Newbie 1030 - Game Over

[Purple Orange]

because how can orange be purple?

*points to avatar*

I'd give you an OMGUS vote right back, but I love those books. So...

VOTE: peaceandlies
I keep reading it as "pecan pralines," and it's driving me crazy. And there's enough food items here between me and that broccoli guy.


And as for the questions:
1) Yep, some.
2) A couple RL games, and three rounds on another forum. They were a

lot

more fast paced than mafiascum games, however.
3) Paranoid Gun Owner.
4) Hirple (to limp) and curple (the hindquarters of a horse) rhyme with purple. For orange, you're pretty much stuck with "door hinge." As far as I've been able to make out, it really can't be rhymed without resorting to proper nouns.

[Purple Orange]

I found it on the internet! Are you saying the internet was LYING to me?

[Purple Orange]

I came up with my usual forum name a few years ago from when someone in physics class mispronounced "Broglie", as in "de Broglie equations" referring to the wave-particle duality of matter. I suppose now I'll get votes from Copenhagen Interpretation people now who say that while I'm alive I'm simultaneously scum, townie, hooker, cop and doctor so I need to be lynched.

If you get investigated ("observed?") by the cop, will that also collapse your wavefunction?

And I think you'd enjoy this thread, if you haven't seen it already.

My IC post will come later for those who are horrendously confused at this point.

I don't know that any of us are horrendously confused, but the promised IC post would still be nice.

[Purple Orange]

Well not many people seem very interested in this game right now..

I know the games here are a lot slower paced than I'm used to (I come from a forum with 24 hr lynch cyles), so I've been giving it the benefit of the doubt. Three days to hit page 2 doesn't seem TOO unusual, from the other games I've looked at.

She jumps on the bandwagon without giving a reason why, and then writes about her experience. It seems like she didn't really read the thread or decided to skim it because she answered some of the question asked, but not all.

I assumed she jumped on it because she's an SE, and knows that pushing someone to L-2 is a decent way to start some pressure, and get some response. So it didn't really strike me as suspicious. If she was a complete noob, maybe, but the SE status says she's not.

I don't want to pick on people for asking questions or trying to get the game to start, but the nature of IceFire's questions were not at all helpful, and some of them were potentially detrimenal. Asking for role is obviously more helpful to scum than to town (except in the case of roleblocker), as all scum players can essentially be considered vanilla, town players mostly just have to worry about alignment. The comedy provided in question three could be considered to have a root of nervousness behind it, although it could potentially be present in town play, the nervousness somewhat links with scum's inherent desire to know people's roles (as opposed to alignment).

Theres also the fact that asking that question has people thinking in terms of roles and not in terms of alignment, but that point is looking a few too many layers down, and i doubt the question would have been formulated, consciously or otherwise, with that in mind.

I wasn't terribly opposed to the questions (which were muh's, not IceFire's, as has been noted), because sometimes even lousy questions are a decent way to get a conversation going and reveal things, either by people's answers or non-answers. Random voting, random questions -- we're all digging for information and trying to get reads with hardly anything to go on, yet.

But what

does

bother me is that muh didn't bother to answer the questions himself. And then there's this post:

Sooo what do now?

Is he serious?

UNVOTE: peaceandlies Arbitrary vote based on their name reminding me of pecans.
VOTE: muh316 Asks players a list of questions, but doesn't answer them himself. Is a SE, which means he's played a game or two, and should

know

what we're supposed to be doing...but comes in and goes "what do now?" like he's an utter noob. It's an utterly useless spam post, which is one way to get away with lurking, without technically lurking.

(Um...yeah, there may be a bit of pot calling the kettle black here, given my post #15...at least I had posted something else that day, though. Will try to avoid doing it again, regardless).

[Purple Orange]

Does Idle Thoughts need a prod as well? We've got no real posts from him either, yet, and his last one was well over 48 hrs ago.

I thought the questions were about being social (which is why he wouldn't have followed up on people, that would seem like prying).

Early questions in a mafia thread aren't for the purpose of being social. Or at least I never assume they are. Like "random votes," they're a way of trying to churn up information.

OTOH, if ICs aren't allowed to IC when dead I'll swap votes to someone else.

This would be a bad reason for swapping your vote. If he convinced you because of some game-related argument to switch to someone else, sure, go for it. But IC's shouldn't be given a pass just because of their office and title. They have the same 22% chance to be mafia as everyone else. (You eventually just dropped any vote altogether, which I don't think opens itself to the same criticism).

[Purple Orange]

Interesting answer

VOTE: unvote
VOTE: muh316

So I'm not mistaken; Is it that the next vote to you automatically offs you? or can someone concede there vote once u receive majority as long as deadline isn't met.

Not that I'm going to concede my vote.

In answer to the game mechanics questions: If another person votes for them (and no one has unvoted), they die. No vote retractions will save them once that happens. And an L-1 on page three is pretty darn fast.

More importantly, however...what the

heck

? You list Ragnarokio and Song and Fire as your top suspects (ostensibly for good reasons), and then you jump on the muh bandwagon instead? What on earth did muh or Rag say, to make you change your mind so dramatically?? And are you going to be as clammed up and unhelpful about why you think muh is mafia, as you were about why you though Rag and Song were mafia?

I'm also not sure what to make of the fact that you ask a question about L-1 vs. L-2 voting scumminess, then jump and do the thing muh says is the least scummy. Were you trying to insulate yourself against an OMGUS vote from muh or something?

i hate to double post but seeing as no one else is saying anything...

Its obvious that we dont share the same views, and I'll leave it at that. as muh316 said, scum seem to be to overly cautious. To me revealing my thoughts so early in the game does a dis-service to myself and the rest of the town. I do see how this makes me an excellent night kill if my probes don't reveal any scum to the rest of u.

Understand that u r mafia ragnarokio, and if you survive day1 and night1 and continue to blatantly play so scummy u wont make it through day 2.

I'd argue that failing to reveal your thoughts is probably more detrimental to the town, at this point. Especially if you think your reasons are serious enough to warrant a vote. Other folks obviously don't suspect Rag and Strong as virulently as you do, yet. (For instance, I'm still trying to determine if their qualifying language is just their habitual playstyle, or a real scumtell). So if Rag and Song ARE mafia, we slow-on-the-uptake townspeople would certainly benefit from having our eyes opened to these suspicious things you're seeing. You're forcing the town to play just as much a guessing game as the mafia right now. And as the mafia is the group holding more information, I think holding back on the reasons for your suspicions currently puts the town at more a disadvantage than the mafia.

[Purple Orange]

To the rest of everyone:
.
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?

What on earth? So, despite the fact that you think Song and Rag are mafia...you're saying we should vote for

Nacho

?

All I'm seeing from you thus far is a bunch of pot-stirring mudslinging accusation, hopping all over the place and splatting on everybody.

*EDIT while posting* -- well, thanks for at least clarifying in your next post who your

real

suspects actually are. This mitigates some of my criticism, but not all.

Purple Orange, I have never said that i suspected muh316. song of ice and fire, and ragnarokio r still my top suspects. its not hard to see what i am doing here. But what strikes me is that its actually working. rag jumped right into muh316s trap.

More Importantly however, You did not change your vote, is it because u dont want to look scummy? in what way would this make you look scummy to you?

Further more, as u can see only one person so far really really really wants to probe everyones mind. me withholding my info, makes it more obvious. However i think that person may have caught on as they aren't asking me a thing anymore.

Err...no it wasn't clear. You overestimate people's mindreading skills, or at least mine.

You voted for them and put them at L-1. That's pretty serious business. I suppose I can see how it's a gambit, but people normally don't vote and put folks at L-1 that they don't suspect are mafia. If you don't suspect muh, why not?

I'm still debating whether to remove the vote. My decision to let it stand is because I currently think it's better to keep the L-1 pressure on muh, than it is to back off. And because I think only muh would be incautious enough to accidentally mislynch quickhammer. Unlike you, I voted for him because I actually read his plays as indicating scum alignment. If you want me to switch my vote, point out where and why you think I'm wrong, and why I should consider another person more suspicious than muh.

Your whole L-1/L-2 question is flawed at its root, because the only real answer is "it depends." Moreover, whether or not someone pushes to L-1 or backs down to L-2 should NOT be influenced by how scummy or not-scummy they think that action could be read as being. Down that road lies only WIFOM.

[Purple Orange]

Holy Moses, that's a lot of posts. *blink*

I've started to post things a couple times, but people up and answered everything before I ever got the chance to ask it, so I figure I'd better post something before the train passes me by again. May throw up another post or two later.

@ Hanzo: This was an observation from way earlier, but since you've brought up the topic of post frequency again, here goes. You'll find a lot of people on this site posting only once a day or so. So wait a day or two before calling people lurkers, or saying they're not paying attention to your posts, or that they've stopped paying attention to them, or that they've stopped paying attention to someone else. Glad this thread is moving a bit faster now, in either case. And...uh...that you've explained yourself. Sort of.

Just so I'm clear: You think Rag and Song are the mafia, but as no one is voting for them (yet), you're going after muh as the next best lynch option, because he's lurking?

@ Idle Thoughts: I think there's no pressure because we're far from the deadline, and no one seriously thinks we're going to lynch anyone in the next day or so. Well, and because muh hasn't shown up around here lately to BE pressured. Also, *EDIT* while posting -- I don't think Hanzo was accusing me of lurking, just pointing out my posting pattern.

[Purple Orange]

Monster Über-Post Part 1: @ Hanzo...mostly

@ragnorokio, That would require me to bring muh316 back down to L-2, if i do that, song will not be able to hammer him. But that didnt answer your question did it? Yes it would be a better move to lynch you and song before muh. but i only have one vote.

What? Why do you WANT Song to hammer someone that you think is town? Have you really completely given up on getting any of us to vote for Rag and Song? Killing town instead of mafia is not a good thing, even if the town is a lurker. (And, really, I doubt you're going to get people on your side, to move over to Song and Rag, if you don't start posting some real reasons).

The only thing I'm really seeing from you is an argument ad repetitum ad nauseum that Rag and Song are mafia...because they're mafia. And a repeated refusal to name any real reasons. Just "Rag and Song are mafia. Rag and Song are mafia. Rag and Song are mafia." (Well, to be fair, you've occasionally hinted at buddying slips, but that's about it).

You've accused them (or at least Rag) of trying to plant seeds in people's minds, but I think you outclass everyone in underhanded shaping of assumptions. I don't particularly like being messed with like this, whether the person thinks they're doing it for a good cause or not. And it's highly annoying to have another bunch of white noise to weed out of posts, while I search for actual arguments and discussion.

1)I don't think the players are ready to read it, meaning not enough activity to really form your opinion of what i think before the scum can slam me with there defenses.
2)Rag is playing very very very well in my opinion, Im mostly waiting for song to slip up again, but reveal that they are partners, while i could argue that rag is trying to distance herself from song to make it seem like they are not at all voting together, I will need to do a reread... and if im correct on what WIFOM is. anyone can call that arguement WIFOM.
3)Without the proper pressure I think my info might be lost or viewed as invalid if it doesnt get either of them lynched.

I'll attempt to post a serious response here, and not a sarcastic one.

First, it's highly doubtful that anywhere

near

most of the players are going to be as active as you are. So you're never going to get this perfect opportune moment you're looking for. Put your argument out, and trust the village to be able to read your post and make their own decisions, and see through whatever screen the mafia could put up against it in the meantime. To refuse to post your arguments simply because you don't think we're "ready" to give them due diligence is condescending, and quite honestly, insulting.

In addition, I think you're in danger of tunneling, if not 100% there already. What if Rag and Song AREN'T mafia? How is it helping matters at all to keep insinuating that they are, repeating ad nauseum that they are, and never actually letting anyone see if your reasons are actually good ones or not? Without you actually posting your info, I'm tempted to assume it's weak and invalid anyway, because you don't seem to trust the case to stand up to scrutiny or attempted derailment.

It's not so much that you aren't posting your reasoning that gets to me -- heck, I've got suspicions and arguments I've not posted yet. Rag just said she'd rather not post some stuff. Broggly had unmentioned stuff. What bothers me is that you're teasing us that you've got an über-argument, insinuating that you have it, winking and saying "go look for it, it's obvious!" And using this supposed hidden "argument" as a pretext to get away with what amounts to, right now, a blatant argument-by-repetition.

