Newbie 1030 - Game Over

[Newbie2010]

UNVOTE: Idle Thoughts

Will list opinions in a few hours.

[Newbie2010]

OK.

Sorry for a very late reply, first of all. RL

Right now I'm not liking Song of Fire and Ice at all. She is hugely indecisive, and while she votes people to get reactions and get her questions answered, I envision more a scum trying to make an assortment of posts scummy. She also doesn't explicitly state scummy points at times, just "interesting" points that warrant a vote. Picking on all the easy and not-so-strong tells doesn't help either.

Well not many people seem very interested in this game right now... There's only a few things of interest I've been able to note, not accusing anyone of being scum yet, but these are interesting things to note:

VOTE: Nachomamma8
Because he's already voting for me so I won't provoke any OMGUS, which is deadly at two votes from lynching since any scum can then end the day by killing me. I've read that setting up 2 competing wagons can generate much more information for the town than just having one. OTOH, if ICs aren't allowed to IC when dead I'll swap votes to someone else. Finally, I'm hoping that Nachomamma will want to defend himself, and since at this point we have no info on anyone I can just defend myself with "yeah, what he said".

He sets up a competing bandwagon to generate more information, which could be useful. But also note that the other bandwagon in on himself... just food for thought.

Yea, this quote. Food for thought? No elaboration = indecisive and hence scummy.

UNVOTE: VOTE: Ragnarokio Not an omgus, she obviously didn't read the thread. Those questions were not mine, I did not ask those questions of anyone. So obviously she doesn't pay attention to detail and that's dangerous for the town as it could potentially get an innocent lynched when someone tries to start a bandwagon on false information.

Yea. Transitioned from thinking that Ragnarokio is seriously scummy for missing one small and rather irrelevant point. (#29 to #47)

Oh yea what was the point of post 30?

In post 47, what is up with "big mistake" but still an unvote? If just a spontaneous mess-up warrants a non-RVS vote and you're still going to unvote when Ragnarokio makes a pointless excuse... that's just plain pointless voting!

I like #34 though. Elaborating on playing style is pro-town. Not that Hanzo doesn't have suspicion on you for being "cautious" though.

Also this. It's just retarded. Being cautious is also a town tactic. Anything someone says, even if it's by a confirmed innocent, can sound scummy and be spun in a way by the person doing the spinning to sound scummy. Being cautious sometimes helps the town more than just jumping in because it prevents quick lynches and stupid accusations. Your logic is flawed. I could give you many links to games where I have been mafia and there was nothing timid about me in those games.

Also Hanz (or anyone for that matter) I dare you to lead a lynch on me. I can be the first martyr to our cause, and when I flip town, which I can 100% guarentee that I will, you can stop pointing your finger at me Hanz.

Wanting to be lynched = ??? If Song of Fire and Ice indeed thinks that her death would help the town in any way whatsoever, she should ELABORATE.

These reasons for suspicion should be worth a vote, but I still have suspicions of Hanzo and muh. Expect some changes in voting soon after I complete my reread.
VOTE: Song of Fire and Ice

[Newbie2010]

Yea I should get around to elaborating on my suspicions of Hanzo and muh.

Hanzo:

Posts are good, I would like to see some comments on the following:

Nacho is the IC, giving him the most influence over all of the town. If he is indeed mafia we r screwed. If nothing credible is discovered about him by deadline; I think we should lynch him. Does anyone agree?
---
Idle Thoughts, I never "voted" the IC I simply put the Idea out that in its simplest for says: We should lynch the IC if we cant tell he's town by the end of the day. And if you read my posts you will understand why i later "changed my mind".
---
TO BE CLEAR: Ragnarokio and Song of Ice and Fire are scum until proven otherwise, However until you all feel the same way, it would be best to lynch off the lurkers because lurking as town can only help the mafia and lurking as mafia can only help the mafia.
---
TO BE CLEAR: I'm not jumping around. read my posts and know that rag and song are my main suspects. I'm voting to lynch muh316 because he is lurking. If i see that he gets prodded that may change.
---
Also to clarify, I dont know what muh316 is as far as town or maf goes, i know he is a lurker, and i will push for a lynch on any lurker if i dont have another option.
---
Food for thought, It is my opinion that distractions only help the mafia. Once a case is presented we should wait for a defense and then pressure the decidedly weaker argument. If we are going to do this, keep an eye out for those that are echoing questions already answered, or good arguments that are already presented. I think scum is more likely to jump on the wagon without doing there part. Then push for a lynch or back off and scum hunt depending on how things go. Jumping around like we are doing isn't getting us closer to finding and lynching mafia.
---
Food for thought, nachomamma8 has pretty much lurked the whole game as well, what are everyone's thoughts on this?

Everything that is quoted represent one part of one of Hanzo's posts. OK. So, first post: Supporting IC lynch just because he's experienced. Disagree. Second post: Elaborate, decide that Ragnorkio and Song are scum. So far so good. However, while keeping his cases on Ragnorkio and Song of Ice and Fire, he also comments randomly on lurking (3rd to last post), scum strategy (2nd to last post), and more lurking. (last post) I don't see a townie intention on that much of IIOA, and the scum intention I'd see is to divert the conversation from his real cases to lynching a lurker. Sort of "trying" to seem like helping the town with his valid points, but actually being anti-town with the IIOA about lurking.

I recognize that this isn't a strong case, if I were to pick two scum at the moment they would be muh and Song. I will clarify on muh in another post.

[Newbie2010]

UNVOTE: Song of Ice and Fire
VOTE: muh316

Stop with your IIOA and start analyzing posts. Your seriously pointless WIFOM in ISO #17 (which is a matter of playstyle more than natural instinct) is only adding to your already big reputation of massively lurking and not posting content.

[Newbie2010]

Song of Ice and Fire, you should claim even though this isn't L-1. Your posts still read scummy.

[Newbie2010]

By the way, muh, do you still think / did you ever think that Nacho is scum? Your vote is based on him being inactive. Do you have any other reasons?

[Newbie2010]

Hanzo:

Ok. Like I've said, your case is good in my eyes. What I want to know is why you would post IIOA so much as town. Not that I don't agree with what you are saying. It just seems like you are trying to hide your case inside other, more agreeable, and less useful material.

Also, I want Song of Ice and Fire to claim because lynching a claimed PR D1 is bad for town. Can you elaborate on your case against Song of Ice and Fire? What does her last post say in regards to scumminess?

muh: So who do you think is scum? Why would you put your vote on Nacho, someone that you have no scum feelings toward?

Song of Ice and Fire:

I've already explained my actions and stated my case numerous times, if I haven't convinced you guys I'm town yet, I'm not going to. I am a Vanilla Townie, so it's really not a big deal if you guys lynch me.

Don't like this. Explain your actions again please.

What was the point of post #30?

[Newbie2010]

To Hanzo in reply to answering your question:

Also, I want Song of Ice and Fire to claim because lynching a claimed PR D1 is bad for town. Can you elaborate on your case against Song of Ice and Fire? What does her last post say in regards to scumminess?

[Newbie2010]

I feel that Song of Ice and Fire is scum because she doesn't actively list opinions and has too many anti-town posts. (which I will state/restate in another post) I have already listed her possible scum intentions in my first post. However, the lurking from muh is more than unacceptable. I'm keeping my vote on muh because of this lurking. I don't like Idle Thoughts either, but he seems to be away for now.

Song of Ice and Fire: Please respond to the following:

1.

She's lost her scope of this game and is confused, but is still willing to vote out muh or me, but not support and idle lynch. This makes no sense to me. I could see if we were close to deadline, but this is scummy. Supporting lynches on people who obviously going to get lynched anyway.

How are you and muh obviously going to get lynched? And tell me why that is scummy. Basically, I disagree with your case.

2.

He sets up a competing bandwagon to generate more information, which could be useful. But also note that the other bandwagon in on himself... just food for thought.

This quote is you on Broggly. This is interesting yes, what do you think it means?

Idle Thoughts when you get back:

1.

Hmm... Interesting how we need to prod an IC.

This is interesting yes, what do you think it means?

2.

I think Song *might* be scum. I don't mind her vote on me, but like I said, it's very hard to defend my position- making me a prime target for scum looking for an easy lynch.

So? A lot of people *might* be scum for the same reason, maybe with another player. Is there something else that singles Song out?

More stuff later.

[Newbie2010]

I hate to keep my vote on muh, but until he proves to be unlurky and make reasonable attempts to scumhunt, I really think he deserves the D1 lynch.

muh: Some questions for you:

1. What reaction do you have for me throwing your vote on you?
2. Why are you still voting Nacho? You seem to think that other people are more scummy.
3.

You say that lurking is bad, but why? Also how can you say that I have been lurking? What is lurking to you? This is directed to Rag but also anyone who wants can answer these questions as well.

Answer this yourself. You admit to being a lurker, so tell me why you think that lurking is GOOD?

Song of Ice and Fire:

Because if you go back, almost every single person was wanting to go ahead and lynch somebody, and almost every single person said they would support a muh or Song lynch. It didn't seem like I could change anyones minds about me, as I don't think anyone understands my play style or my natural use of words. Those are things I can't/won't change. I thank Purple Oranges for actually reading my case and realizing I made sense. Also Hanzo too (who would thunk it?)

Your words are consistent from post to post. I'm not calling you out as scum because of your playstyle. Look at my first post to see my case on you. Only the first quote points towards playstyle suspicions.

Yea. Transitioned from thinking that Ragnarokio is seriously scummy for missing one small and rather irrelevant point. (#29 to #47)

Oh yea what was the point of post 30?

In post 47, what is up with "big mistake" but still an unvote? If just a spontaneous mess-up warrants a non-RVS vote and you're still going to unvote when Ragnarokio makes a pointless excuse... that's just plain pointless voting!

I like #34 though. Elaborating on playing style is pro-town. Not that Hanzo doesn't have suspicion on you for being "cautious" though.

Yeah, what's with this pointless voting? I'd like you to explain why you were voting Ragn on page two.

I understand you saying that you are willing to be lynched D1 is part of playstyle, but still don't like the post.

Your consistency with your playstyle is extremely town-ish though, and while I still think you are scum, I'd rather the muh lynch at this point in time.

2. So why'd you never vote Broggly/me after stating that? Woah, I would've immediately voted if I saw that post. It is scummy and nothing else. Considering how you hop votes a lot, this lack of vote is either a contradiction to your playstyle or you weren't being careful in your analysis of that post. Both of which are scummy.

Why didn't you switch your vote to Broggly at that instant?

Idle Thoughts:

1. So why'd you note it? To look like a contributing townie but actually be an active lurker? Explain please.

2. Explain your vote further. I'm not convinced that you can unvote right now without giving evidence that your opinions changed from the 22nd to now.

FoS: Idle Thoughts

[Newbie2010]

muh:

1. IF you want to catch scum you shouldn't be blatantly anti-town. Deadline is in three/four days... and right now at least you can try to help us find the scum (if you're town) because you're obviously going to be lynched for your lurkiness.

2. If you're going to be anti-town by not knowing who to vote, fine. Do you think that Idle + Song are scummier than Nacho is?

3. Bleh. Let's lynch the lurker D1 again.

[Newbie2010]

V/LA until the evening of the 29th

Sorry all.

[Newbie2010]

Song, I know what you mean about the activity.

Hey Hoppster, thanks for replacing and welcome

I'm not taking my vote off muh until he votes someone other than Nacho. So, muh, you're at L-1. Don't claim. If you want to be useful and save yourself then stop being an obvious anti-town lurker.

Post 250: Did you want me to answer muh's initial questions as well? (I know I didn't)

Yea, muh has admitted to being an anti-town lurker many times already. Most recently was 241:

3. Lurking is also a playstyle. Its usually something that poeple tend to do. I've seen many players(including me) lynched because we lurked and in the end were town. That is the main reason I have nothing against lurking. The vote on Nacho was to get him out of lurking and to post something. It wasn't because he was lurking.

We have like 3 days until deadline. I'm going to try to finish my analysis on Idle before my V/LA (no guarantees), as even though he's obviously just as anti-town with SOME of his posts, my gut instinct says that he's town.

Post 252:

+1 to first paragraph

Song, sometimes you change stance when you have fairly solid suspicions. I don't know about your vote on Ragn, but muh's case seems quite serious to me.

[Newbie2010]

rj:

Inconsistent, saying that bandwagoning is scummy. I can't read this, mainly because I'm not comfortable with an experienced player saying this, but maybe he plain doesn't care about this game. Or he was in RVS...

Sevei:

Her case on Idle Thoughts pretty much sums what there is to say about him. Her case on Song was good, but you sure could say that about more than just one player. I wish she would've continued the analysis and posted her notes about other people. I still can't get a read.

Hoppster:

This is the one that I feel is slightly scummy. I am by no means going for a Hoppster lynch today, but just making some comments before my V/LA.

1. I'm not going to vote muh yet - there was somebody who said they were going to hammer at L-1 I'm sure - but I am close to it.

Why not? You seem to be set on muh being the D1 lynch, considering your first post only mentioned him.

2. But with formalities over, I'm just gonna post a couple of brief comments so you guys can get a feeling of my playstyle-thing-whatever and get a read I guess.

More comments please. If you're trying to use that post to get us to have a town-read, you aren't succeeding.

In general, the rj/Sevei/Hoppster slot has been hard to read. Slightly scummy to null, but then again everyone can find something scummy in the matter of 15 posts.

Idle Thoughts, when you get here start posting content.

[Newbie2010]

I counted Hanzo as a vote for the L-1.

[Newbie2010]

I would be interested in what everybody thought of how they've been scored by Nacho. Obviously I personally have not been scored yet, so... yeah.

Same here.

I'm wondering whether it would be erroneous to include Sevei's accumulated score in my total when/if Nacho eventually gets onto my posts. If it hadn't just been Day 1, but had been later on, a very good player may get replaced by a totally awful player. If the good player has got a strong negative score (I suppose over a few days something in the region of -60 or below is possible), and then this awful player comes in and just gives off scum-vibes all the time, it would take them a while still to get back up to neutral, and thus in the meantime, using the score system they would be judged as more town than scum; ie. replacements should be judged starting with a clean slate.

Replacements should not be judged starting with a clean slate. Unless the replaced didn't really do anything substantial. (Which is basically peaceandlies, and partially rj and Brog)
Why? Scummy behavior is scummy. One might not be able to get the opportunity to question the replacement on what the replaced did, but they should still such information to help them.

What I like about Nacho's analysis is his inclusion of all players at the same time. One can easily pull out a case on someone saying that they are scummy by looking at a few posts - Nacho is taking into account all posts, and not tunneling on one player. What I really hate is his genorosity in giving town points. When someone just makes a random post, they get one town point unless it is an active lurking-esque post. Some people might post less, and in your system will get less town points mainly because their content is stacked in one post.

Pre-deadline decisions:

I reread Idle, and basically all I could really find is active lurking.

I know there's probably a lot more than this to note, but here are my immediate reactions

1. So why'd you note it? To look like a contributing townie but actually be an active lurker? Explain please.

Never answered this. Nor the rest of my post.
In that same post, I addressed his responses to my questions, which were satisfactory until the pointless unvote. If Idle has really been in 15 games anywhere, he'd know enough to know that no lynching D1 is bad, and without his vote on someone (which at least muh did) he is being anti-town. Not that it isn't too late for that.

I also reread Song, and I still see scum:

Her second vote for Ragn is bad.
ISO #33: and to your second question, he was in survivor mode, so I know obviously he's going to want to save himself by starting another bandwagon, but he says it's always good to start a competeing bandwagon for information, like he was trying to pull a fast one, sort of. It just seemed fishy to me.

Broggly was in survivor mode? Explain.

I'd be willing to lynch muh, Song, or Idle. Keeping my vote on muh for now because he's the most anti-town, even though Song is the most scummy. Hanzo on the other hand, like I've stated before, had scummy posts but so did almost everyone else, in my point of view.

[Newbie2010]

Purple Orange:

@ Newbie -- do you see your analysis of Idle potentially causing any major shift in your vote?

It wasn't really much of an analysis... I was just comparing his responses to my questions to his normal play. Active lurkers are still anti-town. My vote will go to any of Idle, Song, or muh depending on deadline circumstances.

Ragn: Song might not be the practical D1 lynch, but making a case is always useful. What if Hoppster held back his case and got NK'd N1?

Deadline Policy: Also, I'm for an Idle lynch, though I still believe that muh and Song make better lynch choices. Only marginally after:

Forgot to say that I'm also away till Monday- currently at a relative's for Thanksgiving, apologize for no posting Wednesday through now.

Definitely will post then, I apologize for the wait.

Though. Why? ISO Idle and you'll see him saying he will catch up at a certain point in time. He never really pursued a case though, and I doubt that if we leave him in the game for D2 he'll discontinue his lurk and only post minimal content when prodded to. ISO #21, putting Song at L-1 and subsequent unvote also highlight this well.

Obviously, people are pushing for a Song lynch. At the moment, I don't see why not- but I'll hang back for a little and review Song's posts, and make my own opinion in a little bit.
At the moment, I'll place a pressure vote. I'll be making a final decision very soon.

Putting someone at L-1 isn't exactly hanging back, and not coming back before deadline and saying that he'll make a "final" decision is worse.

However, although I can name a handful of such occurrences for Idle, I can do the same for muh, and that added to his lack of pushing cases and general disinterest in analysis would make me think that muh is more scummy of the two.
Like hoppster said, muh's ISO #21 is bad. muh, you shouldn't claim because we have had two claims (Song and Idle) and you can redeem yourself by posting more cases D2 without helping the scum by claiming.
Side-question: Did you want to claim because you want to be the D-1 lynch (with you admitting anti-town behaviour and all)? Or are you just treating your claim as your last words?

Hoppster: By the way, Idle has claimed VT. Song was the other VT claim. Idle probably won't post again before deadline, so you should make your decision with what you have now of Idle's 24 posts.

Song: He was at 3 votes when he made that comment and set up that competing BW. What I think about Broggly when he said that was he didn't really understand the scumminess of a D1 speedlynch or the usefulness of his "competing" BW.

[Newbie2010]

Plus Song and Idle are better strategically for lynching because they have already claimed. Hoppster if you had to choose between Song and Idle which one would you choose?

[Newbie2010]

LordChronos: From when I entered the game, I have kept my vote on muh. Why? I want him to know that his active lurking is being detrimental to the town, and his continued lurking behavior made me want to keep my vote on him. I had suspicions on Song and Idle that I pushed, but that doesn't mean that I have to vote them to push such suspicions. As I said, if no one else is online I'll make sure to hammer Idle to prevent a no-lynch. If Idle flips scum, I know it'll make me look scummy for ignoring him for my first few posts, but I really didn't think much of his lurking until his V/LA's made him post substantially less.

Idle: When you posted that muh's vote for you could be OMGUS, what conclusion would you draw from such an OMGUS vote?

Idle: (again) So muh is scum in your eyes? What about the people pushing your wagon, like Purple Orange and Nacho? Are they scummy for pushing such an easy wagon? Muh's not even on your wagon...

Hoppster:

Thanks for that. But turns out you were wrong about him not posting before deadline

That's a good thing

I've ISO'd both Hanzo's and Nacho's posts and I don't see anything where you were considered a high town read. Granted, I only skim-read, so if you ISO and find the post for me I'll gladly eat some humble pie. But... yeah, I'm pretty sure you imagined that. And that seems awfully scummy - only scum would find the need to keep constantly remembering what each player's read of them is, and thus it would be easy for scum to get two people mixed up and thus think that Person D thinks they are town when it's actually Player C.

Ragnarokio did have a town read on you at some point though.

Hanzo did say that Idle's one post was good enough to not warrant an auto-hammer. ISO #34. That isn't exactly a town-read, but to scum it might be considered one, as he did get out of a tight L-1 right there. To a townie, not so much, because he didn't really suggest who scum was in that post, so he wouldn't feel the same sense of accomplishment as he obviously did in his "Hanzo has a town read on me" post.

[Newbie2010]

Trying to get as much in before deadline as possible:

Purple: I agree with his attempts to engage other players. However, considering muh's early wagon to L-1, do you think muh's flip or Idle's flip would be more useful? Granted, Idle is going to have to do some analysis and make some points against more than one player, but so does muh. I think both of them have potential to help the town a lot during D2, one just as much as the other. Idle is still trying nonetheless, though him being prodded to might be a sign of scumminess. Why do you choose Idle over muh, when comparing two active lurkers? Just based on muh's two posts (ISO #22 and #24?)

muh: Sorry, I ignored your post a big ago by accident. Why I supposedly "haven't" looked into Nacho. There wasn't really one post that made me really get a big scum-read. He did indeed make valid points about Idle and other people beforehand however, and we have better lynch options approaching the deadline.

Reply to ISO #25 and #26:

Yes I am a hypocrite. That doesn't necessarily mean that what I said isn't true. I bolded that sentence because I don't see anything wrong with having a few votes. Having a lot of votes and just jumping around is a mafia thing because they want to agree with whatever case is currently at the highest priority.

Like many of your posts, you try to say that "scum" won't do this. That's not a defense. If you were seriously making a case (and I see your Nacho case based on him not contributing much and your questions towards him) you would have probably said "Oh, for the whole day I have had the same scum read" or something of the sort.

Also, Idle lynch is currently only "your" only option, not "our". I still think that a muh lynch would better, only compromised by muh's non-claim and Idle's claim.

Nacho has you on top in his analysis. Also your vote seems pretty OMGUS..... The whole post you were talking about others.

Why do you think that Idle thinks that you suck? And why are you using Nacho's logic? I thought you thought he was scummy or at least not townish with his primary lurking?

Posting in multiple posts so that people have a chance to reply before deadline.

[Newbie2010]

I kept my vote on Idle over muh, because muh actually DID show back up in the thread, instead of continuing to lurk. He's still not posted much, but it was enough to convince me not to switch over, at least until deadline.

Agree. That's one point against Idle.

