Newbie 983 ~ Game Over!

[Switz]

Hello, all!

<Insert /confirmage here>

And I haven't played on Kongregate in ages, but I do remember loving it. They were the ones that came out with the weird card game for a while, right?

[Switz]

Okay, kids, it's game time.

[quote=drmyshotty]1) How many games have you played
2) What is your favorite role
3) What is the most fun thing you've ever done
4) One interesting thing about yourself
5) What is your dream job[/quote]

1)I've probably played a dozen or so games online, and more offline, but haven't done either since high school (about 2 years ago).
2) Fav role would probably be Vig cause you get the Mafia-esque joy of taking matters into your own hands and a town win condition. I'm also a fan of trippy or bastardy roles too though, hence why I love Theme games.
3)Probs won't remember the most fun thing ever, but the most fun thing lately would be a trip I took to visit some friends in Pennsylvania where I got to see a combination diner/dairy/petting zoo. Don't ask.
4) Duh, everything about me is interesting. Don't make me have to pick.
5) Staff writer at either a really big newspaper or a well-established/journalistically-focused magazine. Or writer of a multimillion dollar book series, I'm not picky.

Also

Vote: Haylen

for her minimegapost.

[Switz]

Okay, kids, it's game time.

1) How many games have you played
2) What is your favorite role
3) What is the most fun thing you've ever done
4) One interesting thing about yourself
5) What is your dream job

1) I've probably played a dozen or so games online, and more offline, but haven't done either since high school (about 2 years ago).
2) Fav role would probably be Vig cause you get the Mafia-esque joy of taking matters into your own hands and a town win condition. I'm also a fan of trippy or bastardy roles too though, hence why I love Theme games.
3) Probs won't remember the most fun thing ever, but the most fun thing lately would be a trip I took to visit some friends in Pennsylvania where I got to see a combination diner/dairy/petting zoo. Don't ask.
4) Duh, everything about me is interesting. Don't make me have to pick.
5) Staff writer at either a really big newspaper or a well-established/journalistically-focused magazine. Or writer of a multimillion dollar book series, I'm not picky.

Also Vote: Haylen for her minimegapost.

And of course I forget the quotation marks right away. *facepalm*

[Switz]

I was just getting acquainted, and bonding with the citizens of the game. Also we shouldn't be to quick to lynch, just fyi. If we kill a towny to quick it will hurt us, but if we take our time and really think it won't.

Uh, in what way is it better to kill a townie after thinking about it real hard than quickly? Sorry to be flippant, but I'm just not sure I see your logic. Obviously it's better to think about who we lynch rather than quickly picking someone, but killing town is almost always bad, at least in normal-format games like this.

Good and Honest:

Haha, no full-on novels at the moment. Right now I'm sticking to nonfiction writing and reporting because that's something I know I can make some (emphasis on some) money at. I think I'd have to be significantly more financially stable to even consider writing anything the size of a novel; either that or sell all my possessions and go live on a boat or something.

That said, I'd like to talk about this playstyle of yours because I think it's really not going to be helpful for the town. You describe it much more fully in your first game, and there's a couple phrases in there that really worry me.

won't vote for anyone until we reach a point when the town can't win without my vote (according to my estimations, in Newbie games that can happen on Day 3 at the earliest). I just can't make myself vote for someone before that point...

Scary, scary, scary. The point of being town is to lynch. If you are town and you choose not to lynch because you will feel bad for lynching them, then you are acting anti-town. Period.

I really like yabbaguy's appeal that we be honest. That's another thing that I intend to do - always to be honest, never to lie. Even as a mafioso I'll try not to say things that are untrue. I want people on this forum to know that whenever I'm saying something, it's true.

This is slightly less worrying to me--there's a general theory that the Town should lynch liars on principle, also known as LaL--but it could get you in trouble if you also plan not to lie by omission. If you think that Player X is the Doctor and you say so in thread, you have just killed that Doctor, and probably yourself.

If you think my playstyle is going to make the game less enjoyable for you, you can vote to lynch me.

See, this is a problem too, because, as town, we're likely enough to mislynch D1 anyways, and lynching you to throw you out of the game is not something we want to do. If you're scum, it's something we should do as soon as possible, but I'm guessing we'll have very little way of knowing that because your "playstyle" is so unlike what is considered "townie" or "scum" behavior.

That said (and I apologize if it seems a little harsh, it's been a long day), you have had time since your first game to reflect. Do you have any plans to change your style from this original game to be more compatible with the broader scope of players? I've only skimmed your game, but it seems like lynching you on D1 caused the town a lot of problems they couldn't recover from.

[Switz]

Ok instead of a random voting stage i propose we have a random questioning stage.

VOTE: Vote: G & H

oh and Gandalf wanted me to tell you he wishes he would have subbed into your first game sooner so he could have help be part of your first lynching.

I'm totally okay with a random questioning stage versus a random vote stage, but that means we really shouldn't have more random votes then. Did you have a specific reason for voting G&H?

Quote tags fixed. --KittyMo

[Switz]

I hate my internet connection so much. Sorry again, I somehow lost the formatting of the post when I was trying to get it through. I promise, I'm normally less of a mess when it comes to forum code.

[Switz]

Nice.

So, G&H, I suppose the first and most obvious question to ask before we think about lynching you for your playstyle: Are you scum?

Why are we asking for a claim on Day One? I call rolefishing

Unvote
Vote Prox

I think your argument here's a bit fishy, Haylen. In theory, asking for a claim is obviously rolefishing, but directly asking "are you scum?" is not really asking for a claim because there's only one answer, regardless of whether G&H is or not. Not to mention Prox makes it clear in his next post that he's trying to play off G&H's statement that he will not lie by asking a direct question.

I'm also going to note that shotty takes the opportunity to cast suspicion on Prox without casting a vote, which strikes somewhat of a bad chord with me.

FoS: drmyshottyizsic

And I'm still really torn on the G&H issue. Shotty's argument makes sense, but then again, I'm now suspicious of shotty which makes me hesitant to trust his argument. The problem with lynching him today is that it loses us a day of actual scumhunting, but the problem with leaving him around is that it'll just make tomorrow more confusing since we have no other way to kill him in a setup like this.

[Switz]

Hmm...fair points, shotty and Haylen. I'll withdraw my objections for the time being.

[Switz]

@G&H: To clarify the second part of my statement, I simply meant that there are no Night Killing roles in this game other than the Mafia, unlike in other games on this site where you could have a pro-town Vig to take care of questionable elements in the night.

@shotty: I agree with silverbullet's statement that there's no one I really want to lynch, but, if I had to pick one person, it'd be you--but only because of what I indicated a few posts up with my FoS. I'm seeing you as scummier than the other players but at this point in the game there's not enough evidence for that to be much more than a slight suspicion.

[Switz]

G&H's promise not to vote would make him a less dangerous scum. That, along with the fact that his playstyle is the only currently wrong thing about him, makes me want to decide not to lynch him. We can do that when G&H seems scummy. Like I said, he'll probably slip easily by not being totally honest if he is scum. And, if he's town, he might slip and tell us so, straight out.

Also, we need to be sure not to take G&H's vow too seriously. Nothing but himself is stopping him from lying. But if we catch him lying this game, there's no need to trust his him any further.

Probably the best argument for keeping G&H around I've seen thus far. Means his contribution is going to have to be really good though, because lurking in his case is scummier than others; it'd possibly indicate he was choosing not to speak rather than to have to lie.

No worries, now. Let's focus. Shotty, if you HAD to pick SOMEONE to lynch RIGHT NOW, who would it be, and why?

Answer, please. Just because you ask the question doesn't mean you don't have to answer for yourself. Quite the opposite, in fact.

And I'm definitely willing to

Unvote, Vote: Shotty

, but unless Hinduragi feels the same he should pull his vote; this isn't RVS anymore and we should start acting that way, especially when random votes are contributing to an L-2 situation.

[Switz]

Nice call, Hinduragi. I'd noticed some of these things before, but the G&H voting pattern was something I hadn't seen. Good work, this totally justifies my vote on Shotty even more.

And I second the idea that we need more voices. Lurking is bad, even when it's not actively scummy.

[Switz]

I call OMGUS.

Aww, I wanted to call OMGUS.

But really, though, I agree with Prox on this. Shotty, trying to squeeze Prox's actions over the course of the game into the boxes he set up for you just doesn't work.