I'll try to make this my last word on the subject, because I'm afraid that trying to convince you to post your reasoning has just become a distraction. One you've brought on yourself, and for good reason, but still a distraction from other analysis of posts, pressuring of suspects, and searches for scumtells that we all could be doing instead. Your refusal to state reasons has certainly provoked reactions, but I'm doubtful how useful those reactions are. Especially as we all seem to be on the same "name the reasons, please" page.

Part 2 coming, wherin I try to make good on that last paragraph

[Purple Orange]

Monster Über-Post Part 2: A bit on Hanzo, Song, and Rag

I'd like to see someone else post on which one of you guys are scum, or both of you are scum, or neither.

^My initial read from this, like Hanzo, was "sheep." But, yeah...hesitation, not wanting to get involved, is as easily scumtell as a nervous-uncertain-noobtell. (*EDIT WHILE POSTING* -- err...wow. Consider the above an archive of my views, because his latest posts definitely changed them. )

In either case...and despite his own hesitation to post anything...he does have a point. My eyes were crossing from all the back-and-forth between three players without outside commentary. I was also troubled by the fact that Idle Thoughts seemed to have imbibed the "Rag and Song, Rag and Song, Rag and Song" mantra that Hanzo has been pushing, just because of its repetition. So here are some of my thoughts thus far.

Hanzo

I actually doubt that Hanzo is mafia, simply because don't think a mafia person would go prancing drawing loads of attention to himself, faking Village Idiot for a while. (He's become a bit more consistent, so I don't see him as a true VI any more). Then again, this Hanzo we're talking about, so maybe it really is an epic ruse; he's shown a fondness for traps and gambits. I don't know if he plays like this in every game, no matter if he's scum or not, or if this is a playstyle he only uses when town. Without that background knowledge, I'm rather blind in evaluating him.

I've certainly seen a lot of anti-town from him, but the only real scummy thing I've noted, that I'd be willing to build a case on, is possible parterning language between himself and muh. (Broggly touched on this in passing). Maybe also the backtracking from the "let's lynch the IC!" case. I'm still divided over whether to call his refusal to describe his reasons "scummy." Anti-town, sure, but not necessarily a decided scumtell.

Song/Rag:

This isn't a full analysis of their posts, just of one or two things that have stood out to me thus far. When I go over everything with a fine tooth comb, I'll talk about them individually. The following points are hard to make WITHOUT intertwining them, however, as there HAS been a lot of back and forth between the two of them.

Song and Rag are both careful posters (with lots of posts) and difficult to get a read on for both those reasons. Thus far, though, I believe the direction of their posting has been pro-town.

However, when Song was voted for Hanzo over anti-town reasons, and not scum reasons, I did start to get suspicious of her. Anti-town doesn't equal mafia, and people trying to railroad folks over anti-town reasons (vs. scum reasons) are often mafia looking for an easy kill.

Ragnarokio called her on it before I got a chance, so I just stuck with watching the conversation. In the ensuing dialog, this post in particular got my radar up:

@ 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.

It tends to confuse the game, especially with all the jumping around and stuff. If and when he actually tries to at least appear to be helping the town and starts to explain his actions, I would unvote him if it seemed like the right thing to do.

But when challenged on this, she clarified, and said that we should of course kill any suspected mafia over an anti-town player.

No if I believed someone was mafia, I'd definitely go for them first, hands down. But I took it as you were asking right that second and right now I don't believe we have enough to outright say someone is mafia, so if deadline was tomorrow I would say lynch Hanzo. Once/if we get a better candidate for mafia, then I will most definitely be voting them.

Backtracking after being caught? Perhaps, but could just as easily be an honest clarification.

Again, note that it was Ranarokio who was called Song out for voting for Hanzo on anti-town reasons instead of scum reasons. And continued to press the point, until she forced a concluding statement. I'm content to read this,

for now

, as town player cautiously ferretting out a possibly scummy move. Mafia would have more motivation to let something like this slide, than they would to call it out. (Hanzo obviously has a different interpretation of what was going on here, though. )

I'll have to read Hanzo's case against Song, but as of right now, I still have her on the town side of the ledger. Not as strongly as Rag, but still there.

Finally, the most important part:

(though I still think you are way too gullible, the intterwebz tells lies. Purple Oranges? *scoffs*)

They're real, I tell you! REAL!!

Part 3 -- gaaa...looks like I have to. Idle Thoughs and possibly muh, coming up. Eventually.

[Purple Orange]

I lied. Detailed post later. Quick one now, because this needs to be said, and I'm suprised no one else has.

All in all, though, I definitely think you're town. I'm not so sure on Song, but, since being neutral is bad, I'm pretty sure she might be a power role (cop or doctor). Seems that the form of her posts fits.

I was willing to give his hesitancy a pass for a bit, because, hey, I was nervous noob sheepy townie myself once upon a time. But his latest posts really haven't helped his case any. And ROLEFISHING? That's a textbook scumslip/scumtell, and this is a painfully obvious example of it. The town has no reason to mention or look for power roles right now. It's in the town's best interest to keep quiet about them, avoid triggering discussion and reactions about them, so that the mafia has no clues, and no easy list from which to target. Only scum have reason to care about who has a power role, at this point.

Muh's still minorly scummy in my book...I don't think his latest posts have helped him either. But Idle Thoughts just batted his way into the major leagues with this.

UNVOTE: muh VOTE: Idle Thoughts

[Purple Orange]

idle thoughts, i had came to the same conclusion about the rvs thing, but to me the pattern remained the same so i thought it would be better to leave no stone unturned. Interesting, her nuetrality could speak toward having a power role, I'm glad you brought that up, however if she does get nk'd and she is a power role, ur gonna become suspect numero uno in my book. AND I WILL DO ANYTHING TO GET U LYNCHED!

What about the nature of her posts is seemingly power role-ish?

Hanzo, the same goes for you.

FoS: Hanzo

[Purple Orange]

*Sigh* And apologies, you two, if I came railing out of the gate both guns blazing on this. It's not like I'm entirely unwilling to hear explanations - even townies occasionally do stupid things. But it's pretty serious business, and a pretty serious mark against both of you.

Hanzo, now that I've noticed you actually indulged this, I'm almost inclined to be more suspicious of YOU. Idle might possibly maybe conceivably convince me it was the result of being a rusty noob, and just plain NOT KNOWING AND NOT THINKING. But given your past posts, I would have assumed would know better than this. Another "gambit" of yours, like trying to get the IC lynched?

And golly, I don't think I've ever triple-posted before...

[Purple Orange]

Eeep, yikes. You're right -- there's a happy middle ground between Hanzo's holdouts and immediate call-out, and I can agree I got carried away and muffed it there. Can I blame it on "catch it NOW!" habits formed during the 24-hr lynch cycle where I come from? Please? Pretty please? *repents in sackcloth and ashes*

I'll certainly hold off a day or two before calling out something like that again, so that the next person at least has a chance to hang themselves.

(I cut out the Oranges part because I'm a non believer)

Once thou hast tasted the fruit and drunk the juice of the Moro Blood Orange, thou shalt believe!

and by his I meant her lulz sorry deary

Freudian slip!

[Purple Orange]

Purple Orange, is that last post directed at me? I can't really tell... >.<

Naw, at Song and a bit at Hanzo The people who went, "Idiot! You should have waited to call him out on the rolefishing thing!" You just posted inbetween stuff.

What does

FoS: Hanzo

Mean?

Finger of Suspicion. It's a way of soft-voting a person.

[Purple Orange]

@ Hanzo on Song:
- I didn't think the bolded part was WIFOM -- she was answering an objection by Nacho, giving an example and explanation of why she qualifies a lot of her statements.
- I really don't see a pattern of voting for the people who voted for her. I think all her votes that could be taken that way are plausibly explained for other reasons. And first vote was an obvious joke. I thought the "vote for people who voted for her" was the weakest part of your case.
- I don't see her being neutral. Will have to do a thorough re-read of her posts to double-check that, and I don't have time for that at the moment.

And, yes, you are very hammer happy. I think it worked to everyone's ultimate benefit this time, as it actually pressured the person at L-1, instead of it being a meaningless gesture like it was with muh. But, wow, that

was

a bit intense.

Other stuff (briefly):
* Nacho and Broggly: so long as they give thoughtful posts when they do pop in, and pop in at least every other day (maybe even every three), I'm fine with their lower activity. I'm actually probably going to try to go back to about one post a day myself, just because it forces me to think through what I post better before posting.

* Idle: 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. I don't see that as a good thing, at least for me. And I liked Rag's point about RL mafia being different. Habits formed in a different kind of mafia is also the same thing I appealed to for myself, for what I did, so I need to give another person the same benefit of the doubt, if there's good reason for it.

*

Un-FOS: Hanzo

-- I buy your reasons, for now, for continuing the dialog with Idle about roles.

* Muh: contributing more, and has alleviated a lot of my suspicions. Even with the post on Nacho.

* Rag: I can't exactly defend against accusations based on tone of posting, but I'll be happy address whatever else you're looking at, when you're ready to post about it.

* Sevei: Welcome.

[Purple Orange]

Hello guys. I'm alive, I'm keeping up with the thread and new posts, but I have had zero time the past couple days to do much more than that. (My two suitcases full of inter-library loan books I've lugged home will attest to this ).

Current status = highly confuzzled, because my reads seem to be about 180 from a bunch of other people's. I'm still not hearing Snow as scummy, still pretty darn wary of IT, and still getting a mildly scummy read from muh (especially as he's gone quieter again). And any fundamental shift in those things, if it happens, is going to require an in-depth rereading. Saying I'd play this game was a commitment, so I'll do my damnedest to get to it tomorrow/today, now that I theoretically have a free day. Or maybe someone will spare me the trouble and make such an obviously mafia-esque post I won't have to bother, but I'm not counting on that.

Nacho may just be thinking that the best way for us to learn is to dirty our hands and push cases ourselves, rather than be looking to him as the IC to lead the town. Especially as there's probably some subliminal temptation to follow his cue, just because he's the IC -- I know I've sensed something like that in myself, at least. I don't think posting about once a day would be hyper-posting, however. And a more frequent pace of posting on his part may encourage some other people to post more as well. See the cue-taking thing :/

Broggly just seems to have gone AWOL. Never got a solid read on him to start with; so darn, now I've got 3 people on my list to reread.

[Purple Orange]

Ooookay, almost finished with a reread. A few quick questions:

Purple Orange, I think a reread of my latest post directed at muh316 will show that the only real scummy thing you've noted is quite townie.

Not seeing it. And I'd still like to hear your explanation of the possible partnering language. Asking muh's opinion before voting for him, referring to the trap as "muh's" trap, the "safe" bussing ("I doubt pushing muh316 to L-1 is gonna get him lynched"), voting for him while saying you don't actually think he's mafia, saying muh "let" you bully him -- all those raised flags for me.

Idle thoughts is likely to be town, but if he is scum it is likely its with Song. The same thing applies to Song.

Can you expound upon this?

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.

I think the only people you've NOT jumped around, painted with suspicion, and suggested we start a lynch on are Sevei and myself.

[Purple Orange]

Okay...finally finished putting my notes together.

Song:

Whatever Song is, it's not neutral. Idle, muh, Broggly (before his replacement came in), and even Ragnarokio have been more neutral than Song.
After rereading about the 3rd time, I'm finally seeing why you guys are calling out Song as scum. There's certainly a fair bit of defensiveness, AtE, and some flimsy reasons for voting people in her posts. Also not quite sure what to do with the fact that she protests about 50 times she's fine being a martyr. Some of the posts that most bothered me:

I really think it's a matter of how you guys don't like my style of play, if it's not up to your guys' standards then go ahead and lynch me, I'll go down as the first martyr. Maybe some of you can use what you've learned to find the real mafia but I doubt it, as it's obviously not going very well now.

...
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. [this was when voting for Rag]

....
VOTE: Hanzo_5 for being super unhelpful and kind of annoying.

Still thinking it might just be an overall playstyle conflict, though, so I'm not keen on joining the bandwagon today. If she is town, I'd be frustrated, too.

Also:

And I wasn't still being cautious on page 6, I was explaining on page 6 why I was being cautious on page 2.

She's correct, here. And I agree with her interpretation too, actually. By page 5, certainly enough to go in guns blazing. Page 2 -- not so much. The game started off pretty slow and neutral overall...none of us were really pushing things yet (I think Rag cast the first real vote).

