Open 169 - [Alternating 9P] OVER

[dank]

dank confirmation

[dank]

I'll have to

vote: Deuxieme Octopus

to get the ol' bandwagon rolling down the hill.

[dank]

unvote, vote: RayFrost

Why? I dunno.

[dank]

So why not vote CSL, Lynx?

I see no reason to really. It's odd to state your distaste for the RVS, then continue it along with another random vote. I don't find this necessarily scummy though. It's tough to pull everyone out of it really when you haven't noticed anything suspect.

Is there anything else that I'm missing from your vote on him that would make me more inclined to find it suspicious?

Lets look at the RVS in general. Its random, it takes up time and space, and it really doesnt add any helpful scumhunting, unless someone is willing to step out of it. I think we can both agree that lack of helpful scumhunting is helping mafia. It is town that has the motivation to step out of rvs and get some work done, town is the one backed against a wall.

CSL stated distaste for a long RVS, what I feel is a town point of view, and yet prolonged it with another vote, which I feel is not town. I don't like how you simply dismissed it as not scummy, because unnecessarily long RVS is helpful for mafia and hurtful for town. That is the very definition of scummy, is it not?

[dank]

CSL stated distaste for a long RVS, what I feel is a town point of view

Not necessarily. Both town and scum players want the game to move into a phase where a lynch is both more likely and less reprehensible on an individual level. An RVS-lynch (hammer vote specifically) is an instant suspicion-magnet, something scum would never encourage.

Disliking long RVS's is a null-tell.

Butn at the same time, an RVS hammer (which mafia ordinarily would never do) + instant suspicion magnet the next day is about the best thing that could happen for scum, if its just a stupid townie that hammers. Thats why mafia wants RVS as long as possible, not only does it prevent town from doing anything that's really productive, but it allows the possibility for stupid mistakes that could seriously cost town the game (mislynch + lynch of the hammerer).

That's a specific case, but in general, I don't think it's helpful at all for town to keep RVS going, while it is perhaps the ideal situation for mafia at this point.

Anyway, yeah, saying you dislike rvs is a null tell. I just felt that its something that could be said for town points, especially if no action afterwards supports actually going out of it. Anyway, that's not at all my main point- questioning lynx's assertion that prolonging RVS isn't scummy.

[dank]

Town outnumbers scum, doesn't it? RVS hammer is a crapshoot, pure and simple. Crapshoots will tend to favor scum, because there are more town players than scum players?

Chances of hitting scum through educated guesses > Crapshoots. Educated guesses come only through scumhunting in this game. Are you trying to suggest that its better to take a crapshoot and lynch on close to nothing, instead of gathering info through scumhunting? ++ scumpoints for you.

Yes, if we somehow manage to lynch scum on a crapshoot, great. But chances are greater that we don't, and we'd most likely be in a deep hole afterwards with close to nothing from d1, and perhaps a nooby/stupid prime suspect for d2.

[dank]

My vote may not have changed, but i'd certainly argue that the discussion i started in the last few posts has done the most to get us out of rvs. I did not and still do not want to bring CSL to L-1 quite yet, but I clearly have some suspicions in his direction. For now, i'll

unvote, vote: Lynx

[dank]

I've explained what I didn't like about your post, so please don't try to strawman it into something that it isn't. I didn't like how you seem to think there's nothing wrong with a prolonged rvs, whereas I've explained why I think it is scummy, and why scum would want it to last as long as possible. My vote is the first one on you, my vote is based on very little at this point, you're not even my prime suspect (but due to not wanting L-1, I have no problem with there being a single vote on you). Why are you so so concerned about my vote?

[dank]

I see no reason to really. It's odd to state your distaste for the RVS, then continue it along with another random vote. I don't find this necessarily scummy though

Meh, to me, I thought it implied you also saw nothing wrong with prolonging the rvs. Still reads that way to me, but maybe i'm just misreading what you meant.

As far as your questions: I do not like early L-1s. I think practically no scum, would take the chance to hammer, while a greater percentage of nooby/not so smart townies would hammer (remember the trendy and subversive we played, when saber hammered d1 for no reason?). Saber basically cost us that game, and any other townie hammer at this point easily could as well. Since the chance, imo, for a townie hammer is greater than a scum hammer, I see no need to put us into that situation. There's plenty of time left to figure things out.