Now Idle has come back to the thread, and looks like he IS trying to contribute. And Rag's argument that all this could just be a newbie getting his feet under him DOES get to me, and has continued to nag at me. So I think that in the long run -- if Idle is not scum -- he will learn to contribute like the playstyle of this site demands, and make more significant contributions to the thread than non-scum muh will. Muh has been around this site a while, and is still playing like a lurker. Idle is new, and perhaps more willing to change and learn.

muh is being anti-town and admitting. To me that is plain not trying. Otherwise this is another good point for Idle.

I don't think that he is making a case on Idle, however. He is just saying that he agrees, and will consider hammering if necessary (the pro-town move)

Yeah, basically what I am saying is that if we lynch muh, we will see more out of Idle, but if we lynch Idle, we're probably going to get the same lurking from muh.

Weighing this against the fact that Idle might have been pressured by the deadline and not just turning his game around, and the fact that we have an Idle claim already, I'd still say muh.

Problem is how muh will get that 5th vote on him.

[Newbie2010]

I mean if muh is a PR then that will help us, because there's a 50% chance that team is two goon, and in that case muh might be NK'd, solving both of our lurky problems in one night. If we can get set on lynching muh (find the 5th person), he should claim. If we can't find that 5th vote, then going at Idle is still OK. Not the best, but still OK. Anyone else online that would like to give an opinion?

[Newbie2010]

Yes I will vote Idle at 7:50 if no one else posts. Because we can't risk a no-lynch and should have at least 6 votes ready in case someone forgets or something.

[Newbie2010]

I know. The point is, he might have just been pressured by the deadline. However, what have we seen out of you? References to posts and how they are important please. Also, @324: It isn't a strategic vote, however. Who else would you expect Idle to vote for 2 hours prior to deadline?

[Newbie2010]

By the way muh, why aren't you voting Idle yet? Who else would you like to see lynched today?

[Newbie2010]

As to how muh got so many town points and Idle got scum points:

muh didn't do much scummy, just a lot of anti-town stuff. Idle made a few newbie mistakes and is still learning, so I'd be more lenient with the scumpoints. muh, having played before and all, can easily avoid most of the early scumtells and stuff. Not saying that Nacho's + score on Idle is invalid. Just that his - score on muh should be reconsidered with the anti-town behavior.

[Newbie2010]

Ok if you survive this day stop being inactive and you'll get less stupid. I still see partially mistakes, but can you explain your 15 games and how they were organized please? That's still a bit unconvincing with your newbscumtells. Yes don't be like muh and keep your playstyle even though its +10000 anti-town. But do make cases on other people. Last opinions anyone?

For you of course muh is the best lynch - there's no one else to lynch.

VOTE: Idle Thoughts

In the interest of preventing no-lynch.

[Newbie2010]

You are not the better lynch compared to muh.

No one else is online to hammer muh, so you have to be the lynch.

Also, one point in muh's favor is that he hasn't claimed, while you have. We won't want a 3rd claim D1 for no random reason. (this isn't scummy or anything, just strategy)

[Newbie2010]

UNVOTE: Idle Thoughts

kk, will you vote now muh? you won't hammer if you vote now. reply asap.

[Newbie2010]

bah, need one more person online for muh voting

Otherwise we have to fall back on Idle.

I know most of my posts in the last hour have been IIoA, but just pointing things out in the hope that other people online would acknowledge in their cases for the final vote.

[Newbie2010]

Last minute claim from muh? We have the 5 votes now.

VOTE: muh316

Don't self hammer if you're PR.

[Newbie2010]

If you're PR muh you can make a good case for the NK maybe. Idle can't. With that point in your favor it would be good to claim.

[Newbie2010]

Power role. Cop or Doc. They might provide Night-Kill WIFOM for the mafia. Because mafia would have to decide to fabricate a case on the PR or kill them (unless they have roleblocker, in which case they can roleblock him)

[Newbie2010]

Purple Orange: Self-hammer isn't bad if its the best choice. It is a valid townie strategy for close to deadline. muh, you there?

[Newbie2010]

muh, Claim?

and if you are PR you better vote Idle quick before deadline.

[Newbie2010]

I hate forcing out a 3rd claim, but seeing as muh is the best lynch in more than one person's perspective, it would be beneficial.

[Newbie2010]

OK Thanks and sorry for forcing out that self-hammer. With other people's opinions and points that we missed this might not have happened. I think there's not much more need for discussion, considering all of us (except PO) have gotten out everything we wanted before deadline.

[Newbie2010]

Purple: Ragn is sort of fence-sitting as you say, so considering all cases in the best interest of the town muh lynch might be best. He's being pro-town by self-hammering, because he's not PR.

Idle: If he gets NK'd, ew get two suspects dead in one night. That's good for town.

[Newbie2010]

Wow, he actually self-hammered.

I hope an IC or SE could clarify if possible, as self-hammering near deadline is a valid strategy o nthe forum I used to play on, but not sure about the policies here still. Seen a couple self-hammers because of deadline issues though.

[Newbie2010]

No I quoted you. But didn't want locked thread before I posted that. So didn't bother with quote tags.

[Newbie2010]

Idle in your eyes who isn't pro-town?

PO: What about Idle claiming VT? We thought that muh was best lynch, so we lynched muh. Simple as that. Other than the claim of Idle, I think that muh woudl be a better lynch.

Idle you will get a 2nd chance. But we will still judge you on your D1 behavior. At least I will. Hopefully everyone else does as well.

[Newbie2010]

Purple, just wondering: Did you vote muh just to see my and Idle's reaction or did you really think that muh should be lynched over Idle? Both you and I knew that there was no way muh would not be lynched without the self hammer, but I still think that muh is more info from lynch compared to Idle. And Idle I think is sincerely trying to help.

Agree with muh, but it might have been just a policy on certain websites. muh, is it really auto-lynch if you ask something like that?

Idle, the ghosted grey words is like your "icon" in a way. You choose it.

[Newbie2010]

LC: I know you might think this way, but the fact that I was highly suspicious of muh, more so than Idle, and coupled with the fact that Idle's RL issues are over, I prefered a muh lynch over Idle lynch at that moment.

Hopp: At #331 there were four votes on Idle (Ragn, Nacho, Hoppster, and I)

Agree with you that this doesn't make sense:

So, I am turned to Hoppster, LordChronos, Song, and Nacho. They were inactive that night, making them all suspects. I will go back, carefully now, through their reasoning for voting either muh or myself.

Re:378,

I now believe that either Song or Idle is scum. Not sure which... I'm quite sure though that it's not both of them. I am leaning towards Idle though at the moment for his ridiculous reasoning which seems to be an attempt to get suspicion away from himself.

Why?

Oh, and don't include me on the wanting to lynch Idle list. I voted only because I forgot that muh was online.

Hoppster: So are you going to decide between Idle and Song?
Did you think that my muh bandwagon pushing was scummy or just bad play? (I still think that it was good play for me to push muh BW, because of reasons stated near the end of D1)

Idle:

Why are Purple Orange and I town? That part of your logic doesn't make sense either.

However, I like your case on Hanzo. I also like the fact that you are using your own alignment to help you make a decision.

Answer this:

Side-question: Did you want to claim because you want to be the D-1 lynch (with you admitting anti-town behaviour and all)? Or are you just treating your claim as your last words?

As of now I can't really say much about Idle's first post. My read is still scum.

Song: Who do you suspect? And why did you keep your vote on muh right till the deadline?

PO: Don't really like your "casework". You're basically listing all the possible cases after the "fiasco" (in your words) in the muh self-hammer. How is that casework useful?

[Newbie2010]

I've thought it through, and you're right mathematically. It would be better for the mafia to split themselves I guess. With two bandwagons of 4, assuming there is one mafia on each bandwagon, there are 16 possibilities. With the two mafia on one bandwagon, there are 6 possibilities per bandwagon, totalling 12 possibilities.

So yeah, you're right, I'm wrong again. So if the two scum are on different wagons, then Song must be scum if scenario (C) is correct. That works for me.

What I don't really get in this point is why scum would either split themselves or put their votes on the same person. It's a WIFOM argument at best, with the scum already knowing that they'd get a town lynch. (if Case C is true, and Idle is town) When the mafia gets a town lynch all set, they'd best make sure that they won't be the D2 lynch (not fearing for being the D1 lynch anymore) so they can play all sorts of WIFOM games like this. Nacho + Hoppster combo could be very viable (in my eyes), and even Nacho + LC. Yes, if Idle is town that doesn't mean that we can rule out scum combinations. All of them still hold.

2. (D) Idle's town or scum, and Newbie was trying a ridiculously risky push for a role claim while his buddy slept soundly (if Idle is town). (Newbie = mafia; everyone but Purple Orange = possible mafia)

3. (A) Idle's scum, and Newbie (his buddy) was making a last-ditch move to try and save him.

Isn't #3 a part of #2? I felt as if the roleclaim was the best move. Simple as that.

I had a decent town read on Newbie throughout the rest of the thread, up until this, actually. Forcing a self-hammer, though, is hard for me get around. He says that it's accepted practice on the other site he plays at, though, so it IS possible there was no scummy or malicious intent in what he did. In which case (b) would be the more likely scenario, and I need to more seriously explore options other than Newbie.

The self-hammer was acceptable in my other website, but that doesn't mean it was the best move. It was the best move because I felt that muh lynch would get us more information in D-2.

Hopefully we caught scum- I feel pretty confident.

Idle: This is more than anything a theory argument, but scum won't self-hammer near deadline. They'd just stall and force a no-lynch, so that the town gets one less mislynch. Once muh self-hammered it was evident that he was town. No more WIFOM because if he were scum, scum would be one person down anyways. Post more?

Idle had claimed Vanilla Townie...did anyone NOT remember that?

Purple: What does this have to do with anything? I've told you that I've been weighing the Idle claim against muh's anti-town and unhelpfulness. muh-scum flip would also get a lot in the form of information, because like you said, Nacho could be scum based just on that. I would suspect Song more as well, if muh flipped scum, because of her from the start of the game suspecting muh but never putting a vote on until the very end. That similar behavior wasn't shown by other people. Since muh flipped town, my suspects are Idle and Song (Song from my points yesterday, Idle because of anti-town ness from yesterday)

VOTE: Song of Ice and Fire

The fact that he doesn't single out Song makes me think it's a genuine "them against us" mentality he's showing, with Song included as opposition to Idle. It seems quite natural the way he's done it - not paticularly forced, so I do think they are on opposing sides. The way he's lumped in Song with myself and two others I think are town also makes me thing Song could be town.

Hoppster: If Idle is scum this is all WIFOM. Putting someone on a random list can't be enough evidence of buddying. And you seem to imply that Idle is scum, because Idle elsewise won't know that Song is opposition to him.

Well, I personally found it helpful. My thoughts were all over the place and its helped me to just think about the mafia as a pair, rather than two individuals.

The problem is that we're not eliminating any pairs from consideration.

I understand your reasons for pushing the muh bandwagon (and indeed, it does seem like Idle is contributing more) but I still think it was the wrong thing to do. Even if Idle contributes more, at the end of the day I still think he's scum. Him contributing more does not make him less scummy if he just keeps contributing scummy stuff.

Agree. I just feel that with his absence and all giving him another 21 days will help us get a better read on him.

Right now, through my first read (there will be another), I'd liek to say Hanzo/LordChronos is a good suspect. Hanzo said, "Song Song Song, Rag Rag Rag," while quietly pushing for a hard muh lynch. Now that we know that Rag is town, it strengthens this opinion even more.

Idle: Hanzo pushed for a muh lynch because of muh's disgusting lurking. He was trying to scumhunt by getting a good read on Song and Ragn. So what? Do you have more examples of Hanzo being scummy? (quotes) Once again, in everyone I can find "something" scummy, just not the same amount for everyone.

[Newbie2010]

Hoppster: Yes. Neither Idle nor Song has done anything to rule out such a possible scum-pair.

Purple Orange:

Were you so certain in muh's townness that you thought he'd self-hammer? If so, why on earth did you keep pushing for his lynch, over the lynch of someone that was possibly scum? Did you think a muh town-flip would give more information and be better for the town than an Idle scum-flip? Were you so confident in Idle's innocence that you thought things had really come down to lynching one of two town players?

1. muh brought up the self-hammer possibility. Not me. If he knew that he could self-hammer and stated that he was willing, wouldn't his lack of self-hammer and no lynch be basically claiming scum?
2. No. I thought muh had a higher chance of being scum than Idle, because of anti-town actions.
3. Of course not. Scum flips always give more info than town flips.
4. I don't really care if muh is scum and decides to no-lynch. We'll just lynch him D2 and be left with 1 mislynch till MYLO. I'm not confident in Idle's innocence, but if he were scum, he would have to give us more information before the end of D-2 to prove otherwise. muh will just keep saying "oh I always play this way I'm anti-town but that doesn't mean I'm scum and if I'm scum oh great town didn't gain any info about my partner" on the other hand.


I brought up the VT thing because you were pushing for a PR claim. It's better to lynch a claimed VT than a possible power role, if we have to choose.

I had told muh to not self-hammer if he was PR and instead vote Idle because then muh would be a good NK option. And we won't potentiall yhave to use two lynches one on muh one on Idle if come D-2 the other was still acting anti-town.

[Newbie2010]

Let me get this straight. You told not muh not to self-hammer if he was a PR. That makes muh a good NK option????? We wouldn't have needed to use two lynches on anti-town players at the cost of a PR and this is a good thing?

Yes. Looking through Newbie games, when town is D1 lynch PR's rarely have much of an impact on the game (due to easy fakeclaiming)

Say around 1/30 where PR's helped town find a scum or made substantial other contributions that relied on the role.

If I am wrong about this in theory, please tell me why.

[Newbie2010]

Tell me why a NK on a power role is a good thing. And I have experience with games where a power role saved the game for town. See Newbie 925.

So 1 / 8 Newbie games you completed? Those odds are still worse than a random scum-influenced lynch!

NK on PR = PR dies.

Once again, in the case that both Idle and muh are town it would have gotten rid of one of my suspects and confirmed them town. So in my eyes it is good.

[Newbie2010]

You think that losing the ability for a cop to investigate scum or a doctor to protect is preferable to having a potential suspect around? Does town have a higher chance of victory with or without a doctor or cop?

Does town have a higher chance of winning in a game with all VI's with a lot of PR's or a game with all contributing players with few PR's? (Not saying that anyone here is an VI, just using an extreme example)

You can stop asking me about this theory argument. If you think that the PR is more important, then

explain why

instead of asking questions. Not saying that I am definitely right, just asking why you think such a play is scummy. I still believe it is better for town to eliminate a suspect.

(Look at the Idle Wagon... inevitably people would vote for a suspect that made it through D1)

[Newbie2010]

Hoppster:

Like I've said before, I haven't been able to deduce much from Sevei/rj behaviors, due to the low amount of posts.

I do have a slightly-scummy read on Hoppster though. Elaboration:

#13: Why did you vote Song and not me? You seem to be trying to push the deadline action case against me without voting for me, and instead jumping onto the easier bandwagons/votes. If you sincerely think my play was bad/scummy, why didn't you say that? Also, there's not much of a line between bad and scummy - if someone executes a theoretical bad play, then they are automatically scummy. Do you disagree with my D1 deadline play?

#14: He's explaining his logic based on his alignment. Agreed, just because Idle is town doesn't necessarily clear PO or I at all. However, your big list of who was wanting to vote for which person is rather fluffy - Idle's reason is based on his alignment, not because of PO and I "saving" him. Scummy because of the clear misrep and excuse to put the vote on Idle.

You clearing one of Idle and Song also is bad for town. Not scummy, but definitely not town-ish. As far as I can see, all your case on Idle is basically bad reasoning. Your case on Song is much more scummy.

#15: So why are you voting Idle and not I? Case D means Idle might be town but I am definitely scum, while Case A means Idle and I are the scum. More anti-town behavior.

#16:

Firstly, I only included your name in itallics, to distinguish the fact that you removed your vote.

What is your purpose in that list again? I don't want to vote for Idle even though he's been anti-town, because I see more anti-town behavior in muh. I voted because I feared for the lack of 5th vote. I never supported an Idle lynch at all. If you think that Idle is set to by lynched partially because of me, that's wrong. I wanted muh and Song from the start.

Secondly... Do you mean why I am leaning towards Idle or why I only think one of them is scum?

Sorry I didn't reply to this. Why are only one of them scum? Though you've answered this already, so no need to repeat.

In the rest of #15, you gave a ton of IIoA and WIFOM-based arguments other than the posts I've responded to and this:

I also think that your pushing of the muh wagon was acknowledging the scumminess of Idle, but at the same time you were saying muh's lurking is worse. Did you genuinely think muh was scum or did you just want to be rid of his lurking ways?

I might've said this before, but it's probably in an obscure place, so here: If Idle is acting scummy we lynch him D-2. If Idle convinces us that he's not scum then we gain from Idle's information. If muh is left alive and in D-2 he keeps lurking and not contributing content, we don't have much to gain from him. Either way muh lynch is better for us, as from D-1 the two players that I really wanted lynched were muh and Song, and Idle was just plain annoying with his bad logic.

#17 is more IIoA, but that's acceptable because he wasn't asked questions or to make an analysis.

#18: Good questions for Idle. If he replys badly it'll give us a better sense of how scummy he is exactly. Information is good.

#19: Your Song and Idle questions seem to be pair-fishing (if they reply badly) or just bad questions. If Song-Idle isn't the scumpair, you won't accomplish much with those questions because Idle and Song should themselves build an opinion about the other. However, you don't think that Idle-Song is the pair. About your LC/PO question: What about you? Do you think my play was just bad or scummy?

So out of 7 posts, 2 were good, (half of #19, #18, and half of #15) 3 were useless (#17, half of #14, half of #15, #13), and three were scummy (half of #19, #16, half of #14)

Please respond to my points. And if I forgot to respond to one of yours directed to me, sorry. Prompt me.

FoS: Hoppster

Not unvoting Song until she replies to:

Who do you suspect? And why did you keep your vote on muh right till the deadline?

From my ISO #42, posted 3 days ago. The first part you already gave a brief outline to. How about the second part? Inactivity just before the deadline is acceptable, but why else?

[Newbie2010]

Idle: You have to put quotation marks after quote=, like

Code: Select all

[quote="blahblahblah"]blahblahblah[/quote]

Also, nothing is sarcastic. Good answer to the claim question. If you answered the other question, you would have less motivation to participate.

Post more. Simple. Post more. I don't have my vote on you for a reason. You aren't contributing enough content for me to get a good read. And I was simply stating a fact, an argument against you being pro-town. Counting it against you would be absurd at this moment because it's mostly theory, but it's still a point nonetheless. A point worthy of note that would be used against you anyways. Even given the fact that you are new and that there was a small time constraint, some logic could've been applied.

[Newbie2010]

mathematical fail: I thought #13 was scummy at first, (which would've put my vote on you) but instead decided that it was more a useless post than scummy. Useless doesn't mean anti-town, just not relevant to the discussion and worthy of note as such. Yeah, it was a mathematical fail.

Its not that you aren't being active Hoppster, its that based on some of your posts I have a scum-read.

1. It doesn't mean you shouldn't suspect Idle. It just isn't as a bad a point as you depict it. Besides, it is only one post, and at the rate Idle is posting I'm getting rather frustrated. Either that or we've been pelting way too many questions at him.

2. You're not understanding what Idle means by "set up". He means that mafia are guaranteed a town lynch (in his eyes) not that PO and I set him up by "saving" him, which is how you are interpreting it. Either that or you're too set on Idle-scum that you can't think about Idle being town.

3. Your misrep is the set-up thing.

4. That's why half of the post is useless and half of it is scummy, while none of it is good.

5. Bleh, typo. I meant: "Your case on Song is stronger, because it makes Song look more scummy than Idle based on your Idle-case." Was thinking of two things at once.

6. I don't really feel about Idle right now because of his limited content. I would still rather a Song lynch.

7. Sorry. Yeah, I didn't think that muh was scum very strongly, just a mild scum-vibe. I wanted a Song lynch most, muh second, and Idle third. I felt Idle was rather absent, and didn't really have that many scummy posts compared to newbie posts. However, his D-2 posts aren't content enough for my liking either. Hopefully he'll get around to posting.

8. So why'd you rule out Song/Idle pair in the first place? And you're WIFOMing a lot as well, with you saying that if Idle is town then Song is mafia because mafia would put one person on each BW right after saying that if Idle is town, Song isn't mafia. And you switched your point of view on Idle-scum case as well. Basically, I don't see you pair-fishing after you've been changing your views on Song-Idle so much. It is bad because you don't need to encourage one of your suspects to build a case on your other suspect. You should see who they decide to build a case on and use that to evaluate, rather than limit their options and allow them to get away with appeasing the person suspecting them.

9. OK. Why isn't bad play scummy for someone that has completed four games on another site?

LC: Are you saying that muh won't be lynched D-2 if Idle is lynched D-1? And besides, if Idle indeed flips scum I have a good idea of who his partner might be. If he flips town, at least his contributions D-2 are already more than that of muh D-2 potentially. muh contributed 8 times less the content compared to Idle, even though some of the Idle-content is rather scummy and a lot of it is rather newbish. If you think that muh can survive lylo at his rate of lurking, go ahead and say my play was bad. If muh's going to be lynched eventually, why not get this claim out of the way quickly? The only bad case is if muh is PR and we lynched Idle. Even in this case both muh and Idle would be down D-2 with a 50% chance, which is good in my eyes at the cost of a PR.

[Newbie2010]

LC: Muh stated many times in the thread that he won't improve. If Idle is scum I'd say that Song might be his partner, but so might Hoppster. If he flips town, oh well.

Hoppster: Idle isn't scum in case D, and you said that you think cases A and D are most likely. That means I'm automatically "most likely" scum.

Song: I don't see it. Here's my list of suspicions if you are wondering:
1. Song
2. Idle
3. Hoppster

And if Idle is scum, he could be buddying with me so easily after yesterday. You do realize that right? If you think Idle/me is the scumpair, tell me why I'm scum individually.
LC + Song:
Voting yourself: If you feel I deserve a policy lynch because of my forced self-hammer, go ahead.

UNVOTE: Song

I'll self-hammer if one other person thinks I deserve PL because of my deadline action.