Ragnarokio:

Rereading her posts, Rag is indeed playing VERY carefully. And she's backed off quite noticibly recently, but, then again, a lot of us have gone more inactive. I'd certainly call her more neutral at this point than Snow, who looks like a loose cannon compared to her.

Idle:

Sevei has this nailed. Idle is confusing as heck, he contradicts himself repeatedly within his own posts (ISOs 7-9 are particularly painful), and even with a bunch of words said, has still managed to contribute zilch to helping us find mafia. By page seven he'd STILL not voted, or even named a concrete suspect or two. And now that he finally votes, it's just a "pressure vote" sheeping on the popular bandwagon, with no case laid out of his own. All to top it all off we get some ridiculous WIFOM as he tries to say why he's not scumbuddies with Song:

As for myself, some people say that I'm scum with Song. I like the way these people think, but that's simply not true, because in my opinion, her playstyle and actions in contrast to mine don't make it likely that we're a team- which we're not, I'm trying to take this from a third person perspective. Point being, I'm not scum with Song, and if I was, I'd probably be pretty adamant on an opinion on Song, wouldn't I?

And, yeah, there was that rolefishing thing, too.

I can see your points, Rag and Song, and how all this can be interpreted as a new player stumbling around not quite knowing what to do in this medium. But in this particular instance, the feel I get from the posts as a whole is enough to make be willing to gamble a vote on him. I'm content leaving it on him right now. As muh is equally suspect to me, however, I'm fine moving my vote over and hammering him, if that's what today comes down to.

muh:

Like Idle, he's managed to say a fair bit without actually taking positions. His posts are shorter, but the proportion of noise to content is just about the same. By page 6, he still has no vote and no case about anyone -- just the note that there's "not a lot of scumminess anywhere." When he does present a "case" in 157, it's just an echo of the current very popular bandwagon on Idle. (And, ironically, the post he quotes is one of the few townish posts I thought Idle had).

muh also seems quite cavalier about not reading anything in the thread, except what applies directly to him. That he's doing so is rather evident from ISOs 3-6, but also ISOs 9 and 10, where he says he'll post thoughts soon, and the only thoughts he posts are on hanzo's case against him. (And the vague comment that rag and Hanzo [who were two of the people most stridently gunning for him] are giving him "vibes").

Not being willing to read can just be laziness, but I also see it as a possible sign of mafia alignment as well (as mafia already know who's who, and what's up; they aren't as dependent upon reading posts as town is, to get information).

Later he actually votes...for Nacho. For no reason other than his inactivity. Muh admits is a throwaway vote, but he's unwilling to actually come out and post a real vote and case. Instead he goes and just tosses some suspicions everywhere at Hanzo and Song:

Just throwing this out there but Hanzo has the most posts in this game. Second is song of ice and fire. When I was scum in my previous games I got a bit excitement and tended to be very supportive of the new players and get on everyone's good side. I also had a very large amount of posts. I was able to survive upto day 3 and scum won on day 4. This does not mean that these two are scum but I'm just saiyan.

People were getting on Song for stuff like "just throwing this out there" and "I'm just saying" early in the thread. Because it was early, it still doesn't really bother me. But this far in, phrases like that ring alarm bells. And, yep, we get a helping of WIFOM in that post, too.

Finally, muh has played games before on this site, and has some experience in this medium (at least a bit more than Idle has). So if I have to make a gamble on him as well, I'm more inclined to say his lurking, his lack of attention to the thread, and his unwillingness to take a stand is indicative of scum trying to stay under the radar, than it is of laziness or inexperience.


Also, because my points against these guys sort of open me up to the same question Hanzo got:

Hanzo, why do you support a muh lurker lynch but not a lynch on me?

I don't have a huge issue problem with Nacho's lurking yet, because when he stops by, he actually votes and makes substabtive posts. The two guys above don't. Broggly was borderline, but his replacement is better. And RJ's replacement's one post was awesome.

[Purple Orange]

I have nothing new to contribute at this point. Nacho and Sevei have both promised longer posts (and I'm assuming conclusions), and it would be nice to finally see those. I don't know what the heck Idle's final case and vote is, so one from him would be good as well. Hanzo is without a final vote, but if he's no longer voting for Song, I'm assuming muh is his current lynch choice, based on his past posts. As stated in my last post, I'm fine with moving my vote over to muh and lynching him today.

@ muh: The problem is that your habitual playstyle (if it really is your habitual playstyle) is an easy one for scum to hide behind. It gives little way for people to get a solid read on you (though several of us have tried our best), and it offers zero help to the town.

[Purple Orange]

Yep, Hanzo said he was going to hammer at L-1. Right now muh's at L-2, but I'm willing to put him at L-1, and finish thus finish the day, whenever we feel we're ready. Newbie says he still has some stuff to post, Hoppster just arrived, and Nacho definitely still has things to post, so I don't want to speed a lynch until they've had their say, even though it looks like people are pretty much set in their ways right now.

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

@ Hoppster: Welcome. Thanks for replacing in 10 pages into a game, and for jumping right in. But Newbie is right that we're going to need more than a few brief comments about one case from you. You also jumped right on the most popular bandwagon, and that tends to be a suspicious thing. Have you finished reading the thread to your satisfaction? What do you think of some other folks in this thread? Does anyone else strike you as scummy? Why/why not?

@Song: Yup, I'm trying to get used to these deadlines, too. I think two weeks would have been more than sufficient for this, as things have REALLY tapered off lately.

[Purple Orange]

Do I get a scumpoint or townpoint if I say I'm wary of the illusion of objectivity that your system gives? There's also the fact that it's harder to go through and verify your consistency (and look for possible fudging of numbers), when you've dumped this wall of data on us all at once. At first brush the stuff looks decently solid, however, so these are more just severely nagging doubts in my mind about your methods, than they are anything I can point to with certainty yet. (Although I don't think giving the definition of a FoS = useless post).

I notice you don't do this (or at least don't do this publicly) in your other games I looked at, including your other newbie/IC ones. Is this a technique you use in all your games, but just don't reveal, or something new you're trying? If you use it a lot, about how accurate has it been in the past? What strengths have you seen in it, and what weaknesses?

I believe Idle will be back before the deadline -- today is Sunday, deadline isn't until Tuesday. If there's anyone we need to worry about, it's Hanzo, who DOES seem to have gone AWOL. How much longer does he have, until we have to look for a replacement? Pulling in ANOTHER replacement this close to deadline is going to be rough. (And Hanzo was a pretty unique guy -- losing him will knock a lot of activity and color and argument out of this game).

[Purple Orange]

Is it that the deadline is the end of Tuesday or as soon as it starts? It confuses me.

See post #4:

Deadline: November 30, 2010, 8:10PM EST

[Purple Orange]

@ 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. Muh shouldn't be able to claim "lurking is my playstyle" and get away with it; you shouldn't be able to claim "not making any cases is my playstyle" and get away with it. Both do nothing to help the town, and both are things that scum often do and hide behind. In one sense I'm tempted to agree with Rag, that it might not be fair to hold you to the same standard as players with more experience on this site. But lurking and defensive play are seen as scumtells because scum DO them a lot. So it's a fair bet that either wittingly or unwittingly, you're just doing what comes naturally to a scum player. Gambling a lynch on you over your action something I'm perfectly willing to do.

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.

I don't think that it would be useful at all to lynch me at this point. A sudden hatred has built up on me now, and you shouldn't let the scum hidden in the wagon on me egg it on. Think about it a bit more, and make it clear why you're voting, so everyone can have a nice look at who they're buddying up with- there is scum on my wagon. I'd like to see a vote count to see exactly who's voting me.

If you think there's scum on your wagon -- who are they? Why do you think they're scum? Build a case, attack whichever one of us you think it is. THAT is pro-town. With 3 hours till deadline, I doubt it will get you saved from a lynch. But if you flip town, at least we'll have your viewpoint and suspicions on record, to look back on and add to that collective wisdom thing Nacho was talking about.

As things stand, you've managed to lurk and hide for well over a week without posting anything, so there's not much more from you to analyze. Muh's still not posting much, but since my last mega-post he's made a post or two that attempts to engage other players. If I just had the last few pages to go by, you'd win the scum award over him, hands down.

Comments on muh and some others coming up, while they're time.

[Purple Orange]

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?)

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.

I disagree with Nacho. I do question how he came up with a highly town read on muh and a highly scum read on Idle, when I'm still not seeing muh contributing much more than Idle. He talks about much contributing when not under pressure, but muh has been under pressure pretty much this whole entire game. The one thing I can see skewing his numbers, running through them as best I could under the time crunch, is that he gives muh lots of points for attacking him, because of his IC status. I think this gives way too much benefit of the doubt, and is overly generous. Especially as muh never presents a real case on Nacho, as you point out:

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.

And like Idle, muh has contributed only one vote as well. And it wasn't a real vote either -- it was just a vote to call Nacho out of hiding.

Earlier in the thread, I think Idle showed more evidence of actually reading people's arguments, and trying to follow cases outside of his own, even if he didn't vote on them. Muh admitted he doesn't follow threads carefully, and often just looks for things that apply to him, and his posting echoed this. When he did finally make a case, it was against Idle, the one player everyone at that time was attacking. He has engaged other players in his last posts, but then dodged out for another three days, until now.

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.

...and, running up against the deadline. We have muh willing to hammer at 7:30, am I right? So if we want to extend discussion a bit longer, to wait for your response to this, one of us will have to unvote. Damn. I'll do it for now.

Unvote: Idle

[Purple Orange]

Thank you, Newbie, for forcing me to actually make a decision, here. I've been getting away with calling muh and Idle "equally scummy," and you've effectively just called me out on this, and between you and the deadline, forced me to confront what I actually think and take a stand. I'm re-reading as much as I can right now, and will have a final decision before 8:00.

I agree that Idle is the more pragmatic lynch this evening, due to the fact he has already claimed. That I can't debate Nacho on.

[Purple Orange]

OK. I think muh's more likely than Idle. Reasons later, no matter which way this flips -- don't have time to write them now. If it's 8:09 and no one's hammered, I'll of course hit Idle.

VOTE: muh

[Purple Orange]

I know Rag had a more solid scum read on muh than on Idle. We can hope she comes online and can cast a 5th vote, but I'm none too hopeful.

This is rather ridiculous.

[Purple Orange]

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.

Again, thank you for forcing me to take a definitive side. Just wish we had another day.

I really don't feel like hammering right now. Its a tough decision. I'd be happy to self hammer if you really feel you need Idle's input more than you need mine, though I'm just saiyan(for the town and for my life) that Idle is the better lynch.

WHAT THE HECK??? Um...self-hammering is like, the primary thing town are not supposed to do. If you're town, you KNOW you're not scum. And you don't know the other person isn't.

[Purple Orange]

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

VOTE: muh316

Don't self hammer if you're PR.

No we DON'T have 5 votes. Not unless he self-hammers. Rag ISN'T online, that I can see.

WHY are you trying to get him to self-hammer? It is NOT a valid strategy in this case! HOW CAN YOU SAY IT IS? HE KNOWS HE'S TOWN. HE DOESN'T KNOW IDLE IS. (well, unless muh is mafia, but he's being ridiculously suicidal)

[Purple Orange]

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.

*headwall*

What the bloody hell just happened here? WHY did you convince him to self-hammer? Why was he willing to? I makes NO SENSE, as both of us were willing to switch to Idle and kill him. There were minutes to do that, too. WHY EVEN BRING UP THE SELF-HAMMER?

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

[Purple Orange]

Oooh, boy. Long post, here.

@Hoppster and everyone

There's one thing I'm not clear about: at post 331, there was 5 votes for Idle. Doesn't the day end as soon as a majority is reached?

I unvoted in #320. :/

OK. I think muh's more likely than Idle. Reasons later, no matter which way this flips -- don't have time to write them now. If it's 8:09 and no one's hammered, I'll of course hit Idle.

VOTE: muh

Okay, it's later. Reasons now please.

No problem.

First, #320. Re-read confirmed more overall initial attentiveness to the thread from Idle than muh, and muh only contributing while "under pressure" (he was just under pressure more often than Idle). And interp of Idle as a noob over scum gained more weight in my mind -- Idle had a possible alternate explanation for behavior that, in a more veteran player, I'd have just pegged as scum. Muh not so much.

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.

Finally, there was Nacho's town read of muh. Again, throughout most of the thread, I was seeing similar contributions (or lack of them) from both Idle and muh, and the IC's preference in that scenario made me wary. I believed Nacho gave muh a way too generous town read, in comparison to Idle --ISOs 22 and 24 were the only posts I really saw as town from muh. And Nacho called things an "attack" on him, when I saw really nothing more than

muh repeatedly desperate to get Nacho back and involved in the thread

.