1) Buddying: You accuse Prox of buddying for jumping in on your conversation with Haylen about Kongregate. Ignoring for a moment how silly of a notion this is, you were the one who brought up Kongregate in the first place. Using your logic, wouldn't it make more sense for you to be accused of buddying for bringing up Kongregate in the first place, to try to befriend the town? (NOTE: I do not believe this. It is merely an extension of Shotty's logical fallacy.)
2) Contradiction: You accuse Prox of contradiction for his posts asking G&H if he is mafia. But while this posts are contradictory, I don't think Prox is intentionally contradicting himself, the subject is just confusing. The simple explanation, I believe, is that he was simply testing the limits of what G&H will and will not tell us by asking him the direct question "are you scum?" It was only in qualifying that statement that things got confusing, and I think trying to portray this action as scummy is very misleading and anti-town.
3) Opportunism: I'm just going to skip to the rebuttal on this because Prox is not the direct supporter of the Opportunism argument. That's Hinduragi. In fact, it's sort of strange why you're targeting Prox in the first place because he's not the only one attacking you and he's not the one who made some of these arguments.
4) Trying to push away suspicion: Let's line up some quotes, shall we?

4.Trying to push away suspicion- I have not tried this at all. I never said anything about anyone being mafia, i simply stated that even if G & H is a towny he will hurt the town.

Now I would like to rehash number four, but turn the tables. Prox, all you have done is tried to drive the band wagon of me being scum, thus pushing any suspicion away from you, which if you are mafia is a very very smart thing to do, but it is also the sign that you may be mafia.

...

So, finaly my point. By your theory of those four points equaling mafia. You sir = Mafia
Prox is accused of

1. Buddying
2. Contradicting (several times)
3. Opportunism
4. Trying to push away suspicion (repeatedly)
5. And Being a hypocrite

VOTE: Prox

The above would be a prime example of "trying to push away suspicion." Nice try though.

And in addition to this, there's more scumminess jumping out at me.

2. @Shotty

yes i would hammer because that means others feel he would hurt the town as do I.

Why would you be willing to end the day so incredibly early? We have quite awhile to gather info on everyone... there are still people who haven't posted yet... and G&H's actions (not intentions) in my mind haven't really given me room for judgement yet.. also there still are two people that haven't even posted yet!

You didn't answer this question, but I'd really like you to. We have time to think about who to lynch, and hammering because other people think someone would hurt the town sounds like something scum would do.

There is something that seems strange to me. I have already cited you saying: "Also we shouldn't be to quick to lynch, just fyi. If we kill a towny to quick it will hurt us, but if we take our time and really think it won't.". I certainly agree with this. But later, when asked by silverbullet999, you say that if in the next 2 hours you have the opportunity to cast the final vote to lynch me, you'll do it! I'm especially baffled by this because it has already been said here how bad it was for the town in my first game that I was lynched so quickly...

Ok about this, my play style is strange, kind of like yours. I am on the fence about you right now, but I'm not getting a scum read from you, just a bit of anti-town, but this morning i went and reread your play style and looked at one of your past game and realized that you aren't anti-town you just want to be 100% sure that your choice is correct unless you are need for the game to continue.

Yet another example of evading the question. And it's the same question. How coincidental.

If you call defending myself logically and then attacking another person using perfectly valid points scummy, then I have a problem with you.

I used the exact same points on you that you used on me. I used logical points to defend myself and then attack you. So if you are calling me scummy, then you have a problem with yourself.

This is a logical fallacy, although I can't remember which one. Here's why. Prox makes an argument against you using certain points. You make the same argument against him using the same points. By making your argument work, you say the argument is flawed. But if the argument is flawed, why would you use it to call Prox scummy? It's a flawed argument, and would prove nothing.

In short, it's just a way you can defend yourself by using another player's good arguments against them, which is illogical and flawed in and of itself.

You didn't explain anything about opportunism. Btw, when I say opportunism I mean that you went after G&H because it was the easy thing to do.

I am going after you and this isn't easy at all. You are the one who has it easy trying to attack me.

This too is a fallacy. You're denying that your attack on G&H was opportunistic by saying that your attack on Prox is not opportunistic. The latter does not disprove the former. You can be doing both at the same time.

Bonding is not pro-town. http://mafiascum.net/wiki/index.php?title=Buddying_Up

I bond, i don't buddy up . Buddying up is choosing a single buddy to befriend and share blame with.

What, then, is your definition of bonding? I suspect it will be very similar to buddying up, except without the negative scum connotations.

Oh, and your signature is so passive-aggressive it's physically painful. Just an FYI

---

Aside from my Shotty argument, I have some other points to address. First off, G&H, I feel like you're misunderstanding what we'd like from you in terms of contribution. Asking question after question is helpful, but not contributive. The people who answer are contributing. You're just active lurking.

So, my questions to you: What arguments do you agree with so far? Who do you think is scummy? What do you think of the way people have been voting? What do you think about those lurking? Is Shotty OMGUSing or is Prox the scummy one? Answers to any and all of these would be wonderful, and I encourage you to provide more than what I've asked if you think it would be helpful to the town. Give us some concrete information and scumhunting, not an examination on what we think about theory and how the game is going so far.

Secondly, I'd like to point out that, in addition to those prodded, we haven't heard from Haylen in a while either, so that's something to keep in mind. And on that note,

Mod: You have me voting for both Haylen and Shotty, my vote should be on Shotty only.

Fixed! Thanks. ~KittyMo

[Switz]

@Haylen: Sorry to be a nag; I thought you hadn't posted for a while but looking back your last one is from Friday so being gone for the weekend is totally understandable. Just let us know what you think post-re-read.

@Shotty: First of all, I'd like to know how you went from this--

@ Switz- I understand were you are coming from on all of this. You see two guys fighting over points and you simply read and give your input and i appreciate that.

To this--

I am definitly getting a scum team from prox and switz. You see the only reason switz defends prox is because prox is throwing himself out there and realying on switz to back him up. If switz started getting attack I would almost be certian that prox would defend him. But prox is smart he isn't drawing atention to him and switz being together, because switz is doing that enough. Well those are my views
SCUM TEAM: Prox and Switz.

I mean, aside from G&H planting the idea for you in this post--

And yes, I do have more to provide than what you've asked for. I have made an interesting observation. You and Prox have made quite a few posts (which, as I have said, sound logical and convincing). Each time you have mentioned Prox, you have done one of two things - either agreed with Prox about something or defended Prox from something said by Haylen or drmyshottyizsik. On the other hand, so far Prox has mentioned you a total of ZERO times! Not a word about you... I haven't reached any conclusion about this fact but I wanted to share it with my fellow townspeople.

I guess that's a "be careful what you wish for" moment. But here's the truth: I'm "defending" Prox because Prox is scumhunting, I agree with the evidence he's turned up, and no one's provided a convincing case against him. To a lesser extent, I suppose I'd support Hinduragi as well, although he hasn't had a strong case against him and hasn't done as much scumhunting.

@G&H: Thanks for your response. I think I may have been unclear before; yes, asking and answering questions is contributing, you're absolutely right. I think what I'm looking for is independent analysis of the game, things like "this is what I think" or "I suspect this," etc. You've got a good example of this in your last paragraph--although I, of course, disagree with the analysis. It's independent contribution that forces others to react and consider your thoughts, and it's more helpful to us (meaning the town collective, as I meant it earlier) than mere questions and answers at times. Both types of contribution, however, are necessary and appreciated.

[Switz]

[sarcasm] I call shotty and foilist scumbuddies!

sar·casm: n. a mode of satirical wit depending for its effect on bitter, caustic, and often ironic language that is usually directed against an individual

@ Everyone- At this point in time three people have really been tested, and ridiculed, and questions. I think that we need to get to know Switz, Haylen, Hinduragi, and silver bullet a bit better.

Again, this sounds like you're putting heat off yourself. I'm just going to come out and say what Shotty is trying to do. No, this is not intended to be anything against him. In fact, I'd like to give him some posts to defend himself because so far any post that, in my opinion, has content, has been about Shotty. In fact, it feels like everyone is ganging up on him ever since I posted my case. I noticed that Switz had a giant of a post. Then, after discussing, as G&H said, "drmyshottyizsik versus Prox", he had a paragraph and a half or so of other things to discuss. This leads me to believe we should have a more active discussion about other fellow players before someone even considers moving Shotty to L-1. Shotty, I think you're in the right here that we should all get to know each other a little better. Unfortunately, I have nothing to contribute to the actions of achieving this. Suggestions would be welcomed.