[Newbie2010]

I'm not self-voting now because Idle-scum would hammer and get town in a lot of trouble. But from what I hear I deserve the PL.

[Newbie2010]

If people want to PL me then they should go ahead. That's why I offered to self-hammer if your only reason is PL (you = Song + LC). Evidently not. But LC and I going back and forth on theory sounds like he thinks I'm bad for the town because of my deadline action.

I said I'll self-hammer because I wanted to see if anyone else thinks I deserve to be auto-lynched for that one action.

I'm not gambitting. I still think that voting muh and forcing the self-hammer is the right play. Since you can't convince me of that in a theory argument, you should lynch me because you think you are right and I am wrong.

[Newbie2010]

Honestly, right this minute, I'm leaning towards an Idle/Newbie team. If you guys read the last three pages about what they are saying about each other and such, it just seems fishy. I'm too tired to do quotes right now, but if you guys don't see it by sometime tomorrow I will pinpoint all the posts I see.

Which posts?

[Newbie2010]

Ok that's good. Considering you want to lynch me for other reasons, if Idle flips scum auto-lynching me isn't a bad idea. What if Idle flips town? Do you think I am scum in that case? Because I think that Idle will flip town (hence why I didn't vote for him today)

Not that his absence and less content isn't grounds for a lynch.

[Newbie2010]

This has convinced me that he's not scum, in that he's willing to self-hammer for a PL.

Why? I just said that because of the strong PL-feelings. That shouldn't eliminate me as scum anyhow.

Hi Hoppster. Who do you think is scum if Idle flips scum?

Also, in your "casework", if your cases are correct, and that indeed idle is scum in BDA and I am scum in DA, doesn't that mean if Idle is town I am town? Can you explain your "process of elimination"?

[Newbie2010]

Song: Idrc about that WIFOM. I didn't jump on Idle wagon because I thought he was slightly townish but his lack of posting hurt my read a lot.

OK, so I'm the "obvious" lynch. Lynch me then! No, really, tell me why I'm the obvious lynch. A helping hand on the quote tag is considerred buddying? really?

[Newbie2010]

All I can say to the Idle scumflip is; Yay we caught scum even though I was wrong. Didn't think I needed to state that as an "reaction" when it's obvious that me calling Idle town-ish and Song scum-ish just got disproven.

And I was in a rush to post in my first post. (Hence why I didn't even give a vote or any of my suspicions)

Here they are: (since I'll probably be lynched today after my defense of Idle)

Purple Orange:

She is most likely town. Would like her to give a content post soon based on idle scum-flip.

To ISO #31 (her last analysis post):

You think that I was making a last-ditch move to save Idle D-1 in your most likely "a)" Tell me the scum intention of doing that and why I'm scum because of it. (Now that we've confirmed Idle is scum, we don't have to waste time discussing Idle-town cases)

Nacho:

Analysis? Why does an Idle-scumflip make me scummier? I'm not really getting a read, but I think he gave an honest opinion on his page by page analysis after reading it multiple times.

Hoppster + Song:

I'm pretty sure Hoppster is the last scum, actually. I don't really see a Song-Idle scum team, because Song's responses to Idle's vote on her that put her to L-1 (page 9 or 10 I believe) seems rather genuine and all. My suspicions on her are mostly from her "careless" play with the WIFOM, IIoA, and some AtE in it. Individually, I feel that Song is more scummier compared to Hoppster, but Song-Idle makes less sense compared to Hopp-Idle.

Notice Idle's #44 skipping Hopp's questions. And fencesitting on Hopp in #42 (same with Nacho). Post 25 reply to Hoppster's post is only reply / interaction I see.

Okay, I'll take Sevei's opinion of me with a smile. It makes sense- I don't really understand how or even if I'll defend against that, so if you want my defense, it's a few pages back.

Interaction read - scum.

Probably most startling, however, is that Hoppster mentions Idle in post 12, after EVERYONE ELSE.

VOTE: Hoppster

Yes, I still have doubts about this. But really, interactions with Idle have shown me quite clearly that Hoppster is more likely to be scum.

Also, does anyone think I should claim? I understand that my "incorrectness" on Idle can be easily seen as scummy, and as such I will probably be lynched today. Just wanted to list my suspicions before I lynched D3.

[Newbie2010]

PO: OK, I wanted to lynch muh over Idle. Because I thought muh's lurking > Idle's lurking and other reasons I stated before. This is scummy now with the Idle scumflip, yes. I agree with you here It was scummy. Because of that reason exactly. I asked the question because I wanted to see why you thought it was scummy. It just happened that my reads failed me!

I put Song out of L-1 because I didn't want a hammer on Song, and wanted more content from muh. I don't want to vote Song because Idle-Song doesn't make sense. I don't want to vote Hoppster now, because Nacho's town read could well be an investigation result (no justification for both that town read and the town read on me D-3) Don't want to vote PO because I still think she's more pro-town compared to Nacho.

Going to ISO Nacho, UNVOTE: Hoppster

[Newbie2010]

Sorry, had an unexpected RL situation. I'll be away for at least one more day.

While I have internet (probably the only time I will for this trip) let me say this:

1. Looking at Nacho's analysis, I'm leaning Nacho-town.
2. I still think the Hoppster case is stronger compared to the Song case. (interactions between Idle and all)
3. Hoppster: Why do we lynch Nacho if Song flips town? I thought you were still suspecting me? Or are you talking about the hypothetical situation when Nacho claims cop?
4.

3. Again, Newbie may have wanted to quick hammer you. You can't rule him out because he didn't post between the time period I voted you and then unvoted you. Your justification is that because you're town and it will be lylo if you are lynched, scum is on your wagon. Nacho and I are on your wagon, ergo, one of us is scum (you don't say this, but it's heavily implied). My argument: I am town, if I get lynched it will be lylo, therefore scum is on my wagon, because mafia could have jumped on my wagon and taken me to L-1 but they didn't. You are the only one on my wagon, therefore using your logic (which I assume you believe is correct), I can conclude that you are likely to be scum. I don't believe this is the case: the point I am making is that your case is totally useless. Anybody can build a case on anybody doing that. It just makes your vote on me look like an OMGUS vote (I know that you don't like abbreviations, but this illustrates it perfectly).

Yea, Song's elimination process is really bad. PO / me are confirmed town if we make a post saying: "NO HAMMER"?

No vote yet, because I still need to decide between Hoppster and Song. Nacho looks town because his page by page analysis looks honest (after comparing it to one I did myself) and his case on Song obviously isn't fabricated.

PO is still looking townish. Getting a PR vibe from me only because of her staunch discussion of the Nacho-PR issue. Don't claim yet if you're PR / VT.

[Newbie2010]

Also, I would like a day or so to reply to the ongoing posts: And elaborate why my opinions are such.

[Newbie2010]

Hoppster:

No, my point was that you seemed to be agreeing that an Idle scumflip would implicate you as scum, and you were apparently so sure that Idle was town. I really would have expected some sort of post saying "Oh, wow. Okay, I know that makes me look like scum, but I'm happy to admit I was wrong" etc.

OK, I just didn’t see the point in such a post. I thought it was obvious.

Well, I can't defend myself from this, because you're accusing me of scum based on somebody else's behaviour. Not that that's bad, it's just that I don't want you to think that I haven't acknowledged this point. I suppose one point I can say is that the only interaction in which I could have been scum imo is my possible bussing of Idle in my intense questioning, however Nacho can also be picked up on this: he was the first major Idle lynch advocate.

I know, this case of mine is based on Idle’s behavior.

Um, what? I mentioned my suspicions of him in #2.

And also, shouldn't that be lack of interactions with Idle (with your point above being that he largely ignored me)? In which case, it seems rather contradictory to accuse me of being scummy on this basis when you've said several times before that you couldn't get a read on Idle due to his lack of content.

I don't personally think you should claim. If you think you have a chance of being lynched, defend yourself for as long as possible. Don't just claim when there's only one (my) vote on you. That'd just leave Nacho, PO and myself who haven't claimed. Assuming all who have claimed have been honest, one of the three are mafia, which means that if there are any PRs then the mafia have at least a 50% chance of hitting them.

I stand corrected about the #2. But it’s still a valid case – you didn’t really do much other than “oh muh’s a better vote but I don’t want muh to be hammered”
Lack of interactions with Idle: I’m talking about the few times you did interact (Hoppster asking Idle questions, Hoppster voting Idle near deadline, Idle responding to such questions, etc.
About me claiming: Agree. Just that Song + You + LC were sort of set about lynching me, so I thought I’d be required to claim near the start of D3. I wrote the claim question because when LC died, I wasn’t sure if there was anyone else thinking that the Idle “supporting” was extremely scummy.
Also, how does the number of votes on someone affect why they should claim?

Hmm. While obviously I'm glad that you unvoted me, I don't think that was the right thing to do. You just made a case on me. If I'm scum, making a case, placing a vote, and then unvoting randomly does nothing to pressure me. I am doubtful that Nacho's town read on me is purely from an investigation: it'd be pretty obvious that you were the cop or scum if somebody (eg, me in this hypothetical scenario) was acting scummy and then somebody announced randomly with no justification that I was their town read of the day.

Why are you glad I unvoted you? After Song’s bad logic of “eliminating” me as a candidate due to the NK (which was really bad) wouldn’t you want to see if Song wanted to place you at L-1??
If I were the cop, I would probably investigate you or Idle N-1, Idle because of general lurkiness and all, and you because of the replacements making you hard to read. Investigating me D-2 also makes sense because of game-over if the cop hits scum. That’s what my Nacho-cop speculation is based off of.Hence why I unvoted you.

Your reasoning about it using his town read on you however does seem both intelligent and town. Also, a declaration of intent on somebody who's just made you their Town Read of the Day seems pretty town to me. I am slightly concerned that you've raised the issue of roles here though. Why are you ISOing Nacho? You've just speculated on him being a cop, but then you're ruling out voting for the other three of us. Are you suspicious of him or are you investigating this idea of him being a cop further?

If he were to claim cop with innos on you and I, he may well be scum trying to gain a coupe of allies. I wanted to ISO Nacho to see if he had any scum intention behind his analysis with the PR intention I’ve already mentioned. (and this time by analysis I don’t mean the big player thing, I mean what happened in D2)

If Broggly was scum, then I don't think Idle would have complained so much about still having his vote down on him.

My first impression can be summed in one word: “overreaction”. I don’t think it is really telling, just a misunderstanding / questioning of the rules. Of course because of Idle-scum we can infer that he didn’t want the extra vote that was mine on him for obvious reasons. More than anything I still treat this as a null-tell in terms of buddying/bussing.

Wow. Never thought of it that way before. I completely agree. Idle always seemed very cautious, and I agree with you that I don't think he'd put his partner at L-1. Does leave me in a bit of a pickle with the remaining scum. Most scummy to me are Song and Newbie (in that order... although Song doesn't seem to have been so scummy recently and Newbie seems to be moreso to me), but then Idle play has made both pairings unlikely imo.

Having said that, not so unlikely so that I automatically am very suspicious of PO and Nacho. Just wary

This I don’t understand at all. First you say that Song is not likely to be scum because of their “pressuring” each other and etc. I feel that the Idle vote on Song makes Song automatically more townie (considering that the other two people Idle attacked at all, muh and LC, both flipped town. I also don’t think that Idle would really do such a drastic bus so early.
Next you say that Song and Newbie are scummy in that order, then you say that I am more scummy recently. I feel that using Idle’s actions as suspicions is less effective than using the person you suspect’s posts.

So, um... yeah. I think we're going to struggle to agree. The only person who really has a solid idea is Nacho, so I would suggest that a Song lynch is perhaps the most realistic, although a Newbie lynch is feasible. Having said that, Song will be getting back to us possibly with a solid opinion on either myself or Nacho, in which case I can see myself being bandwagoned.

I’m pretty sure Nacho is town. So you can correct your ??? to Hoppster and Song, in that order.

@ Song: Feel free to build a case on him, but I would suggest that a vote on Nacho is a wasted vote. It's only really you and possibly Newbie gunning for him - I'm agreeing with PO in that I'm confident of Nacho being town. So, if you want to avoid a No Lynch, I'd advise voting either myself or Newbie.

Cases are always good. Remember that votes are not permanent.

[Newbie2010]

Absolutely. If his scoring system has proven to be accurate and we can all trust him to be town, perhaps we should just assume his reasoning to be accurate and lynch Song? I doubt that he would get a town read strong enough to be made "Town Read of the Day" on scum (unless they're really experienced/gifted scum: unlikely in Newbie games?), so that really just leaves Song and Nacho as the two candidates for scum (if Nacho is scum, he would still select the most town people for his town reads of the day, otherwise he'd just look stupid/suspicious). Therefore if we lynch Song now and she flips town, we should be able to confidently lynch Nacho the day after.

Even if Nacho is confirmed town, this doesn’t mean that his reads are accurate. Why od you think that PO is “confirmed” just because of Nacho’s early town read? I know there are other factors that point towards PO-town, you can’t just use one of Nacho’s town reads to confirm someone.

Sorry Song. Although you haven't really seemed that scummy to me recently (Newbie's seemed more scummy imo), I'm going to trust in Nacho's town reads.

Why are you trusting Nacho’s reads? Just because he’s 4/4 doesn’t mean he’s right again.

Hmm. Didn't realise you were psychic. If you are psychic, that's extremely scummy. A townie psychic would have told us who the scum were by now. Joking aside, I do believe that you're doing a classic AtE. I think that's even the example they give on the wiki: "Lynch me, and you'll be sorry/you'll lynch a townie/you'll lose!"

Agree with Song AtE’ing

Anyway, I didn't actually realise you would be at L-1 (forgot that Nacho had voted you), but even if I had known, I still would have voted you, because I firmly believe it's the best strategy for town. Either that, or a Nacho lynch today followed by you being lynched the next day. But I think you're more likely to be scum, which is why I voted you. I did think that Newbie was scummier than you which was why I was sort of sorry, but with Nacho having a town read on him (as well as everybody else apart from you), it just makes more sense strategically to lynch you than it does Newbie.

Why would you forget that Nacho voted Song? I don’t buy this at all, considering how at the time yof your post you also were talking only about Nacho. Strategically? Why don’t you convince Nacho that I am scum?

If I get NK'ed, then I hope town would follow my advice and lynch Nacho. If PO gets NK'ed, then I will push for a Nacho lynch. If Newbie gets NK'ed, Nacho lynch. If Nacho gets NK'ed (which I doubt - if Nacho wasn't mafia, why would mafia kill him? I've made it clear that I intend to get him lynched the next day) then I would have to re-assess the situation, but that is very unlikely to happen imo. So, umm, yeah.

Why would you go immediately for a Nacho lynch in LyLo? And you are sort of assuming that Song would flip town, and sure of a Song D-3 lynch. I thought Nacho was your strongest town read?

Also, previously (see quote I reference below) you had decided to rule out Newbie, but now you've declared it's either him or myself with no justification (for both of us I think). Looks like you're just siding with the one pretty-much-as-confirmed-as-can-possibly-be townie.

And so are you saying that you think Nacho has got a town read (of the day) on two possible scum candidates in your opinion (myself and Newbie)? (Upon which the unlikeliness of happening is my logic based upon.) Not that that would be impossible, I'm just clarifying.

People’s opinions are different. I still think you are scum, and would push for your lynch until cop investigation or someone else’s case convinces me otherwise.

I never said you thought Nacho was scum. You misinterpreted my list. I put "Hoppster or Nacho" because, from your earlier post, it seemed that you had decided it was one of us tow that were mafia, but you did not say which. Which is thus why I put "Hoppster or Nacho":

Yes, Song rules out a lot of people randomly. It’s a thought process more than anything. I don’t like how Song’s using a WIFOM based case to rule me out though.

1) Well, it's just that Nacho's scoring system looks so impressive. Also, (although my previous post was not made with that knowledge,) I have found her latest post to be a bit scummy. And as I said in this post, I didn't realise it would take here to L-1. Besides, the vote isn't made so much on Song's scumminess, but by eliminating other possibilites (albeit inadequately in hindsight). And the only assumption I am making about his reasoning is that it's correct. A bit rash, perhaps...

Impressive? Is it because you got away with a -46.55 based on good D-1 play but started looking scummy in D-2 or D-3, while Song got a big + score in D-1? You do realize that opinions change, and a D-1 score won’t necessarily be anything close to a D-2/3 score. In fact, D-2/3 behavior is more telling because the extra information (the two flips) would cause people to make different cases based on what they think individually.

2) Egh. Certain specific circumstances? Would you care to clarify, or would this be speculating further?

Cop claim w/o a guilty isn’t auto-win.

3) As I said before, I trust in his awesome system. I don't see what there is to worry about. Although I suppose he could be wrong in his reads (paticularly if you're disagreeing with him on them), I doubt this is the case. However, I suppose the rest of town probably isn't as gung-ho as me to place a vote without hearing Nacho's case/justification.

Once again, just because you are convinced Nacho is town doesn’t mean you should be convinced that his reads are correct. They may be honest, but honest and correct are two different things.

I unvoted you because PO convinced me it was rash of me and that I hadn't adequately ruled out other possiblities. Notice the 'Preview Edit' bit.

The bit about me voting you without knowing it would put you at L-1 etc is just me being honest. I could have chosen to say "Oh, I didn't know, sorry, I'll unvote" or "I knew, I wanted to pressure you" etc, but I chose to be honest. Not following why this makes me scummy.

It makes you scummy, because according to Song, townies don’t quickhammer and scum always quickhammer.

It is also possible that the people who haven't quick hammered you are simply busy in RL (although this is not the case with PO it could be with Newbie). That's not a basis for saying the people who are active (and thus able to vote for you) are more likely to be scum. And the fact that it would have been lylo does not mean that scum was on your wagon. Using that logic, anybody who doesn't vote for a no lynch is potential scum. I don't know for a fact that you are town (as you say), and only the scum does. If town vote for somebody, that person could be town as well, and they (the person being voted for) can then claim that since them being lynched would put town at lylo, there must be scum on their wagon (as you have done). You have voted for me, and ergo using your argument, scum is on my wagon, because if I get lynched town is at lylo. You're the only one on my wagon, therefore you are scum.

I was busy on RL. Though I would still rather lynch Hoppster over Song, and hammering would be really bad play for me.

Yes, it does mean you are ruling everybody else out if you believe that one of the two people who voted you is scum.

You also imply that I've been twisting your words. I'm sorry if you think this is the case (not being patronising here), but I really have just been getting my interpretation of your post from what you're typing, and as shown above, PO has in at least some cases drawn similar conclusions to myself.

You’re still using other people as part of your argument.

[Newbie2010]

Why is referencing the wiki snobbery? It's using collective knowledge (which I presume is the point of a wiki). It seems rather foolish to just ignore it when it's there because several people have found it to be correct. Besides, the site tutorials practically worship the wiki. Don't see how you can blame me (or the rest of the group as a whole) for then using it.

Besides, it's not so much explaining actions and reasonings - it's just showing that it's scummy/a bad argument. Really, anybody can make some of the defences that you've made. I will illustrate with a defence from your attacks on me:

Hoppster: Song AtE’s a lot, but I still agree with you her one AtE was greater than the others by a LOT. This is a good case on Song, in my opinion.

That's just my style of play. I'm an aggressive voter, and I vote with what I think. I'm not going to ignore somebody I think is scum just because somebody else tells me I should. I don't take into consideration whether somebody's at L-1 or whatever: if I think they're scum, I'll vote for them, because it's for the good of the town. I know that some people will think that this is scummy of me and looks like I'm just quick hammering them, but I know that I'm town and I'm just voting for the benefit of town. I don't care whether you think I'm scummy or not, because I know that with my playstyle, we are going to get scum lynched. This is my first game, so I'm not very experienced, but whether you're experienced or not does not change the fact whether you are town or not - and I know I am town. If you lynch me, then the mafia will NK another town assuming no doc protect and we'll be at Lylo. I know that my inexperience and playstyle makes me look scummy at times - but would scum admit that they look scummy? I think not. Voting for me is a big mistake. It only takes one more vote before mafia quick hammer me and then we'll lose.

Good comparison, but truth is Song’s playstyle does contain more AtE than does yours. This doesn’t mean that you can say it is scummy, just have to filter it out of Song’s cases on you.

Although on the whole I do completely disagree with your logic, your thought process does seem towny. Having said that, pretty much everybody seems more or less town now. While your logic is absolutely atrocious at times, I don't think mafia would think that way.

Disagree, though good point.

I'll happily (well, perhaps happily is the wrong word. Freely?) admit the flip-flopping. I am very suprised nobody picked up on that before hand, as I've noticed myself doing it a lot. That's just because I'm indecisive though I guess. I'm not really sure. I'm finding it difficult to build a solid opinion. I didn't actually realise that was what you were getting at, you should have made that clearer. I'm sure that if I didn't realise it (and I know that I'm flip-flopping) then other town wouldn't have either.

But I am not twisting your logic, you're interpreting my interpretation of your logic incorrectly. You said

Flip-flopping is pro-town unless your cases for flip-flopping are bad. In this case they’re pretty good. I don’t like your over-defensiveness of your flip-flopping though.

3. Again, Newbie may have wanted to quick hammer you. You can't rule him out because he didn't post between the time period I voted you and then unvoted you. Your justification is that because you're town and it will be lylo if you are lynched, scum is on your wagon. Nacho and I are on your wagon, ergo, one of us is scum (you don't say this, but it's heavily implied). My argument: I am town, if I get lynched it will be lylo, therefore scum is on my wagon, because mafia could have jumped on my wagon and taken me to L-1 but they didn't. You are the only one on my wagon, therefore using your logic (which I assume you believe is correct), I can conclude that you are likely to be scum. I don't believe this is the case: the point I am making is that your case is totally useless. Anybody can build a case on anybody doing that. It just makes your vote on me look like an OMGUS vote (I know that you don't like abbreviations, but this illustrates it perfectly).

Are you trying to be counter-productive to the town by using an abbreviation on purpose ?It sure seems like it.

Umm... that kind of assumes he's a cop? It really makes me uncomfortable how far we're delving into roles now. Although I guess you're experienced with this?

