, sorry I've been slacking a bit on this thread. Got distracted during the week, and I'm back home just now for my dad's birthday. I'll go back through and have some concrete thoughts for you tomorrow. Apologies again.

[almightybob]

Sorry guys. As I said, unexpectedly busy week. I've been catching up today.

My reads right now:

boberz

- Town. His attack and pursuit on me reminds me exactly of how I've felt in the past as Town. I've never been able to reproduce it as scum, I've always been too hesitant to commit like that. It's hard to replicate. If he is scum, I will be very impressed.

LS

- Leaning Town. He pushed pretty hard against the Medix wagon. I see little scum motivation to do so, especially when Medix was acting as scummy as he was. There were plenty of opportunities for scum-LS to mount a legitimate-looking offensive against Medix and get the easy mislynch.

Charlie

- Unsure. Based on just Charlie, I'd say Town. It's rare in my experience for scum to put quite so much effort into big analyses etc unless prompted to do so by other players.
On the other hand, Flareonage's vote on PD fits the classic bussing pattern - realise your partner's lynch is inevitable, jump on the wagon late.
And Magic Trainer's overly conspicuous "What is bussing?" post makes me nervous.

Kyiv

- Neutral Leaning Town. I just reread Kyiv, and there are points where she makes some good pro-Town moves. She posts some new analysis to kickstart discussion as well as bringing up some points against PD here. Also spoke out against boberz' case on me here and here, when I think scum-Kyiv would have been better fueling that fire.
On the other hand, this speaking out did come after MS made similar comments, so it could be good blending.


This is difficult. I feel that the scum is probably either Charlie or Kyiv, but I can't tell which. Of the two, right now I'd pick Charlie. However, I can't be sure that I'm right, and if I'm wrong, we will be in serious trouble.


At this point, I think a massclaim is in order. I know we tried the soft-massclaim after we hit the RB, but we could still have a Cop out there. There's nothing to be gained from hiding our roles anymore, a LyLo claim is very unlikely to be believed, and if we have a cop they may just have something useful. Even if it's only an Innocent on someone, it will help hugely.

If someone is strongly opposed to this, feel free to shout out. I'll assume not and use the dice tags to randomly generate a claim order, so that scum can't hang back.


1 - almightybob
2 - boberz
3 - LastSurvivor
4 - Charlie
5 - Kyiv

Original Roll String: 1d5

1 5-Sided Dice: (5) = 5

Original Roll String: 1d4

1 4-Sided Dice: (3) = 3

Original Roll String: 1d3

1 3-Sided Dice: (2) = 2

Original Roll String: 1d2

1 2-Sided Dice: (1) = 1

[almightybob]

Claim order is:

almightybob
boberz
Kyiv
Charlie
LastSurvivor.

I'll wait a day or so for any serious objections to the massclaim, then get us started. Please do not claim out of order.

[almightybob]

I have a slight objection, why??? If anyone has any gamebreaking info then they reveal it. But why tell the last remaining scum any power roles?

At this point, our cop may be holding back because they only have an innocent result. However, a confirmed innocent would be a huge advantage right now.

Even if our cop has no useful results, we can gain information from a massclaim. We could even win the game. Think of it like this:

Fact: we either have 2 power roles or none.

If two people claim a power role

- they are both confirmed Town (barring counterclaim - see below). Town wins, because the rest of the game pans out like so:
1) Two players claim Doc and Cop.
2) We lynch from the remaining three.
3) If we mislynch, Cop investigates from the remaining two. Doc protects Cop.
4) Scum can either
4a) kill Doc, which would leave Cop + Cop's investigation result in Lylo, giving a Town win, or
4b) kill the other from the two, leaving confirmed Cop and Doc with himself in Lylo, a Town win.

If scum fakeclaims

- we now have the scum narrowed down to two candidates, the scum and the real PR he claimed. Town wins by lynching both.

If only one person claims a power role

- we will know that person is lying, because there must be either 2 or 0 power roles. Lynch them for the win.

If nobody claims a power role

- we lose nothing. Back to good old instinct to find the scum rather than cold harsh game-breaking logic. Well, hopefully still some logic, but not pure logic.


I'll give it another few hours before I start the claims, but considering we have a potentially game-winning strategy here, I doubt anyone will object. Even the scum would be silly to do so.
And happy birthday Charlie

[almightybob]

Okay, I think that's enough time for anyone to object.

Please do not claim out of the randomly generated turn order.
And Townies - it is absolutely imperative that you do not fakeclaim. If you lie, you could ruin a game-winning strategy.