In short, if muh was scum, I was going to go after the IC as his partner. I saw it as the clearest and most dangerous possible partnering in the thread, given Nacho's IC status. And the chance of proving or disproving IC-scum (as much as it

can

be proved or disproved), when added on top of the things mentioned above, tipped the scales for me on this one.

Would have made me feel a lot better about what I did if muh actually HAD flipped scum, obviously. But for what it's worth, Nacho probably isn't scum.

@ Newbie and everyone

And the other question that needs answering:

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.

I voted muh because I thought muh should be lynched over Idle. Moving it simply to play bluffing games with either of you would have been reckless and stupid. (Even moreso than changing my vote at the last minute, which I will probably

never

do again). I wanted to put my vote down there as at least a statement that yes, it was a pretty close call, but I think this guy is more likely scum than Idle, and is the better lynch for today. I held out the vague hope that Rag would come online and finish the job, but didn't think it was likely.

I assumed both you and muh would hammer Idle. I considered the distant possibility that lightning might strike one of you dead, and there would only be 4 votes on Idle come the deadline. In that instance, as I said, I would have switched my vote over and killed Idle, because a lynch is better than no-lynch.

I never ever considered the possibility that muh might self-hammer. EVER. No townie should EVER self-hammer (barring some exceptional circumstances, and these were certainly not those circumstances), and no self-respecting scum would self-hammer in this case either. It's one of the things that is like bolded and underlined and written in red ink and shouted from the hilltops, in all beginner guides to this. I believe I shouted my reasons why he shouldn't self-hammer loud and clear, when you guys started discussing it, but it didn't register or convince you.

Three days of calm and reasonable hindsight says that what I should have done is switch my vote back to Idle as soon as the self-hammer thing was mentioned, instead of waiting and trying to talk you out of it. All I can appeal to there is absolute shock and befuddlement at what was happening, which shot a bazillion holes in my judgment. Everything was a mess, we were all talking past one another, and as we hit the wire, I became increasingly afraid that we'd cross-vote if I switched back, and end up with a no-lynch over a lynch, especially with muh apparently unwilling to hammer.

And finally:

I believe these are the possible interpretations for last night. Ones near the top I currently consider more plausible; ones near the bottom, not as much.
(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)

If anyone sees an (f) or (g), please say so.

There was enough last night to tip my vote over to muh, and I would like to think legitimately. But it's not like Idle magically became town. It was a matter of choosing the worser(?) of two evils, and with muh dead -- and confirmed town -- this moves Idle into my top suspect bracket. If he's a noob, he's a ridiculously scummy noob. Moreover,lynching him will confirm whether we did indeed have a competing scum and town wagon (which I think is more likely), or two competing town wagons.

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

VOTE: Idle

[Purple Orange]

Eep, Song was on the muh wagon too. Add a (possibly) in front of the "bussing him" in point (b).

[Purple Orange]

Not sure I hit all the points that I should respond to, but these were the ones that jumped out at me.

Are there not two variations of (d)? One where Newbie's mafia and one where you're mafia?

Theoretically, yes. But I

really

don't think the text of the conversation supports that interpretation at all, as you yourself noted. If you think I ought to have included it, though, be my guest.

Also, I assume that because (a) is what you consider to be most plausible, you suspect Newbie to be scum? Is that merely on a basis of the situation before deadline or is it including various things you've picked up that seem scummy about him?

Your points (a)-(e) appear to be made purely on the situation around deadline. So I'm going to try and refine those from an impartial point of view using my judgment about other factors and thus narrow down the possibilities.

That's a good point. :/ The deadline situation has been what's preoccupied me, but I need to go reread and try to put it in better context, and see better where it fits within the whole thread.

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.

I think that if (c) was the case, the two mafia would probably have ended up on the same side as each other in terms of voting, and as Song was the only one voting for muh, I'm going to rule her out.

Not sure I understand this --I've always thought the smart thing for scum to make sure they split themselves between two players (especially if both players are town, and it doesn't matter which one of the two is lynched). So that when a wagon and lynch are analyzed, both of them aren't caught voting for the lynched town player.

(D) Idle's town

or

mafia

, and Newbie was trying a ridiculously risky push for a role claim while his buddy slept soundly (if Idle isn't Mafia). (Newbie = mafia; everyone but Purple Orange = possible mafia)

NB:

This works regardless of whether Idle is town or not. Newbie could have decided to cut his losses on Idle, but also to use Idle's last moments to try and pull out a role claim. When it turned out that muh self-lynched, that'd just be a bonus.

Ah,

veo

. That was something that hadn't occurred to me (or that I'd just lumped in under "trying to save his buddy").

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?

I'm not particularly happy with it either, but it's about as far as I've organized my thoughts on the matter thus far. People have been bringing up ideas of who was scum and who wasn't, but I was having trouble seeing what each scenario would imply about the larger picture. This was how I started trying to connect the dots, as best I could.

I probably could have just kept my running notes in Notepad, but by putting them out in the open, I was hoping they might somehow help someone else start to get a handle on this as well. And feedback like Hoppster's has shown me where my logic I

thought

was solid might be rather off, and where I've overlooked possibilities I should consider. ((See revision of point (d), or the fact that one of the scenarios I consider plausible actually does paint Nacho as possible mafia, when I'd pretty much dismissed the idea after muh flipped town and my one theory was discredited.))

[Purple Orange]

I'm not sure about how activity checks work, but I suspect that Nacho and Song are inactive - not a lot of posting before and after lynch. This would mean that they can't be mafia - mafia would have to have chosen somebody to NK, and thus be active, therefore the two of them can't be mafia. So that's the reason (apart from Idle's stupid reasoning) why I'm more suspicious of Idle.

Nacho is most certainly NOT inactive!!!

He's is not posting in this thread (as usual ) but he has posted stuff

every day

in at least one other thread.

Song hasn't logged in since the 29th. But since only one mafia member needs to send in a kill, one of them being AWOL doesn't matter.

[Purple Orange]

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

You were relying on muh to hammer himself to secure a flip. As you note yourself, he's not going to hammer himself if he's scum unless he's idiot scum. So by bringing up and pushing the self-hammer, it's possible that you'd have ended up with NO flip to analyze. Just a non-self-hammer by muh, which would not have proved conclusively that he was scum. And it's not like muh DIDN'T wait until the last minute.

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?

Again, if I'd had any brains that night, I would have moved my vote back to Idle immediately, because we were assured, between your vote and mine, of getting a hammer and flip there. Looking back on this, we lucked out that muh WAS town, and that we got a flip at all.

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.

[Purple Orange]

Rule #13, guys! And I'd assume stuff like this is allowed to be taken to PMs, so long as you don't talk about roles or whatnot from the game.

[Purple Orange]

@LC: I feel it was unnecessary and scummy, but I can see his thought process behind it.

So you think he was legitimately following a townie line of reasoning, and is town?

[Purple Orange]

@Newbie - my opinion on townies self-hammering (especially when there's an alternative option) should be pretty evident. The people voting for you aren't voting for you because they want a policy lynch over what you did. They're voting for you 'cause they think your actions indicate you're scum. (Well, or because they're scum looking for a townie lynch. But either way, no one's mentioned wanting a policy lynch).

Why are we NOT lynching Idle today?

Like, seriously.

We're waiting for him to finish posting? Some people still think Newbie is the better bet? Scum are stalling things? HOW is this post helpful?

[Purple Orange]

@newb It's not a policy lynch, you talked someone into self hammering. That was uber scummy. That has nothing to do with policy, at all. And you saying you'll self hammer, if you are town, is selfish and dumb. Anyone who does that deserves to be lynched imo.

Unless "selfish and dumb" = scummy, not exactly something that deserves a lynch. :/ The one reason to lynch him over his self-hammer offer is if he's actually pretty smart scum, using it as a gambit. (Trying to look willing to die for some misconceived good of the town or whatnot, when he knows we'll all go "what the heck? NO!" and stop him before it gets to that).

[Purple Orange]

Prodding Idle

Pretty

sure he just got hammered in 343.

[Purple Orange]

Err, make that 434.

[Purple Orange]

Have been looking at vote-patterns first, and trying to finish a re-read...will have better thoughts once I finish ISOing folks. What I've got thus far:

* Voting patterns on Song and Idle make me think they're probably not the scumpair. Both put one another at L-1 in the thread. Song puts him there (#144)then leaves him there even when Hanzo is saying he'll insta-hammer if Idle gives an answer he doesn't like. Idle's vote on Song he calls a "pressure vote" (#217), and the post is full of WIFOM distancing himself from her. But it still puts her at L-1, and Idle-scum I'm not sure I see as the sort of guy who'd do that to his partner. I saw it more as opportunistic scum following the popular crowd.

* Nacho decided on an Idle lynch and didn't stop. When he posted against Idle, opinion in the thread was still swingy and mixed, and an Idle lynch was not inevitable. Nacho's post pushed it over the edge - took debate off muh and off a bit of Song, and focused it on Idle. He either decided to beautifully bus a scumbuddy that was turning into a liability, or he's town, and I think the latter explanation is the likelier.

* Hopp I've got nothing on in terms of votes. Too many replacements, nothing out of the ordinary.

* Newbie comes in and votes for song when he arrives...I suppose it could be interpreted as scum jumping on the current bandwagon, but it's a well-reasoned post. And he takes song down from the L-1 Idle had put her at a short bit later. (The overlap of the timing of 217 and 218 make me think they were pretty much simultaneous, however, and not a response to one another). Then there's the muh and Idle deadline thing.

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)

Scum intention? Save a partner and/or eke out another role claim while you were at it. Scummy because I seriously saw no other reason to do what you did there. I'm still not sure whether to buy your explanation as rationalization, or as an honest belief that this was the right thing to do in that situation. Maybe I've just got a mental block here - Nacho seems to think you were sincere, and my strongest town read right now is on him.

[Purple Orange]

Nacho -> Song
Newbie -> ??? (Hoppster? Nacho?)
PO -> Newbie?
Song -> Hoppster or Nacho
Hoppster -> Song or Newbie

I'm considering both you and Newbie right now.

[Purple Orange]

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

Yes, only you kept wanting to lynch him even when he offered to self-hammer, which would be considered either a strategic bluff on his part, or a sign of townness. (It's why I'm damn suspicious of you for going "Oh, if you think policy lynching me is a good idea, I'll self hammer"-- we've all made our opinions on town self-hammering pretty clear, and there was no way we would have agreed to you doing that, so it was a perfectly safe offer to make as scum).

You seemed OK with an Idle lynch (if not preferring it), as you voted for him, so I really do not see why, when it was apparent the only way a muh lynch was going to happen was if muh self-hammered, you kept pushing him to do it. (Same criticism could be applied to me for not immediately moving my vote back to Idle, in all honesty). You talk about how him not self-hammering would prove he was scum, but it wouldn't have -- he could have just done it a second too late, and said "oops, missed it," and we'd have spent the day trying to figure out what was what. (And you'd also save your partner for a SECOND day in the end, if muh failed to self-hammer, because you could probably secure a real muh lynch the next day).

It's the fact it just seems like a such a

dumb

scum move to jump in at deadline, though, that makes me have the most doubts.

No problem with you removing your vote from Song, I saw it as a decently town move to take her out of the hammer (especially as we know now that both of you aren't scum together).

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.

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.

"Clearly"? There's practically no interaction there to speak of...I suppose you can maybe build an argument from a negative, and that might be the case, but this is far from "clear" -- under argument from lack of interaction, Nacho may as well be as much scum as Hopp, and it seriously strikes me as flailing scum looking for some target to settle on. You removed your vote a bit later, but this was rather absurd.

After reading back Idle's ISO's to review Newbie's case on myself, I don't think that an Idle-Newbie scumpair is quite so convincing:

@mod: It doesn't make much sense to make Broggly's vote still count on me- by that, I mean Newbie should choose for himself as opposed to already having a vote down. Just my opinion.

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

Or it coulda been a way of signaling to his new partner "yo, there's a vote on me, get it off, please maybe." Not inclined to just dismiss this.

Is that a polite correction or is that a "Your last post was extremely scummy" (said in threatening voice)? It's hard to tell. But anyway, yeah. I put a question mark because I wasn't sure. Your last comment about me was something like "Nothing out of the ordinary".