Or are you taking his statement as a subtle (not so much anymore now I've brought it into attention) cop claim? I do agree that we could potentially just be discussing really pointless things. I feel like I'm just going in a circle all the time.

I don’t really like this, because you should keep building your case on Song. You are innocent to yourself no matter what role Nacho is. Why are you ignoring your case on me?

3) So either this is due to his amazing mafia reading skillage, or his prior knowledge due to him being scum? I really do think it would make sense to trust in the system and then lynch Nacho if Song flips town. It would really help me to hear Newbie's input into all this. (HINT: Newbie, post please. )

Thanks for the prompt. Sorry I was away. Tell me what other things you want me to address after reading my posts.

1. I assume you mean the huge Nacho analysis from ages ago? So do you think the analysis is accurate, or is it just that his investigation seems towny?

His huge D-1 analysis is what I mean. The analysis could be taken from a scum point of view, but all in all I think it was a pretty honest assessment of the situation.

2. Okay. That's a fair case. As I said before, I can't defend myself from that.

Didn’t expect you to. Thanks for the acknowledgement.

a) If Nacho claims cop investigation on you and I, then lynch Song. Should Song flip town we lynch Nacho.

Wait, your strongest read is on Purple? Am I getting two people confused? Sorry if I am.

b) If Nacho claims cop investigation on PO and either you or I, then I'll continue with this logic if that happens. I don't want to reveal my hand just yet.

c) If Nacho claims cop investigation on one or less of the people alive (ie. he investigated Idle/somebody who got NK'ed) or doesn't claim cop investigation, then we trust in his logic/reads due to his awesome mafia skillage. If he were mafia, he would still claim a town read on those who genuinely seemed the most town (despite him knowing who is town). If Song doesn't flip scum, then I'm still not quite sure what we'd do then, however, either way, it still seems to makes the most sense to lynch Song as it will give us the most information, rather than lynching somebody else who Nacho claims a town read on.

Ultimately, we have 2 lynches left to get scum, and imo one of those HAS to be Song. Nacho's system looks to be the most decisive thing in town, the rest of us seem incredible confused imo. He only has one candidate for scum, whereas I'm pretty sure the rest of us aren't that sure yet. Because Nacho's only suspicion (presumably) is Song ignoring her for one of the lynches would be foolish imo. We can rule out one person's suspicions with one lynch, whereas everybody else will require at least two. With the potential for these candidates being NK'ed, we can then reassess the situation tomorrow with another candidate probably ruled out from the NK.

b) What is your hand that you are referring to? Is it a case on someone?
c) What if scum no-kills to mess it up? (they know there’s no doc for whatever reason) Who would you go after in that case? Would you recommend a NL without discussion?
4. My analysis was basically a scoring system like Nacho’s, and after Day 1 you were pretty townish, around Hanzo’s level. Notice how my case on you is mostly due to D-2/3 behavior. That’s also why I’m reluctant to rule out Song.

[Newbie2010]

OK, I will get on to my Song-case as well as why Nacho is town. Sorry about the absence.

[Newbie2010]

Sorry, still working on my Song case. it's taking longer than I thought (forgot to make a Song case D-2, some of her behavior there was rather scummy.)

This is just my quick reply to Hoppster's post

Hoppster:

I don't seem to be phrasing my point very well. Basically, you had almost got to the point of saying "Okay, if Idle scumflips then I am scum". I would have thought that in the light of an Idle scumflip you would have thought of some clever defence or argument to prove that an Idle scum didn't actually necessarily mean you were scum.

If a townie is wrong, they would automatically be more scummy than usual, just because scum would benefit from a townie being wrong. There's not much I could've said to that other than I'm wrong. I'm scummy for it. And I can't defend myself.

As an explanation for the, um, "specialness" of my first few posts (reading them back now), basically, I was just extremely nervous. I'd been reading this game where basically all that happened was that everybody was jumping on everybody else for every vote and stuff, and the guy who hammered D1 got lynched D2. So that's why my first few posts are kind of weird. Now I've gotten into the game I hope I'm not coming across as stupidly flustered as I was when I replaced in. If I'm honest, I can't remember a lot about who I thought was scummiest when I first replaced in and why etc, because I didn't really know what to look for. I was just kind of going on the basis of other people's arguments and what made sense to me.

About you claiming: from what I've read in guides/past games, I had thought it was generally advised not to claim unless you were at L-1. Maybe this isn't the case, but it makes sense not to claim unless you are in very big danger of a lynch. I know that you could have thought Song and LC were about to vote you and you could be hammered before you got a chance to claim, but even still, claiming with few votes on you just makes it easy for mafia to pressure claims out.

Like I said, I didn't want to claim for the same reason. Glad we have same opinion. And I understand what you said about the nervousness and all. Like I said, your D-1 play was pretty townish. I was just trying to find a way to interpret your D-1 play as Idle-Hopp scum-team. This is still a weak interpretation compared to the one I have on Song-Idle though.

I'll be honest, that bit about Song putting me at L-1 was missed on me. I'm obviously not creative/imaginative enough to think forward like that.

And my point was that you implied that me being Town Read of the Day could be solely due to Nacho's investigation, which I thought would be very, very unlikely. I wasn't saying that Nacho wouldn't have necessarily investigated me N1, but I was saying that if he had, that probably wouldn't have been the only basis on which he declared his town read (of course, he wouldn't need any other basis, but without anything to back it up, it just alerts the mafia to cop and may make him look scummy to town).

Also, about me being investigated N1... I wouldn't have done that if I were cop (and obviously not playing as myself). The game which I had been reading prior to replacing into this game saw the guy who replaced in late D1 get lynched N1, which I thought I probably would have done as well if I were mafia (both in this and that game).

You're saying that you would've NK'd LC if you were scum? Well, who would you think a cop would investigate in that case then? Not LC of course, but who?

the guy who replaced in late D1 get lynched N1

People don't get lynched in the night.

Second impression: The second time I saw this (because I didn't really think it was that important my first time) was after Idle flipped scum and I was looking for D-1 buddying tells. This sort of stuck out, but since it's directed to me I really don't have an impression.

In hindsight, maybe I am seeing a bit too much into it though.

One buddying tell isn't enough to make a solid case. (Hence why my buddying tell(s) on you were only the "weak" part of my case)
For all we know, Idle could have left a bunch of buddying tells on purpose. Though someone having a lot of buddy-buddy behavior with Idle would be solidly scummy.

[Newbie2010]

Oops, preview fail. Will continue replying.

[Newbie2010]

Continued reply to Hoppster's posts

Okay. I'm a bit lost here - it'd really help if you referenced the quotes

But if you look at Nacho's recent post against Song, it shows where Idle bundled in Song with other people. Actually worked completely on me, I saw one of them as proof that Idle and Song weren't a scumpair. So I don't think that because Idle only attacked town in muh and LC means necessarily that Song is town.

The bit about you and Song is due to my haphazard reading of you both. Song has OVERALL seemed scummier to me, but post N2 you (to me at least) seemed to have a brief spike in scummy content while Song didn't really say much that seemed scummy. You also based your case on me on Idle's actions towards me: he had been ignoring what I posted for much of the time. In that, you're not basing your suspicions on my (ie, your suspect's) posts, you're using Idle's actions as suspicions. You dirty hypocrite

I didn't base my case on that. My case is based on the D-2 case I wrote up. It's just that Idle flipping scum made me reconsider my reads on Song and you, and you turned out scummier because of the Idle-scum. Like I said, my case on you due to buddying is not strong at all, just a footnote to my D-2 case.

One buddying tell isn't enough to make a solid case. (Hence why my buddying tell(s) on you were only the "weak" part of my case)
For all we know, Idle could have left a bunch of buddying tells on purpose. Though someone having a lot of buddy-buddy behavior with Idle would be solidly scummy.

I believe that his reads are likely to be accurate due to his point system on a post-by-post basis, and the fact that he's used the system before and found it to be accurate. I also never confirmed PO to be definite town just as I never confirmed you to be definite town. I didn't imply anything to do with cop reads, so it's curious how you wonder why PO is "confirmed" town but don't wonder about yourself.

Look at what you wrote here:

I doubt that he would get a town read strong enough to be made "Town Read of the Day" on scum

I really genuinely don't know. Why do I sometimes forget what I went upstairs for? I know it's not the same, but the point I'm making is I don't know. Logically, I'm guessing it was due to the fact that it just seems strange that a second vote can put somebody at L-1 whereas it wasn't so long ago when you needed 4 votes.

Look at what you wrote here:

I didn't actually realise you would be at L-1 (forgot that Nacho had voted you

True, you didn't really know why you put Song at L-1. I don't really think this discussion will go anywhere, mainly because I'm buying the "I don't know" part of your argument. It is noteworthy that you said logically you thought it was 4 to lynch, but before thinking "logically" you said you forgot that Nacho voted Song. Once again, not a big thing and I don't think its worth further elaborating.

Notice the ifs. Assuming that I get my way with the Song lynch, there would only be a NK if Song flipped town. If there is a NK, then of course I am assuming Song flipped town.

This I understand even less than the first quote. If you want your way with the Song lynch, why don't you vote Song? What's your case on Song? Are you still waiting for Nacho to augment your case?

I was just clarifying.

I know you were. I didn't expect a reply. I just wanted you to know that not everyone sees the thing the way Nacho does. So it wasn't bad play in my eyes for Song to say that her top two candidates were you and I.

I don't think that's what PO meant. She said it involved something the mafia must not do, or words to that effect. Thanks for answering though.

Oops, my bad.

Wow, you're cynical. I meant impressive because it's so huge and detailed (points assigned to every post). I didn't make any point regarding specifc content/conclusions being impressive.

It was impressive because of good D-1 analysis. Right now it doesn't impress me much at all. D-1 is a different story. It was awesome to look at at the end of D-1.

I never said that you would hammer. I was just saying that her assuming that you wouldn't hammer was incorrect.

Clarification.

Yes, because she implied (maybe I'm interpreting it incorrectly) that I personally was twisting her words. I was showing her that PO was at least in some cases drawing the same conclusions as me from a post, therefore it was wrong of her to imply that it was me individually twisting her words. Besides, what I've seen of your case on me is based on Idle, so stop being such a dirty hypocrite!

OK. After my case on Song I'm going to rewrite my D-2 case and tie it into your D-3 posts. You're right, I haven't made a good case on your D-3 play yet. I will. (And by case, I don't mean that you're definitely scummy D-3. By case I mean elaborated opinion)

[Newbie2010]

RESPONSE TO 501

Which part do you disagree with? Her logic being bad or her logic being towny?

Her logic being townie.

Flip-flopping can be pro-town? That makes me feel better. All the guides seem to criticise it.

And you don't like my over-defensiveness? What's your point? I don't like your face.

Unless you mean you think it's scummy. Well, I didn't really know how else to respond. I can't deny it because I realise that I do it. I didn't realise I had been over-defensive either: my defence was that "I'm indecisive". The rest of the post was about Song making her point clearer and me wondering why my flip-flopping hadn't been picked up on before.

Look at one of Nacho's analysis posts on Hanzo saying something along the lines of "Backing down is very townie" when Hanzo admitted that his case on Song + Ragn wasn't that good. Also, as long as you don't flip flop w/o reason then its a good thing.
By saying I don't like your overdefensiveness its that I haven't seen that side from you yet. It just feels weird and I don't like it. It doesn't prove anything, other than I want you to keep posting like you are and prove to me that it was natural and not scummy. Right now it definitely isn't scummy. It just feels like you are going too far with the defensive thing, but I can also see where you are coming from, with Song throwing "flip-flopping" at you mutliple times.

What? Okay, so instead of using an abbreviation, I'll describe it pointlessly even though there's an abbreviation that fits it perfectly?! That just means there's more pointless content for the rest of town to trawl through. I'm sure Song has used "omgus" as a term before anyway. If I hadn't have put the bit in brackets, would you have blinked an eyelid? You've been using "AtE" a lot in your most recent posts, but because I want to show that I'm not being a jerk (I don't want that whole stupid argument with Song to flare up again) I get criticised for being counter-productive?!

I used AtE once. It was in reply to you saying that Song showed AtE for w/e situation, and it was me being in agreement. I didn't direct the AtE to Song either. I just said I agree. Song has used OMGUS as a term before, in page 1, but once again you don't need to go that far to illustrate it. You could've just used your analogy and people would understand. At least I did right when you mentioned your "analogous" defense.

I'm pretty sure of both PO and Nacho being town. Not very precise with my own reads yet, can't say who I think is "more town". However, I think that if one of the two were mafia, it would be more likely to be Nacho, so I suppose my strongest read is on PO. Don't blame you if you're getting confused, not quite sure myself.

OK. I'm pretty sure Nacho + PO are town as well.

b) No, it's a train of logic that is rendered totally useless if I announce it out loud.

OK.

c) What, scum can no-kill?! Wow, umm... do we get told whether scum no-killed or doc saved, or do we just get the same message for both? However, even if scum do no-kill, then we still only have 1 more lynch in effect. I originally thought in this case we just vote for no-lynch and see what happens, but I'm not really sure. It's why I asked Nacho about mylo play. If scum can no-kill, then at mylo if we vote no lynch, they can just no-kill again and force us eventually into a mislynch surely?

I don't think we get told anything other than who died.

@ Newbie: Unlike you, I haven't preview failed. I'm going to read + respond to your newest posts after this one.

Sorry about that again. I just hit submit too quickly some times.

[Newbie2010]

Hoppster:

the guy who replaced in late D1 get lynched N1

So the guy that replaced in late D1 got lynched D2? Or was that the person that hammered? Or did you mean NK'd as opposed to lynched? Just trying to follow your train of thought.

[Newbie2010]

My case on you: Post 412
The vote "mistake" was not worth elaborating on because it is such a small thing, and probably wouldn't be included in one of my potential cases. I just wanted to make sure your answer was "I don't know" other than making an excuse about it, (which would be scummy because it would be dishonest)

I didn't expect a reply from you when I was seeking clarification from Song on her suspects

Sorry, I was just trying to make something out of every thing I saw from you. Notice how in my original 3-page quotation I basically split all your posts in the last two pages to chunks.

I just wanted you to know that not everyone sees the thing the way Nacho does.

Not that you don't know already.

Doesn't impress you because it hasn't been posted recently?

It doesn't impress me because I know that it has minimal use now because of later actions.

[Newbie2010]

What, if scum no-kill?

Or are you saying we get told nothing at all if doc saves or mafia no-kill.

Yes, I'm pretty sure we get told nothing. (at least from the 7 newbie games I read, one of them had doc successful protect and another had mafia no-kill, same basic flavor) I can link you if you want.

I've just counted four

And they weren't directly addressed to Song, but they were regarding her case, which she might want to respond to.

Sorry. My bad. I think it just slips my head when I say it sometimes.

I think it's just I'm slightly more guarded around Song since that "incident". I do understand what you mean about not seeing that side from me yet because it felt weird when I was typing it, I wasn't really sure why.

Sorry I'm not understanding, but which incident? Are you talking about Song's bad cases or my muh self-hammer pressure?

Oh, you confused me. (Yes, that's right, it's all your fault ) I think I messed it up in my latest post. But it was the person who replaced in D1 got NK'ed and the person who lynched D1 got lynched D2.

Let me get this straight. A person got replaced, the replacement came in, didn't say much, and got NK'd. Meanwhile, someone hammered someone else, and the hammerer ended up being the D-2 lynch. Also, can you tell me which game this is?

Wasn't really getting at you for that, it was a joke

[Newbie2010]

Ah, I figured out why I thought I mentioned it only once: All of the AtE saying was directed to that one subpost of hers when she ranted about how lynching her would put the town into LyLo and all.

[Newbie2010]

Sorry all, I might not be able to finish the Song case before the holidays begin. Don't expect it before the first.

However, Song, correct me if I'm wrong, but here's your case you've layed out against Hoppster so far:

Hoppster put you at L-1, has to be scum because there wasn't a quickhammer and you are convinced that Nacho is town. Also, Hoppster really thinks you are scum so he's being a jerk and so he's scum. And he lied about being "sorry" about voting you.

That isn't really convincing in my mind at all.

Song:

That was uber scummy.

From post 434, directed towards me:
OK, if its uber scummy why aren't you voting me? Was Idle really that much scummier? More than "uber" scummy?

I feel as if I should reply to your #439, sorry for ignoring it for a bit.

I know. The point is, he might have just been pressured by the deadline. However, what have we seen out of you? References to posts and how they are important please. Also, @324: It isn't a strategic vote, however. Who else would you expect Idle to vote for 2 hours prior to deadline?

Ok... I wanted muh (#1 suspect) to stop being apathetic if he wants to save himself from being a D-1 lynch. This is more of me wanting muh to make cases and prove that he isn't the better lynch compared to Idle last-minute.

Thanks for the arguments for me.

In addition, I saw many people still voting me who said I was just inactive town/town that didn't know what he was doing. I'm fine with changing up my playstyle a bit if it helps the town- I hope I'm showing that I am not a townie who is just inactive/kinda stupid.

This enforces my vote on muh, and I will likely be keeping it for the next... 20 minutes that this game goes on. I believe muh is the best lynch, and we don't have long- a no lynch is the worst situation we can get into on D1.

I don't know what to say that I've already said; I hope that this post gets the emails into people's inboxes and we can hear some more varied opinions.

This has nothing to do with me. This is Idle being Idle and explaining his vote on muh. Unless you are talking about "Thanks for the arguments for me." This screams "Thanks for helping me survive D-1", which seems more of a newb-tell than town or scum-tell.

As to how muh got so many town points and Idle got scum points:

muh didn't do much scummy, just a lot of anti-town stuff. Idle made a few newbie mistakes and is still learning, so I'd be more lenient with the scumpoints. muh, having played before and all, can easily avoid most of the early scumtells and stuff. Not saying that Nacho's + score on Idle is invalid. Just that his - score on muh should be reconsidered with the anti-town behavior.

I was answering a question from Purple Orange (I believe) about how muh got such a negative score for being lurky. This is once again, me saying that muh is worse than Idle in my opinion. (Those were obviously the only two options 30 minutes before deadline)

You are not the better lynch compared to muh

No one else is online to hammer muh, so you have to be the lynch.

Also, one point in muh's favor is that he hasn't claimed, while you have. We won't want a 3rd claim D1 for no random reason. (this isn't scummy or anything, just strategy)

Explain further please. I don't understand at all.

Okay, after rereading the thread, I've come to my own conclusion...

Muh was town. I am town. The mafia had us set up- either way, it was a townie lynch. A victory for them. They didn't have to worry, they could have just sat back and watched as we squabbled over a meaningless lynch anyways.

So I believe Newbie and Purple Orange are very town- the mafia would have absolutely no need to bring it down to the wire like they did- again, the lynch didn't matter, we were both town.

So, I am turned to Hoppster, LordChronos, Song, and Nacho. They were inactive that night, making them all suspects. I will go back, carefully now, through their reasoning for voting either muh or myself.

Right now, through my first read (there will be another), I'd liek to say Hanzo/LordChronos is a good suspect. Hanzo said, "Song Song Song, Rag Rag Rag," while quietly pushing for a hard muh lynch. Now that we know that Rag is town, it strengthens this opinion even more.

So, I'd like to place my vote there.

VOTE: LordChronos

A mafia slot is a mafia slot- doesn't matter if it's Hanzo or LordChronos.

Stop quoting entire posts and quote parts where this is buddying. Idle voting LC is NOT buddying at all.

Okay, get ready for a pretty large wall- this is just page 16, all of the questions I got combined are a BIT too much for me to handle at the moment.

Why are Purple Orange and I town? That part of your logic doesn't make sense either.

However, I like your case on Hanzo. I also like the fact that you are using your own alignment to help you make a decision.

Answer this:
Side-question: Did you want to claim because you want to be the D-1 lynch (with you admitting anti-town behaviour and all)? Or are you just treating your claim as your last words?

1. Well, in my reasoning, scum would have no reason to be drumming stuff up at the end of the day, near the deadline- they were happy, because no mafia were on the line. You are town because you were there- only a truly misguided mafioso would go down to the wire- no reason to. I am not calling the people who were inactive scum, I'm calling you town, which makes everyone else suspect. The other four are currently who I'm going through.

2. ...I can't tell if this is sarcastic. I think it is.

3. My claim was somewhat my last words, yeah- or at least I expected them to be.

Idle: This is more than anything a theory argument, but scum won't self-hammer near deadline. They'd just stall and force a no-lynch, so that the town gets one less mislynch. Once muh self-hammered it was evident that he was town. No more WIFOM because if he were scum, scum would be one person down anyways. Post more?

Fail on my part; sorry.

I don't get what you're asking me to do.

@Idle

I wasn't online at deadline because I was busy with real life stuff.

Why would a townie want to nearly make us no lynch? Wouldn't the scum like us to no lynch?

Look, just read my first response to Newbie- I have confirmed (in my own mind, at least) that Purple Orange and Newbie are town. That doesn't make you scum; it makes you one of the unconfirmed in my book. I don't see where you're trying to go with that no lynch part- okay, you were busy. That doesn't make you town. The scum were happy because it was a town lynch either way.


As for the last few messages, I just don't see how it's "ripped off"... That's my opinion. In fact, after I'm done answering these questions and defending myself, there'll be more.

Page 17 responses coming tomorrow afternoon, probably (different time zone confusions: maybe 21-22 hours?)

Fixed Tags.

Once again, stop quoting entire posts. I don't get what you are getting at.

Idle: You have to put quotation marks after quote=, like

Code: Select all

[quote="blahblahblah"]blahblahblah[/quote]

Also, nothing is sarcastic. Good answer to the claim question. If you answered the other question, you would have less motivation to participate.

Post more. Simple. Post more. I don't have my vote on you for a reason. You aren't contributing enough content for me to get a good read. And I was simply stating a fact, an argument against you being pro-town. Counting it against you would be absurd at this moment because it's mostly theory, but it's still a point nonetheless. A point worthy of note that would be used against you anyways. Even given the fact that you are new and that there was a small time constraint, some logic could've been applied.