I am a Vanilla Townie.

[almightybob]

Exactly.

[almightybob]

We can just tell him we're in the middle of a massclaim, and to claim before he reads.

[almightybob]

True.

Mod: Update on the LS situation? Any reply to your prod on the 24th?

[almightybob]

Hi Broken, thanks for replacing.

The reason for randomly selecting the claim order is to prevent the scum waiting to see what everyone else claims before making their own claim. Of course, there's still a chance that the scum would be randomly selected to be last, but this way they have no choice in the matter.
In this particular situation it's rather arbitrary, because there's only one (relatively) safe claim for scum, but I thought I'd do it anyway.

Now claim please (even though from your post it's obvious that even if you are scum you know what to claim), so we can move on.

[almightybob]

so we can move on

To anything in particular? Or is it simply analysis and scumhunting?

Yep, analysis and scumhunting.

Oh well, massclaim didn't work out. Worth a shot anyway.

As I've previously said, I have a pretty Town read on both boberz and LS/Broken, so that brings me to either Kyiv or Charlie. I feel that of the two, Charlie has played more Townie, but his predecessors have been scummier than Kyiv has, as Broken has just pointed out, along with others. I'm fairly happy with him as today's choice.

Vote: Charlie

- Note that this is L-1.

[almightybob]

If he flipped Mafia, you'd be reckless Town who hammered someone the day they replaced into the game, when there was over a week left, with analysis that they promised (on RandomMaster) still unfinished.

If he flipped Town, you'd be either foolish scum or game-losing Town, because it would be so suspicious that you would probably be lynched in LyLo.

[almightybob]

A little of all of them. Mainly the last one though.

[almightybob]

Hm. I do agree with you that Broken has entered strongly and looks pro-Town, which combined with my previously Town read on LS makes me fairly confident of his alignment.
My read on boberz is based mainly in the manner of his attack on me. In it I see myself in the past as Town, so sure that I had found scum. The way he focused on me just reminds me so much of my own Town play from my early games that I would have a very hard time seeing him as scum. It's extremely difficult to fake that as scum, and to be honest it probably would be a bad idea for scum to tie themselves down to that extent.


Regarding my LS jump - yes, this was a mistake on my part. In my head, I had attributed things to LS that were not actually him. I said in post 472 that I had confused myself, and that in fact when I reread LS I found I was wrong and that he was pretty pro-Town. I tried to figure out who I was thinking of, but I couldn't. I think I must have gotten mixed up and thought that some actions were LS when they were actually various other players.


If it turns out we're wrong with you, and if I survive the night, I'll almost definitely be voting Kyiv tomorrow. I won't place my vote without a thorough reread of course, but right now I just can't see either of boberz or Broken being the last scum. If they are, they've fooled me good.

And if Kyiv does turn out to be the last scum, PD should be banned from MS. And I won't be happy that we all danced around the issue and let Kyiv off with it on D2 because of PD's WIFOM.

[almightybob]

Not good enough, almightybob. If the core of your argument is that boberz is town because of the way he attacked you, then your judgement is totally biased; based more on personal experience and not more on logic.

That's not the only reason I think he's Town. It's the main reason that I felt initially that his attack on me was a Townie one, and other things have confirmed my suspicions. I can make a boberz-is-Town case if you really want.
But yes, this judgement is partly based on experience. I would be foolish to ignore my previous experience in Mafia, and that experience is telling me that boberz's attack on me was Town-motivated.

No way. It may not be faked, it is just an effect of replacing in as a new player, with fresh new perspective on anything. It does not exclude boberz being scum.

Obviously I don't consider him 100% Town, I could clearly be wrong. But for lone scum to replace in on D2 and then go all-out on me the way boberz did seems a very unlikely scum play. I really can't see boberz deciding that the best way to survive three lynches would be to tunnel on a player that at least one person had already called Town.

I'm sorry bob. You admitted to making that mistake, but I feel at the pace that this game is going (very slowly), there should be no room for error. Nobody is under pressure for a quick reply. Being a qualified IC, even more so. (I'm not arguing Burden of Proficiency here; the argument is slow game = no mistakes made by anyone, scum or town)

If you're not arguing Burden of Proficiency, then the "qualified IC even more so" should not be in that argument. Committing a logical fallacy is not undone by noting that you commit it in the same breath.
And since you say that neither alignment should be making mistakes, then how does a mistake show me to be scummy? If you'd said "only scum should be making mistakes" then the logical progression is clear, but you haven't made the connection here between confusion and scumminess.
I can't really talk about other games while they're still in progress, but this is not the only one I'm in right now. Suffice to say that during the time I made this post, I was in the middle of an incredibly active game - 25 pages in Day 1 kind of active - and so trying to keep track of many names across many games can sometimes lead to a little confusion.