Ray- 1. Reasoning was given, though you seemed to not read it.
2. Oh, should Lynx be immune because he's helping us get out of RVS? I wasn't aware.
3. Read my post. Helping get out of RVS could be an attempt to gain town points, but it is technically a null tell.
4. Reasoning was given; more in quantity and quality than the ones you just gave here. You give hardly any reason for voting me here (and the ones you do don't really make much sense; i guess that means you're kinda scummy too).
5. Game theory could easily help find scum, as scum will often try to turn these discussions in their favor, and perhaps convince the town of a strategy that could help them, or even advocate a town strategy to look more town. ANY discussion is helpful in this game, because ANY discussion lets us get know the players better, and gain insight into what they're thinking. Why exactly, is this discussion distracting and unhelpful? Would you rather we still be floating around in RVS land?

[dank]

my condolences.

[dank]

CSL: If you are not going to contribute anything, then get your L-1 vote off. Thanks.

Also, sometimes, its nice to contribute stuff.

[dank]

Speaking of which, CSL, are you trying to lynch someone for posting fluff and not contributing, where you've done the exact same thing? Mighty sneaky of you.

Khamisa: no need for a claim here, but seriously, start posting content.

CSL:

unvote, vote: CSL

[dank]

Why are you so sure its the other game that's causing it?

[dank]

It kinda of defends it, if you're putting a disclaimer to his poor gameplay.

[dank]

Again, you are directly tying his behavior to something in another game, which is a point he himself did not make. Yes, the disclaimer can serve as a disclaimer for your own actions, but, you had not shown any actions related to that game yet.

In reality, the only thing that disclaimer did was explain his stupid/poor gameplay and tie it to what happened in another game. That, is pure defense of another player.

[dank]

why is khamisa the better choice?

[dank]

Has CSL not only "cosistently provided fluffy, contentless posts in the game despite repeatedly being told to provide some content and having what content is explained" but ALSO put in a very scummy L-1 vote?

CSL has done the same thing, and has been perhaps even more useless than khamisa. Though if you disagree, please tell me how CSL's been of more use/more helpful than khamisa.

[dank]

....

Ray, your reaction towards CSL has been very interesting. You ignored his horrible play until just now, even though its been pointed out many times. You defended his play for him in several posts.

Hell, you even quoted a post where CSL put the first L-1 vote on someone who had a very weak case on them, and rather than saying anything about the vote, you merely told him with Info over content meant.

I see coaching, defense and bus. This is all weak speculation, so of course there's no reason to act on any of this, but if CSL is ever lynched and flips scum, you will easily be my prime suspect.

[dank]

And since you've got CSL at L-1, i'll

unvote, vote: RayFrost

. Would like to hear the others' comments on the last few pages, primarily CSL and Rayfrost interactions.

[dank]

Well, since RayFrost said IoA = Scum, and I hardly have any idea what to do...

Vote: Khamisa

Information over analysis = information without giving analysis

Obviously, you can give analysis & information and not be scummy.

Merely stating information already known without any views or opinions upon it is scummy.

y'gitme?

That's not khamisa's post, is it?

[dank]

^^You completely went along with a completely bullshit vote, and your reply was the answer to a question CSL didnt even ask. You merely fed CSL a reason for following your lead. That's coaching.

[dank]

Ray: Khamisa is scummy because of the IoA thing.

CSL: Ok, ray says Khamisa is scummy, so i'll vote khamisa for the IoA thing I dont really understand.

Ray: No silly, the IoA thing really does make someone scummy. Let me describe it more, so that your vote doesnt look quite as stupid.

[dank]

and why would you need to unvote whoever it was you were voting if you're not going to vote anyone else yet?

[dank]

mod, could we get a votecount?

[dank]

unvote

Ahh now what!?

As per Paradoxombie's post, I feel like it's directed towards me, but I can't really decipher whether or not you're asking me something. Clarify?

When CSL threatened to claim you chose to apply more preassure. Once he'd actually claimed you unvote. I think that's suspicious.