This is a good point, but let's not reduce the heat on Shotty just because we haven't discussed everyone else. We can learn more about each other and keep the pressure on him at the same time, and I think it'll be beneficial all-around. And in regards to your EBWOP, do you think we're not discussing the Shotty case sufficiently? Or that I am scum, for that matter?

Of Shotty's suggestions, I'm leaning towards examining silverbullet a bit further. I don't have a good read on him yet either way, so it can only help to get one. I'm gonna skim the thread quick and then post up my thoughts on silver's play so far.

@ the replacements: Welcome, good to finally have a full town playing. Arch, I look forward to your read; Foil, you seem to have done so already so I'm going to turn to you. Part of me likes that you're taking a hard line on G&H, and part of me is worried that it's going to do nothing but derail the town. The latter part of me's winning, especially since Shotty's performing his personal trademark "bonding" on you for going after one of his targets. I know you're still working on the read, but do you think G&H is scummier/worse for town than Shotty, or not?

Of Shotty's suggestions, I'm leaning towards examining silverbullet a bit further. I don't have a good read on him yet either way, so it can only help to get one.

[Switz]

Okay so obviously "quick" didn't happen but here's what I've got:

Most of SB's posts seem to advocate waiting, which is a bit ambiguous to me. The most notable example is his statement where he says he'd put Shotty at L-1 except he wants to wait for the other two roles so he can try to get a read. Which now begs the question: Silver, if you get a good or decent read on Foil and Arch, are you still planning on putting Shotty at L-1? Why or why not?

The only other thing jumping out at me is that he's spent most of his time focusing on trying to translate one statement Shotty's made, and is just agreeing with the arguments. Like the above though, I'm not sure exactly what to make of that either.

[Switz]

@Silverbullet:

The only other thing jumping out at me is that he's spent most of his time focusing on trying to translate one statement Shotty's made, and is just agreeing with the arguments.

Could you sort of clarify on this a bit more? I would understand if you said I've been focusing on Shotty's attitude with lynching/voting Good... but I don't know if that's what you mean.

Shotty's attitude is what I'm talking about here, I suppose. What caught my eye is that series of posts where you keep trying to get Shotty to answer your question about whether he would have hammered G&H if he got to L-1. Looking at it again though, it's not especially scummy, since most of those posts were trying to get Shotty's attention. As long as we're discussing it, though, did you ever get a satisfactory response?

@Arch:

I can understand your argument against Hinduragi, but I'm not sure I necessarily agree with it. Couldn't his self-analyzing, overly-qualifying writing style be an indicator that he's newbtown as much as newbscum? The way I'm reading it, those same efforts to sound logical seem more like a less experienced townie trying to make their arguments sound logical so the rest of the town will follow them. Not to mention the remainder of Hinduragi's posts aren't seeming especially scummy to me. Are there any other scumtells you're picking up in his play thus far?

And what do you think of Hinduragi's response to your questions? You don't reference them at all in your next post, where you're attacking G&H instead (an attack I'm growing to agree with, btw).

@Foilist:

I really have no idea what to think of you yet. On the one hand, you and Arch are starting to turn me around on what to do with G&H. As scummy as I think Shotty's playing, G&H is appearing to be more of a danger to the town so far.

But then you're trying to push the Hinduragi wagon for a while, which I really don't think has much logic or evidence behind it. You eventually begin to focus on G&H again, but your accusations on Hinduragi strike me as taking advantage of another's good-sounding argument. The fact that Shotty too jumps on it only accents that, both votes seem like the same sort of opportunistic action.

Also, what is the rationale for you FoSing me? Was it tied to the earlier post (which doesn't seem justified) or did you just throw it out there for no reason at the top of page 8?

@Shotty:

Shotty, you've now managed to jump on practically every bandwagon possible except the one on you. You immediately support Arch against Hinduragi (who, coincidentally enough, is attacking you) and as soon as Hinduragi posts his rebuttal, you jump off and are soon going against Foilist. And speaking of which...

I find neither of these all that scummy they just both make me angry when ever someone attacks me. Honestly if i had to pick right now i would put my vote at Foilist. He immediately attacked Hinduragi, then switched to G & H, I mean its one thing to scum hunt, but to all out try to destroy two people in 11 posts is a little over the top.

If you think Foilist deserves a vote then why the hell don't you vote for him? I mean he has no votes at all right now, yours won't push him over the edge. Softvoting (or whatever the term actually is) is scummy. Also, you describing Foilist as someone who attacks one person right away and then switches to another is a nice example of the pot calling the kettle black, don't you think?

@Hinduragi:

While I do generally disagree with the bandwagon against you, I do think that you're not doing enough to actually defend yourself. Arch and Foil (and Shotty, to a certain extent) all have accused you of being scum, and all you've done in response is calmly answered their questions. That's good, but it's really not enough to clear you. You're off my list of targets for now, but I will be keeping an eye on you.

@Haylen:

Before/during your reread, I'd really appreciate it if you could answer this question Prox asked earlier; you don't have many posts and this one jumps out at me.

Nice.

So, G&H, I suppose the first and most obvious question to ask before we think about lynching you for your playstyle: Are you scum?

Why are we asking for a claim on Day One? I call rolefishing

Unvote
Vote Prox

I still don't get it. Did you say this to evoke a response from me, or because there wasn't much there to vote for and you wanted to end the RVS, or because you wanted to misrep me?

I don't see how someone with so much expirience could misinterpret me in this way.

FoS

@Prox:

I'd comment on your rebuttal to Shotty but everyone knows we're scumbuddies now so I won't bother. [/sarcasm]

@G&H:

At this point, I think I'm going to have to side with Foilist and Arch. If you don't take a more active (read: voting and actually scumhunting) role, we're going to have to get rid of you, because you're a liability to the town.

Unvote, Vote: G&H

[Switz]

You seem to think that there can't be an individual who is an intelligent, disciplined thinker and at the same time very emotional and, in a way, so incredibly naive...

If you know you're naive, you're not naive. And honestly, your posts don't come off that emotional to me.

@ Switz - what are you accomplishing with your G&H vote exactly? I like most of your play so far, but I think you aren't maximizing the information generating potential of your actions right now.

I'm indicating that I think he should be lynched?...I'm not sure what your problem with this is. Would you rather I just voted and unvoted every player in succession, as you seem to be doing? We can question people without voting them arbitrarily. Also, how do you expect to definitively find both scum today? For one thing, you can't definitively know anything until after lynching a scum/N1 w/ a cop, and for another, I was under the impression you too were looking to get rid of G&H tonight.

And Foilist, just a quick answer on why you FoSed me, since I really don't get it.

[Switz]

I'm indicating that I think he should be lynched?...I'm not sure what your problem with this is. Would you rather I just voted and unvoted every player in succession, as you seem to be doing? We can question people without voting them arbitrarily. Also, how do you expect to definitively find both scum today? For one thing, you can't definitively know anything until after lynching a scum/N1 w/ a cop, and for another, I was under the impression you too were looking to get rid of G&H tonight.

I'd say you have it backwards. You can indicate who you think should be lynched without voting for them, but you can't really pressure players that much with just questions.

And ouch! What a misrep. Really? I'm just randomly voting all the players in succession? I've voted exactly two players, and I've explained clearly why those players got the votes they did. And unlike you, I'm making very active efforts to pressure the players that I vote in ways that I hope will expose their alignment. What are you doing to scumhunt G&H?

Also, I never said anything about "definitively finding both scum." I said I was optimistic about our chances of

nailing

both scum. Suspicions are almost never "definitively" right. They often are accurate though.

And finally, whether or not "I too" was interested in getting rid of G&H tonight should be irrelevant to whether or not you suspect him. And if you were reading the thread carefully, you might have noticed my most recent post that I addressed to him, in which I said I'd be willing to let him live at least into D2 if he were willing to compromise with me.

I don't think it's a misrep at all. You start by voting Hinduragi, then completely drop his case and move on to G&H, then, when you're done with him, you move on to Haylen, and now are spreading out and FoSing me and Foilist. I'm not saying you're not making good points with your accusations, but you're just firing them off one after another without really following up on them. And it's not particularly easy to scumhunt G&H, as numerous others (including you, I think?) have pointed out, because his playstyle is calculated to reveal absolutely nothing.