OK, this could be construed as buddying. I admit that. More or less when my "Idle is less scummy than Song and I need to look more into Hoppster" read D-2 came out, anything I said could've been buddying as long as it defended Idle somewhere.

[Newbie2010]

Quick post because of holidays business: Still not done the Song analysis, mainly because of her consistency in trying to be counter-productive and her lack of elaboration, which is anti-town, but not so much when its consistent and she still has a good case on Hoppster.

However,

Newbie you can't tell me how to quote my posts. I will quote them as I please. I quote the whole post to show the context of the post. I will not change anything because you tell me to.

Then you're not going to convince anyone that I am scummy because of Idle-me interactions.

VOTE: Song of Ice and Fire

L-1.

(Hoppster can now "not hammer" and use Song's logic to prove that Hoppster is town, but that's not the main point of this L-1. Song is basically abandoning the case on me without doing anything, and even though I'm in her top two consistently, she never makes a case against me or responds to it. Song, if you were busy during the holidays (which I presume we all are) its probably why you ignored my 518 at first. Reply to it and I'll hopefully finish the Song case by then)

So far to me Nacho + PO are town, Hoppster is probably town after good replies to my case and all, some replies weren't as good but I already commented on those. Song's anti-town behavior shouldn't be the only reason that she is lynched for the day, and I have found scummy behavior from her. Now my D-1 analysis of Song is all messed up though, because of muh and Idle and my tunneling on muh and talking only about comparing him to Idle for the latter part of D-1. Song had some good posts by the end of D-1. Oh, and Nacho's case of Idle announcing Song is town in a group with others isn't really telling to me, because he announced town-groups a LOT. Only about half of them mentioned Song, so I'd still hesitate to say that that is a good tell. His post on the second distancing post is extremely telling though. Everything else is just "eh, but I can give an example of him doing it to someone else, but not as much as Song" The neutral quote might just be an Idle-newbscum tell that has nothing to do with Song.

[Newbie2010]

Is it sort of the definition of WIFOM, though, to go "no mafia would be that obvious in buddying a buddy, so if he's helping that obviously he's probably not his buddy, just misguided town"? :/

No, because I was wrong, and anyone can paint me as scum because of that. There's not much I can defend myself with with this case of yours.

Oops, that should say "if muh WAS scum, he assumed he wouldn't self-hammer." Too many negatives in there. Also, reference (#387):

With muh being an SE and all, I had expected muh-scum to know that self-hammering is bad. I would have gone all out on muh D-2 if he refused to self-hammer and make us no-lynch. (because then he is almost definitely confirmed scum)

Her consistency in trying to be counter-productive and lack of elaboration is anti-town.
However it's not so much anti-town when it's consistent (which it would have to be to have consistency). So what makes her anti-town also makes her less anti-town.
She still has a good case on me, which contradicts your earlier post.

With holidays and all, that was a really quick post. Basically I'm trying to say that her playstyle is consistent. Even though it is anti-town. And I believe Song sure thinks that her case on Hoppster is 100% foolproof or something.

1. Would you have been prepared to hammer had my vote still been on Song?

No, because I'm getting more town reads from you now than I had D-2.

2. Were you expecting me to hammer at some point once you'd taken Song to L-1?

No, I was just showing how flawed Song's logic was. Considering I still haven't delivered my case on Song, (which I will do before another V/LA) my vote is basically a placeholder right now. I'd expect a townie to at least wait for the case on Song before voting. (As both Nacho and I have not delivered cases but put our votes beforehand)

Mod: V/LA from the 3rd to the 8th

Sorry all, I'll be sure to finish my case on Song before I go on V/LA.

[Newbie2010]

EBWOP:

Forgot to address this:

Her consistency in trying to be counter-productive and lack of elaboration is anti-town.
However it's not so much anti-town when it's consistent (which it would have to be to have consistency). So what makes her anti-town also makes her less anti-town.
She still has a good case on me, which contradicts your earlier post:

Because anti-town tells aren't the greatest tells. And it doesn't make her less anti-town, it just makes her less scummy that she's doing it consistently and not say once in ISO #8, once in #24, and once in #45 and everywhere else she's just using it as an excuse.

[Newbie2010]

Fail on my part; sorry.

I don't get what you're asking me to do.

Oh yeah, this is pretty telling, I'd have to agree, but what can I say about it?

[Newbie2010]

Case on Song, Part I - Song's numerous useless posts that don't provide content and/or attempt to distract the town from the topic at hand.

Well not many people seem very interested in this game right now... There's only a few things of interest I've been able to note, not accusing anyone of being scum yet, but these are interesting things to note:

And lastly, peaceandlies has not voted or checked in yet. Not saying that's a tell, but just something to keep our eye on in case that person does check back in and doesn't need replaced.

Just to throw the actual quote from the person who asked the actual questions for those who don't like to pay attention to what they read.

Honestly right now, IMO, muh is lucky that it's too early in the game to put him at L-1. If he would have read anything about what Rag put, he would've realized who he vote and accusation was really against. And him trying to point his finger at that argument, maybe trying to distract from the real reason everyone is voting for him.

Totes agree with Purple Orange on this (though I still think you are way too gullible, the intterwebz tells lies. Purple Oranges? *scoffs*) This early on day 1 and putting someone, especially someone you don't think is scum, whether or not you have a "plan", is dangerous.

Yes those are my four points, which are all antitown, which is why I voted for him. I never said he was mafia. Right now I don't have enough evidence to accuse anyone of being mafia outright. But what I do have adds up to Hanz being the most antitown right now.

Also Hanz (or anyone for that matter) I dare you to lead a lynch on me. I can be the first martyr to our cause, and when I flip town, which I can 100% guarentee that I will, you can stop pointing your finger at me Hanz.

And no you just aren't bullying muh, you are trying to push every single person on this thread around. Maybe that's your play style, maybe that's just for this game, but I don't like it too much.

I actually laughed for like ten minutes on this one. Which in turn moved you off of my shit list. I actually find you quite funny, though that doesn't make your actions any less antitown at the moment.

No one besides you thinks I'm scummy.

And basically I think the reason you seem the most scummy to me is you don't give any reasons for anything you say or do. You expect every to blindly follow you in your conclusions, but really who are you that we should just trust what you so automatically without any evidence. It seems mafia to try and lead everyone to find scum without giving anyone reasons for anything you say. It's a contridiction. I'll compare it to a religion, you're basically asking for faith in you, though you have no real evidence or a book explaining why we should believe in you. No one who is smart would follow that religion, even if some of it made sense.

I don't believe in lynching innactives on day one, it gives the mafia too much power in the NKs.

I also feel that as much information can be gleaned from the lynchee and the lynchers, especially when power roles come into play. Who they argued with, who they stayed away from, when they were alive did they team up with anyone else, blah blah blah. So if you lynch an inactive you obviously can't get any information from them, and really you probably won't get much from the lynchers either because if all the town decides to vote inactives then potentially the mafia could just sit back and not do much while we vote townies off. I think it's acceptable to lynch inactives after Day 1, like I already stated, but Day 1 should be a lynch that matters and will give the most information we can get.

It's not his agressive playstyle that I care about. I can be aggressive too. It's his unwillingness to provide us with a method to his madness. If he would've come out and said hey I think Song and Rag are mafia, here's why, blah blah blah. That would've been one thing. but he refuses to say anything. To me that's deceitful. If he's not being upfront with the town, then how do we know he's really working on helping us. Him choosing to not share his supposed information isn't helpful, and it seems scummy.

If you haven't noticed I'm definitely not being neutral or cautious in anything I'm doing now.

and with everything else I've seen from him I'm willing to put him at L-1 and unvote Hanz for now, though that doesn't make me any less suspicious because of reasons stated earlier and what you added with your posts Purple dear (I cut out the Oranges part because I'm a non believer)

Also I find it very interesting that Rag is now pulling a Hanz and refusing to share her thoughts with us...

I'm not comfortable with leaving you in the position to be an easy target

*note this is not a change in my stance. I said I don't lynch innactives, not lurkers. They are two different things. I define lurking as posting as little as possible while still seeming semi active, without helping out in the game. Innactives just don't really play. Maybe posting once every few days when they're prodded. Just to explain in advance because I know everyone will jump on me for that one

AWWWWWWWWWWWWW my nemesis is being replaced!?!?!?! WTH who am I going to fight with now (that is if I don't get lynched) Someone better get their boxing gloves out, and be willing to replace Hanz ;o)

And I'm sorry town, but no lynch is not an option for us. If anyone votes no lynch I will get pissed. I am very adamnant about this in other games I've played, it always gets brought up, and the answer is, in my book, no lynch is probably one of the most scummiest things anyone could ever suggest. Just going to throw that out there in case someone decided to stall out the vote.

First off, if I was actually scum would I admit that I looked scummy? I think not. Anyway, on the three other sites I play on I play with the same people over and over again, so metagaming is a huge problem over there and I hate it. Using metagaming as an excuse for a vote, IMO, is a cop out. While metagaming might not be as big of a problem over here, especially in the newbie cue, I'm not going to change the style I play. I play the exact same way when I'm town and when I'm scum so when I am scum, it's hard to distinguish from when I am town. I'm definitely not taking a moral ground for being scummy.

The biggest most scummy thing I have seen in this game is the fact that newbie pressured muh into hammering himself. I can link you to games I've played where I have gotten into cyber fist fights with town members who self vote.

I am town through and through and just letting the town know, if you lynch me then it's one townie down today, one townie down tonight, and then we are in a lylo position. I swear to you this isn't a smart move.

Also I don't care about the dumb ass snobby acronyms and crap you guys use to explain my actions or reasonings. WIFOM and ate or whatever else, I don't give a damn about any of that. My reasoning and thought process and opinion is my own, just like my playstyle. I won't change is just because of peoples snobbery in looking stuff up in the mafia wiki. If you don't like it, sue me. It's not going to change. That's the biggest thing I hate about this site, everyone thinks they are so cool because they can look up words. This isn't directed towards one person, but the group in general. I really don't care about the terms and such, I play mafia for fun and not to be told all the made up crap in the wiki.

No hard feeling when I flip town and I prove you guys wrong

I already gave my thoughts on Hoppster. If it's not good enough for you guys, then I don't care, it's good enough for me. I'm sick and tired of having to explain myself numerous times. I'm also sick of defending myself because I don't fit inside your mafia playing box. I play outside of it. I'm damn proud of that too. I'm also sick of the circles everyone keeps going in. There's no way we should still be on this day, and I bet we wouldn't be if it wasn't around the holidays. Let's just get this day over with already. That's my opinion.

[Newbie2010]

Case on Song, Part II - repetition fluff without adding any content.

That's just an optical illusion, you probably photoshopped that!
(though I still think you are way too gullible, the intterwebz tells lies. Purple Oranges? *scoffs*(I cut out the Oranges part because I'm a non believer)

Also I think voting someone off, especially someone who could be very helful i.e. the IC, just because you don't have enough information to prove them guilty or innocent , is probably the most ridiculous thing you've said on this thread so far, I know it's early you probably have plenty more where that came from. What if they have a power role? Then the town is basically screwed from the first lynch, and so for the rest of the game we'd be working with a major handicap.

I just don't find your posts very helpful at all, and you're questions are ridiculous. You seem to just want to come into this game and cause a bunch of confusion, so we're distracted from finding information we really need.VOTE: Hanzo_5 for being super unhelpful and kind of annoying. If you ever explain yourself fully, and quit screwing around, then I'll consider unvoting you.
I did however forget to put in there that he accuses two people of being scummy, and he flat out calls Rag mafia, and never explains anything. That's definitely anti town. And then he doesn't even vote for one of the ones he calls out, but someone he doesn't even think is scum.
Yes those are my four points, which are all antitown, which is why I voted for him. I never said he was mafia. Right now I don't have enough evidence to accuse anyone of being mafia outright. But what I do have adds up to Hanz being the most antitown right now.
@ Rag, sorry I missed your question. Yes I would fully support a lynch on Hanz if he doesn't shape up. Sometimes being anti town is worse than being mafia as it doesn't help the town band together and actually find the real mafia.
And basically I think the reason you seem the most scummy to me is you don't give any reasons for anything you say or do. You expect every to blindly follow you in your conclusions, but really who are you that we should just trust what you so automatically without any evidence. It seems mafia to try and lead everyone to find scum without giving anyone reasons for anything you say. It's a contridiction. I'll compare it to a religion, you're basically asking for faith in you, though you have no real evidence or a book explaining why we should believe in you. No one who is smart would follow that religion, even if some of it made sense.
That is your first post and it most definitely is asking the townies to follow your thought process and come to your exact same conclusions without giving any information at all. And you even state you're not going to give any information. That is by far the most antitown play I have seen this whole entire game.

I don't really get anything about this paragraph (excepting the no lynch is good for mafia). It's only been about 5 days since we started this game and there's a 3 week deadline, where do you get at all that we are heading towards a no lynch? Though I do agree with you that a no lynch is never, ever and I mean ever, never good for town. I've seen it argued for, but there's no way in hell I'll ever support a no lynch. So while it seems you are trying to help the town with that statement, the beginning of the paragraph makes no sense to me and something feels wrong about it.

And I'm sorry town, but no lynch is not an option for us. If anyone votes no lynch I will get pissed. I am very adamnant about this in other games I've played, it always gets brought up, and the answer is, in my book, no lynch is probably one of the most scummiest things anyone could ever suggest. Just going to throw that out there in case someone decided to stall out the vote.
I feel so strongly about self voting that I would rather a no lynch, and I also feel strongly about no lynches so that should tell ya'll how against self voting I am. I also can't believe that someone who was looking out for the interests of the town would push someone into lynching themselves.

Anyway, Hoppster, you are now number one in my book
He's looking the most scummy to me right now.
I already said I think it's hoppster and that's where my vote is.
I already gave my thoughts on Hoppster. If it's not good enough for you guys, then I don't care, it's good enough for me. I'm sick and tired of having to explain myself numerous times.

[Newbie2010]

Case on Song, Part III - Song's interactions with Idle

Notice how Song doesn’t mention Idle until post #22, and only points out a slip by Idle there. In post #24 is her first real case against Idle. (scratch what I said about Hoppster being the one not talking about Idle earlier)

UNVOTE: VOTE: Idle Thoughts until he explains why he wanted to put suspicion on me as a power role, it's never very town like to openly talk about power roles until later on in the game, if then.

What makes this look like a scumpair is the fact that there’s an “until” stuck in there. It seems as if Song intends to unvote Idle if Idle does something that is neither pro-town nor scummy, but anti-town. (elaboration on why Song = PR) This means that Song’s accusation is rather fake, which would point to a scumpair or Song-scum putting weak pressure.

UNVOTE: Idle Thoughts for now, your answers are enough to soothe my suspicions for now, and I'm not comfortable with leaving you in the position to be an easy target. It seems like Hanz is really hammer happy

This is pretty much buddying. Just as much as I buddied Idle on D-2.

Well I was waiting for Idle to speak his peace. He said 2 days ago that he was going to give his defense, but if he hasn't by tomorrow morning I will be willing to hammer.

Basically, “post, scumbuddy or I’ll use you for town-cred”. Why didn’t you hammer Idle right then and there? Two days w/o a defense is still pretty bad.

[Newbie2010]

The first three parts is basically all I've completed in the Song case so far. I know that many of you would say that my buddying with Idle is worse, because admittedly I really expected Idle to flip town, but still take into consideration my part III. Song's repetition is bad because she never gave new content in her posts, and tries too hard to get support for the same outdated case. And finally, the amount of fluff in Song's posts (Including her AtE and all) is pretty bad compared to that of Hoppster. There's still a lot I haven't covered, but with the holidays and my V/LA, I might not get to it so I'm posting some of it now.

[Newbie2010]

EBWOP:

Everybody have a nice Christmas?

Yes, I had a great one. How went your Christmas?

[Newbie2010]

I used to have a scum-read on you at the start of D-3. Now I have a town read on you. So I wasn't willing to hammer Song at that point in time, if I find the time to finish my case on Song I would probably hammer her if there were stlil two votes on her.

[Newbie2010]

And I won't hammer without finishing my case on Song, because that would be the exact definition of a quick-hammer. <-- another reason I didn't hammer Song when I had the chance to.

[Newbie2010]

OK, you seem rather sure that you can out-argue Hoppster-scum in LyLo and can similarly out-argue me-scum in LyLo so you're willing to lynch either of us and you are pretty sure PO + Nacho are town. Because if you're going to randomly bandwagon Hopp or I, you'll only win if you can outargue the one whose lynch you didn't push. So why don't you find holes in my and Hoppster's cases? What do you think about our replies to the quote wall of 490-492?

[Newbie2010]

Newbie, what happened to this?

Nacho, Song was #1 and muh was #2, while Hanzo and Idle were somewhere beyond that, and Hoppster was unreadable, and everyone else seemed townish. The D-2 change didn't make Idle look townie, he was still my 2nd/3rd suspect, but I felt as if my case on Song was better than that on Idle. Of course, Idle got less and less town points for his lack of defense, and even with Idle flipping town, I could understand someone hammering him.

And if I misunderstood and you meant, "why didn't I switch back to Idle" it was because of muh's willingness to self-hammer, which, because he was an SE, wasn't really that townie compared to his other anti-town posts.

In my eyes, he didn't really look townie, I just found him hard to read, like the Hoppster slot. Song was definitely my top suspect for most of D-1, with muh following close close behind. I think right when Hoppster replaced in I told him "oh you're hard to read because of all these replacements and so you should post." Idle had some RL issues, which similarly prevented him from posting. I did make cases on both Idle and Hoppster on D-2, and neither felt as strong as my case on Song. If Song would flip scum, I would've preferred Hoppster over Idle as her buddy. If you want, I'll link to some potential (but of course pointless now) Song-Hoppster scumpair tells that made me consider Hoppster as scum strongly if Song flips scum.

[Newbie2010]

Nacho:

Nothing happened to that. It still holds true. muh is my suspect so I want him to claim isn't really a random reason.

Hoppster: Well rj, Sevei and you all mentioned suspecting Song in your first posts.

Song's reply to these are rather indictive of buddying:

UNVOTE: VOTE: rj20876 OMGUS, who are you to say who someone can and can't vote for

Not scummy, just included this for completion.

Sevei just started, so i don't have a read.

She doesn't talk about Sevei's case on her at all.

You replaced a replacement, so if you particapate more than those two, which is not hard to do at this point, I'll be super happy! You're already off to a good start XD

So in her first post after Hoppster replaced in, she tries to ignore him. Then she feels "sorry" that she forgot to thank Hoppster. The "I'll be super happy!" part sounds like buddying.
Of course, Song's ISO #39 didn't really strike me as buddying even with all that content, so during the last four days of D-2 I was trying to look at Hoppster at scum and see how it fits. Luckily, Idle flipped scum so the Song-Hopp combo is invalid.
Also from Hoppster's posts:
Hoppster's ISO #10 was really what struck me as buddy-buddy. Puts a vote on Song even though he knows that Song can't be lynched because of deadline issues and his vote being the (then) first vote on Song.

[Newbie2010]

I was writing a case on Song in the end of D-2 after my case on you, and just when I started (1 day) Song hammered Idle. Like I said, once D-3 came this would be pointless discussion as Song-Hopp is invalid.

[Newbie2010]

PO: For the quotes, the one with Song saying the difference between inactives and lurkers, it was fluff because although she makes a good point, it doesn't contribute to the discussion other than "see I'm voting LURKERS, not INACTIVES, so I'm being pro-town, so I shouldn't be lynched!" I didn't really see the one about Rag voting Hanzo, mind quoting it again please?
And what I'm trying to get at in Parts I and II is that Song really didn't contribute much in the way of scumhunting, and a lot (almost half) of her posts ended up reemphasizing points from before and not adding on to them. That Song, in a way, is almost active lurking, but not quite.- she has provided content, just not a lot and definitely not 50+ posts of good content.

Also, deadline is in 4 days. Suspect list and order? (which person you suspect most, to least in order)

Song:

Who is your top suspect? Hoppster or I?
How do you compare the cases against Hoppster and I? Which one is stronger in what way? Which points about the cases against us both are strongest? Which ones are completely null-tell?

Nacho:

You mentioned that your post-by-post points system had worked on previous games. Can you show me one such game, and your points system for that game?
On the 19th, you mentioned that your case is mostly process of elimination. For which people out of {Purple Orange, Hoppster, Newbie2010} were your confident town-reads no more? Do you still have the town-cases on the other people?

Hoppster:

Suspect list of people in order? Deadline is in 4 days so we have to make a decision soon.

[Newbie2010]

Mod: I announced V/LA from the 3rd to the 8th. Request replacement

if

I end up missing all of Night 3 due to the V/LA. (to prevent night-action WIFOM)

[Newbie2010]

Oh, forgot one thing:

Purple Orange:

On the 27th, you voted me even though you found both Song and I similarly scummy. Your reasoning for voting me was that "this way Song won't be hammered.". This implies that you find that having a vote on is better than no vote on. So why did you unvote me? Wouldn't the same reasoning still apply (minus the Song won't be hammered part)?

[Newbie2010]

My suspect list:

Song
Hoppster
Nacho
Purple Orange

There's not really much of a disadvantage now, because it's quite evident that most of the town believes that PO + Nacho are town. So revealing town-reads won't really direct the mafia NK much.

[Newbie2010]

I'm here. Sorry, I just came home after the V/LA.

I'll start the claiming because both of you seem to be waiting for me. VT.

Content post(s) will come soon.

[Newbie2010]

Comments on Hoppster's recent posts:

@ PO: Why don't you think you were a NK? I really don't understand at all. I was incredibly sure that you (for whom the general consensus seemed to be a pretty much confirmed townie) would be NK'ed. This doesn't just apply for N3, but N1 and N2 as well.

When did PO say that she didn’t believe that she would be NK’d? Sorry, it might have been unseen in my catchup.

Immediately following the nightkill I admit that I was suspicious of you due to the fact that you hadn't been killed. You've pretty much countered my suspicions though. So, um, that leaves Newbie.

So this implies that you were suspicious of someone just because of the NK. Who do you think the Ragnarokio and LordChronos NK’s implicated?