But at the same time, should someone back off pressure when someone says "leave me alone or i'll claim!" I don't think saying something like that exonerates him the least bit. It could be a softclaim at a pr, but it could as easily be mafia trying to buy time and trying to get a free pass. There's no reason not to continue applying pressure at the scummiest player if that player happens to suggest they're going to claim, and there's no reason not to unvote once you have an un-ccd power role. Im curious, paradox, what would you have done in this situation?

[dank]

Khamisa: Who do you find suspicious? Why do you find them suspicious?

[dank]

Why wouldn't you have voted at L-1? Your vote clearly says you find khamisa most suspicious. Why not hammer?

[dank]

that was directed at CSL.

[dank]

CSL- Could you answer my question on my last post on page 10?

Anyway, I'm a bit suspicious of the bw on khamisa. Yes, she's been more or less useless, but lets look at it from a practical point of view.

Khamisa is reasonably experienced. She's been in other games, and has been much more active, as others have pointed out.

Is it actually reasonable to assume that less activity, while it does not help town, implies that she is scum? I find this to be a very elementary argument that has a load of exceptions to it. Reasons for khamisa's behavior could include lack of real life time, or quite possibly, a general disinterested townie mindset (since she has now claimed townie), which i'm sure all of us (I know I have) all been in. To be honest, on the list of her behavior, her being scum and blatantly not voting or contributing anything is at the very very bottom of the list.

It just doesnt make sense if you think about it for a little bit. If you're scum, you blend in. You don't blatantly stand out from fear of making a mistake and not contributing anything. A first time player of both mafia scum and mafia in general who has no clue of the game and its enviroment may do this, but an established player like khamisa most certainly will not.

Khamisa has been very anti-town and has not been helpful to the town. I think the chances of this behavior being a result of her being scum are very low, and I do not believe in policy lynches, so I will not be voting her atm. I do suspect some mafia have jumped on the bw however, since its setting up to be an easy lynch with a good deal of support, even though the reasoning, in my opinion, is pretty bad.

Regarding rayfrost, i'm going to

unvote

for now, because I haven't been following the game that much lately. I'll catch up and let you all know my suspicions a bit later.

Also, Haylen: Post.

[dank]

Lynx- There's still a chance a cc has purposefully not happened, I think, so CSL isn't technically confirmed yet. But if he is town, I suspect the strangeish defense was just a result of them knowing each other (they seem to be friends, and are in at least another game together).

Like I said, i'll reread and post more later.

[dank]

Why doesn't it fly right? Your vote would be contributing to the lynch as much as anyone's. What makes the lynch early at this point? What are we missing?

[dank]

Ray: Antitown means a player doesnt help the town. Scummy, means a player is mafia.

Explain to me, how khamisa's behavior has been scummy, as opposed to antitown.

[dank]

It's scummy behavior for outright stating she will not post content / thoughts / etc. In addition, Khamisa has yet to really post any of her own logic.

"It's scummy" doesn't answer my question. Why is it scummy over antitown? Why is mafia more likely to not post content than disinterested town?

In addition, it's best to deal with the anti-town players (As they are more likely to be scum than even neutral read players), especially since there is a greater chance of hitting scum by going with such reads.

I happen to find policy lynches scummy. Notice how i follow this up with a reason: Policy lynches allow a town player to be lynched for an irrelevant reason to their alignment, and bring mafia further to their win condition. It's an excellent strategy to try to paint someone as scummy when they're actually unhelpful disinterested town, which is a very common occurance on these boards.

You also say anti-town players are much more likely to be scum. Could you explain that too?

[dank]

Also, she's buddying up to me? Other than answer one question, has she even addressed me in a post?

[dank]

Vote: Khamisa

. Clearly you need to help the town.

Thanks, Paradox.

If Kham was at L-1, I wouldn't have voted.

And yes, too lazy to check at that time, as I have other games I'm in too.

why?

[dank]

Ray:

Um, what? A policy lynch is lynching someone for being unhelpful, annoying, anti-town whatever, but NOT scummy. That is what the khamisa lynch is to me.

Its a win win situation? We don't know khamisa is scum. If we get rid of an anti town player and get mafia closer to their win condition, thats a win for town? What alignment exactly are you?

[dank]

Vote: Khamisa

. Clearly you need to help the town.

Thanks, Paradox.

If Kham was at L-1, I wouldn't have voted.

And yes, too lazy to check at that time, as I have other games I'm in too.

why?