And you're misinterpreting my last sentence. Those two points were about how you expect to "find" two scum. So I was saying that if we lynch G&H b/c he's anti-town, but not specifically because he's scummy, that won't help us find scum. It has nothing to do with my suspicions of him. I did miss the post about letting him live to D2 though, sorry.

You're also right about me misusing my vote, and for that I apologize. I still think getting rid of G&H is our best bet, but it's best to keep an open mind and scumhunt as long as we can.

Unvote

As for Hinduragi, my current impression is that he's acting townish but I really don't like his latest attack on Foilist because it does seem really desperate...I'll give it a closer look in a bit. I'm not dodging, I just want to give it my full attention rather than skim his ISO quick and make a kneejerk call.

[Switz]

Also,

@Haylen

, before you replace out, I'd like your thoughts on the game and players so far. Something substantial, if you could.

[Switz]

Hinduragi ISO:

2: Says we shouldn't vote G&H. Says Shotty is slightly scummy but doesn't give reasoning. Wants more discussion.
3: Gives reasons why voting Shotty--trying to "bond," trying to relocate focus on G&H and away from himself
4: Distances self from Shotty wagon. Points out that Shotty is trying to partner both him and Prox and me and Prox. Says Shotty's defense isn't good enough. Then wants Shotty to defend himself and to look at other players??
5: Says scum might be trying to push Shotty lynch, wants to study others.
6: Responds to Arch's initial attack. Gives list of who he thinks is scum-to-town. Says there hasn't been a case against him yet.
7: Says he's always calm, implicit nulltell.
8: Says why he considers Arch/Foil town. Points out Shotty's vote jumping.
9: Analyzes G&H some, says he will support a lynch if G&H does not change style b/c he read other G&H games.
10: Rebutts Foilist's points about why he is scummy.
11. Calls out Foilist on "contradiction." Asks Haylen why she isn't active, doesn't react. Re-asks G&H if he will change playstyles. Asks Arch why he FoSed Foilist.
12: Says he wasn't being nice to Foilist. Thinks overall argument is weak.

So I guess what I think of his play is...*shrug*

It all seems pretty nulltell to me. I really don't like his 11 because I think it's misguided, but that could just as easily be the mistake of town trying to get back on track as scum trying to pull together a weak case. His early play's the same way. It could be town seeing some scummy things Shotty's doing, then pulling back to avoid a mislynch, or scum seeing some scummy things Shotty's doing, then pulling back to look town and avoid suspicion. I personally am still leaning on the town side of that argument, but it's a weak belief because he hasn't done anything definitively town or scum.

Now I'm going to reverse it and ask what you think about Hinduragi. One of your first posts here denounced him out of nowhere, and since then you've been content to let everyone else do your work for you. Out of all your posts since then, you've mentioned him twice, and neither has been even remotely in response to his defense against your accusations.

[Switz]

@Arch:

Now I'm going to reverse it and ask what you think about Hinduragi. One of your first posts here denounced him out of nowhere, and since then you've been content to let everyone else do your work for you. Out of all your posts since then, you've mentioned him twice, and neither has been even remotely in response to his defense against your accusations.

Answer or you're getting my vote. Your avoiding this question only further cements my point above. You ask a lot of questions, get a lot of info from the rest of the town, but don't answer any yourself or do anything with the info you get.

@Seraphim:

My apologies for what you've got to work with, Haylen was starting to look pretty scummy by the time you got in. Her last few posts in particular are giving me really bad vibes, and while it seems there's RL issues behind them, I can't help but read them as scummy. If you hadn't replaced in just now, I'd have voted her, so I'll be keeping an eye on you.

@Hinduragi:

Sorry, I don't have any other finished games on this site, mafia or otherwise. And I haven't played online in years, so I honestly don't even know where I'd find old ones, but I'd hope my ability to play games like this has improved/changed since then, so it probably wouldn't help anyways.

@Shotty:

You are really seeming like Prox's scum buddy to me. Just saying.

As Seraphim has just said above, not everyone can be Prox's scumbuddy. If you are really town, give us some actual evidence for your accusations, not OMGUS and AtE. I decided to unvote you to go after G&H, but more and more it's looking like I should go back to you. (Arch: not an excuse to ignore my accusations).

Vote: Shotty

[Switz]

@Silverbullet:

I never said I was going "heavily" after G&H, as you put it. And I already explained why I had changed my mind on G&H.

@G&H:

At this point, I think I'm going to have to side with Foilist and Arch. If you don't take a more active (read: voting and actually scumhunting) role, we're going to have to get rid of you, because you're a liability to the town. Unvote, Vote: G&H

@ Switz - what are you accomplishing with your G&H vote exactly? I like most of your play so far, but I think you aren't maximizing the information generating potential of your actions right now.

I'm indicating that I think he should be lynched?...I'm not sure what your problem with this is. Would you rather I just voted and unvoted every player in succession, as you seem to be doing? We can question people without voting them arbitrarily. Also, how do you expect to definitively find both scum today? For one thing, you can't definitively know anything until after lynching a scum/N1 w/ a cop, and for another, I was under the impression you too were looking to get rid of G&H tonight.

I'd say you have it backwards. You can indicate who you think should be lynched without voting for them, but you can't really pressure players that much with just questions.

And ouch! What a misrep. Really? I'm just randomly voting all the players in succession? I've voted exactly two players, and I've explained clearly why those players got the votes they did. And unlike you, I'm making very active efforts to pressure the players that I vote in ways that I hope will expose their alignment. What are you doing to scumhunt G&H?

Also, I never said anything about "definitively finding both scum." I said I was optimistic about our chances of nailing both scum. Suspicions are almost never "definitively" right. They often are accurate though.

And finally, whether or not "I too" was interested in getting rid of G&H tonight should be irrelevant to whether or not you suspect him. And if you were reading the thread carefully, you might have noticed my most recent post that I addressed to him, in which I said I'd be willing to let him live at least into D2 if he were willing to compromise with me.

You're also right about me misusing my vote, and for that I apologize. I still think getting rid of G&H is our best bet, but it's best to keep an open mind and scumhunt as long as we can.

Unvote

So that's how that went down. I was going after G&H because Foilist and Arch's arguments had convinced me it was best, but as time passed, other arguments convinced me the opposite way. I still think G&H is a liability, but I never thought he was scummy. So when I said, as you quoted, that I unvoted Shotty to "go after" G&H, I wasn't going after G&H because I thought he was scum. Thus, Shotty's recent actions plus my prior suspicions are enough to justify my current vote.

[Switz]

Ok Prox here I go clean slate.
1. Gut feeling
2. It almost feels like you are pushing for a mislynch
3. You are too pushy
4. You exploit everything
5. You don't stick you what you say
6. Your attacks don't always make any sense
7. I get a scum vibe from you
8. You almost seem nervous sometimes

Ok there you go.

Prox, why does this convince you? And furthermore, why are you choosing to ignore Shotty completely? This seems like a big turnaround for you with minimal explanation. Especially since Shotty isn't doing anything different except saying what he's been saying all Day more logically and is continuing to ignore parts of your questions. Really, I don't get it.

[Switz]

@Prox:

The only reason I'm buying this for now is because your feud with Shotty has been going on for so long that there's no way it's some sort of crazy gambit between the two of you. So either you're town and you've really changed your mind, or you're scum who's decided to try and jump on the Seraphim wagon before it's too late.

I'll

Unvote: Shotty

for now but I'm not sure I'm convinced on Seraphim yet. Let me go back through his posts now that he's amassed a few of his own. I really wish Arch hadn't V/LAed too cause I wanted to question him more but there's nothing we can do about that for now.

[Switz]

Also, Shotty -

@ everyone if you are the real cop please say so.

Wtf? You have no idea how much more assured I am that you're scum playing VI or newbscum now. If they're the real cop, why the hell would they counterclaim now? They'd get NK'd after the lynch.

Uhh...because when scum claims cop and you're the real cop, you counterclaim so the town doesn't get led around by the nose by the scumteam. Real cops staying quiet to save themselves are not playing to their win condition.

I did not think I was going to be doing this earlier in the game but

Vote: Hinduragi

.

And since I haven't gone back to look at Seraphim yet I'm definitely not sure what to make of the claim. I feel like it's standard procedure in games to leave the claimed cop alive one Day at this point in the game, right?