Polite correction. There's nothing that stands out in your voting record, but post content/interactions may be another matter, and I haven't gotten to rereading all that yet.

[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.

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.

UNVOTE: VOTE: Song

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.

1) Why should we assume ANYTHING about his reasoning before hearing it?? Why are you putting her at L-1 based on a simple "because" from another player, especially if your own research leaves you uncertain about her guilt?

2) Correction of my own post: "cop should claim, and the game is pretty much won" is true only in certain specific circumstances. I may also be wrong that we should stop speculating today, but that's dependent upon Nacho's case on Song. I'd very much like Nacho to get on over here, and to stop lurking and leaving us to spin our own wheels.

3) To say "if Song flips town we should be able to confidently lynch Nacho" is to assume WAY too many things. He could just be town and wrong in his reads, too. :/ Not enough information to work with here, and I don't care to clutter up another page with a) b) c) d) possibilities, especially when the guy who could narrow them down for us is alive and just hasn't posted yet.

haha you aren't sorry Hoppster, you wouldn't vote me if you were really sorry and you wouldn't leave me vulnerable for a quick lynch. I'm L-1, but whatevs, with the way this game has been going I expected to go a lot sooner. 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.

Anyway I with Purple, I'm leaning more towards a newb or Hoppster lynch. Can someone give me a quote on where I said Nacho was scum. I don't remember ever saying that, so Hoppster if you can point out where I said that, it'd be much appreciated.

It's this quote:

That leaves Hoppster and Nacho... and I will be back in the morning to finish my thoughts.

I was sort of hoping you had something better, after all this wait. Me holding out because "I don't see Idle as the kind of guy who'd put his partner at L-1" is looking rather flimsy in the face of these most recent posts of yours, with AtE all over the place, and not much else. Of course if you're town and we lynch you we're in lylo. (Or mylo, if there's a doc and a successful doc protect).

It honestly sounds like you're just throwing in the towel and giving up. :/ If you're town, please don't -- keep making cases and posts, add to that collective wisdom thing, let us have your thoughts. :/

[Purple Orange]

I don't have a game-winning investigation at this time, sorry.

I'd like to remind that deadline is January 5th, so we're not really in a significant rush right now. My Songs case is mostly based on process of elimination and interactions with Idle right now, so you'll have to give me a little more time to make my case.

There's also no reason to needlessly slow things down, or force us to keep fruitlessly discussing things. You also promised a case, then didn't deliver, and still haven't, while the rest of us have all posted a decent amount of flailing content.

Are your reads on Hopp and Newbie certain, or did one or more of your previous investigation subjects die? If you think it's more prudent not to say who you've got I can understand, but I think it would be a big help to any people who

are

clear to narrow down their investigations.

[Purple Orange]

Hit submit too early. :/ Continuing the above:
I was mainly irked that you hadn't posted

any

of your reasoning on Song. Claims and whatnot be damned...if you'd said, "I don't care to discuss the cop matter; evaluate my case against Song based on its own merits," I'd have figured that was your call, and rolled with it. Same with the question of whether your townreads on Hopp and Newb are investigation-based or not. What I didn't like was being stuck in the limbo-land of hypothetical theory. If you claimed cop, the next moves were decently obvious; my asking you if you wanted to discuss the "why" of your townreads is one of them. But if you decided to leave it an open question, then we all just needed to stop worrying about it, and get back to looking at the thread and making our own cases on anyone and everyone.

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.

LOL, I'll avoid using shorthand jargon on you, then. By saying AtE, I was saying, "um...yeah, if you're town it's bad to lynch you and it will hurt us. Duh. But that's not a defense; that just sounds like trying to shame and scare us into not voting for you. That's scummy." By saying WIFOM they're saying, "yes, or the mafia could have just as easily killed LordChronos to make us think what you're thinking...looking at nightkills just leads to looping arguments that can't be proved either way."

Wow, that sucks. I was so sure that you were going to agree with my logic

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...

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

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.

1) I agree that a Song lynch could be an excellent process of elimination tool, but only if Nacho claims cop plus a pair of innocents on you and Newb. (And even then,

you

could never have the same certainty that we should lynch Nacho if Song flips town that I could have).

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.

3) Nacho had said himself that it was susceptible to confirmation bias. But it's definitely delivered accurately thus far, and he's been more correct in his reads than I've been. :/

[Purple Orange]

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.

Err...not really experienced. :/ But when we're down to five players, with two possibly confirmed innocents, I do know that it becomes more of a viable possibility to discuss roles than earlier in the game. I'm not

sure

which is the wisest course of action right now, and Nacho's the one with the most experience, and also the one under the gun over the claim, which is why I wanted to leave it up to him whether to push the cop matter or tell us to forget it.

Some of the language in his post is a bit ambiguous, but between the "at this time" and "process of elimination," I found it difficult to interpret it as anything other than a claim. If you didn't intend it to be, Nacho, my apologies, I misread what you were saying, and I'll back off; it could simply be you saying "I don't have a guilty investigation on Song, for whatever reason," and I'll work under that assumption from here on out if that's all you were saying.

[Purple Orange]

1) Sorry, that's gone over my head. Please explain (paticularly the bit about you being able to be more certain than 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.

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.

[Purple Orange]

Purple, you're not going to get any further reponses from me about the entire cop situation. You can continue discussing it if you'd like, just don't expect anything from me

No problem. I'll chalk up my interpretation of 470 as possibly wrong as well.

But if you can't/won't appeal to authority, can you give the reasoning behind your flip concerning Newbie, after saying this in 416?

So you think he was legitimately following a townie line of reasoning, and is town?

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

[Purple Orange]

Holiday stuff is definitely slowing me down as well. :/

Finally finished ISOing and rereading Newbie and Hopp; added Song to the list. Overall:
* Hopp is eager and talkative, though sometimes misreps and jumps to conclusions. Things I've been tempted to call scummy on him (like his "lynch Nacho if Song if town" deal) I'm also inclined to chalk up to misunderstanding or haste. Overall townread from his posts. (Nacho -- why did

you

have a townread on Hopp? Same reasons, or different?)
* Newbie is quite methodical and patient. There's interactions with Idle I don't like, muh hammer-pressure I don't like, and the whole "policy lynch me!?" I don't like.
* Song has all those acronym things she hates us talking about all over the place. Defensiveness and high amount of appeal to emotion in particular. I can still make myself read her posts as playstyle difference, but the withdrawal and far heavier proportion of appeals to emotion to any actual content on Day 3 make it much harder to give benefit of the doubt.

On Newbie:

It's difficult.

But, after I rethought it, I decided that the tenacity displayed by Newbie in getting his top scumread lynched was definitely pro-town. I've never seen scum so utterly gutsy where they would pressure a self-hammer from a suspect, even if that would draw out another claim. It's an extremely pro-town move to pull out all the stops to get a scum suspect lynched if you truly believe that they're scum. There's also the point of Newbie-Idle interactions. Hopp provided a very valid point when he said that Idle wouldn't be worried about Broggly's vote on him if Broggly was his scum partner. The L-1 situation is also a fair point, but I don't find it as strong for two reasons. 1) He said "this is a pressure vote", which he didn't do for any other votes. This obviously was an attempt to lessen pressure. 2) He simply pushed Song up to a claim, which could be another attempt to save his buddy. He might've figured that a claim saved him, so a claim would probably save song. Then there's the whole issue of Newbie continuing to be active and Song disappearing, Newbie not taking the easy scum out and going after one of my declared town reads and possible investigations over Song while song clears newb in her first post of the day then says she's leaning towards lynching him in the next.

Maybe it's just that I've not played as many games as you, then. :/ But Newbie has said that if muh wasn't scum, he assumed he wouldn't self-hammer...so by his own words his top suspect wouldn't have been lynched that evening, if muh were actually scum, and we were stuck with a self-hammer. No one would have. If there's anything he's persistent in, it's a persistence in thinking that Idle is NOT scum. (And while he saw muh as being more suspicious than Idle, muh wasn't his top scum read of the day):

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.

And Day 2 is

full

of him helping Idle. Heck, I've bitten the bullet and defended people in other games, when I thought someone was attacking someone unfairly, because I think misrepping someone can definitely be a potential scumtell. So I'm not 100% ready to call his helping out and defense of Idle on Day 2 evidence of them being buddying scum. But he certainly did help him out, and made a point of clarifying what he thought Idle was saying.

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.

(Reading back on it, he was also largely right -- Idle wasn't being nearly as illogical as Hopp was saying he was). But stuff like this felt went over into outright coaching:

Fail on my part; sorry.

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

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.

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'll give you his continued presence here is a definite mark in his favor, and Song's dropping out makes her look pretty awful at this point.

On Song

* The scumstyle paragraphs in ISOs 31, 37, and 39 are problematic. They do read like a rationalization and apology for scummy-looking play that we may be seeing this round, in an attempt to minimize it.

I think sometimes to find scum, you have to think like them. Playing cut and dry townie is fine and good for some people. I'm just not like that. So if I ever play another game with any of you guys keep some of what I'm saying in mind.

This in particular I'm still confused by this. What elements of your playstyle to YOU see as scummy, that you wouldn't be doing if you were playing "cut and dry townie"? Regardless of how it may help or hurt future games -- do you think that you'd be able to benefit the town more

this

round if you played "cut and dry townie" instead of the playstyle you've chosen? Or do you think that your current playstyle is helping us more this round, than if you were playing "cut and dry townie"?

* Not persuaded by most of the associative/distancing quotes Nacho lays out. The "if Song and I were scumteam" post is really the only possibly damning one I see; the fact that he actually bucks overall town opinion in his ISO 3 and lists Song as town I also find suspicious.

* Not entirely persuaded by Nacho's reasoning on why Idle might have put his vote on Song, but it's possible, and it weakens my holding-out over the L-1 point.


tl;dr -- Newbie and Song both look scummy to me, and while I realize a mislynch today isn't the end of the world, I'd prefer not to hammer Song this soon unless/until I've heard reactions to some of this.

VOTE: Newbie

[Purple Orange]

But Newbie has said that if muh wasn't scum, he assumed he wouldn't self-hammer...

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

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?

[Purple Orange]

Part III of Newbie's case is solid. Agree Song has buddying tells with Idle along with Newbie.

Parts I and II I'm not sure exactly where you're going with them, and they include a lot of selective quoting of posts. And some of the stuff you quote as distraction/worthless WAS relevant content, such as discussion with Rag about why she was voting for Hanzo, or explanation of why she supported a lynch on one sort of lurker over another.

Also, I don't see the point in discussing Hopp-Song connections, as we know they're not both scum. Distraction from what we should actually be talking about.


Hopp -- I think Song's case on you was
a) that you were flip-floppy
b) contradicted yourself when you sort of backed down by saying you hadn't noticed she was at L-2, but then said you would have put her at L-1 anyway
c) that scum would have taken the chance to quickhammer when they had the chance, and that as she was left at L-1 for so long, the last scum was probably on the wagon. Nacho reads more townie than you, so you must be scum.

a) yeah, you do flip, but when you do I think I see you doing it in response to new information, or something you just didn't realize before. Ala my last post when I call you overeager town instead of scum.
b) That sentence strikes me as "off" as well, but I don't think it's lynch-worthy
c) Bad argument. Newbie was absent, so we can't know what he would have done, but that aside, I can think of several reasons scum versions of Newbie and myself might not have quicklynched Song at that particular time.


I'm assuming holiday stuff is what's keeping people from posting more? Or are we really at an impasse here? I'm personally waiting for Song to respond to Nacho's questions in 544 before I make another move.

[Purple Orange]

Also,

Unvote

.

[Purple Orange]

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)?

Short answer: I now think Song's more likely scum than you, and either way I don't want to see you hammered right now either.

Spoiler: Long answer

*Yep, this recently persuaded me that a vote is pretty much always better than no vote.

* You guys's arguments, plus Song's effective abandonment of the game, are convincing me Song is scum. Part III is solid, especially the "until" you point out. Song's answer to my question about the scumstyle paragraphs made zero sense to me. And having just observed scum-abandonment behavior in a recently completed game here, and in an off-site game that finished yesterday, I see it as a rather damning tell. I wasn't sold on Parts I and II at the time of the unvote, but the above things were enough to make me want to guarantee you weren't quicklynched.