Flareonage posted in the wrong thread in post 383. Does that mistake make you scum?
I'm only human, and I got muddled up. If you don't want to accept that, fair enough, there's not much more I can say about it.

Seems that you're very confident that I'm today's lynch? I think not.

Well, you're at L-1 and Broken has already expressed a willingness to hammer, so forgive me for thinking that you are a likely lynch for today.

Also, almightybob voted me immediately after BrokenBlueprints entered with suspicion cast on me. I think that timing makes a pretty good cover as scum to be voting.

... well of course I voted after Broken entered. We were waiting for him to replace in so we could finish the massclaim. I'm not going to go throwing votes around in the middle of a massclaim.
I've been saying for several pages now that my choice for D3 lynch was between you and Kyiv.

As far as I'm concerned, the last scum is either Kyiv or Charlie, by a process of elimination.

I feel that the scum is probably either Charlie or Kyiv, but I can't tell which. Of the two, right now I'd pick Charlie.

Particularly after that last quote, I'm not sure why you're surprised or suspicious of my vote. If anything, shouldn't you be more concerned about Broken following my lead, since I've clearly intended to vote you for a while if the massclaim didn't pan out?

[almightybob]

No, I don't think a boberz-is-Town case would be entirely useful. How about sharing other key points that made you think boberz is town instead?
I have no further comment on the using experience matter.

For one thing, he's been keeping an eye on everyone's activity and drawing attention to those who haven't contributed in a while. There are various examples throughout the thread. More activity is pro-Town, and ensuring that people can't get away with lurking is pro-Town play.
Another example of Towniness is iso 17, where he urges caution and speaks out against the majority feeling to say how he thinks the wagon should be formed. Again, fairly pro-Town as I see no scum motivation to do this instead of just getting on the wagon.
Those two pop into my mind right now. I'm sure if I went on a hunt I could find more.

Look at what you are saying. I didn't notice it before, but this falls under buddying: boberz attacks almightybob, almightybob says boberz is town. Neat.

Lol. If he attacks me and I say he's town, I'm buddying. No doubt if I said he's scum, you'd be shouting OMGUS instead. This is a laughable point.
I've clearly explained why I think his attack is Town-motivated, several times.
Identifying someone as pro-Town with reasoning is not buddying.

I'm sorry if you find my use of disclaimer language to be distasteful.

I'm just confused why you chose to include it when you clearly knew it was a logical fallacy, and felt the need to add a disclaimer instead of just remove the fallacy itself.

Okay. "Since neither side should be making mistakes with a slow paced game, the presence of one is indicative of scum".

You ignored this point before, so I'll make it again: Flareonage made a mistake in post 383. Therefore if your statement is true, Flareonage = you = scum.

You still haven't established a logical connection here.

Why

would a mistake be indicative of scum? Neither side should be posting pictures of Whitney Houston. Does that mean that posting pictures of Whitney Houston is indicative of scum?

You're missing my point: I'm not saying that you should vote in the middle of it. Of course you should vote after, but you could have waited for BrokenBlueprints to finish up his analysis first. Instead, you decide to cast your vote now. That seems quick to me. Ergo, scummy.

I could have waited. I didn't. So what? I don't hang the timing of my votes on what other players are doing, unless it's a hammer vote.
In case it's escaped your attention, we're not far from deadline. A degree of urgency is necessary here.
And

again

, you fail to make the logical connection of why a "quick" vote (which I have repeatedly stated as my intention for pages, hardly quick) is a scummy vote.

Hell, if we're talking about quick votes, you went from "My opinion is that the last scum is between Kyiv and boberz" to "vote: almightybob" in 3 and 1/2 hours.

So if quick vote = scummy vote, and if mistake = scum, you're ticking all the boxes Charlie.

[almightybob]

But I am stagiht on almightybob tommorow if charlie is scum.

Casting a quick vote in LyLo is the most anti-Town thing you could possibly do. Even if I was scum I could not lie about this, because it is an empirical fact.

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

Fine. So boberz is likely town.

So you concede this point.

Haha...No comment.

And the lack of rebuttal suggests you concede this one.

Now you're just messing with my head.

And this.

I take it back: mistakes are not indicative of scum.

And definitely this.