[Switz]

Okay, so as much as I want to believe Prox is town and I haven't been following scum after townShotty, the more I look at things the more Prox seems scummy. I've skimmed through his ISO, and throughout the Day, he's:

Flipfloppy on G&H
Went after Shotty relentlessly with little initial reason
Cribbed most of his Shotty-argument from Hinduragi
Switched wagons at a convenient and appropriate time
Willing to completely change his convictions at the drop of a hat (see above, w/ Shotty/Seraphim switch)

My vote would put him at L-1, but since we have the time I won't give it. I'll just join in the asking for a claim.

And @Arch: I honestly don't fully believe Seraphim's claim, but since he himself hasn't been acting especially scummy, I'm willing to give him the benefit of the doubt for now. As others have said, if there's a counterclaim on D2, then I'll start to think about it a lot harder.

[Switz]

Well, there's nothing like a spontaneously generated L-1 to wake you up in the morning. It's 1 in the morning here and I don't have time to respond fully to Arch's wall of text accusations, so I'm just going to put down my immediate Daythoughts.

--The Night Kill proves that G&H is town unless he's actually been lying about his playstyle the whole time. In which case I will be so pissed you have no idea.
--It would have been nice to have waited for Seraphim to say what his results were before immediately wagoning me. I can't imagine he chose me for an investigation but it'd be nice cause then I might actually live through the Day.
--On that note, since I am at L-1, I'm claiming: Vanilla Townie. Sorry it's not more exciting.
--Foilist: I really hope you're being sarcastic.
--My top suspect for today is Silver, so if/when you mislynch me, I'd start there. I wish it was Arch, because then there'd be a reason for him to be leading the Crusade against me, but it's not. I actually think he's one of the players most likely to be town at this point. [/statement you'll misinterpret and use against me]

Significantly more in the morning.

[Switz]

Before I respond to Arch's case:

Foilist: I see your intent now that you're explaining it and it's not 1 in the morning. I just remember looking at that and thinking "if I find the letters for any of the other players hidden in your post..." But good thinking. You're wrong about me being scum, but it was smart to keep your suspicion of me close to the chest at any rate.

Arch:

Your accusations of me are well-thought-out and well said. But they are not correct for two simple reasons.

1) For the majority of the Day, I believed that Hinduragi was town.
2) This is a newbie game, my first game in years, and I'm still working out the kinks of how to develop a good town playstyle.

I apologize in advance for the wall of text below; it's easier to reply to your arguments via quote wall.

On the Curious Life of Mr. S W I T Z

I'm also going to note that shotty takes the opportunity to cast suspicion on Prox without casting a vote, which strikes somewhat of a bad chord with me. FoS: drmyshottyizsic

And I'm still really torn on the G&H issue.

Shotty's argument makes sense, but then again, I'm now suspicious of shotty which makes me hesitant to trust his argument.

The problem with lynching him today is that it loses us a day of actual scumhunting, but the problem with leaving him around is that it'll just make tomorrow more confusing since we have no other way to kill him in a setup like this.

Lol at the hypocrisy. Here, switz says he suspects Shotty for taking the "opportunity to cast suspicion" on someone "without casting a vote." Yet switz does the exact same thing himself,

in this very post

. Where's your vote switz? Or do you want to make sure that the town has absolutely nothing it can attack you on before you commit yourself to a wagon?

See, anyone who pays attention should be able to see right through this garbage. Switz is doing what everybody who fancies themselves a clever mafia player tries to do: he is fabricating a gradual progression of his suspicions, and weaving it in the thread one post after the other. First, he mentions that he just sorta suspects shotty. Next post, his suspicions get a little firmer, but he's still not ready to vote yet, cause there isn't enough evidence. He only he drops the vote once everyone else has implicitly agreed with the suspicions he wants to pretend to have.

Also, the bolded is another text-book example of scum. He says something, and then immediately qualifies it, all the while foreshadowing his future suspicion of shotty. This is classic scum play. It is only the scum who desperately want to make every little machination of their reasoning known to the town. They do this because their reasoning is fabricated, and they know it. Town players, secure in the sincerity of their beliefs, simply state their conclusions. Now, this is not to say that town players are never uncertain, or never change their mind over time. But they do not flip flop back and forth in the same post, qualifying everything they say, and mentioning possible exceptions to their opinions based on evidence that they NEED everyone to see they've noticed.

At this point, my vote was on Haylen, who I had RVed earlier in the game. As I said in the part of my post you didn't quote, however, she had just made her "I call rolefishing" post and I was calling her on it. I thought it was worth leaving my vote with her, but I didn't want to ignore Shotty's statement above--

She has a point, you are being awfully bold and trying to pass the blame a lot. I'm not going to vote you Prox, but don't ask for claims.

This was a blatant, direct statement that he was not going to vote accompanied by his suspicions, and it jumped right out at me. What didn't jump out at me was the realization that I was doing the same thing. But you'll note in my very next post that I backed off Shotty after he explained his actions. What would have been the point of this if I was "fabricating a gradual progression," as you say? This seems like a step backwards to me.

I'd also like to point out that my statement of qualification that you point out is not an immediate scumtell. Why do only scum have the desire to "make every little machination of their reasoning known to the town"? Why wouldn't town players want to make sure their ass is covered at such an early stage in the game? You yourself say town players can be uncertain, and that was uncertainty. Sincere uncertainty. I understand if you don't want to see it that way in the wake of Hinduragi's play, but there is no reason why making a qualifying statement in one post is a scumtell.

Let's continue.

@shotty: I agree with silverbullet's statement that there's no one I really want to lynch, but, if I had to pick one person, it'd be you--but only because of what I indicated a few posts up with my FoS.

I'm seeing you as scummier than the other players but at this point in the game there's not enough evidence for that to be much more than a slight suspicion.

More nervous energy, of the same type we found in Hinduragi. Laying suspicion on shotty, but too concerned with covering his own ass to actually vote. Bolded is the kind of methodical, nervous, self-analyzing that I was just talking about.

In addition, Switz casts suspicion on shotty without voting, which again directly contradicts the reason he FoSed shotty earlier.

Again, this is a sincere answer to the question. There wasn't a lot going on at this point in the game. And I had previously given reasons for why I suspected Shotty and why I didn't think it was deserving of a vote at that point in time. That said, if I was in this position again, I probably would vote Shotty at this point (or earlier) to spark discussion and/or see who else overeagerly jumps on board.

Answer, please. Just because you ask the question doesn't mean you don't have to answer for yourself. Quite the opposite, in fact.

And I'm definitely willing to Unvote, Vote: Shotty,

but unless Hinduragi feels the same he should pull his vote; this isn't RVS anymore and we should start acting that way, especially when random votes are contributing to an L-2 situation.

Here's where we get to the real meat of things.

Thanks for letting us know that you ARE, in fact, now "willing to unvote, vote: shotty." Before you weren't, because there wasn't enough evidence, right? What new evidence surfaced in the intervening time exactly?

Bolded is the real crime of this post though. Here, Switz blatantly advises his scum partner on what to do. You can tell because there's no teeth in it. If switz was town who had just happened to notice that Hindu was keeping his rvs vote for no reason, his reaction would have been "What the hell are you doing? FoS Hindu." Instead, he very pleasantly suggests what Hindu "should" do. This seems to assume, rather naively, that Hindu is on the same team as Switz.

Unless, of course, he already

knows

that Hindu is on his team.

Honestly, I overreacted here. I saw Prox ask Shotty who he wanted to lynch, then I saw Shotty had answered Silver's question and ignored Prox's so I jumped on him. At the time it was just enough evidence for me, now I think I would have just had the earlier part of the post, asking him to answer Prox's question.

And my conversation with Hindu was incredibly naive, and I'm kicking myself for it now. But I can use it in my favor now, because while you're reading it as a scum conversation, it was meant in an entirely pro-town fashion. Here's my thought process: "I think Shotty is now worthy of my vote. However, I don't want him to get lynched unless he really is scum, so it'd probably be a good idea to make sure anyone random voting is off the wagon, so I'll give Hindu a heads-up."

Yes, I'm aware it's dumb, and I'm also aware that my thoughts probably weren't that developed. But I've got no other defense for making that post other than to say it was a mistake.

Nice call, Hinduragi. I'd noticed some of these things before, but the G&H voting pattern was something I hadn't seen. Good work, this totally justifies my vote on Shotty even more.