* I don't want to see you hammered either. Because of the above, and because I think that even if you are scum, there's still discussion that should be wrapped up -- in particular, Nacho's questions. The remaining non-vote people have both pushed for a Song lynch over a you-lynch, so you getting hammered is far less likely than a Song hammer. But I'd prefer not to leave you out in the open like that.

If I voted anyone at this point, it would be Song. If Nacho thinks we should lynch without his questions (and now yours) being answered, I'm willing to do so.

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?

Sorry, I caused some pronoun-antecedent confusion, there. she= Song in that sentence. "...discussion with Rag about why she [Song] was voting for Hanzo"

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.

OK, I see this.

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

Song, Newb, Hopp, Nacho. (Except on days that I'm paranoid. Then Nacho switches with Hopp). I think it's pretty evident from my posting, so I don't think there's a drawback in me reiterating this.

Nacho: is there any theoretical town disadvantage in listing our scummy to not scummy reads in order, at this point? And answering all of Newbie's questions? (Can I ask you this as an IC and not as a player?)

If there's no drawback, what's your own suspect list, Newbie?

[Purple Orange]

Err...should I wait for Hopp, or should I hammer now?

[Purple Orange]

PO wanted an answer to some points from before though, so I'm giving Song the chance to answer those.

Actually, it was conditional:

If I voted anyone at this point, it would be Song. If Nacho thinks we should lynch without his questions (and now yours) being answered, I'm willing to do so.

As for whether to lynch Song before she answers our questions or not... I wouldn't mind it. Song's recent lurking has solidified the choice of who to lynch today in my mind, at least, and I don't think her responses to those questions will give us any big advantage.

And you've posted, Hopp, which answered my last question.

VOTE: Song of Ice and Fire

[Purple Orange]

As Nacho isn't here to say it:

IF YOU ARE TOWN AND CAST YOUR VOTE WRONG TODAY, WE WILL LOSE.

Mafia will jump in and seize the hammer opportunity (unless they're out of town, like Newbie is until the 8th). Don't vote until you're as sure as you're as convinced as possible that the person you're voting for is the right guy to nail. :/

=========
Going by pure nightkill analysis (and who we said we'd all vote for yesterday), Hopp is more likely mafia than Newbie. There's other complicating factors, however (see below), including the fact I still read Newbie as the scummiest overall. Taking my own warning above:

FoS: Newbie

(in the place of a vote)

======

@ Mod: Despite him being dead, can I ask Nacho questions with him answering as an IC?

@ 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.

Short answer? Because you're mafia, and killing Nacho is way better for you than killing me. (The fact I'm alive today does make me question my scumread on Newbie, and thus my townread on you).

Long answer:
Why I wasn't killed N1 through N2: pretty sure it was scum trying to avoid running into a doc protect (leads to loss of a kill, and even the confirmation of two townies if the doc has a chance to claim).
Why Nacho wasn't killed N1 through N2: similar fear of a doc protect...plus his system was useful to the mafia so long as it pointed to a Song lynch.

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.

Spoiler: additional minor reasons

* They might have still thought Nacho had a good chance of being a cop, given some of his statements inthread? (Roleclaiming/investigation-claiming today doesn't 100% prove anything, but if it lines up consistently with what one has said and breadcrumbed before in the thread, it can sway things powerfully. Plus the claim forces scum into an early one-vs-one with another player, instead of giving them more flexibility in who to get lynched).
* Potential WIFOM of being able to go, "if a super-town-looking role survives this long, they're probably mafia! kill them!" (As either Nacho or myself

had

to survive through to today, however, they sort of shot that line of argument in the foot by leaving us both alive on Day 3).

Finally, if

YOU

are mafia, there are specific additional reasons that a Nacho kill was more rational than a me-kill. If you left myself and Newbie alive, you'd have a decently secure vote on Newbie today from me, if I followed through on the momentum of my suspicions. But if you left Newbie and Nacho alive, things were FAR from being that certain. I think there's indications Nacho would have been inclined to vote for Newbie...but a) you might have interpreted his posts different than me, and b) even then, he was still a huge question mark, unpredictable, and skilled, and I think way too much of a risk for you to have left alive.

If Newbie was mafia, I think he would have been better off killing me, leaving you and unpredictable-Nacho alive. Still, the things listed above might have convinced him that killing Nacho was still the better bet, especially if he thought Nacho would probably come after him.

[Purple Orange]

I'm confused. I'm more likely to be mafia but you're (more?) suspicious of Newbie?

You're more likely to be mafia

based off of last night's kill

. But pretty much everything else I've seen in this thread points to Newbie being more likely mafia than you, per the arguments I posted on Day 3. ( And usually one IS advised to ignore nightkills, as the mafia could just as easily try to kill one person to try to frame another person. ) There's some additional things on Newbie I've found in my reread yesterday that I'll try to finish summarizing today or tomorrow, along with summarizing the stuff I've already got. And I also need to run another ISO you - you do have a couple scummy posts that I'd like to hear some explanation about. But overall I'm decently confident it's Newbie at this point. I personally don't want to vote for him until he's at least had a chance to post, however, in case there really is something I've missed that he might have seen.

Also, is this NK analysis purely on this most recent NK or on the previous two as well?

Just the most recent NK. (I don't really see the other ones providing any leads...the two SEs were killed off, that's the only pattern I see there).

Yeah, I suppose you're right. I probably would have killed Nacho if I had been mafia.

What about if you were mafia? (

"Obviously"

you're not, but what would you have done? )

LOL. Nacho, per the reasons listed above, plus the additional fact that you and Newbie both listed the other as your top suspect. Basically, there's general reasons why I think any of us would have killed Nacho were we scum, but additional specific reasons (based in who people said they'd probably vote for the next day) that scum versions of both you and I would have been especially wise to kill him.

[Purple Orange]

One question for you, Hopp: how/why did you go from "lynch Nacho is Song flips town," to this?

Top suspect: Song
Second suspect: Newbie

[Purple Orange]

@ PO: Regarding claiming. What do you think?

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).

Claims usually go by having the scummiest person/people claim first, because it's easier to catch scum in a fakeclaim that way.

[Purple Orange]

Yeah, I thought we should wait for him (we're kinda at a standstill without him anyway, if neither of us care to vote for him yet)...but he's still not reshown up here, and it's now after his V/LA is supposed to be done. :/

[Purple Orange]

Lynch post happened at 9:14 PM on Jan 02, and Newbie's profile says he was last online at 10:52 PM on Jan 02. (Hours are in my time zone, but the time elapsed is constant regardless).

The reason Newbie said he wanted to get replaced was to prevent night action WIFOM in the event he was gone for the entire night, but a) Nocmen said he could send in his action early if he had one, and b) we lynched soon enough that there was enough window for him to get an action in anyway. So I don't see why he'd be expecting a replacement. Maybe his vacation was just longer than he expected?

Question @ Hopp: do you want to wait for a replacement for Newbie, in the event he doesn't show up, or claim and maybe vote with what we've got? :/

[Purple Orange]

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

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.

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?

Both. I think it would have benefited either of you to kill Nacho, simply because he was the most experienced player. But based on who we all implied we'd vote for today, Hopp should have killed Nacho, and you probably should have killed me, unless you thought Nacho was going to come after you. (Which it's very possible you did, given his removal of a vote on Song when I brought you up. And as you note, my case against you was known factor, but Nacho hadn't presented one yet. Better the devil we know, etc.)

Can you elaborate on this now that it is LYLO?

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.

[Purple Orange]

Okay, do I claim next or is there something else we need to do before that?

I think you go next, unless you guys both want me to go first.

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.

Heh, I was paranoid of Nacho for a while, so I hear you. :/

[Purple Orange]

Unless he's scum, in which case he's suspicious of neither of us.

VT, here.

We've got a goon-roleblocker setup if you're scum, and a goon-goon setup if me or Newbie is scum.

Neither of you guys's claims seems to clash with with your play, but that's about all I can take from that. VT is always a safe claim for scum, especially if they're first in line on a roleclaim. At first I thought the Hopp doc claim would be risky to do as scum, but then realized that if he were scum, he'd know that either cop or doc was safe to claim, after seeing Newbie post VT.

[Purple Orange]

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.

Yep, you're reading too much into that. It was a correction of a previous statement I'd made, that I'd realized was wrong. I had said "cop should claim, and it's pretty much over" -- then realized I was an idiot and that it wasn't true, unless the scum made a very specific move or two. (Counterclaiming cop, or preemptively claiming cop and getting counterclaimed). I hoped they might slip up and do something of the sort anyway, which is why I didn't specify things. It does strike me as laughably obvious now -- but at the time I was also neck-deep in mafia theory and contingencies, thinking what every person might do about 4 moves ahead, and obvious things weren't striking me as obvious.

[Purple Orange]

Vote Count:

None so far.

Activity is good. (Purple will be prodded within 24 hours if he doesn't post though)

HA! In before prod!

Sorry guys -- real life ate me for a couple days. Looks like they've been rather eventful here, as I've come back to Newbie FoSing me. Answering post(s) in a bit.

[Purple Orange]

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?

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.

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.

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.

[Purple Orange]

What happened to not speculating about Nacho-cop?

Posts 462 through 477, particularly Nacho's 470. You've missed the fact that inbetween posts 461 and 478 is a lengthy exchange of me trying to get to the bottom of why Hoppster wants to lynch Nacho is Song is town...and more importantly a post that I interpreted as a Nacho cop claim (and thus permitting speculation and discussion).

First, there's my admission in 466 that I might have been wrong about not speculating. (I go into my reasoning for having said this later, in 477, but for now, just note that I say I might have been wrong in 461):

2) Correction of my own post: "cop should claim, and the game is pretty much won" is true only in certain specific circumstances.

I may also be wrong that we should stop speculating today

, but that's dependent upon Nacho's case on Song. I'd very much like Nacho to get on over here, and to stop lurking and leaving us to spin our own wheels.

Despite saying this, that paragraph is the extent of the further commentary I made about the cop, until Nacho's post 470.

I don't have a game-winning investigation at this time, sorry.

Which as you will note in 473 (see 477 for further reference),

I interpreted (wrongly) as a cop claim:

Are your reads on Hopp and Newbie certain, or did one or more of your previous investigation subjects die? If you think it's more prudent not to say who you've got I can understand, but I think it would be a big help to any people who are clear to narrow down their investigations.

Note the conditional in 461: cop should claim,

otherwise

we should stop speculating. The cop claimed (or so I thought). Thus, speculation became OK, and I felt free to discuss the implications. Nevertheless, I

still

tried to hold back until Nacho answered the question I'd asked him. Hopp kept pushing the "lynch Nacho if Song is town" thing, however, and I ended up saying most of what I said later in response to his posts, trying to understand why the heck he'd say that, and where he was coming from. (Again, under the assumption that Nacho had indeed claimed cop, and that it was thus OK to discuss the matter further).

If you look at 474, you'll see that the cop thing also becomes tied into my argument with Hopp about why he shouldn't go "lynch Nacho if Song is town":

]1) I agree that a Song lynch could be an excellent process of elimination tool, but only if Nacho claims cop plus a pair of innocents on you and Newb. (And even then, you could never have the same certainty that we should lynch Nacho if Song flips town that I could have).

Even after feeling freed to discuss the matter, I'm still trying to be brief. (This was also the post with my "I'd be telling the mafia what to avoid doing" sentence, trying to avoid saying much specifically).

Hopp still doesn't get it, however:

1) Sorry, that's gone over my head. Please explain (paticularly the bit about you being able to be more certain than me).

2) Fair enough

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. )

So I end up posting more (477 and 478). Maybe I should have waited for Nacho's blessing to continue, as I admitted in 477 some continuing uncertainty about the wisdom of proceeding...but he was taking his time getting to the thread, and again, I saw 470 as a claim, and in that sense an invitation to discuss the matter in some fashion. (And 478 is basically me explaining to Hopp why I asked the "did you get innocent reads" question; I didn't feel I'd said anything new).

477 is also where I explain why I said in 466 that I might be wrong about ignoring the cop thing, and where I state that I saw 470 as a cop claim (and why). Also note the fact that I say here that I'll back off if I've interpreted wrongly and it's not a claim -- implying that I would never have said all the things I did if I thought it wasn't a claim.

Err...not really experienced. :/

But when we're down to five players, with two possibly confirmed innocents, I do know that it becomes more of a viable possibility to discuss roles than earlier in the game.