Fine.

And this one.

So now that you've conceded every other point, your case on me boils down to one issue - that I cast my vote on you soon after the massclaim finished, while Broken was expressing suspicion of you.

Yet you've already conceded that time is ticking away, and that this was a factor in the timing of my vote. Therefore I shouldn't take too long in placing my vote.
And you've already conceded that I shouldn't have voted during the massclaim. Therefore I shouldn't have placed my vote any earlier.
So these two points explain the timing of my vote.

And you've already conceded that I've repeatedly stated my intention to vote for you, for several pages, long before LS even went AWOL. Therefore my vote shouldn't have gone on anyone but you.
Therefore that explains my choice of target for my vote.


Really, this case has nothing to stand on.

[almightybob]

Your vote stands although you feel your case is based on nothing?

[almightybob]

I never planned to vote you quickly in lylo.

Fair enough, I interpreted "straight on you" to mean a vote.

My vote stands because your actions can be attributed to scum. I try to not overthink stuff. Your mind tricks won't work on me.

Every single action anyone takes can be attributed to scum if you ignore all the evidence that shows it isn't scummy

. My "mind tricks" are logic and reasoned argument, which show that your case is crap.
Remember this?

If the core of your argument is that boberz is town because of the way he attacked you, then your judgement is totally biased; based more on personal experience

and not more on logic.

You've conceded every other point against me, and those concessions logically preclude your final assessment, as I just showed. Yet you continue with it.

At least one thing you've said is correct - you're definitely not overthinking.

[almightybob]

List of scummies in decreasing order: almightybob, Kyiv, BrokenBlueprints, boberz.

Whoa whoa whoa. boberz is now your least scummy player? How did that happen? What happened to this:

My opinion is that the last scum is between Kyiv and boberz.

You've totally crumbled in these last 2 pages Charlie. I think it's because you're the last scum.

[almightybob]

Question that I'd like everyone to answer: What have I done that made you think I am not mafia? i.e. what part of what post, or what series of posts made you decide I wasn't mafia in your mind?

I already had a Town read on LS before you came in, and you haven't done anything to make me rethink that. You've seemed fairly pro-Town since you replaced in so I'm happy that my read on LS was accurate. For example, you showed that you reread the thread very carefully, which I consider to be a pro-Town move. Mafia already know the relevant roles, so they don't need to look for clues the way Town do.

By that logic: me => town thinking, BrokenBlueprints =>town thinking ergo both town. Yeah?

Remember when I called boberz Town because I recognised his attacking style as similar to my own as Town in the past? And remember when you said that it was a weak reason, based on experience and not logic? How come you're using

identical

justification now?


I thought you were joking when you asked me to take my vote off you earlier. It's two days till deadline.
I like my vote where it is, thanks anyway.

[almightybob]

I like my vote where it is, thanks anyway.

[almightybob]

What about me? I don't like it where it is.

Frankly, I don't care.

If you have no real defence to offer, don't waste your breath asking nicely for me to unvote. It's not going to happen.

[almightybob]

All right. That's cold, but understandable. Is a lengthy defence case from me going to change your mind then?

Nobody likes having a vote placed against them, but if we all unvoted when asked nicely, nothing would ever happen in Mafia.

A defence case would be good, but this close to deadline it would need to be mind-blowingly spectacular to change my mind. I'm not going to risk a no-lynch.


If either of Broken or Kyiv is prepared to hammer - I can't see us getting much more useful information today. Deadline is almost upon us - 24 hours to go - so whenever you want to pull the trigger.

[almightybob]

Get out of my brain!

[almightybob]

Yeah, once your defence reduced to "unvote me please" I was pretty certain we had the last scum.

Good game everyone!

Any comments on my playstyle/overall gameplay? Or how I could have handled the situation better?

When you first came in, I thought you seemed pro-Town. You started well, but after the massclaim your arguments went to pieces. Learning to keep calm under pressure is something that comes with experience in Mafia.
At that point, your best bet would have been to scour the thread and form a case against Kyiv, since he was the other main candidate for lynch. This might have got you into LyLo, and if you'd taken boberz and myself you probably could have persuaded him that I was the last scum.

[almightybob]

Perhaps massclaim on day 3 should have happened a bit earlier, but overall, well played.

Yeah, I should have realised we had potential game-winning earlier in D3. It worked out in the end, but still.

sorry almightybob, I kind of thought it was you for the whole game

No problem, it happens



Oh yes, and thanks mod for running the game, keeping people active, getting replacements and all the other modly things