Y'all should be able to see the pattern by now.

For his next couple of posts, Switz mostly focuses on attacking shotty and G&H. These are by far the easiest players in the game he could have possibly picked to attack. Shotty's play is plagued with numerous superficial scumtells; AtE, bandwagoning, omgus, etc. It's very easy to make a purely logical case on this type of player, regardless of alignment. And G&H was a great choice to go after, because of how uniquely anti-town his play is. Very subtle and effective scum move on Switz's part to primarily direct his attention at these two.

Now, I want to be clear. The fact that Switz focused on G&H and Shotty isn't a scum-tell in and of itself, as there were others in the town who voiced similar opinions. But the overall manner with which Switz positioned himself certainly does seem to fit the profile of a cautious scum player. It's not more evidence, but it does fit the case.

Yeah, Shotty and G&H were/are easy targets. But if you'll look at my posts I wasn't following Hinduragi. I was following Prox, and I'll admit it. I didn't pick up on the fact that most of his argument was a slightly more elaborate form of Hinduragi's, but when I read it I thought "this makes sense" and decided it would be worthwhile to support this idea. It was sloppy but it was a newb mistake, not a scum ploy. As I played with Shotty, here and in other games I won't say more about, I began to realize that his illogic is not necessarily a scumtell, which is the point where I began to back off.

And, again, this post is based in the false assumption that Hinduragi was town.

Of Shotty's suggestions, I'm leaning towards examining silverbullet a bit further. I don't have a good read on him yet either way, so it can only help to get one. I'm gonna skim the thread quick and then post up my thoughts on silver's play so far.

More of the same stuff. Declaring what he intends to do before he does anything. Really reasonable sounding progression of thought, which he wants to make sure we all are aware of.

I don't see how letting the town know what I plan to do next is scummy. It might be bad play, but I don't think it's indicative of my alignment either way since I did follow through with a (weak) analysis.

@ everyone -

If you've been skimming through this wall up to this point, here's where I want you to pay close attention:

@Arch:

I can understand your argument against Hinduragi, but I'm not sure I necessarily agree with it. Couldn't his self-analyzing, overly-qualifying writing style be an indicator that he's newbtown as much as newbscum? The way I'm reading it, those same efforts to sound logical seem more like a less experienced townie trying to make their arguments sound logical so the rest of the town will follow them. Not to mention the remainder of Hinduragi's posts aren't seeming especially scummy to me. Are there any other scumtells you're picking up in his play thus far?

And what do you think of Hinduragi's response to your questions? You don't reference them at all in your next post, where you're attacking G&H instead (an attack I'm growing to agree with, btw).

Extensively

defends Hindu out of the blue, for no real reason. Not only expresses his opinion of my argument against him, but also asks me very intently what I think of Hindu's response to my initial attack. The fact that I hadn't mentioned his responses yet was evidently really significant to him, as not only was he following Hindu closely enough to

notice

that I hadn't responded...he felt it important enough to comment on.

Why does Switz care so much about my suspicion of hindu? I mean, it'd be one thing if Hindu was about to be lynched or, something. But he wasn't.

Also, Switz's attempt to explain away Hindu's actions gives Hindu HUGE benefit of the doubt. I explained

precisely

why I found Hindu's nervous energy to be more of a scum-tell than a newbtown tell. Switz is adding nothing to the discussion here, and I interpret this as his being freaked out at the fact that we already caught his partner, without him really understanding what it is that we found.

I defended Hindu for the very simplest of reasons: I thought he was town, and I thought you were scum trying to save Shotty by distracting us. Not to mention I saw in Hindu's posts something I saw in mine--the effort to sound logical in order to be taken more seriously. Hence why you now think I'm scum. Except my posts actually do sound logical for that reason, whereas you pegged Hinduragi right from the start.

And I think it was absolutely logical for me to ask about your response to Hinduragi. At the time, it seemed like you had completely dropped the case to start questioning G&H, and I couldn't think of a reason why you'd ask the questions if you weren't interested in the responses.

But wait, it gets better:

@Hinduragi:

While I do generally disagree with the bandwagon against you, I do think that you're not doing enough to actually defend yourself. Arch and Foil (and Shotty, to a certain extent) all have accused you of being scum, and all you've done in response is calmly answered their questions. That's good, but it's really not enough to clear you. You're off my list of targets for now, but I will be keeping an eye on you.

Pure. Scum.

More coaching here, telling Hindu precisely what he ought to do to improve his situation.

And then, the weakest declaration of fake suspicion ever. "You're off my list of targets for now, but I will be keeping an eye on you." Give me a fucking break.

Here's my translation of this whole quote: "You haven't sucked enough horse cock for me to bus you quite yet, but you need to start pulling your own weight. Get your act together, partner!"

Yeah, there's no defense for this except my Reason #1. It was stupid and naive and it won't happen again whether you lynch me toDay or not. And it was probably colored by the suspicions of you I had at the time.

Next, he votes G&H, even though nothing about his shotty case has changed at all. He essentially goes from voting who he thinks is scum to who he thinks would make a pro-town policy lynch.

I ask Switz about his G&H vote, and this is his response:

@ Switz - what are you accomplishing with your G&H vote exactly? I like most of your play so far, but I think you aren't maximizing the information generating potential of your actions right now.

I'm indicating that I think he should be lynched?...I'm not sure what your problem with this is. Would you rather I just voted and unvoted every player in succession, as you seem to be doing? We can question people without voting them arbitrarily. Also, how do you expect to definitively find both scum today? For one thing, you can't definitively know anything until after lynching a scum/N1 w/ a cop, and for another,

I was under the impression you too were looking to get rid of G&H tonight.

And Foilist, just a quick answer on why you FoSed me, since I really don't get it.

Read my question. Now read his response. Now read my question again.

Overreaction much? I don't attack or accuse him of anything remotely scummy. In fact, I even compliment him on his play. He, however, was obviously on the edge of his seat, as his response is aggressive and overly-defensive. He even tries to flip it back on me, misrepping my play and throwing a barrage of heated questions at me.

Boldest is again the scummiest line of this section, where he pretty much gives away the real reason he had his vote on G&H to begin with.

You and Foilist convinced me going after G&H was the smartest town move, and then as soon as I voted G&H you turned around and implied that I wasn't accomplishing anything with my vote. Of course I overreacted. Yes, I voted G&H because you and Foilist were. But because I agreed with what you thought, not because I was trying to bandwagon him.

@ Shotty

As Seraphim has just said above, not everyone can be Prox's scumbuddy. If you are really town, give us some actual evidence for your accusations, not OMGUS and AtE.

I decided to unvote you to go after G&H, but more and more it's looking like I should go back to you. (Arch: not an excuse to ignore my accusations).

Vote: Shotty

More of the same.

I could go on for several pages with these sort of things, but I don't want to waste your time. If you read his iso, a lot of it should jump out at you.

I don't really see this as scummy at all. I thought it was quite clear that I thought lynching G&H was good because he was anti-town, and I thought lynching Shotty was good because he was scummy. So just because I was voting one hadn't meant my suspicions had changed regarding the other.

Skipping to the startling conclusion:

Uhh...because when scum claims cop and you're the real cop, you counterclaim so the town doesn't get led around by the nose by the scumteam. Real cops staying quiet to save themselves are not playing to their win condition.

I did not think I was going to be doing this earlier in the game but Vote: Hinduragi.

Oh? You didn't think you were going to be doing this earlier in the game? Thanks for telling us.

This is the most obvious bus ever. Like, EVER. It was a fairly safe one too, because it seemed at the moment like Seraphim was gonna get lynched. This enabled Switz to distance from his partner while simultaneously staying off the mislynch wagon. Great move.

And it doesn't make any sense as town. Go back up and read his defense of Hindu from earlier. I don't have it quoted, but at one point he even threatens to vote me if I don't explain my suspicion of Hindu.

Here, however, despite having never agreed with any of my and foilist's earlier attacks on Hindu, he suddenly decides that Hindu is now his new top suspect, something which he "did not think he was going to be doing earlier in the game." For a really weak reason too.

What exactly is it that Hindu said about cops there that was SO scummy, it changed Switz's mind? Nothing. He just had the

audacity

to suggest that maybe a cop counterclaim wouldn't necessarily be the best play right then. This opinion, which is actually a common town opinion, is what supposedly pushed Switz over the edge.