I'm not sure which is the wisest course of action right now, and Nacho's the one with the most experience, and also the one under the gun over the claim, which is why I wanted to leave it up to him whether to push the cop matter or tell us to forget it. [<---- by "pushing the cop matter" I mean telling us whether he has innocent reads on people, vs. just simple claiming]

Some of the language in his post is a bit ambiguous, but between the "at this time" and "process of elimination," I found it difficult to interpret it as anything other than a claim. If you didn't intend it to be, Nacho, my apologies, I misread what you were saying, and I'll back off;

it could simply be you saying "I don't have a guilty investigation on Song, for whatever reason," and I'll work under that assumption from here on out if that's all you were saying.

And once Nacho says, "um...that might not have been a cop claim," you'll notice that I DO shut up about it, even though he says "you can keep talking," and even given 466, where I think it might still be valid to speculate. No cop claim, no speculation.

Purple, you're not going to get any further responses from me about the entire cop situation. You can continue discussing it if you'd like, just don't expect anything from me

No problem. I'll chalk up my interpretation of 470 as possibly wrong as well.

But if you can't/won't appeal to authority, can you give the reasoning behind your flip concerning Newbie, after saying this in 416?

This is the last I say anything about the cop, and I think the one question there I ask is fair, especially as you yourself had brought up before the issue of Nacho's unexplained quick turnaround votes in 258.

[Purple Orange]

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)

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.

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

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).

[Purple Orange]

If you didn't think a muh lynch was likely, why didn't you just announce that you were more suspicious of muh but then lynch Idle in interest of preventing No Lynch? Paticularly as it was a close call for you, presumably an Idle lynch still wouldn't have been that bad for you.

I felt I should vote for the person I considered most suspicious; I also believed that between Newbie and muh, Idle would be lynched even without my vote. In addition, I

had

seen Ragnarokio's name on the online player listing at the bottom of the page a short while before; I didn't think it impossible that she was still around, and I knew she had suspected muh above Idle for most of the day.

Do you think muh's self-hammer was worse than the potential cross-voting you are talking about?

About equal, as both had the probability of ending in no lynch. Again, the much self hammer thing caught me off guard, and I seriously wasn't thinking very clearly at that point.

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.

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.

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.

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

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

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.

Evidently you read him better than me -- you were right on the first post being a VT claim, and I was dead wrong it was a cop claim. :/ I interpreted "I don't have a game-winning investigation, sorry" as meaning, "I don't have a guilty investigation."

[Purple Orange]

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.

Fencesitting there was deliberate on my part-- I was with Nacho on thinking that the less information the scum had to make the nightkill with, the better, especially after he confirmed some of my thoughts on the matter. The only reason I posted a list at all before getting an answer was because I thought my position on these things was already apparent. As he noted, it was a pick-your-poison thing, so I don't suppose I can legitimately fault you for picking the other one.

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

Really? I remember being surprised by the fact that I felt I'd talked more about points against muh than points against Idle -- relooked, and I'm still seeing the same thing. I talk about muh a fair bit early on, then his lurking gives me nothing much else to work with. Then Idle rolefishes, and I jump on him for that...but otherwise don't end up saying much else; then think I may have overreacted, per Rag's comments. My ISO 18 ends up having more examples and references for muh in it than it does for Idle.

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

I'm not sure what quote wall you're referring to, as my entire case and vote on Idle at that point was based solely on the rolefishing matter (with a bit on his hesitancy thrown in). My recent walls were on Hanzo, Rag, and Song -- Idle was an afterthought to those, triggered by his rolefishing post. After Rag's comments, giving an alternate explanation for the rolefishing, I did think I very possibly

had

overreated. So, yes -- I was unconvinced. (And I backed down from Hanzo as well as from Idle on the rolefishing matter).

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

Can you link me to the Hanzo post? It was the fact that you HADN'T really made a case on Idle yet (but said you were going to make one) that caused me to ask the question, if I'm remembering correctly:

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.

Your case on Hanzo hadn't caused you to change your vote; your case on Idle, yet-to-be-made, might, and the deadline was creeping up on us very quickly. (The fact that I didn't consider Hanzo a suspect, and that I didn't think he was in danger of a lynch that day, and that I didn't have a vote on the guy, also possibly made a difference, but I'd have to go back and check). We were very close to deadline, and I was considering moving my vote back to muh, and was still wiffle-waffling between Idle and him. :/ I wanted to know if you were as set in your voting ways as the other people -- it was this part of my post that puts the question in context:

Yep, Hanzo said he was going to hammer at L-1. Right now muh's at L-2, but I'm willing to put him at L-1, and finish thus finish the day, whenever we feel we're ready. Newbie says he still has some stuff to post, Hoppster just arrived, and Nacho definitely still has things to post, so I don't want to speed a lynch until they've had their say, even though it looks like people are pretty much set in their ways right now.

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

He was complaining about RL things getting in the way of the game...I saw it as supplementing Hopp's "that sucks, but you shouldn't appeal to out-of-game things for sympathy" by proposing another way he could have dealt/could deal with the matter he was bringing up as an excuse. (I've got coaching tells between myself and muh, Hopp, and Song as well, for what it's worth).

[Purple Orange]

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.

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.

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.

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.

But you did list it as

a

reason -- I couldn't just ignore it. :/

[Purple Orange]

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.

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?

I didn't even post a complete case on you that day, as I was still questioning you and gathering information at that time. And I asked the questions I did to try to understand what was going on in your head, and see if there actually was any town motivation or explanation for actively forcing out a claim and a self-hammer, as I was failing to see any. 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.

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?

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.

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.

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?

How can I make myself clearer here? I was "satisfied for the time being" with your answers in the sense of, "I got what I wanted out of the answers (or as much as I thought I was going to get)." Hence the "I didn't exactly buy your answers" part of the sentence.

Why do you still think we were all after a policy lynch on you? If I voted for your lynch, it was going to be because I thought there was no good town motivation for pressuring a vote out of muh at the last minute -- I saw it as a last-ditch effort on your part to get another power-role claim, or maybe even save your partner another day. I thought I said this pretty clearly in a couple posts, especially at the end of the day, when you were accusing Song and myself of wanting to "policy lynch" you. I didn't want to vote for you because I disagreed with you'd forced a self-hammer. I wanted you voted for because I thought that you forcing a claim and a self-hammer came from scum motivation, not town motivation.

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.

In addition to that,

there were bad interactions with Idle on Day 2 (along with the Day 1 stuff).

In addition to that,

there's the the fact you bring up the cop matter.

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.

[Purple Orange]

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.

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.

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.

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.

[Purple Orange]

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.

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.

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?

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).

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?

If Idle flipped town, my case on you would actually be weaker, because there wouldn't be the added "possibly save a buddy" reason for having done what you did.

[Purple Orange]

@ Hopp: Still trying to understand the "lynch Nacho if Song is town" deal. Was it based in the fact that you thought the ONLY options were Nacho was 100% accurate town, or he was scum?

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.

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.

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?

Also, you never answered this question of Newbie's, which gets at the same thing:

Strategically? Why don’t you convince Nacho that I am scum?

I argued you down from the "lynch Nacho is Song is town" thing, I think removing the pragmatic reasoning you were making for the lynch, and you unvote Song:

As PO's just shown me, we haven't quite eliminated the impossible (as I thought we had). After that dressing-down I'm just going to UNVOTE: and quietly sit in the corner. Paticularly as I still believe there's a possibility of Newbie being scum now.

But by the end of the day, you have Song as your top lynch pick again. Had you come to see her as more scummy than Newbie by that point? Or were you still lynching her for pragmatic reasons? Both/and?

[Purple Orange]

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).

I was actually talking about Night Killing myself - I'd forgotten LC had replaced in after me. So yeah, I would've NK'd LC if I were scum.

So you thought the mafia likely would kill LC (the replacement), but you protected Nacho?

[Purple Orange]

@Newbie:

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)

Scum intention? Save a partner and/or eke out another role claim while you were at it. Scummy because I seriously saw no other reason to do what you did there. I'm still not sure whether to buy your explanation as rationalization, or as an honest belief that this was the right thing to do in that situation. Maybe I've just got a mental block here - Nacho seems to think you were sincere, and my strongest town read right now is on him.

^ For clarification, this is about where I still am when it comes to your Day 1 actions. I can see a possible town explanation for it now (based on answers you gave to the questions D2), which means I can't call it a slam-dunk argument like I was seeing it as before then. But pretty much any action can have scum or town motivation...deciding which is most probable is the tricky part. It's null at best to me, scummy at worst, and I have a hard time just dismissing it.

[Purple Orange]

Sort of glad you're at least committing to an FoS, even if it's on me. :/

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.

Newbie had to say what he did and defend what he did to be consistent, because he was actively pushing for the muh self-hammer at deadline. (While I was going "what the HECK?? What's going on??") 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.

In similar fashion, if I'm town, I'm being open and honest that I was caught off guard, and made a poor decision, and did not understand why Newbie was doing what he did. If I'm scum...I'm saying I was caught off guard and made a poor decision, because trying to defend my decision to stay on muh would look self-contradictory with my posting at and during deadline.

Also a minor note: if you think that the the other player was town, though, you have to believe that they were NOT trying to save their scumbuddy. So you have to think that one of us had town motivation for what we did. You can't say that both of us could have had "no other motivation." (Theoretically, then BOTH of us could be town and doing what we did).

(And I think both of us would have been wiser, as scum, to have done nothing at deadline, and ridden the credit of an Idle 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.

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.

No. Pre-ISO 37, I would have killed myself, because I had forgotten that LC replaced in after myself. Post-ISO 37, I would have killed LC. N1 (which is pre-ISO 33) I had a feeling I was going to be killed (and would have killed myself N1 had I been somebody else who was scum). However, post-#37, I have remembered that LC has replaced in after me, and thus I would have killed LC N1 had I been the same person from the first hypothetical scenario but also with the added knowledge/recollection of LC replacing in after me.

Ok - I think that makes sense.

[Purple Orange]

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).

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

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.

Here's the quote of mine Nacho says he ripped off, for comparison's sake (full post here; my ISO 8 also has some stuff):

You list Ragnarokio and Song and Fire as your top suspects (ostensibly for good reasons), and then you jump on the muh bandwagon instead?

First bolded part is what Nacho pointed to in his post; second is my emphasis.

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.

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).

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.

Still, I definitely get more of a town read from your interaction with him D2..out of time at the moment to finish the analysis I was doing of your interaction (and Newbie's) with him, but short version is that any possible coaching/buddying I DO see you do with him (both on Days 1 and 2) tends to include a vote against him that has a decent chance of contributing to his lynch.

[Purple Orange]

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.

Realized my answer to that, at least for the first couple sentences, was like textbook WIFOM.

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.

I can see how the appearance of dead-on-knowledge there looks scummy, and, unfortunately, there's not much I can say to that, except that I DID think it the most likely option. My (b) option was pretty close in probability to my (a), in my mind, but (a) did win out. I thought that Idle was likely scum (when there's two competing wagons, one of them is very likely scum, especially in a game this small). And I was failing to see town motivation for what Newbie did. My mind put the two together, and it came up with (a).

[Purple Orange]

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.

Hum - agreed, I think, that there's no case to be made in the singling out argument.

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?

Why did you not state that fact here:
[...]
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.

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.

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 saw parallels between these two parts:

Replacements should not be judged starting with a clean slate. Unless the replaced didn't really do anything substantial. [...] 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.

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

=====

Also, forgot one thing:

[...]

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

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

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.

From your deadline posts, you appeared active, involved, and like you knew what you were doing -- muh asked about a self-hammer, and you agreed, and gave certain conditions in which he should do it or not do it.

And I set a trap here:

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

...darn, well, so much for my "Newbie is scum, and voting for me because I strongly FoS'd him off the bat, and he doesn't think he can change my mind as easily as he can change Hopp's" train of thought I had going for a bit. :/

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.

[Purple Orange]

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.

^ 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." )

[Purple Orange]

A bit; I didn't have time this afternoon to post like I thought I would.

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

I would hate for this game to deadline right now,

[Purple Orange]

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.

<snip>

Sounded rather defensive to me...

Oh, veo. I saw it as taking off the gloves for a moment and being more blunt than usual, but I can see how it reads like defensiveness. :/ And the high proportion of WIFOM that ended up in the post doesn't help matters.

Moroever, I

was

defending myself, and to a degree I didn't feel had been necessary in response to your question about including my name with yours. Your question seemed to deal more with the mechanics of my posting. (I thought it related to your approval of Idle on D2 for making cases based on his alignment, and disapproval of Hopp and me for our "neutral" posting). I'm sure you had some reason for asking it that would relate in some way to some possible case on me, but I wasn't seeing it yet.