A part of me wonders whether his V/LA is not just a super-sneaky tactic where he is able to lurk and then sneak in a hammer when we think he's away. I'll assume that's just me being paranoid though.

If you don’t vote Purple Orange, this won’t happen. (You already said in the previous post that you don’t suspect PO)

[Newbie2010]

Reply to Purple Orange's recent posts:

(The fact I'm alive today does make me question my scumread on Newbie, and thus my townread on you).

So you would’ve thought that I would’ve NK’d you had I been mafia? Or do you think that it would benefit Hoppster more than I to NK Nacho?

As for N3: your question to the mod is part of the answer. Basic reason I think I didn't die is that the mafia believed that Nacho (for whom the general consensus was also pretty much confirmed town) was the smarter kill of the two of us, and/or that the doc (if there is one) would probably protect me instead of Nacho. Dead people/non-players aren't allowed to participate in the thread. And Nacho was the most experienced and knowledgeable player amongst us...and thus the greatest threat for the remaining scum player, all other things being equal. He's been very very good at making cases. If he says "vote for this person," it's probably going to happen. He may have been useful to the mafia to have around as long as his system said "vote for Song," but the "recalibration" he promised was dangerous.

I think the main reason that the scum killed Nacho is because of the fact that he promised a case, but never really delivered. If you read his D-3 posts in isolation, he talked basically only about Song, and I guess the scum didn’t want him to finish his case.

I don't think it can hurt things. As stated, it can force the scum into a one vs one counterclaim with another player instead of giving them more options in who to pressure for a lynch. And if one's claim matches up with how they've behaved in the thread thus far, it's an indication that they're who they say they are. (And if it conflicts, it's a decent argument they're lying scum).

Agree.

Is it sort of the definition of WIFOM, though, to go "no mafia would be that obvious in buddying a buddy, so if he's helping that obviously he's probably not his buddy, just misguided town"? :/

I guess it’s that I look scummy just because I was wrong.

2) I can, but I'd be telling the mafia precisely what they need to avoid doing today, and you're not cleared as mafia for me, yet.

Can you elaborate on this now that it is LYLO?


Cases for PO and Hoppster coming tomorrow, sorry for the wait.

[Newbie2010]

PO:

I didn't. He's just asking me why I think I'm alive, because he says he can't think of a good reason.

OK, I misunderstood.

If I'm remembering correctly:
* Hopp still possibly mafia because I hadn't finished rereading him, and because the "if Song flips town, Nacho is scum" was bad.
* Scum would lose if there was any sort of counterclaim to a cop claim...there were some other scenarios that could be very sticky for them (including an uncounterclaimed cop that we all believed, claiming two innocents), but a counterclaim that day would seal the game.

But if there was a cop with innocent x2, it won't really be something that scum would have to not do. I mean, it's quite obvious that scum shouldn't counterclaim cop given the non-LYLO situation, but was there something else I'm misunderstanding? It seems as if you had something regarding specific people that you didn't want to share.

Hoppster:

Well, immediately following the NK (before PO's response) I was feeling slightly paranoid, wondering whether PO had spun a web of deceit and blinded us all, and was considering a vote. This paranoia also made me wonder if you would re-appear and hammer not only if I voted PO, but if PO voted me (as was possible - she suggested that the NK implicated myself from her POV). So I was worried for myself as well.

Why would you vote for someone that is more town (in your mind) purely based on NK analysis?

It could be possible that, if I'm scum, it's a clever ploy by Newbie to lure out a fake claim (ie. both you and he would be PR's).

Come on, town don't lie when they're the top suspect in 3p LYLO!

[Newbie2010]

Hoppster:

1) Posed at you; you have evidence that I am scum, don't you? If you don't, why in your last few posts have you been saying "I'm leaning towards Newbie" and all. If you do, I really didn't understand why you posted that "paranoid" statement at all.

2) Yeah, it was just a statement.

I was more confident in Nacho and PO being town than Newbie (sorry!) but out of the two, I felt that I would be more confident about making a decision between PO and Newbie than Nacho and Newbie, as I had begun to have a few doubts about Nacho towards the end of D3.

Sorry Song. Although you haven't really seemed that scummy to me recently (Newbie's seemed more scummy imo), I'm going to trust in Nacho's town reads.

What exactly do you mean when you say "sorry" in these two situations? The same thing or different?

Overnight, Ragnarokio died. He was a vanilla townie.

It is now Day 2. With 7 alive, it takes 4 to lynch.

Deadline: 12/24/10, 10:45PM EST

Oh, crap.

Were you considering protecting Ragnarokio at any point in time for N1? Or was this just a reaction because Nacho evidently wasn't targeted for the N1 NK?

Purple Orange:

So, current verdict: Lynch Idle; grill everyone else to pieces. Especially the folks active at deadline last night.

Why didn't you just say "me"? I was really the only one active at deadline last night other than muh (lynched) Idle (already mentioned) and you (...) Was this just to make a general point: That what happened at deadline D1 was bad?

[Newbie2010]

Purple Orange:

I saw Nacho's blunt confidence about stuff as more playstyle than anything, but if he does have a cop-based innocent read on both Newb and Hopp, the game is pretty much won, and he should claim. Otherwise we should stop speculating about this.

If Nacho is the cop, but doesn't have an innocent investigation on one or both of you (or if Nacho is not actually a cop), then one or both or you are still potentially scum. Town-Nacho will just be relying on his awesome mafia skillage to get a read on you guys, not anything 100% confirmable. Under those circumstances, if Song flips town, I do not want to reflexively vote Nacho as scum. And I'm hesitant to even vote for Song, especially without hearing a case from Nacho. The other people could still be scum, and Nacho may just be wrong about them.

However, if Nacho claims confirmed innocent reads on both you and Newbie, things become much more stark. If he's the cop, you guys are innocent. If he's scum, you guys are innocent. Your logic is correct there- You're eliminated from scum contention either way. Possibly unfortunately for me, however, I am not, because Nacho's townread on me, on Day 1, could not have been based on a cop investigation. If Song flips town, either Nacho or myself are the remaining scum. For me, the fact that Nacho is the remaining mafia player will be obvious. For you (or Newbie), it won't be 100% clear.

Does that make sense?

===========
Note all the "ifs" in there. Again, all this is dependent upon Nacho claiming cop with innocent reads on both you and Newb, and on Song NOT being scum. I feel I've been discussing game theory for the past couple days more than actual cases, and I'd like to get these "ifs" out of the way, whether by being told to ignore them, or having them confirmed and my choices of scum narrowed down. If you and Newbie aren't scum, I need to look at Song and Nacho and forget any suspicions I had of you and Newb. If I can't know one way or the other, I have to keep going after the people I think are the most suspect.

What happened to not speculating about Nacho-cop?

[Newbie2010]

Hoppster:

b) If Nacho claims cop investigation on PO and either you or I, then I'll continue with this logic if that happens. I don't want to reveal my hand just yet.

Post 482. What was this about? What do you mean by "hand"?

Sorry for the multiposts, just posting my ideas in my D-3 reread.

[Newbie2010]

I currently have a pretty solid town read on Purple Orange and Song of Ice and Fire. Overall, they have helped the town and provided useful insight.

Including PO in a list of more than one "pro-town" people.

Hanzo, I don't think Purple Orange is lurking. If he is trying to, he's not doing it very well- he's made a bunch of constructive votes, and then hasn't posted for a little. That's okay with me for the moment, but a day or two more and I'll agree with you.

Fencesitting on the PO lurking or not lurking.

@Purple Orange: Thank you for reconsidering.

Why would Idle put "thanks"? The reason must be that he's thankful for PO lessening the pressure on him, which in my opinion is rather telling.

Thanks for the arguments for me.

Thanks again. (PO and I this time)

Newbie's first post makes sense. Definitely townie-like.

Same with Purple Orange.

Grouping.

@Purple Orange: Time restrictions- and, honestly, he was considered scummier, correct me if I'm wrong.

This isn't a strong point in my opinion, but this does seem rather close to buddying.

So I believe Newbie and Purple Orange are very town- the mafia would have absolutely no need to bring it down to the wire like they did- again, the lynch didn't matter, we were both town.

Grouping.

Once again, these are points of interaction of PO + Idle. I'd say this would point to PO being scum, but really, with all the fencesitting that Idle has done it is hard to tell if he slipped or was just acting anti-town. The grouping argument is weak because though Purple is grouped in three times, Song is twice, and so was I. Interaction-wise, I'm more for Purple-scum than Hoppster-scum.

[Newbie2010]

Hoppster:

Well, I wouldn't call it evidence. It's just that I don't really have any case whatsoever on PO whereas I have a lamentable attempt of a case on you: despite how weak it is, it's better than anything I've got on PO.

Which parts of which posts of your case on me do you think are the most telling?

Do I just ignore that it (the NK) happened? Do I make an "Oh, that sucks" post? Do I make a post pondering on the NK? I was still pretty worried that pretty much anything I did would be percieved as scummy, and in the end I went for the "Oh crap" post because I felt partially responsible for the NK after failing as a doctor and thus didn't want to ignore it, but also could not think of anything to speculate from it (even if as I know now it would have been WIFOM anyway).

To be quite honest, I didn't think of that as a doc softclaim at all. So really, it wasn't that ineffective.

as I did for most people

Who other than Nacho and Ragnarokio did you consider for D-1 doc protection? Why didn't you protect Purple Orange N1?

@ Newbie: Regarding Idle interactions, have you softened your stance on Idle's lack of answers to my questions then or have you just temporarily forgotten them?

Neither. To me, building a case on no interaction is almost always worse than building a case on bad interaction.

[Newbie2010]

Hoppster:

What exactly do you mean when you say "sorry" in these two situations? The same thing or different?

[Newbie2010]

PO: Are you away right now? Post would be appreciated:)

[Newbie2010]

Waiting for PO to post. I really don't have mcuh to say without the reply.

Hoppster:

Good explanations, I'm "more" inclined to vote Purple Orange right now, to be honest. Like I said, I don't like my case on either you or Purple Orange, but Purple Orange is scummier when it comes to interactions. Your only real scummy point was the lynch-plan / cop-speculation. The contradiction of Purple Orange saying we should stop speculating Nacho-cop then speculating herself outweighs this by far.

FoS: Purple Orange

[Newbie2010]

PO:

At that point in the game, both Hoppster and myself were including ourselves in our lists of suspects whenever we thought our analysis and sets of options pointed to us as well as anyone else. I think we both stopped doing that later on (?), but at that point, we were still engaging in the practice. The statement you quote was the summary/conclusion of my a-b-c-d-e listing previously in the post, where I listed myself as a suspect several times. Given the listing, it would also have been strange if I'd said "grill Newbie, but not me," when I hadn't yet laid out the various ways I thought your actions and my actions differed that night. I didn't like the fact that my own conclusions pointed to me as a top suspect, but they did, and I couldn't avoid it, so thus counted on the differences coming to light and being discussed once people started examining both of us.

But you said "Current Verdict:...". Which means that you are talking in your own person, and not just exploring all cases and including yourself as a scum suspect. And besides, you never really interacted with me D-2 after saying that, just seemed to ignore my so-called scumminess in the D-1 deadline play.

Yep, it's weak, especially because, as you note, Idle was thanking and buddying and town-grouping several people (yourself included). Still, interaction between yourself and Idle is greater than between Hopp and Idle, and it's one of the reasons I find you more suspect than he, so I can't necessarily argue with this so long as I'm using it as a marker myself. But I notice that all of the posts you point to are also simply from Idle about/to me -- when I made a buddying case on you and Idle, there were also posts from you to Idle that I found suspect.

Like I said, that's why it is weak. Why are we arguing about this when we agree?

470 - I might just be bad at reading PR's. I think Nacho basically claimed VT with 470, actually. Why else would Nacho-town say "sorry"? If he were cop, he would almost 100% have investigated Hoppster + me, so there's his two innos. I think he said "sorry" because he wasn't cop and he wanted us to stop speculating. (Of course, he could've been cop playing some WIFOM games, but I think the whole town wanted Nacho to claim in the case he had two innos. However, my point is really reversed by #482, which Hoppster posted AFTER Nacho's second VT claim post.

Why did you bring up the cop deal in the first place? If any of us suspected Nacho cop before then, we weren't talking about it.

I brought it up because I thought Nacho had innocent on Hoppster and I. (After his Townread of the day post without reasoning for two days in a row) I felt that if Nacho had the two innocents he should claim.

Why did you ask all these things, when it was quite clear that barring super-extraordinary circumstances, Song was going to get the noose that day? I'd converted to the Song-is-scum side...there was no one left arguing against it at that point. (Nacho had also said in 521 that he had very strong townreads on everyone left, except Song. Only change I noted after that was a probable reevaluation of you, in 524).

Several reasons. For you, I wanted to see what you thought of Nacho and Hoppster (with your other two suspicions clearly revealed.) Of course, you fencesat that one and the last time I got on before N3 I forgot about that point and was just answering the theory question with my opinion. On Nacho, it is just because of his lack of contribution for ALL of D-3 except the less-important half of his case (interactions vs. PoE). I was pretty sure that either you or Nacho would be NK'd no matter what, and even though the NK would provide WIFOM, I felt that the extra opinion before it died would benefit the town more than WIFOM the town.

Yes guys, I cocked up there. Please stop rubbing it in my face.

I was just comparing my two cases. I'll stop talking about it

I suspect that a key factor in solving this case is regarding D1 deadline play by the two of you. In my re-read, I noticed a couple of things I'd like PO to clear up for me:

If you're town, you know that both scum were online at deadline. How do you feel about interactions? Do you have any questions for me?

[Newbie2010]

PO:

Second, I also realized I'd spent more time in-thread recently questioning muh's townness, and talking about muh than about Idle, even when I had a vote sitting on Idle. The lack of consistency between my current vote and my positions bothered me, and when I tried to go back and justify an Idle vote over a muh vote that evening, I felt I was grasping at straws. That's never a good sign.

Looking back at your ISO I see you talking more about Idle than muh, to be honest.

I'll re-examine your posts, and try to determine whether I overreacted there to what you said. My vote is sticking for now, but the fact that I triple-posted does give me pause.

Fencesitting after building a case on Idle. You seemed unconvinced that Idle was scum even after your big quote-wall.

@ Newbie -- do you see your analysis of Idle potentially causing any major shift in your vote?

Why didn't you ask me this question when I failed to vote for Hanzo after my second case, the case on Hanzo?

@ Idle: If you wanted to show pro-townie-ism, you needed to read the thread, pick out who you think the scum are, and build a case on them.

Coaching = / = Scumpair. This is not pointing towards PO-Idle scumteam. However, why bring up the replacement thing?

Also, if RL prevents you from doing any more than lurking in a game, it might just be best to ask for a replacement -- I know we've had a LOT of them, but some of the stuff you've run into lately seems like quite decent reason to bow out of a game, and I don't think anyone would have blamed you.

Post 24 in PO's ISO gives negative points towards Idle-PO scumteam.

[Newbie2010]

I'm buying Hoppster's doc claim right now, but once again, the reversal of the cop-speculation case really hurt my PO-scum read. Like I said, I'm probably still missing things so I'm not going to vote yet.

[Newbie2010]

That's not how I was using the it at all; I saw it as a summary of what I said in the post. "Current verdict," for me, meant a summation of the points made, and the conclusion drawn from them.

I see.

Aside from Idle, I'm pretty sure I went after you on D-2 more than I did anyone else, and in particular over the deadline play. There's the 388 and 391 exchange with you, for instance. Other folks also ended up asking stuff of you before I managed to get there myself (the buddying posts with Idle); in addition, after Nacho gave you a town-pass for your actions (407), I was willing to suspend my judgment until we saw what Idle flipped. If you were scum, he was definitely scum; if he wasn't scum, what I thought I had on you was a lot less solid.

I started both discussions... you didn't exactly try to "grill" me. And you were more replying to my D-2 posts, instead of my D-1 deadline posts more than anything.

Because you're using it as a reason to vote for me? :/

That's not exactly my only reason, you know? Though one of my reasons was rendered useless when I realized that Hoppster speculated about the Nacho-cop thing just as much as you did.

Hoppster:

Why did you "trust" Nacho's logic throughout D-3? Now that Nacho is confirmed wrong, (about one of his town-reads) how does your new case compared to Nacho's?

[Newbie2010]

I did go very quiet that day, after the initial posts -- I didn't grill much of anyone, despite advising folks to grill everyone else to pieces, you and me especially. If you want to call that a contradiction, I suppose you can, but it's more a case of me failing to live up to grand intentions. External circumstances, and me being content with the Idle lynch going through, both played into this as the day progressed.

That's understandable. You not taking initiative isn't as understandable.

Your 387 stuff addressed to me is in large part response to questions and accusations I'd thrown in 361, 379, and 384. I agree I was not as proactive on the matter as I could have been, but I don't think it's fair to say you started the discussion. I also asked everything I thought there WAS to ask, that day, about your deadline posts -- why you forced a self hammer, why you thought doing so was pro-town, how it made any sense in your head to have done what you did, etc. I didn't exactly buy your answers, but I was satisfied with them for the time being, until we got an Idle flip.

So is that your whole case on me in D-2? Forcing a self-hammer from muh because I wanted muh over Idle, and then saying that I thought the self-hammer was a good decision? Because I thought you had something else in there with me being active at deadline and switching the lynch from Idle to muh, and just never got to it because Idle flipped scum first.

and me being content with the Idle lynch going through, both played into this as the day progressed.

So just because you are content with the Idle lynch, means you don't scumhunt for the other 1/2 scum in the same day?

[Newbie2010]

I didn't exactly buy your answers, but I was satisfied with them for the time being, until we got an Idle flip.

So your case on me changed from a policy-lynch of sorts for the self-hammer to bad interactions with Idle. But because you were satisfied with my answers, means you think the self-hammer case is now a null-case? And that your only case on me D-3 was the Idle interactions?

[Newbie2010]

No, that was not my case on you in D-2 -- I'm not entirely sure where you're getting this, and it doesn't even make sense. Are you pulling it from the series of questions I said I asked?

What else did you comment on about my D-1 play other than that so-called "anti-town" move about the self-hammer?

No town motivation for an action (that I could see), and quite a lot of scum motivation for an action ---> the person doing the action is likely scum.

This is also known as anti-town. Pushing a lynch for someone that is anti-town is also known as a policy lynch.

If you want someone who didn't bother to scumhunt at all that day, it's Nacho, though he admittedly had made more of a habit of not-posting than me the day before, and I don't know what was going on inside his head and in his notes. But I'd offer that as a counter-example to your apparent argument that my decreased observable activity that day means I'm scum.

Yep, I was in the middle of thinking about a case on him (like I said there was a lot more in the case of Nacho than that of you), but of course I really have no idea why he got NK'd

wanted you voted for because I thought that you forcing a claim and a self-hammer came from scum motivation, not town motivation.

Ok, if you really think what I did had scum motivation, then you'd call me anti-town. So your lynch on me would be a policy lynch. It stopped being a policy lynch the moment Song wrote the quote wall about the interactions of Idle and I.

In addition to that was you, at the end of Day 2, going "I'm willing to self-hammer policy lynch myself," when we had all made our opinions on self-hammering very clear, and were obviously going to yell at you "NO DON'T DO THAT." Maybe I was paranoid there, but I saw it as a gambit.

It was a gambit, but for the wrong intentions. I wanted to get the people on my wagon (LC + Song) to know that their case on me so far is no more than a policy lynch. Not because I was scum, but because I wanted a real, non-anti-town-based case on me, which Song provided.

In addition to that, there were bad interactions with Idle on Day 2 (along with the Day 1 stuff).

Point accepted. Like I said, this is the only real part of the case against me I see.

In addition to that, there's the the fact you bring up the cop matter.

Why is this scummy, and/or even anti-town? A cop claiming before LYLO even with a pair of innocents or even ONE innocent would be better than a cop claim at LYLO.

In addition to that, is the fact that you ask us all for our reads on everyone right at the end of Day 3. I'm inclined to drop this point, as I see valid town motivation for doing this.

Nacho lurked through D-3 with only one good post, and D-3 was around 17 days. I wanted that case out of him before D-4 if Song flips town. Also, if you think it is bad for me to give out our reads, WHY did you give out your own reads in reply to my question? Why didn't you explain to me why it is bad for you to give out your reads?

[Newbie2010]

Forgot this:

My scumhunting wasn't as proactive as it could have been, but I hope I still managed some that day. Please don't twist what I said into me saying, "I didn't bother to scumhunt." I asked questions, I looked for answers to things that most bothered me, I read cases, I posted a lot of my thoughts, especially at the beginning of the day. Again, external circumstances (which I don't like to appeal to, in all honesty, and tried not to that day, but they were a factor here), plus a lynch I wanted that was very likely to go through (that would narrow down some of the crazy number of variables and scenarios that I was spinning) --> less time than ideal spent on the game. I posted when I could, and did what I could.

You did manage more scum-hunting than Nacho. Just not as much as I felt you promised when you stated that a)b)c)d)e) thing. I didn't say that you uncharacteristically lurked through D-2. What I mean is that you didn't really follow through with your promises of "grill everyone else" and not even the "especially grill Newbie" part. If you got my answers, and Idle flipped town, what would you think of me? Would you immediately vote for me in the D-3 LYLO or would you instead look at other people more?

[Newbie2010]

Hoppster: OK, so if some hypothetical scum were to tunnel on one or two people you'd trust them? Because it sure seems like what you are getting at in your logic.

#105 says that my only scummy thing was my whole charade with the auto-lynch Nacho and the cop speculation. However, that came in D3, and #84 states that you had a scum-read on me at the start of D3 (ie. before it occured). Whilst the cop speculation did come early in D3, you didn't seem to be suspicious of PO at all D3 (who as we've discovered is also guilty of cop speculation). #63 implies that I had been acting scummy D2 as well.

#105: I had a case in #48 (where I mathematical failed with the typo with 2 scummy posts) but it wasn't that good. The later in the game you go, the better the cases get. I didn't like your D-2 play, but then again I didn't like either my own or really anyone else's. The quickhammer by Song was understandable, but deprived many of us of the time to build cases.

scum-read on me at the start of D3 (ie. before it occured).