Quicklynches are bad for town, because we wouldn't get enough information in time to use the next day.

Yes, that's a fine generic answer. Why, in this particular game, would you be afraid to hammer Khamisa, when you're giving someone else the right to hammer by placing your vote on her?

[dank]

Ray's strong insistence on what he basically calls a policy lynch pulls me back in his direction once again. I really don't like how he's saying that town wins if khamisa happens to be a townie and we mislynch. I'm sorry, a mislynch of a townie does not help my win condition. She is not sabotaging our game, she just has a more cautious playing style, a style which, like paradox said, matches other games. I honestly can't fathom mafia purposefully playing this kind of game on d1; it makes no sense to me.

Ray's last few posts were very interesting. He really wants this lynch to go through, on what I think is a very weak case. He seems to be really grasping at straws to explain her scumminess, when all it is is just antitown. Again, his points of 1. lynching an unhelpful townie as being good for town, and 2. anti-town = scummy really seem like scum trying to hang on to what looked like an easy lynch as it might start to slip away.

Of course, i'm not proclaiming Ray as scum at this point, there's plenty more to analyze, and it'll be interesting to see what happens next, but Ray is prime suspect at the moment. Call it blatant defense of khamisa if you'd like, but this makes alot more sense to me than a khamisa lynch.

vote: RayFrost

Would very much like to hear from the rest of you about the latest discussion we've been having.

[dank]

Paradox if she exhibited this behavior before then why have you been pressing her for it. She was town in that role correct? And why did you put a question mark after your vote on empking?

Well I was kinda lazy about checking the games we were in, and pressing people is it's own reward. Looking back, she was actually less passive in another game the three of us were in where she was scum. That seems more significant to me, but I'm unsure if I want to change the lynch this close to deadline, because there are still aspects of her play that bother me, like her interest in lynching the claimed doc.

Why would close proximity to the deadline stop us from making a more informed, and perhaps better, choice?

[dank]

Your counterargument is that your cases are typically crappy?

[dank]

Do notice rayfrost tossing aside the two page discussion about khamisa being scummy vs antitown, in favor of saying i'm voting him just because he's confident in his case.

It's very interesting.

[dank]

Why should the accidental hammer be immune from milking?

[dank]

Haylen has 19 posts on mafiascum since her last post in this game, and is participating in several other games she's in. Therefore, the excuse she gave here no longer applies. I'm forced to believe she is deliberately avoiding posting content in this game, which makes her scummy like Khamisa, eh Rayfrost?

This vote is purely motivation for Haylen to participate, and stop pretending she can't when she's posting in other games.

vote: Haylen

Also, Ray: Haylen's exhibiting the same exact behavior, well, even worse behavior than khamisa. Khamisa had an excuse for her behavior as well, which you didn't buy. A careful review of Haylen's posts show her excuse is fail, and imo, even worse of an excuse than Khamisa's. I find your carefulness voting Haylen interesting, considering the actions you've said you find scummy.

[dank]

So do you now believe that not posting content is no longer scummy?

[dank]

Haylen, don't take things so seriously. If you can't handle being in so many games, then drop out; no one's forcing you to play them all. The fact that you remain in this particular game, and are posting outside of it, implies you're not posting here for a reason. I'm not saying you're scum by any means, but you are being antitown by not posting. It is not helping us, and if you feel you're not able to catch up for a while, then please let someone else take your spot.

That said, i'll

unvote

, since the necessary attention has been given to Haylen's absence.

Again, Haylen, we need participation from everyone. If you're unable to catch up, let someone else take your spot. You are really not helping town in your current position.

[dank]

Unvote

Vote: Paradox

Lurking.

Why not vote Haylen if you find that suspicious? Her explanation certainly shouldn't dissuade you, since she had time to make a giant post and has yet to contribute ANYTHING of substance to this game.

In addition, Haylen has been here and yet posted nothing. To me, active lurking is far more indicative of scummy behavior, since regular inactivity could have real life issues involved, while active lurking is definite purposeful uselessness.

If you find lurking suspicious, you should be jumping on the active lurker, not placing a vote on someone who isn't even here.

fos

[dank]

If you read my post carefully, I voted Haylen purely to get some attention onto her (which you agreed was sorely needed on d2), and then promptly unvoted after she made her post. I have no intention of lynching (or even voting) Haylen on antitown uselessness alone, and I think I made that clear. The vote was purely pressure.