See Reason #2. I thought, as I clearly state in this post, that the best play for a real cop to make at this point was to counterclaim. Hindu went after Shotty for suggesting that the Cop claim, and since I had been convinced Shotty was town at this point, I saw this as a pretty scummy move, so I impulsively voted.

Unfortunately, as numerous others pointed out, this is not the case. So what I should have done was unvote Hinduragi. In fact looking at my next post, my last one from D1, I think I may have honestly forgotten that I was voting for Hinduragi, because I say "My vote would put him at L-1, but since we have the time I won't give it," which seems to imply I thought I wasn't voting anyone. Dumb mistake. But a mistake, not a bus. I didn't really realize Hinduragi was that close to a lynch either, which is yet another mistake.

But I think the point I'm trying to make here is that my voting of Hinduragi doesn't really make sense as town or as scum, so why make it into a scumtell that doesn't exist?

Final word:

Okay, so as much as I want to believe Prox is town and I haven't been following scum after townShotty, the more I look at things the more Prox seems scummy. I've skimmed through his ISO, and throughout the Day, he's:

Flipfloppy on G&H
Went after Shotty relentlessly with little initial reason
Cribbed most of his Shotty-argument from Hinduragi
Switched wagons at a convenient and appropriate time
Willing to completely change his convictions at the drop of a hat (see above, w/ Shotty/Seraphim switch)

My vote would put him at L-1, but since we have the time I won't give it. I'll just join in the asking for a claim.

Here, he starts off the beginning of his next cycle, which is in this case the moving of his vote from Hindu to Prox. He declares exactly what he is doing, and feels it is very important to explain why he

isn't

already voting for Prox.

I want everyone to notice an important pattern here: Switz's suspicions are determined by what everyone else in the town is saying. He has followed town opinion like an obedient dog:

- He voted shotty only after everyone else had expressed suspicion of him.
- He moved his vote to G&H after

agreeing

with foilist and I, and became very flustered when he realized that I didn't actually want to lynch G&H immediately.
- He returns his vote to shotty, his initial, safe target.
- He moves onto Hindu for a very fake reason, obviously to distance himself and because he feels hindu is losing against foilist.
- He

talks about

, in passing, how he plans to vote Prox soon, and now agrees with everyone else, and is only abstaining to avoid putting Prox at L-1, but makes sure we know that he will "join in asking for a claim."

Switz has done very little truly original scum-hunting of his own (I won't say none, that would be a misrep), and certainly seems to be very mindful of town opinion. He doesn't commit to anything until he feels he has the backing from other people for it, and is always nervously analyzing himself in his posts to make sure there is nothing he can be attacked for.

I don't know what I can say to this to convince you otherwise. Yes, I have been over-mindful of town opinion, and yes, I've done very little original hunting (although there is some early in the Shotty case). But it's not because I'm scum. Not the strongest of arguments, and I'm not expecting it'll save me, but it needs to be said.

Conclusion[/u][/b]

You guys, we have our scum. I’m 100% on this, and I'm happy to lynch now.

Summary

Reasons that Switz is scum in order of significance:

1) He blatantly coaches confirmed scum Hinduragi and gives him preferential treatment on more than one occasion.
2) His play is filled with precisely the same kind of nervous energy that we nailed Hinduragi for yesterday. He over-explains, qualifies and requalifies, overreacts to things, and generally posts in ways that do not bespeak of a mindset which is ignorant of the roles. Most his reasoning sounds fabricated, and he goes to great lengths to make sure that every little detail of it is understood.
3) His votes are cast in a manner very reminiscent of classic scum play. He always picks safe targets, and always votes for players after OTHER people have expressed suspicion on them. Also, he very awkwardly foreshadows the progression of his suspicions before casting a vote in a way that seems contrived.
4) His hinduragi vote doesn't make any sense, and smells overwhelmingly like a bus that he didn't expect to go all the way through.

Let's do this guys.

vote: switz

So in response to your summary:

1) Read Reason 1
2) Read Reason 2
3) Read Reason 2
4) If it doesn't make sense, it's not a tell either way.

Silver case will be up tonight. Yes, I'm aware this is yet another example of me projecting what I'm going to do to town. But unless Seraphim is really the Cop and investigated me last night, this is my last Day and I need to get all my suspicions out in the open.

[Switz]

Ok, well I guess all I have to say is good luck on Day 3 then, cause you're going to wake up in the morning if you lynch me, I guarantee it. At least having lynched Hinduragi keeps you out of Lynch or Lose tomorrow.

Here's my Silver case, for all the good it'll do me. My comp is being a bitch so I'm sending it as two posts in the hope that works:

Silver doesn't really start the game until page 5, although he does answer Shotty's questions earlier. This is his first real post, and in it he unvotes his RVS (Haylen), says we are getting "serious so soon," brings up those who haven't posted yet, and says he doesn't want to lynch anyone yet. But then in his very next post he encourages Shotty to keep voting for G&H if he wants him dead. This isn't an direct contradiction, but it does seem odd for him to be saying "let's not lynch anyone" out of one corner of his mouth and "if you want to lynch someone you should" from the other.

Especially in the wake of the contradiction he actually calls Shotty on:

nah im good, but i will hammer him if he gets L-1.

If he were to get to L-1 in the next 2 hours, you would hammer?

yes i would hammer because that means others feel he would hurt the town as do I.

Why would you be willing to end the day so incredibly early? We have quite awhile to gather info on everyone... there are still people who haven't posted yet... and G&H's actions (not intentions) in my mind haven't really given me room for judgement yet.. also there still are two people that haven't even posted yet

Silver's not nearly as concerned about the fact that Shotty would be potentially hammering someone town as he is the fact that Day would be ending early, and then there's that repeated focus on waiting until everyone shows up that's going to be a major theme throughout.

In addition, Silver adds this tidbit at the end of his post:

I would vote shotty but that throws him on L-1,

and I'd like to actually get a few reads on others and hear from the other two people before this day ends.

If this is scummy when I do it, it's certainly got to be scummy when he does it. And then there's that desire to wait again, for the third time in one post.

His next post is only significant because he gives Hindu a "cookie" for his case, but then G&H questions him on his odd request from above, where he tells Shotty to keep his vote on G&H even though he himself is not willing to vote G&H. Here's what he says:

I unvoted you because it was RVS on you and I didn't find it applicable to keep the vote on you as you weren't suspicious at the time to me. It seemed that I had "convinced" shotty to unvote you as well. Since (if memory serves me right) his vote was not RVS and votes to pressure someone in my mind always helped. Basically I did not mind his vote on you as I said, pressure is always good and you were only at l-3 with my unvote (I believe anyway). Is that sufficient or would you like me to go in even greater detail?

So basically, Silver's saying he thinks G&H isn't suspicious, but he thinks Shotty should have left his vote on G&H to put pressure on him. Doesn't this look like a bit of a discrepancy?

Then Silver comes back to the question he asked Shotty (in ISO 10) about why he would want to end the day so early. And I think it's very telling what he says about it.

Right now I would throw my vote on you til you answered said question. However I still want reads on the other 2 who have contributed nothing yet thus I'm holding off. But just warning you right now, your #1 on my list until you at least answer said question.

Shotty's "#1" on Silver's list, but he's choosing not to vote for him anyways. Why? Apparently, because Silver doesn't have reads on the two people who haven't posted yet. What's more, Shotty's only going to be #1 on his list until he answers Silver's question. Yet only a few posts prior, back in ISO 10, Silver says the same thing, that he would throw his vote on Shotty except for <blank>. He's consistently staying away from the wagon while giving it and Hinduragi his implicit support.

Then G&H steps in, and it seems like he's the only one who's consistently questioning Silver about his own contradiction in the chain of Q&A with Shotty. He asks,

So you confirm that you had no problem with drmyshottyizsik's vote staying on me. When you said that to drmyshottyizsik, you added: "Worse case scenario is Good & Honest gets quickhammered which then lets us investigate the wagon and more than likely the hammerer". It sounded to me like you didn't think that that worst case scenario was really bad, i.e., even if I was quickly lynched, there would be something to investigate.