This was the quote in my #48.

Whilst the cop speculation did come early in D3, you didn't seem to be suspicious of PO at all D3 (who as we've discovered is also guilty of cop speculation). #63 implies that I had been acting scummy D2 as well.

I wasn't really suspicious of PO, mainly because of me getting impatient waiting for Nacho to post his case on Song, and in general PO contributed quite a lot in terms of scum-hunting.

Regarding #58: You say that you were pretty sure I was the last scum, however, if my only scummy points were the auto-lynch campaign and the cop speculation, then that's not really that much to use as a basis for suspicion. This post also came early D3, before my auto-lynch Nacho idea.

Yes. I said I was pretty sure you were the last scum because of my case on #48. My mood about you shifted from scum to townish during D-3, and I felt you responded well to the quote-wall of back-and-forth replies.

Also, why were you confident enough to put PO bottom of your suspect list in #93 (and me second) but now you're more inclined towards PO-scum than Hoppster-scum?

PO was less scummy than you at that time because of your D-2 play and the lack of a similar issue with PO (a.k.a. me not reading PO closely enough to discover such issues) PO was less scummy than Nacho because Nacho lurked more. You were more scummy than Nacho up until Nacho put Song at L-1. Nacho putting Song at L-1 would've given him big scum-points, because he lurked through D-3 and refused to show his hand, even though he was a good player and the whole town was counting on him to make a case. Like I said, my cases on PO and you are still about equal. PO's interaction with Idle > Your lack of interaction with Idle, so that's the thing that tipped the balance. Plus, your doctor protections make sense, especially that soft-claim at the start of D-2. The reason I'm not voting for PO right now is because my case on her is still weak, just that my town-case on her is weaker than that of my town-case on you. And you might have just been a clever scum thinking out the doc fakeclaim D-2.

[Newbie2010]

Real life = Absence, sorry.

PO:

I commented that I found a lot of it pro-town in tone? :/ I openly admitted I hadn't had a scum read on you until the deadline actions. But how you've summarized what I was saying about you over the deadline actions is not what I was saying about you.

Maybe we just have a difference in vocabulary here. I never pushed a lynch on you because I said your actions were "anti-town" -- I pushed a lynch because I thought they were scummy, and I do try to make a distinction between those things.

Anti-town actions aren't necessarily scummy, but they CAN be. (And most scummy actions are anti-town by definition). Lurking can be anti-town, but if one's doing it to stay out of the limelight as a powerrole, it's not necessarily scummy. Clamming up like Hanzo did early in the thread, then Nacho later, can be anti-town, but there can also be town reasons for clamming up. Doing crazy stuff like Hanzo was doing can be anti-town, but he could honestly think that he was doing it for reasons that were good for the town.

I'm rather confused here, and I seriously don't know what you're expecting or looking for in a case. I went after you because I thought your actions came from scum motivation, not town motivation. I don't know how many more ways I can say this.

Yes, it does seem like a difference in vocabulary. What you are saying about me implies that you think I was anti-town during the deadline play (in my vocabulary) and you put suspicion on me because after Idle, everyone else has acted less anti-townish than me. To me, scummy means constant scum-slips, while anti-town means just plain bad play.

I would have called it scummy, and you scum. One can do anti-town things without being scum. Again, maybe it's just a disagreement in vocabulary here, but I still don't understand why you keep trying to say what I did was a policy lynch.

And I'm pretty sure that indeed what you are saying is a policy lynch (in my vocabulary) because basing a case on only anti-town things (things that come only from scum motivation) is pretty much a policy lynch. You could say that my pushing on muh was also a policy lynch, mainly because I didn't receive the same scum-vibes from some of Idle's slips that Nacho pointed out and of course muh was more anti-town compared to Idle. The closest you get to a case on me is:

I had a decent town read on Newbie throughout the rest of the thread, up until this, actually. Forcing a self-hammer, though, is hard for me get around. He says that it's accepted practice on the other site he plays at, though, so it IS possible there was no scummy or malicious intent in what he did. In which case (b) would be the more likely scenario, and I need to more seriously explore options other than Newbie.

Which is about the closest I got to a case on muh.

But we had no idea at the time that there even WAS a cop, and you were very specific in singling out Nacho. If he was breadcrumbing cop, he obviously had decided not to say anything about it then. If all you wanted to say was "if a cop has two innocent reads, or even just one, he should claim"-- then say it more vaguely like that, and avoid drawing attention to the person that you think might be the cop. If you wanted Nacho to give an actual reason for his reads, then simply yell at him to give his reasons. Obviously Hopp and my latching onto the matter forced it far more into the limelight -- but once you brought up the possibility of a specific player being the cop, the cat was out of the bag, so to speak, and any anonymity and choice in the matter he might have preserved was gone.

It just seemed so obvious a potential breadcrumb that I pointed it out to get other townies to see it. If I were the final scum, it would've been better for me to ask the cop to claim instead of asking for a Nacho-claim because I know that Nacho did not investigate me, so there's not any scum motivation behind that singling-out action. Not saying that me saying that would mean that I = scum because of the WIFOM argument, just saying that it is not anti-town to state the cop-read. And I'm sure that if I wanted a cop claim, I would have to be asked why, and then I have to bring up the Nacho case to support my claim anyways. So to me it felt like claiming Nacho-cop-read was justified.

I stated in that very post itself that I gave my reads because I thought it was already apparent where I stood. (And as you note later, I fuzzed the Hoppster/Nacho line).

I also wasn't 100% certain it was bad to give reads -- I was waiting on Nacho's response before I made a final call on that. Though I think my "it's already pretty evident from my posting" sentence indicates where my doubts lay, and that the following paragraph made it clear I thought there might seriously be a disadvantage to answering your questions. I even made sure to put in an "if there's no drawback" in my counter-question to you.

I was also quite wary of giving you advice, because I thought you were the most likely scum candidate if Song flipped town. For the previous reasons mentioned, but very much compounded by the fact you had asked us all for our reads, but hadn't volunteered your own. I didn't see you acting in good faith there at all. (This is also one of the reasons I went after muh early in the thread -- asking a set of questions of other people, but not answering them himself)

It is never good to give out reads unless someone requests such reads. Of course, I totally expected someone to ask for the read, but in case some people went inactive and D-3 neared deadline I would conceal my reads to myself due to a lack of interest.

It looks like your reasoning for voting for Song was ostensibly pragmatic -- you didn't think she was the scummiest, but (somehow?) thought it would best narrow down town options to lynch her? In neither scenario would Newbie (the person you said you personally thought was the scummiest) have a chance of getting lynched, however. Either Song would be scum, and we'd be done, or Song would be town, and we'd lynch Nacho. So what made you eliminate Newbie as a lynch option at that point?

The only real thing I see scummy about this is the fact that Hoppster buddies up to Nacho quite a bit. However, this is consistent with his Doc-protect of Nacho. The only real problem is that I still don't buy Hoppster's PO protect on N3. I mean, if you get town vibes from PO but basically sheep Nacho until he is wrong, won't a Nacho-protect be better? Nacho really backed down from the Song lynch during the middle of D-3, and PO and then I pushed it back up. At around the same time, you backed down from the Song lynch as well, and you weren't even on the Song wagon as Song got hammered.

If I were scum, I would never have stated a theory like this, knowing that it could possibly be turned around and used on me like this. It would have been pretty blatantly suicidal. I voiced it because, even though I saw that it could possibly implicate me as well, I thought it pointed to Newbie as scum. (If people thought it was a decent argument, but I ended up getting lynched for it instead of Newbie, I hoped people might continue it and get Newbie with a later lynch). As scum, I would have every motivation in the world to try to steer discussion away the deadline matter, and certainly to avoid naming buddy-saving as a top suspicion of mine. As town (and a powerrole-less town at that), however, I would not have motivation to avoid it, if I thought it was likely the truth. Which I did think it was, because I thought Idle was very likely scum, and as I saw no town motivation (at that point) for Newbie's actions.

Why did you not state that fact here:

At that point in the game, both Hoppster and myself were including ourselves in our lists of suspects whenever we thought our analysis and sets of options pointed to us as well as anyone else. I think we both stopped doing that later on (?), but at that point, we were still engaging in the practice. The statement you quote was the summary/conclusion of my a-b-c-d-e listing previously in the post, where I listed myself as a suspect several times. Given the listing, it would also have been strange if I'd said "grill Newbie, but not me," when I hadn't yet laid out the various ways I thought your actions and my actions differed that night. I didn't like the fact that my own conclusions pointed to me as a top suspect, but they did, and I couldn't avoid it, so thus counted on the differences coming to light and being discussed once people started examining both of us.

This is the second time you are talking about the abcde casework thing, and it seems as if you are changing your standpoint, from saying that it would be awkward to saying that it was not anti-town.

If you plan to use that as part your voting rationale, you should probably also consider this post.

Where in that post do I relate to Idle's posts? If you are saying that me saying Idle is active lurking is your analogy, you should note that I pointed that out for muh even more so and first. If you are saying that my 15 games comment, muh brought that up before I did. I only picked it up because muh said something about it.

And about the replacements thing, I don't see any relation at all.

I believe he was ripping off whatever he could find, perhaps with help from whoever his scum partner was, perhaps not. The fact that you attacked Idle's attempt at a case (with some apparent misunderstanding of it), while Newbie goes out of his way to clarify what Idle was saying and help him forward, is one of the things that makes me lean Newbie-scum over you scum. If he got any coaching in making his case, it was from Newbie. (CF the quotes references in the last part of this post).

Agree 100%.

You could still be scum, but have just decided to leave him to his own devices, I suppose -- you weren't around at deadline, and he was probably going to be the day's lynch, so I think you would have considered him already as good as lynched.

Actually, if anyone bussed Idle, it would be either Hoppster or Nacho. Hoppster's unvote of muh in post 297

I agree with Ragnarokio that, although acting scummy, IT's behaviour could just be inexperience. IT may be a better case than muh, I agree, but I firmly believe that Song should be the one to be lynched (first at least).


VOTE: Song

Is actually most of the momentum that shifted the muh wagon to the Idle wagon. Not that bussing is a huge scum-tell, because it didn't really hint to relations between Hoppster and Idle.

PREVIEW EDIT:

Trying to redo this without falling into that problem: I believe there is a case to be made that I would have very little scum motivation to propose such a theory, but quite a bit of town motivation to do so. I don't know if this avoids the WIFOM problem -- it may just disguise it in fancier words, but it's the gist of part of what I was trying to communicate.

It doesn't matter. Null-town actions are still null-town and not anti-town.

Also, forgot one thing:

(a) Idle's scum, and his buddy was making a last-ditch move to try and save him. (Newbie or me = other mafia)
(b) Idle's scum, and his buddy was sitting on the sidelines after bussing him, letting Newbie and me argue ourselves blue in the face. (Song, Nacho, Hoppster, or LordChaos = other mafia)
(c) Idle's town, and the mafia were snug in their beds, secure in a town lynch. (Song, Nacho, Hopp, Chaos = possible mafia)
(d) Idle's town, and Newbie was trying a ridiculously risky push for a role claim while his buddy slept soundly. (Newbie = mafia, everyone else but me = possible mafia. )
(e) Idle's town, and both mafia are idiots made a ridiculously risky push for a role claim. (Newbie and me = mafia)

You are saying that if I am scum, then I made a ridiculous risk for the muh roleclaim.

His was a quite methodical push for a self-hammer...trying to blame it on time constraints or pressure or whatnot would be stupid for a scum version of him. If he's town - yes, he's being honest and consistent, and saying what he really was thinking. And if he's scum, he's presenting a consistent rationalization and defense of his actions. Because blaming his actions on time constraints and pressure would be contradictory and suicidal -- based on his deadline posts it's obvious he WAS thinking through what he was doing then.

So I took a ridiculous risk, but I also knew what I was doing?

[Newbie2010]

Hoppster:

While if Newbie is town I do understand the angle he is coming from, looking at it with Nacho's town reads thrown anything but certain (as it is now) I am slightly suspicious that PO and myself both failed to jump to the conclusion that Nacho could be cop with his unexplained reads, despite the fact we would be coming from a similar viewpoint as Newbie if he were town. However, the fact that only he decided that it showed up Nacho as a cop candidate makes me wonder. It did seem a bit to me as a way of him to seem that he was adding something to town (advising cop to claim) and also re-iterating his town-ness (Hey guys, I'm town, so I think his town read on me might be cop investigation).

More or less it was because his town-read on me was right after

Yes. With an Idle Thoughts scumflip, however, I most likely won't feel the same.

---

Yeah, that's my heavily flawed logic summed up. I discounted Newbie because he didn't fit into the logic. I assumed that when it came to my read vs Nacho's read, Nacho's would be correct. So in essence, the answer to your question is "yes". I didn't think he'd be 100% accurate, but pretty damn near enough so that he's basically 100% accurate.

I didn't want to convince Nacho that Newbie was scum because I didn't really believe it myself. The only person I have been near 100% convinced of being scum at any point was Idle Thoughts (however I was definitely quite sure of Song near the end of D3).

How can you be near 100% convinced that someone is scum without encouraging others to help you push the case?

Towards the end of the day, Song was much more scummy than Newbie in my opinion. Paticularly with the whole thing where she concluded there was likely to be scum on her wagon. Having said that, the main reason I found that scummy was because it was so incorrect, and of course I am just as guilty with my auto-lynch campaign. I wouldn't really have a problem if you decide to lynch me because I'm finding it difficult to decide between you and Newbie and my cases suck (having reviewed my own case on Newbie I have no substance and just a general 'feeling') and I'm probably very little use. I can't even defend myself adequately. Worst comes to worse I'm just going to flip a coin and blindly vote for one of the two and hope. Don't get me wrong, I'll be disappointed (and a little bit guilty) but I just really can't find anything substantial on either of you. I know as I type this that I probably look scummy (and I suspect I'll be blamed post-game if we lose) but I'm hoping this will absolve some of the blame. Really, the only thing I can think of doing right now is the said coin flip.

I would hate for this game to deadline right now, but I'm not at all convinced that PO is scum and I am still doubting the N3 protection in your doctor claim. I think it is perfectly fine to doubt your reads until the end of this 21-day LYLO. Just don't no-lynch

However. I'm not giving up just yet, so I'm having one last stab. It's not paticularly game-breaking, but just a little observation really. In terms of post-D1 play, PO and Newbie took two decidedly different routes over the muh self-hammer: Newbie tried to justify his decision and just really stuck to his guns I suppose, but PO blamed the pressure and whatnot for a stupid mistake. Okay, so now for me it seems likely that one of the two of you were aiming to save your scumbuddy (as I see no other motivation). For scum, I think it is much riskier sticking to and justifying your decision to vote muh than it is to blame the time constraints and risk of No Lynch. I also find it interesting that in PO's ISO #31, the scenario she sees as most likely is the one where the last scum tries to save their buddy Idle. Perhaps it's just an immensely good analysis, but I wouldn't have thought that most likely at all (as it would have been more discrete for scum just to let Idle be lynched imo), however, PO, rated that as her most likely scenario (and it turns out to be correct). From PO's perspective, I'm doubtful that I would have read Newbie as scum helping Idle. His mindset seems to be of town who also assumes PO is town.

How does risk-taking and not risk-taking have to do with scum strategy?

It's also a small thing, but I wonder if it's just a coincedence that Idle's "attack" is ripped off PO (#393 pg16). We never conclusively decided that it was, but if it wasn't intentionally ripped off, then it's feasible that it could have been subconciously absorbed and regurgitated by Idle. I'm not sure how scum would think, but I'm fairly sure that if you were scum, the posts you would pay more attention to would be those of your partner (paticularly if you're first-time scum looking for guidance).

Refer to all of Idle's many buddying posts to see why this is a really weak tell in my opinion. (and so are the interaction tells I pointed out about PO) Not saying that you are wrong with this, just that you need to convince me that this is even a tell at all.

[Newbie2010]

Hanzo, I don't think Purple Orange is lurking. If he is trying to, he's not doing it very well- he's made a bunch of constructive votes, and then hasn't posted for a little. That's okay with me for the moment, but a day or two more and I'll agree with you.

Idle getting PO's gender wrong doesn't seem like two scum chatting in a QT, especially considering Idle has gotten all the other genders right in all his 47 posts. Not really something anyone could defend against, just something I noticed.

Thinking this through again, Hoppster's doc crumb reacting to Ragnarokio's N1 death could be a cop crumb as well, because hypothetically a cop that investigate Ragnarokio would give off the same general feeling of frustration, but to a greater extent. If Hoppster were the scum RB, he would still need to crumb both cop and doc because of the need to counterclaim if a cop claimed or a doc claimed.

[Newbie2010]

One problem I see with Hoppster's play is that he has contradicted himself without much of an explanation.

NEWBIE2010 case:
This has convinced me that he (Newbie2010)'s not scum, in that he's willing to self-hammer for a PL.
With you(Newbie2010) having made that post earlier, I would expect you to have some sort of response to Idle's scumflip, but you've just completely ignored it. Very scummy to me indeed.
SONG OF ICE AND FIRE case:
Sorry Song. Although you haven't really seemed that scummy to me recently (Newbie's seemed more scummy imo), I'm going to trust in Nacho's town reads.
Besides, the vote isn't made so much on Song's scumminess, but by eliminating other possibilites (albeit inadequately in hindsight). And the only assumption I am making about his reasoning is that it's correct.
Paticularly as I still believe there's a possibility of Newbie being scum now.

He has buddied with every person other than Song D3 as well, all the time saying that I am scummier and not really convincing anyone to push my case.

[Newbie2010]

And I set a trap here:

I'm buying Hoppster's doc claim right now, but once again, the reversal of the cop-speculation case really hurt my PO-scum read. Like I said, I'm probably still missing things so I'm not going to vote yet.

I never really fully liked Hoppster's doc claim and actions, but I wanted to see how he would react to this: He reacts by buddying hard with me, to the point of FoS'ing PO, which is a big tell in my opinion because before hand he never mentions anything about my posts being townie.

UnFoS: Purple Orange, FoS x2: Hoppster

In addition to

However. I'm not giving up just yet, so I'm having one last stab. It's not paticularly game-breaking, but just a little observation really.

Which is giving me deja vu because of:

@Nacho: Not scummy, just the tiniest bit amusing.

[Newbie2010]

By the way FoS x2 means basically more than what I had against Purple Orange.

[Newbie2010]

Yeah... through this game I've noticed that people jump at very small things as signs of buddying (such as Newbie helping Idle with quote tags) which quite frankly I find ridiculous. (I'm not blaming you, I'm just making a general statement.) If that's the case, in future I would be loathe to advise anybody about anything for fear of being labelled as buddying.

Buddying isn't a strong tell, but buddying with opinions that clearly do not reflect what you think if you are town is quite a strong tell.

I do personally think that had I been scum I would have made a pretty damn good Idle-bus.

Like I said I don't 100% see the bus, but neither do I see a PO bus against Idle.

You misunderstand me. Why would I push a case I don't have faith in? While what I could see made me suspect you as scum, taking Nacho's views into account I was swayed into thinking I had made mistakes. As I've said, my previous cases lack much detail.

Why'd you vote for me at the start of Day 3? Were you reaction-fishing?

1) I don't understand what's so hard for you to believe about it. At the time I decided that PO was probably most likely town, and I also thought it'd be very challenging deciding between Nacho and yourself at lylo.

This PO / me decision sure seems to be the hardest thing in the world for you right now. (Of course, my decision between you two is just as hard, so I'm resorting to gambitting more than anything.)Why did you trust all of Nacho's reads EVEN AFTER he backed down on Song is what I don't understand. You don't place a second vote on Song after I decide to vote Song but you have no faith in my case and you still suspect Song, and you don't put a second vote on me after PO's case on me D3, but you immediately vote Song when Nacho puts suspicion on her at the start of D3? If this isn't complete trust of Nacho = town as doctor or scum I can't really see what it is. Why was Nacho not as townie-like as Purple D3?

2) Um, everything? Why take unneccessary risks? Of course, if you're scum, you'd be the better one to advise in scum strategy, so please go on and enlighten me if that's the case.

Why did andrew94 fakeclaim cop in Newbie 1020? Do you think his risk paid off? And besides, scum taking risks can lead to this exact WIFOM that we are discussing about almost every case.

Furthermore, you previously state that I buddy up a lot (which I may do, if I do it's subconciously/my play style), in which case, why should this case be significant? Am I forbidden from FoS'ing now it's lylo (PO previously FoS'd you)? Should I just self-hammer in this case as it's pointless me even being here? Or should I just cast out a random vote and hope I'm right?

No. You have no reason to believe that PO is scum mainly because of your lack of a case and immediate FoS. It seems quite logical that your FoS is an attempt to buddy with me. And really, you were talking more about me compared to PO.

I also think you are reading far too much into this whole soft claim thing. I genuinely didn't feel that it was a soft claim in any sense. If anything, it's slightly scummy. According to the wiki, it's a scum tell.

If I were looking for softclaims that would be the first one that I'd spot.

[Newbie2010]

Why did you feel a need to get the other townies to see it, at that point, though? You also say a bit later in the thread that you think I'm possibly a power-role -- why did you also voice that?

Power-roles, especially cops, claiming before LYLO is usually better than them claiming in LYLO just because of the guaranteed information gained from their alignment. I thought you were pushing the Nacho-cop thing a bit too much, because you wanted a scum-Nacho to possibly claim cop when you were cop, which would be game over. Of course, you 180'd on that in your next posts, so there goes my PR-vibe. I might be wrong in theory, but I think with a 1 scum in 5 people setup, a PR claim would really help things a lot, and a fakeclaim would be caught easier.

I'm confused as to what you're asking - help? Those quotes are answering two different questions; yours was why I included my name along with yours, while Hopp's was why I had come to the buddy-saving conclusion. I thought the answer I gave was fitting to each -- again, though, I'm not entirely sure what you're asking here.

I'm just wondering why you got all defensive in your last post and didn't do so in your previous posts about your ABCDE casework.