As far as D1, with about half the town saying they won't change their votes and it would be foolish to attempt a change this close to the deadline (you included), I saw no need to continue arguing an alternate lynch. The lynch was set, according to all of you, so there was really nothing I could do.

[dank]

A question for Ray: you're voting paradox for something that happened quite a while ago that you found suspicious. The reason may have some merit (though I think paradox's vote there was genuine), but I find it odd that you didn't pursue it on D1. You made one post that you found paradox's case suspicious, and then you dropped it, and spent the rest of D1 either defending yourself or purshing the khamisa lynch.

I guess my biggest issue with ray is how strongly he seemed to push khamisa's lynch. Not only defending the argument that antitown actions are worthy of a lynch, but not pushing alternate cases that even he brought up that could take away from the khamisa case. Basically, I don't think any legitimate townie could be that certain of a lynch, especially one with such a shaky case as khamisa's was.

Emp's caught my attention with his last few posts, where he's trying to skate by with minimalist posts with very little substance. I believe that is his meta, so I don't know if there's much to take from it, but i'll give his posts a look as well. I'm between those two for my top suspect at the moment, and i'll vote once i compare the two.

[dank]

ISO posts 43 and 45 by rayfrost are interesting.
43: regarding mae, "lurking alone is not a scum tell for her" because thats her meta, whereas later, when khamisa's meta was also described as lurking, ray brushes it aside. Possible defense of mae/empking.
45: Here again, khamisa lurking is scummy, Mae lurking is a null tell.

They started off the games very similarly, but Ray seemed to be giving mae the benefit of the doubt. Possibly ray-empking connection here.

Overall, ray seems very sure of the khamisa lynch, and only gets his toes wet on alternate cases (like the one post on paradox's vote, or Haylen/mae not posting). This sureness on khamisa is what I find most suspicious. A townie should not be that sure of a case based on antitown lurking. Ray seems to have learned his lesson now, but I find it very unlikely that in his 1000+ posts on this site, he's never seen a player who is disinterested in a game and lurks, and turns up town. His carefulness in voting a lurker after khamisa's mislynch does not seem genuine to me.

It looks like he saw an opening for an easy lynch, because chances are, khamisa was just disinterested in the game and wouldn't start posting better, so he went after her full force since the town seemed mostly for it. Then, he feigns shock/regret, and now won't vote a lurker. The sureness/quick change of heart seems too staged.

Emp contributed very little to the game, posts in one liners, skates through without providing content etc etc.. Seems to match his meta. I don't see enough to make much of a case on emp at the moment, so i'm a bit hesitant to vote in his direction. I looked at his interactions with ray though.

Iso post 7- asks ray if he thinks dank and kham are scum, which is kinda silly to ask a week into the game. Iso post 8, 9, 10 are a neutral discussion with ray about me and ray being in a town v town discussion, which isn't really a conversation that should be happening or particularly helps town. Could be that they're talking for the sake of talking, which I find common with scum. Critisizes ray in 11 and 12, then doesnt mention him again.

7-12 are all talking to ray, and asking neutral questions that don't really further the game- talking for the sake of talking. Might be a connection with ray and emp, maybe not. I'm seeing a slight hint of it.

vote: RayFrost

, Empking is the clear number two. Empking, post content please.

[dank]

Vote; Kham

Why did that die?

I have to agree with other players. Suggesting (but not doing it herself which could suggest she just had a blonde moment) is very scummy.

If you're trying to say that by voting khamisa without any logic, and then agreeing to others suspicions of her is you starting a bandwagon, then I think you started a pretty damn scummy bandwagon. You contributed nothing to the argument behind her lynch. That's what I mean by doing nothing.

[dank]

I did not support her lynch, and pursued an alternate case.

[dank]

Empking's grasping at straws to explain away the fact that he's done nothing all game. First serious thing he's done is try to defend himself, though there's very little ammunition he can use there, and he's doing a poor job. The fact that he goes the whole game without giving a serious contribution to anything, yet gets much more serious once the pressure's on him, convinces me to

unvote, vote: Empking

[dank]

For clarification: yes, anyone will defend themselves when accused. But Empking more or less actively lurked all game, which suggests either purposeful lurking (he's scum), or apathetic lurking of a disinterested player. The fact that when the pressure's on him he seems have gotten much more active, implies that it was probably not the latter. I'm getting that vibe from his posts.