Hopp's post was different; it was actually incorrect of me to say in that last post he'd asked me why I brought up the buddying thing in the first place. What he made was an accusation, with a question that was only implicit, if it was there at all:

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.

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).

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?

Translate it however makes sense to you? I'm still not the same wavelength with you in terms of vocabulary and terminology. I'm saying that it makes you look considerably less scummy to me: the thing I would have

expected

you to do, if you were scum, would be to try to solidify Hopp's position against me, now that he was on your side when it came to lynching me. Not to switch and FoS the guy who'd just added his future vote to yours. There's WIFOM in there, sure, probably on a couple levels. But seems more a town action to me than a scum action.

Traps always make you look suspicious, only because you can blame any of your scumslips on "oh this is a trap"

.
Agreed.

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.

Actually, they

were

affected to some degree, ala the paragraph 2 above this one (like I said yesterday).

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.

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

[Purple Orange]

Still, I definitely get more of a town read from your interaction with him D2..out of time at the moment to finish the analysis I was doing of your interaction (and Newbie's) with him, but short version is that any possible coaching/buddying I DO see you do with him (both on Days 1 and 2) tends to include a vote against him that has a decent chance of contributing to his lynch.

^I've had the longer version of this finished for a bit, but wasn't sure there was much use in posting it unless people had questions, as there's some WIFOM and speculation in it. (And I didn't really see anything new when it came to Newbie).

One thing, though, is that I was wrong about Hopp's vote Day 2 being one that could possibly lead to a lynch. It's the first vote on Idle, and it draws attention to him, but I think Idle was going to get a lot of attention that day anyway, so it doesn't really do anything to shift any momentum.

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.

In my read a while back, I concluded that it was Nacho's vote and case that shifted the momentum, and I still think that's the case. Rag switched her vote from muh to Idle shortly thereafter. Then Hopp switched and put him at L-1 (his ISO 12), after first putting his vote on Song (ISO 10), and being told by Rag that it was useless to do so. Hopp had already sort of dismissed muh as a suspect in ISO 5, so it wasn't terribly likely he was going to go back there.

@ 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?

[Purple Orange]

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.

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?)

[Purple Orange]

Summary of what I've got so far.
* Newbie's answers to my questions have made me to reconsider and mitigate some of my points against him.
* Hopp's voting the first and second day reads scummy to me. (continuation of thoughts from here)
* Newbie's flip of FoS I can really only see as coming from town.

Below, I've attempted to go through and bullet-point all the points I've made I still think apply, and any additional conclusions from the questions I've been asking. The slights/moderates/strongs are how strong I currently feel the points are.

Case for Newbie

cf the last paragraphs of my 621

• deadline push (slight) - your answers have made me mitigate my stance on this quite a bit
  
• "self hammer" gambit (moderate) - trying to look sacrificial, ready to die, and town, when he knows we'll tell him not to do it
  
• 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.
  
• cop drawout/rolefishing (moderate) - I
  can
  see your reasoning, but it's still reading to me like reaction-fishing, trying as scum to confirm your suspicions about a power role. I would have thought that if you were town, you would have waited and let the power roles claim for themselves.
  
• asks for reads but doesn't give own first (slight) - still a bit hard for me to see this being in good faith

Against:

• N3 kill makes less sense from his PoV (slight)
  
• D4 switch of FoS VERY town (strong). More on this below. It's basically made me have to rethink my entire read on Newbie.

Case for Hopp:

• Day 1, after Nacho presents pivot-case, he first tries to vote for Song to try to steer away wagon on Idle. (moderate)
  
  Spoiler: more

  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)
  
  
• Day 2, similar - back to Song. Until Idle shoots himself in the foot with his post. Then goes back to bussing. (moderate)
  
• 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
  
• N3 kill makes 100% sense from his PoV. (slight)
  
• Waiting to FoS until both of us had posted (moderate) - though obviously someone has to FoS last, he had many opportunities to do so before he did. Implies scum waiting, not wanting to take a stand until both sides commit.

Against:

• Doesn't appear to understand Idle case D2 (moderate)
  
  Spoiler: more

  Hopp apparently misunderstands or doesn't get Idle's case. Which I think points AWAY from you two being a scumteam together, as I would assume that scum would talk during the night, and maybe try to coordinate their strategy and cases the next day with one another...see the Newbie case, where I list this as a point against him. (Though I

  have

  been scum in other games where my scumbuddies have been decidedly unhelpful and close-mouthed, believing that too much nighttalk and coordination of cases would betray itself the next day. So this isn't a slam-dunk they're-not-a-scumteam case)
  
  
• "Lynch nacho if Song flips town" reads more like town oversight than scum plot to me (strong)

============================
You can turn the slights/mods/strongs into numbers ala Nacho, and I think they end up with Hopp having like one more blip against him than Newbie at this point. Hopp hasn't had as much opportunity to debate me back and forth on some of these things as Newbie, though, particularly the Song-voting thing, so some of my moderates and slights on him are less certain than are my ones on Newbie, and I take the numerical difference with a grain of salt,

But sometimes there's posts that change and color one's whole perceptions of everything else, and for me, that's Newbie's switch of FoS in 644.

I'm saying that it makes you look considerably less scummy to me: the thing I would have

expected

you to do, if you were scum, would be to try to solidify Hopp's position against me, now that he was on your side when it came to lynching me. Not to switch and FoS the guy who'd just added his future vote to yours. There's WIFOM in there, sure, probably on a couple levels. But seems more a town action to me than a scum action.

I've mucked around thinking through this a while longer, and I think my initial, "WHAT THE HECK?? TOWN!" reaction was right. I do NOT see scum doing what he did, switching and putting his FoS on the guy who just sided with him, especially with

me

still FoSing him strongly.

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.

I've got 48 hours or so to reconsider this, and maybe I've

still

missed something. And if I manage to knock the above argument out from under me, I'll be darn confused, and the decision harder, and I'll probably lean Newbie-scum again, even with the mitigated suspicions on some things. But for now, 644 is the tipping point, and to me it's yelling that Newbie is town.

UnFoS, FoS: Hopp

[Purple Orange]

VOTE: Hoppster

[Purple Orange]

Seriously, though - everything I said in the last post I believed 100%. If I were town, Hopp was definitely scum.

[Purple Orange]

Holy Moses, you guys were

hardcore

today -- I had hoped you'd just FoS/vote one another right off the bat, and let me make the deciding vote...but LOL. You folks went through the thread with a fine-tooth comb, asked me questions that hit WAY too close to home, and there were so many times I thought I was doomed, that it wasn't even funny.

Hopp was really the doctor, far as I know, 'cause I'm a goon.

I don't believe I had my gender listed on the board at that time. (But I wasn't about to tell you that, obviously...).

[Purple Orange]

LOL, I think you guys totally DID make him proud, even if you didn't get me in the end. You made me freaking WORK for this win.

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.

Yeah, we actually talked quite a lot (there's some posts I'd like deleted, if Nocmen decides to reveal it, because we discuss some strategies I like to use that we never used here, and because I talk a lot about my meta on other sites. :/)

But when I'm new to a site I don't normally tend to reveal my gender to anyone. I ended up listing it eventually because everyone here seems to do it...and because I thought it might make me look nicer and more sympathetic and not-mafia-ish to you all.

hardcore

I think the better word for me would be V/LA
Sorry for my what 5, 6, 7 V/LA's...

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 [/QUOTE]

You were BRUTAL, Newbie...your questions were always good, and I was convinced you were on to me. :/ Once you started after me, I really thought my only hope was to convince Hopp to vote for you. And my case on you was looking flimsier to me by the day, because your whole good-question-asking playstyle was so darn PRO-TOWN. I had to start dredging up things and asking questions back to people left and right, just to make it look like I cared about finding the mafia as much as you did. When I would have

much

preferred to coast through the day.

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.

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...)

[Purple Orange]

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

LOL. When I said that you'd caught me completely off guard, that I was confused, that I'd made a bad decision, and that I wasn't thinking straight, that was the honest-to-god truth. The self-hammer thing came completely out of the blue, and combined with me feeling really bad for Idle Thoughts that day, I did a

horribly

stupid thing. As scum, I should have totally switched my vote back over to Idle and murdered him. That was a complete total awful bit of play on my part, and I was sure I'd cost us the game.

But...um...once it happened, it happened, and I felt all I could do was admit how awful it was right off the bat, and try to make you look worse for it than me. (On the other hand, you couldn't die

too

soon, or else people

would

start using the same arguments I used against you on me).

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.

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.

[Purple Orange]

On nightkills

* We killed Rag because we thought she was a power role. She was also the one person D1 who was in any way on to me.
* We killed LC because we thought Hanzo was being Hanzo, and bluffing/gambitting about not thinking there were any power roles.
* I wanted Nacho dead because I figured that if anyone was likely to catch on to me and get me lynched, it was him. He might start out with a case on someone else, but he was a darn good player, and I was sure I'd slipped up enough to give him a foothold somewhere, and that he'd get it out of me by the end of the day. He hadn't revealed his order of reads, so I didn't know exactly where I stood...he was a wild card in that respect. And people seemed to think he was quite town.

So...um...yeah, I killed him for pretty much all the reasons I listed in my post today about why I thought he died.

A large part of my reasoning for risking a kill of him N3 was that I

was

still paranoid that he might be the cop. (If I'd bothered to read his meta in time, I would have realized that he wasn't...but, oh well). I know that claims in lylo are iffy...but a Nacho-cop claim, with a guilty on me or an innocent on you, would still be damn hard to argue against. And he would be 100% sure of himself, and he would

know

I was scum. Lylo would be him saying "PO is scum," and me having to convince the other person that Nacho was scum instead of me....scum who had made the decision to attack me in lylo, instead trying to go for the easier mark of the scummier player. I had zero confidence in my ability to pull that off.

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.

Now that I look back at that...risking mylo to avoid a me vs. Nacho lylo may theoretically not have been the best decision. But that was my thought process at the time. I was terrified of Nacho, and was quite sure I would lose the game if I ended up locked into arguing for my life against him.

@ Nacho:

I'm super-curious. Who

would

you have found most suspect, if I'd killed Hopp instead of you? What WOULD your cases have looked like?

[Purple Orange]

I've learned a lot from this game...

...Namely, I'm not as 1337-haxz0rz as I thought I was, and that this game is a billion times deeper than I had first broken into.

I have studying to do... Next time I won't be a faceless n00b with little tactics. Sorry for being useless, Purple Orange. But it was fun while my meaningless little life lasted. Really good play on your part, and on everyone else's.

Hey, man - we won! And Newbie's right -- there were many things that could have gone wrong at the deadline, and you avoided associating with me any more obviously than anyone else. (I came the closest to betraying it, with the replacement thing, I think).

And, LOL, you played way better as scum in this game than I just played in another game here where I was scum, where I screwed over my whole team big time. (Will link you to it when it finally finishes. It makes me wince, big time, and was quite a humbling experience. )

So, yeah - you not incriminating both of us is

big

deal, and a really good thing.

Sorry the case I hacked out for you on D2 didn't work out so good.

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.

Heh, you hid it well. You and Hopp both scared me to pieces.

But, yeah - I thought I at least had a

chance

in me vs. you mylo. Though I still think Nacho could have pegged me as scummier for the same reasons Hopp did. I think the similarities between us start to look LESS similar the closer they get examined. And I think I had more inconsistencies in what I posted than you had.

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.

There was something he said that made me about 100% certain he wasn't the cop, but I don't remember what it was.

If he was a power role, I had him pegged as the doc. You were obv-VT because of your willingness to get lynched on Day 2. Though I did consider the distant possibility that you were the doc or cop. If you were doc, I figured you'd protect me, and woo, Nacho would die! If you were cop...well, there wasn't much I could do there.

[Purple Orange]

What precisely made Hopp's game so blatantly pro-town? I also thought he was yelling town town all thread, mostly because any surface-ly scummy stuff he did looked like a new townie player just missing something and making an oversight, and super-obviously so. But I don't have a very objective perspective on this, as I

knew

he was town anyway.

Also...my experience with lylo IS limited. But I have seriously never seen mafia do what Newbie did...it's how I've called at least two other lylos elsewhere correctly recently.

Would

I have been wrong to make a call like that (and go against a very strong gut townread of Hopp), if I'd been town?