If I were scum, I would never have stated a theory like this, knowing that it could possibly be turned around and used on me like this. It would have been pretty blatantly suicidal. I voiced it because, even though I saw that it could possibly implicate me as well, I thought it pointed to Newbie as scum. (If people thought it was a decent argument, but I ended up getting lynched for it instead of Newbie, I hoped people might continue it and get Newbie with a later lynch). As scum, I would have every motivation in the world to try to steer discussion away the deadline matter, and certainly to avoid naming buddy-saving as a top suspicion of mine. As town (and a powerrole-less town at that), however, I would not have motivation to avoid it, if I thought it was likely the truth. Which I did think it was, because I thought Idle was very likely scum, and as I saw no town motivation (at that point) for Newbie's actions.

Sounded rather defensive to me...

I saw parallels between these two parts:

D'oh!

The ridiculous risk refered to scenarios in which Idle is town (d and e). It's a more understandable decision if Idle is scum, though still not terribly wise. Either way, a bad decision (and even a ridiculous risk) can still be executed well. Cruddy analogy...driving your truck off a cliff might be a bad idea, but it can still be done deliberately and with a bit of precision.

Understood.

With Hopp, I am rather suspicious of claims of traps and gambits. But your switch of vote once you had Hopp over on your side, FoSing for me, doesn't seem to make much sense as a scum move, barring you playing this a level or two of WIFOM deep (knowing I'd react this way), or unless you're trying to get me over on Hopp as well as Hopp over on me before you made a move.

So it isn't anti-town. Go on?

With Hopp, I am rather suspicious of claims of traps and gambits.

Traps always make you look suspicious, only because you can blame any of your scumslips on "oh this is a trap". But I think that because of it, even though your opinions weren't really affected, it got me a step further in finding the scum.

^ LOL, this. That was my first thought when I saw it the "oh, darn" that day...certainly not doc-or-cop-softclaim. If it really is a softclaim, it's a pretty bad one, as it's ambiguous enough to mean pretty much anything, so I've just been dismissing it as null. (With maybe possibly maybe a bit of scummy, ala the wiki link, and your whole post today about how you were worried about how you were "meant to react." )

Well if it were a softclaim it would've been rather effective, because I got the same reaction (see where I said I didn't feel PR from Hopp's speculation)
But I might be trying too hard to look for softclaims from the PR and focusing on the PR more than the person I think is scum.

[Newbie2010]

Anyone have anything else to say? I'm ready to vote personally.

[Newbie2010]

Obviously I'm being unclear, sorry.

Err...and you're ready to vote after saying this in your 116?

Because of my inactivities and the general slow-pace of the game. But after that one day of no posting, it just felt like everyone has finished their cases already.

I suppose what most got to me was the shift from him asking questions about stuff, to just straight out (soft)accusing...I hadn't seen any preparatory questions leading up to this, from him, like I think we'd all been doing for the past couple of pages. Just bam, out of the blue - and he seemed to use it as a large part of the basis of his FoS on me. (I think I BAM-laid down some accusations myself myself earlier in the thread, though, so I suppose I can't really fault him for it).

I think he himself said that he would coinflip or something for the FoS. Though I still think him FoS'ing PO was an attempt to buddy buddy with me and get me to vote PO.

? Does this mean you're back to thinking Hopp's claim is correct?

No, I'll just pretend that Hoppster didn't claim doctor because although his play doesn't make sense, I feel like I'm trying too hard to use his doctor fakeclaim as a part of my case, and I should drop it and look at my Hoppster case from a different perspective.

@ Newbie: Why are you seeing it as a bus rather than just as an "I think this person is scummy, I'm voting for him" town post? Or was that sentence just written with an assumed "if Hopp is scum...[then what he did there was a bus]" in mind?

I'm seeing it as a bus because I'm more convinced that Hoppster is scum. Like I said the bus case is still doubtful and weak, but it does seem viable that Hoppster bussed. The bussing thing isn't part of my case, just me showing that Hoppster's late vote on Idle was not a contradiction to my thought that Hoppster is scum.

Overall read is Hoppster-scum still.

[Newbie2010]

Mainly due to your lack of reaction from the Idle scumflip, which nobody else seemed to think was scummy oddly (to me anyway). As I said previously, I think I have a tendency to sway from view to view as posts crop up. That (your absence of reaction) appeared to me as scummy, so I voted to show my opinion on it and to try to get more of an insight into your behaviour. I did think about just asking without a vote but I didn't think that you'd take it seriously (and you still didn't really seem that concerned even with my vote imo).

Why was my lack of reaction to Idle scumflip scummy? Think about if you were town in my position, having defended Idle throughout D-2. Wouldn't you want to forget that Idle ever existed and start over with your reads?

Okay, maybe I'm wrong about this, but there seems to me to be no additional benefit from sticking to your guns in a move largely seen as scummy by town than blaming it on the pressure/time-constraints. Indeed, PO's hand in the matter seemed to go largely unnoticed by everybody else while there was a little bit of a hoofah over your policy self-lynch etcetera.

So if you saw it scummy, why did you not vote me because of it? You commented at LC expressing agreement that you were annoyed muh got lynched, but beyond that you make no attempt to make my muh-switch seem scummy, instead going after Song and then Idle. Besides, as you probably already know, I still feel that it was the right move as town and kept pushing the fact that I got my top scum suspect lynched D-1, even though I was wrong. That it wasn't a mistake on my part to push muh to self-hammer.

I'm certainly not ready to vote. However, I've nothing against you voting if you really think you're ready. For one thing, it'll either show you up as scum or I'm dead. In either case, if I'm dead, well it sucks, but at least it's not my fault (apart from maybe playing badly today) that we lose. If you're scum, well, provided I convince PO then yay, town wins. If I don't, I'm dead, and as mentioned previously, it's not my fault for mis-lynching. (It'll be your fault, PO. I hope you're happy.)

I'm not ready to vote if you still want to defend yourself (like you are right now). I wanted to vote because the thread seemed inactive and I felt everyone has presented their cases.

You haven't addressed my point (unless I've missed it) that only that one post out of three following your 'trap' could be possibly be construed as 'buddying' up to you.

Wait, I didn't think that you were saying that my trap is invalid.

From #605 (where I FoS PO) I start the trap (buddying to you to see your reactions)

ISO #62 and #63 were asking PO questions. #64 and #65 were asking me questions.

Of course, it could be that Newbie's just more observant/thoughtful town in which case the other town (it's me ) and scum were just a bit less creative with their thought process or whatnot.

This seems to be pretty clearly buddying. You make a case on how my Nacho-cop speculation is scummy with the reiterating "I'm town" thing, then you dismiss it with me=town.

#66 and #68 were clarification more than anything.

Next we have your case against PO because you don't arrive at the same conclusion as she does:

From PO's perspective, I'm doubtful that I would have read Newbie as scum helping Idle. His mindset seems to be of town who also assumes PO is town.

Next you have #70 which is yet again a clarification post. So here we have 9 posts, out of which two posts where you buddy to me, zero where you buddy to PO, and two questioning posts.

Now let's take your ISO before I set the trap, for this I will take posts #51 to #61.

#52:

Immediately following the nightkill I admit that I was suspicious of you due to the fact that you hadn't been killed. You've pretty much countered my suspicions though. So, um, that leaves Newbie.

This is the exact opposite of #64. You say that you suspect PO but follow that up immediately with "she's town".

#51 and #53 were question-posing and answering while I was away.

#56 was questioning me, but not exactly calling me scum.

It could be possible that, if I'm scum, it's a clever ploy by Newbie to lure out a fake claim (ie. both you and he would be PR's).

Here you are calling me town in a case, but the case is only valid if you are scum! So this isn't a valid buddy-point towards me.

And the bottom part of #60 could be construed as you buddying with me to see if I forgot my case or not, but at that time I am already talking about PO more than you, so it could be a buddy-point towards me.

So out of these 11 posts, one of them buddys to PO, one of them (potentially) buddys to me, and some questioning posts that are fairly evenly spread to PO and I.

Do you see my point now?

Also, if you see my reaction to your 'trap' as buddying, why don't you think I buddied up to PO who FoS'd you right off the bat?

You did in one post, and came dangerously close to doing so in another #56, where you say PO is right and all.

I like how you've established my supposed fakeclaim as a fact. Only scum (or possibly cop) can play with that level of certainty (even if in this case you would be lying).

No, I was talking about my case where I concluded that you are more likely to fakeclaim than claim when town purely because of your night actions and how they match up to your play.

Yeah, I did. I won't be doing that now it seems likely you'll vote me as if PO's scum, I'm dead, and if PO isn't scum then I'm voting you. You scum.

Is this calling me scum now for being ready to vote or something? Or is "you scum" directed out of frustration because of me wanting to vote you?

[Newbie2010]

Yes, perhaps, but in that case you should probably make a clarification post along the lines of "Okay, guys, I messed up big time. Starting my cases from scratch again".

So perhaps your gut reading could be justified.

That's not my point. In fact, if anything, I'm saying scum would be more likely to take PO's approach - laying low.

So why did you say it? Who does it implicate?

Sorry. It's just that your phrasing strongly implies that me fakeclaiming is a fact.

Ok, thanks for all the clarifications.

I do see what you're getting at now, but don't you think that is consistent with my style of play? You've been calling me out for being wishy-washy in a sense with my comments on who is scummy etc. before but now in this paticular case it's buddying.

Wishy-washiness wasn't scummy until you switched exactly how I thought you would after I called you town.

[Newbie2010]

Sorry, RL came up again. (Hmm... this is the fifth time or something RL has come up, really sorry for all the lack of posting)

For clarification: you thought that if Hopp were town, his FoS of me over you was based purely on a coinflip? (Between his bit on you in 631 and his bit on me 636?)

Pretty much, yes. I mean, he wasn't really making a case on you, and he mentioned somewhere that he is really stuck on the situation.

clarifies/helps Idle case on D2 (moderate) - other buddying stuff I'm pretty willing to dismiss as null. This much familiarity and help with a case, not so much.

This one I can't really defend myself on, other than "I thought Idle was town". Though you probably have heard this from me many times and don't expect me to reply

D4 switch of FoS VERY town (strong). More on this below. It's basically made me have to rethink my entire read on Newbie.

I wouldn't say that this is strong. Once again, take my gambit however you want to, but scum has taken risks that proved successful.

"self hammer" gambit (moderate) - trying to look sacrificial, ready to die, and town, when he knows we'll tell him not to do it

I directed this mostly at LC and Song, because LC argued me all of D2 on theory and Song, well, she was inactive and just randomly voted me.

asks for reads but doesn't give own first (slight) - still a bit hard for me to see this being in good faith

True, I should've expected someone to ask me for my reads.

Newbie's mentioned bussing, but it's the Song vote more than the Idle vote that I see as possibly pointing to scum. His ISO 5 has him thinking that muh may not be scummy anymore, so if he was scum trying to redirect the wagon, the vote for Song would have been that attempt, as backtracking to muh would have been difficult. Finding the Song track useless Hopp gave up and switched over to Idle in ISO 12 (giving maybe a bit of advice to him in the process, but I think the case on that bit is pretty weak)

If Hoppster were scum, him jumping on the easiest target (Song) at that time wasn't really scummy. It just seemed as if he contributed nothing to the Idle case, and just placed his vote there for distancing. Even his D-1 Idle vote post, he started by making a case against Song and eventually went to Idle instead. This is scummy because scumpartners would have no incentive to make cases against each other and propel the wagons, and Hoppster's vote was the 6th vote or willing to vote at that time. (Unless I messed up my counting and forgot about someone) The Song point I don't feel is as strong, mainly because Hopp-scum didn't really know that IT would be on the chopping block when he voted Song, so him attacking Idle at that point would really be better, because he would have gained more town-cred if he bussed before the bus was inevitable. I mean, I don't see a townie voting Song randomly anyways, but I just don't feel it as scummy as the Idle straightforward bus.

Sheeping the IC (slight)
sets up "lynch Nacho if Song is town" deal (slight) - see below, where to me it implies town. Its effects would have been self-serving and scummy, however, so including the fact of it up here.
Votes Song over Newbie even while saying Newbie is scummiest read (slight) - his explanation makes some sense, but it's hard for me to just drop this

These three points seem to be really one big problem with Hoppster's play, his complete trust that Nacho couldn't flunk a town-read of the day.

N3 kill makes 100% sense from his PoV. (slight)

For some reason, I still fail to see this.

Doesn't appear to understand Idle case D2 (moderate)

I think he just overextended himself in an Idle-bus, and ran out of points to supply his initial case.

"Lynch nacho if Song flips town" reads more like town oversight than scum plot to me (strong)

This still about complete trust in Nacho.

In fact, one of the things that was confirming Newbie as scum in my mind earlier was the fact he'd FoS'd me over Hopp today, after calling me townier than Hopp all game. Sure, he might have done it because he honestly thought I was scummier (and maybe he still does), but it would also be the natural scum reaction to counter-suspect the person suspecting them, and try to convince the more undecided person to their side. So when he sidled up to Hopp and FoS'd me, he was doing exactly what I thought he'd do as scum, and I intended to bring that up when I made a final case against him. :/

But then to do what he just did, and flip and FoS Hopp, who'd just sided with him? THAT IS NOT A SCUM THING TO DO. (Says me from the limited number of lylos I've been in or witnessed, but I'm pretty damn convinced of this). The scum thing to do is keep coasting along convincing Hopp to lynch me -- not rock the boat, not provoke the guy who's agreeing with you (or at the very worst undecided), not look into the lion's mouth and create a ring-around-the-rosey FoS-Vote, like we have now. Especially not when the other person (me) looked set on voting for Newbie.

So I'm left seeing town who did what he did because he believed in his case, and/or he was looking for reactions to gauge. He's admitted he's using gambits now, so for all I know, he still suspects me more than Hopp, and the whole switch has been a way to double-judge reactions, or some such thing. But either way, I'm left reading what he did as town, not scum.

Like I said, you can build a case of me double-WIFOMming you, but that once again is the whole point of a gambit. It could be an excuse to cover up a bad move, (in this case if I were scum the PO FoS would've been a bad move for me) but as town at least I got some insight into who is scum. I really honestly had no idea of who to FoS so I just used the interaction tell on PO, but I purposely left out one of the most telling interactions between Sevei and Idle, one that would make Hoppster's interaction case much worse than PO's. I am getting more and more convinced that Hoppster is scum, so I will supply my vote to prove that I am not gambitting on a second-level and plain feel that Hoppster is scum.

1) Did you ever actually suspect PO at all today or was it all from the word 'go' an extremely elaborate (not to mention ridiculously cunning) trap?
2) What would you done had I not responded as you expected to your trap?
3) How long have you been scheming over this trap? Due to it's immense complexity, I wonder whether your whole gameplan has just been to find a suitable candidate D1 to lure into your trap D4?
4) Why did you even feel the need to set a trap? And why for me rather than PO

1) I suspected PO for all those interaction tells and pretty much nothing else. Once I reveal the Sevei-interaction tell you will see why it is stronger than the PO interaction tells.
2) I would have reanalyzed my cases, and knowing that I would be on the chopping block (you and PO FoS'ing me) I would eagerly await a case from you.
3) ...
4) You were my top scum suspect other than Song ever since my ISO #48.

1) Which post is it you're referring to where Idle shoots himself in the foot?

Quite honestly, I didn't feel that #377 was really scummy, other than "I'd like to say that Hanz/LC is a good suspect", which sounds forced.

Also... it's a bit of a small thing really, but I'm suspicious of the "FoS x 2" Newbie used in combination with him revealing his trap, and then the clarification he felt that he had to do "FoS x 2 means more than FoS". It felt like a pretty tacky way of proving that it was a trap (ala "Look, this trap which I just totally set has made me so suspicious of you I'm going to put a x2 at the end of my FoS!"), and something that scum would do to try to look town. It's hard to explain. My general feeling is that town possibly would not have felt it necessary to add the x2, and anyway, if they did, certainly wouldn't need to explain it. The explanation could also be a way of looking town, but I'm less confident about that.

FoS x2 was written in my notes, but I accidentally just wrote that out loud. I didn't really think that you would understand, so that's why I clarified what I meant by FoS x2. My FoS on PO was really pretty weak (interaction tells) so it might've been obvious anyways.

Sevei + Idle case:

Basically, IT...you're fence-sitting is hugely anti-town. If you aren't scum, you're still an excellent lynch because you are doing nothing and making it possible for scum to keep attention off themselves and on you. You are also contributing nothing in the way of reads, and your "aw shucks, what do I know?" attitude is making it possible for you to post a lot and say nothing, which is commonly known as active lurking, a scum-tactic.

If we can't agree on scum by the end of the day, IT would be a completely viable lynch imo.

Sevei puts the case on Idle, her second suspect, before the case on Song... even though the case on Song (in her opinion) was stronger? And the last sentence is clearly a fake accusation. (Sort of the accusation that I did on muh throughout D-1) If IT flipped town, this wouldn't have been a big point, but because of Idle-scum, Sevei's post here seems like distancing while at the same time not deflecting the Song-wagon.

The reply is even more scummy, however:

Okay, I'll take Sevei's opinion of me with a smile. It makes sense- I don't really understand how or even if I'll defend against that, so if you want my defense, it's a few pages back.

Acknowledgement, while at the same time not mentioning the case or less-fencesitting at all.

VOTE: Hoppster

PO, if you were scum, good play.

P.S. One final point:

Although Nacho called Hoppster -46.55 for D1, note that PO got a score of more than the boundary, less than -50. And out of the five points that I disagree with, two were from Hoppster: The +2 for first intention being getting a read is scummy in my opinion, and Hoppster didn't really back down in #270 because he didn't really have a scum, rather anti-town case on muh.

That puts his +5 total at a -2 instead.

[Newbie2010]

[Newbie2010]

Idle getting PO's gender wrong doesn't seem like two scum chatting in a QT, especially considering Idle has gotten all the other genders right in all his 47 posts. Not really something anyone could defend against, just something I noticed.

Did IT intentionally get your gender wrong to distance?

[Newbie2010]

Wait, Hoppster was seriously doctor? Or did he do a VT fakeclaim? I still can't get over the fact that Hoppster protected PO over Nacho N3.

[Newbie2010]

Wait did you talk with IT in the quicktopic? I really didn't see a PO - IT scumpair not talking in the QT at the start of D-1.

hardcore

I think the better word for me would be V/LA
Sorry for my what 5, 6, 7 V/LA's...

and there were so many times I thought I was doomed, that it wasn't even funny.

My main counter-trap for you was if when I questioned you you would shift the attention to Hoppster and show that you knew that I was town or something, but you never did that And Hoppster did exactly what I expected.

Yep, that means that Hoppster was the doctor then. Like I said I didn't treat the Hopp protect N3 as a tell, it just didn't seem right (in my opinion) I've probably not gotten the whole picture though, and yea, the tunnel-vision on Hoppster ever since D-2 sort of doomed me.

[Newbie2010]

Thanks for modding Nocmen! Great game, everyone. I'd really like to play in another game with any of you. Had lots of fun! And awesome win, IT and PO

Make me proud.

[Newbie2010]

And I knew the more you guys picked through the thread, the more you'd be likely to stumble on some things that badly implicated me. Hopp was dead on with his "but why DIDN'T you switch back to Idle" question, and all I could hope for was that I could get away with an "I was confused," and that you guys wouldn't look any closer and ask me any harder questions about that.

The one time I got to that was when I told you that you were talking more about Idle than muh, but really, most of it was a gambit that you played through perfectly and I didn't really give Hoppster much option other than to make a case on me or be called scum. My bad

Another post I was REALLY dreading you guys finding was where I asked Nacho, "Are your reads on Hopp and Newbie certain, or did one or more of your previous investigation subjects die?" (Note my failure to mention the possibility of a roleblocker...)

One of the main problems was that everything you were guilty on, I was even more so guilty on Everytime I tried to build a case on you (which wasn't often), I'd think "wait, didn't I do this as well?" I don't think I mentioned roleblocker for the entire game.

[Newbie2010]

Yep...I vaguely remember noting that you'd not mentioned one either, and figured it was going to be my hail Mary if push came to shove. Still, it would have been a nasty bit of work to talk myself out of, and I'm not sure I could have done it.

At one point in time in D3, I was like "Woah PO has never gotten a vote since RVS, and is thus less likely to scumslip", but ignored that logic under the fact that your cases were actually good.

Oh and by the way, did you NK Nacho to not get that case he was hinting at at the end of D-3? Or did you want to frame Hopp so that I would vote for him? Or was there something else I'm missing?

[Newbie2010]

And I still don't get how NK'ing Nacho would make 100% sense for Hopp, thought that it actually implicated me because of Nacho's backing down after your case on Song and me, and I honestly thought that he was trying a PO-case-push or something instead of a me-push because of him calling me town D3.

[Newbie2010]

or unless you're trying to get me over on Hopp as well as Hopp over on me before you made a move.

...I got both of you to FoS the other, just made the wrong decision

[Newbie2010]

IT: In my opinion, you did really well not letting the PO-IT pairing be known. You and PO had like 100 chances to slip during the D1 deadline, but both of you failed to hint at a link, which was one of the reasons for my final decision. This added to the fact that your interaction tells with Sevei were rather strong and didn't feel forced, made it a really good play as scum, even though you went down D2. I mean, you not getting lynched D1 was mostly my thing, but you convinced me that you were town

[Newbie2010]

I was actually willing to risk Hopp protecting Nacho (which I thought he would do if he was the doc), clearing both he and Nacho, and sending us into a Newbie vs. Purple Orange mylo, than go into lylo with a Nacho-cop that I'd have to argue for my life against.

You probably would have won Newbie vs. Purple Orange mylo, because of

One of the main problems was that everything you were guilty on, I was even more so guilty on Everytime I tried to build a case on you (which wasn't often), I'd think "wait, didn't I do this as well?"

Seriously, I had zero confidence in the case I presented against you in D4.

Did you consider Hoppster-cop at all? I actually almost considered that for a while, only because of the "hiding info" thing that Hoppster was doing while speculating. If Hoppster were cop you might have FoS'd me at first and then had Hoppster say that I was confirmed town.