[dank]

In my experience, if you're not interested in a game, then you're just not interested in the game, regardless of what's going on.

Prime example is Khamisa. She was jumped on pretty early for being an apathetic townie, and responded with one or two posts, hardly making any sort of defense, and then just dissapeared. Same behavior throughout.

Its not foolproof by no means, but I think its a decent deduction based on my experience in this game, other games, and even my own behavior (just ask Lynx about Quiet Town )

[dank]

unvote, vote: RayFrost

I'm vote hopping, since Ray and Emp keep trumping each other in my mind, but I think Ray just gave himself the upper hand.

Lets start with the whole D1 Khamisa fiasco. As i've said before, Ray argued that uselessness/policy lynches usually lynch scum, and are worth it. I've already outlined what I found scummy about his play there, so I wouldn't rephrase that here.

D2:

ISO post 85:

Umm... you find the fact that I'm more cautious after mislynching for these reasons I thought scummy (and turned out wrong) to be scummy?

That is really confusing. Do you mean you'd prefer I was an idiot that didn't learn from my mistakes?

ISO post 86:

So do you now believe that not posting content is no longer scummy?

It is, but it's not vote/lynch worthy in of itself.

ISO post 95:

RayFrost, where do you stand on all this?

I find the case on empking to be points for bugging him to contribute more, but to actually get him lynched over (especially after the khamisa stuff)... not really.

Soooo...

Poke Of Doom: Empking

post content, please.

And finally, ISO post 96

That's nice, basically quote my last post as your own, then tell Empking to contribute more content. Hypocritical, no?

FoS: Ray

RayFrost, if you had to lynch someone right now, who would it be?

I didn't realize I was quoting you, but eh... it's the truth of the matter: the stuff on empking is more "contribute" than "lynch"

If I had to lynch somebody... probably para or empking.

Para cuz he's the only one I feel I've got at least semi-solid suspicions of that haven't really been defended againt.

Empking cuz he's distracting and making it harder for town to concentrate elsewhere.

Tbh, neither are exactly excellent in reasoning, but those are my top choices,

if I had to lynch somebody

Ray is very careful to qualify this last post with "If I had to lynch somebody". Are you suggesting we don't lynch anyone with no protective roles? This is a very scummy thing to say so close to the deadline. You should be scrambling to figure out who to vote for and to make a good case on them, and instead you're saying meh, no one's really that suspicious, I dont

really

want to lynch anyone. Very scummy.

But that's not all. Lets examine the content he put here. We've got two suspects.

Paradox: Ray made an argument against him, poked at it a bit. He says the suspicions are solid and havent been well defended against. Yet he doesn't follow it up. Ray's basically let this "good" case drop, and instead of pushing paradox further, just announces that he had a good case on paradox, but not worthy of a lynch. Good scumhunting.

Empking: First three posts I quote all have Ray quickly learning from his mistake with khamisa. Its not worthy of a lynch, is the refrain we hear. Well guess what, suddenly, it is. The empking lynch ray suggests does not reflect any of the cases lynx or I have made on emp, just that he's been "distracting".

1. He is getting warranted attention, "distracting" means that he's getting attention that shouldn't be there. Do you not want us to focus on empking? Should we ignore his behavior? If we should, why are you suggesting lynching him?

2. Though Ray carefully qualifies this with his "if I had to lynch somebody", he is quickly suggesting yet another policy lynch, just like the one he helped build D1. After reminding us again and again that he learned his lesson, he's quietly slipping in the idea that maybe he can get another policy lynch in. Scummy.


In short, the combination of "If I had to lynch somebody", not pursuing the one legitimate case he made, and sneakily slipping in the idea of another policy lynch make me pretty sure Ray is scum.

[dank]

If there are 7 players in a game, and you give two you would lynch, you are advocating a lynch for either of those players, as opposed to the 4 others. The reasoning on the empking lynch is just a policy lynch, so please explain how you're not advocating another policy lynch after spending several posts admitting the khamisa mistake you made.