However, then you asked drmyshottyizsik "If he were to get to L-1 in the next 2 hours, you would hammer?" and when drmyshottyizsik answered [...] your reaction was "Why would you be willing to end the day so incredibly early? We have quite awhile to gather info on everyone... there are still people who haven't posted yet... and G&H's actions (not intentions) in my mind haven't really given me room for judgement yet.. also there still are two people that haven't even posted yet!". This sounds to me like you were definitely against that "worst case scenario", which previously didn't seem to be that big of a problem for you.

Silver responds with a vague statement that there's a difference between voting for someone and being ready to hammer them, but that doesn't really answer G&H's question. What G&H wants to know is why Silver was okay with G&H getting hammered when the town's main target was G&H and why he wasn't when the main target was Shotty. The answer: because he's scum.

And then in that same post, he suggests to Hindu that ganging up on Shotty isn't bad, and he's totally okay with wagons shifting around until they find someone the town can agree on: a strategy that doesn't help town in the slightest. He should be actively scumhunting, not waiting around for everyone else to decide who scum is. That's something scum would do.

Here, he's still infuriatingly noncommittal on the Shotty wagon. Apparently, he thinks Shotty is scum, but doesn't want to cast his vote until people react to the replacements. This is just getting ridiculous. And then there's this, his first post after Arch votes Hinduragi. He doesn't agree with Arch or disagree, he just passively asks Hindu to post links to his prior games, presumably as a way for his scumpartner to defend himself. This is the closest he comes to forming any sort of position on Hinduragi all game, except for giving him a cookie for his case.

More notably, as soon as Hindu is suspected, the quantity and quality of Silver's posts declines further and further. He doesn't post anything game-related until the focus has been shifted to G&H by Foilist and Arch, but all he asks is what G&H's success rate is--a prime example of active lurking. He then gives a nonresponse to a question I ask him about questioning Shotty earlier, but then vanishes while Foilist goes after Hinduragi again, only resurfacing after Arch specifically asks him why he's not voting, at which point he votes G&H. He tries to justify both his vote and his reason why he hadn't voted before, but I'm not buying it anymore:

I didn't throw a vote as I wanted to see Good's reactions and if he would actually change... throwing my vote on him now cause it's obvious he won't and I'll be suspicious of him the whole game. His post just seemed to be begging to get off his back about the playstyle and he's not going to stop thus i'm fine with him bein lynched for now.

Which would be okay except this is the first time since his semi-random vote at the beginning of the game when he's expressed any interest in lynching G&H. He's just following what he believes to be the wishes of the town as a whole as well as pulling attention away from his scumbuddy Hinduragi.

Shortly after, Arch points out that the town is not ready to lynch G&H yet, and says sticking to the wagon is scummy and active lurking. Silver responds by throwing out this convoluted reasoning:

Ummmmm bob... where did i say... "LETS LYNCH G&H NOW!"? No kidding the town isn't ready to lynch him yet... all I've said is i'm fine if he ends up getting lynched for now and threw my vote on him to add some actual pressure to him. Maybe he'll actually do something. Since when has adding pressure done nothing (exception being haylen apparently).

Here's the play-by-play of this paragraph, from Silver's POV with my response in bold.

I didn't say "Let's lynch G&H now."

Except the reason you gave for your vote is because he won't change his playstyle and you'll be suspicious of him the whole game. This, at the very least, implies that you will not change your vote, so it doesn't matter how long Day takes for you.

Of course the town isn't ready to lynch him yet.
I'm okay if he gets lynched, for now.

This contradicts your reason for voting him. You say here there is a possibility you will unvote him, but your reason for voting on him hinges on something that will not change. Why, then, would there be a possibility that you would unvote him--except to jump on a better bandwagon.

I voted him to add pressure, maybe he'll do something now.

This doesn't make sense either. G&H shows absolutely no signs of changing his playstyle at this point. If you wanted to productively hunt for scum, you'd be putting pressure elsewhere.

After Arch goes after him for this, he responds, going through each of Arch's accusations one by one. Going through each isn't very helpful, but one in particular sticks out at me.

----If you think you've played well so far, then by all means, show me the error of my ways.
I've gotten reads on mainly everyone here thus far... I concentrate on one scum at a time... the one person i'm leaning scum though am not fully sure is G&H thus my pressure on him.

This is patently untrue. The only way this would be a true statement is if Silver has a read on everyone which he has kept privately to himself and never hinted at in his posts--and there's no indication that this is the case--or if Silver is scum, in which he would of course have a read on everyone in the game.

Silver then goes back to posting with minimal content for a few days, returning on page 12 where he posts noncommittal reads on both G&H and Shotty. In his next post, he begins a short conversation with Hinduragi that is the only time the two ever address each other directly:

SB - Why is your vote still on G&H? I thought we established that all we have from him so far is that he has an anti-town playstyle. Your play so far for me is null tell leaning scum. Also, sarcasm aside, based on the post where you voted G&H, it seems like you did that because you were pressured to post. When you replied to bob, I don't agree with putting votes on G&H just to pressure him. Remember that he was already L-2. He stated at L-2 his playstyle would remain indifferent. If we move him to L-1, I see a possible mislynch in case a random townie starts seeing the point of voting him and he is accidentally quick lynched.

Hindu - whoops...
[...]
Votes still on G&H cause I'm not sure if I wanna hop the shotty wagon just yet as we still gots a weekish before our deadline. (Basically the vote on G&H is harmless now and I want more responses from certain people before I decide to switch). When was he at L-2 though?

SB - He was at L-2 on page 4, post 85, during the VC. Also, is there another reason as to why you voted Arch so suddenly?

-Hindu, Prox
[...]
Your questions are similar thus grouped!
I am leaning arch being scum right now as 1. He's made 2 (or more?) posts already... without mentioning my case. Granted his latest post quickly talks of V/LA (how convenient..) but he went out of his way to make another case... while ignoring my own against him. Thus why my vote is on him

In the wake of Hinduragi being revealed as scum, doesn't this conversation, especially the first part, read like a scumconversation?

Hindu: Why are you still voting G&H? You look scum. You only voted him because you got pressured to.
Silver: I'm not sure if I want to be on the Shotty wagon. I'll get off soon though.

And when he makes the last post, he's halfway to doing just that, jumping off G&H to vote Prox. First, he plants the seeds, at the bottom of the above-quoted post:

Prox-
However Prox... your all of a sudden liking towards shotty... tempts me heavily to throw my vote on you.

How do you go from calling him an idiot to a bud? Explain...

And then votes for him in his very next post without giving any reasons except some vague mentions of "flailing." It plays exactly like his earlier hesitancy on G&H and Shotty, except this time, he's forced to vote right away because we're nearing deadline.

And that's pretty much it. There's not much content in his remaining posts of D1, although he does follow Hinduragi somewhat in his statement that Arch is town. D2 he's had one useless post where he throws his support behind my lynch with a few faint words of congratulations and then fades away.

So here's the crux of the case:

Silver has been active lurking the majority of the game.
His play is defined by an inexplicable desire to put off taking action as long as possible, both personally and game-wide.
He repeatedly posts his suspicions without votes, and refuses to actually cast the appropriate vote for as long as possible.
His reasons for voting/suspecting both G&H and Shotty are contradictory.
He and Hinduragi rarely interact on any level, sharing only one conversation which can be read in the context of a scumconversation.
He has absolutely no opinion on the Hinduragi case, and actively tries to draw attention away from it.

So, if you don't want to mislynch me today,

Vote: Silver

. If not, I guess I won't see you in the morning.

[Switz]

Ha, well I wish Seraphim had been here earlier so I hadn't had to write those massive wallposts. Good to know we would have gotten him eventually though.

[Switz]

Good work everyone! Sorry I almost drew the game out by getting near-mislynched. Good to see my dying case vindicated though.

I was hoping that by not claiming I'd confuse the scum, especially since it was unlikely that any experienced guys were there. I hope that helped.

I actually thought you were softclaiming doctor at the end of the day, so I would have totally been on your side if you had lived until D2. Unfortunately, you didn't, so it didn't really matter.

And Silver, you definitely could have made it through if you tried. You could have killed Seraph, like Porx and Foilist said, or you could have just not killed, fakeclaimed Doctor, and hoped Seraphim wouldn't have checked you overnight. It wouldn't have worked in this particular case, but if Seraph never checked, you would have easily lynched me today and could have gotten anyone on D3, especially G&H.

[Switz]

Oh, yeah, I forgot about the roleblocker. You still could have made it work for a day though because we would have gone right after G&H, because he said earlier he wouldn't kill if he was the last mafioso left.