[dank]

The "If I had to lynch someone" is both irrelevant and scummy, so we will ignore that.

1. We have to lynch someone today. By giving two names you would lynch, you are in support of either of those, emp being one.

2. You're telling us its a better idea than lynching the others. Your suspect list is at

3. You've said its bad reasoning, yet you add his name to the list of who to lynch.

4. You did not make this clear in the original post.

5. You weren't voting anyone then.

My question is this: Why did you include empking, rather than just leave it at paradox?

[dank]

EBWOP: suspect list is at 2.

[dank]

Second choice? As in, second choice for a lynch? As in:

1. calling for empking's lynch in case the paradox case falls through?

2. convincing everyone, if paradox's case falls through, that it might be a good idea?

3. openly stated that the reasoning for this lynch, if paradox's case falls through, is better than lynching any of the 4 others in the game?

4. preferring the empking lynch, if the lynch you prefer more, paradox, falls through?

5. voting for emp, since you think its the next best lynch, if the paradox case falls through?

In other words, advocating yet another policy lynch after feigning that you learned your lesson with khamisa, which was scummy in its own right (of course, only if paradox's case falls through)?

I feel very good about my vote.

[dank]

I felt you and paradox went about your votes in a much more town way. You admitted the weaknesses of the lynch, but it was too late at the deadline to get an alternate lynch going without possibly making a stupid mistake. While I didn't completely agree, I could understand your dilemma, and it was nice to see that you understood the lynch was by no means a sure thing.

Ray, however, did more than anyone to push the lynch. He tried to use faulty arguments to push it through, and tried to make it look much stronger of a lynch than it actually was. Basically, he seemed to want this lynch more than anyone, and didn't acknowledge or even shot down others doubts about it. In other words, the opportunity for an easy lynch was there, and ray took it. With empking, another opportunity's presenting itself here on D2.

As far as emp, there's so little to anyalyze that I can't really make that strong of a case on his "why did this die" post, which was basically all he said about khamisa. His gameplay's been bad, and there is a case for his lynch in my mind, but Ray's is loaded with far more support.

[dank]

Ray just stood out in my mind both on D1 and D2 for the way he went about pushing the lynch. I disagree about scum putting in that much effort in a case like this. Scum want to look as if they're scumhunting as much as the rest of us, though they can sometimes take on cases that have weaker logic, whether its because they're not as interested in genuinely scumhuting since they know they're scum, or because they're trying to just push a lynch of someone they know is a townie through.

I think ray saw a case that could feasibly go through and pushed it with faulty logic, because he wanted it pretty badly. Perhaps one of the alternate cases (I should go look who they were on) were on a scumbuddy, and ray wanted to distract away from it. Whatever it was, I am very confident that a townie would not have gone about the khamisa lynch the way ray did, then say he learned his lesson, then suggest the same kind of lynch the next day (there is a valid case on empking, but ray's reasoning is that he was "distracting", which shows that 1. he wants another policy lynch and 2. he's not even paying attention to the valid cases on empking). I think he's the better lynch here.

I'm not sure what to think of emp. His meta seems to fit this game, which makes it hard for me to read him. I feel this could be a trap kind of lynch that looks good, but really doesn't have that much behind it (its just his style). Other than claiming he's done something when he's been useless, is there anything more to his case? I thought it was suspicious that he got interested in defendeding himself after mostly lurking, but he seems to be back to lurking now. So, i'm pretty unsure on him.

[dank]

Where did I say that I don't see any case for empking?

[dank]

Yes, and that very content that I got from Ray makes him scummier in my eyes. There is far more to the case than Ray pushing khamisa's lynch and posting alot. Have you actually read the posts he's made? Because I pushed him to post more, he's tied himself up in what he believes and doesnt believe, and has said some pretty scummy things.

In the same way that you're accusing me of understating Empking, who's case doesn't have much more evidence than uselessness (and you have yet to give me more than that), you are understating the case on Ray, which has far more backing. Why is that?

I'm getting the vibe that you haven't actually been reading much of the posts in the last week or so where you've been less active, which is a bit suspicious.

[dank]

You've contributed nothing meaningful as far as I can see, and I'm fairly certain Ray has at least tried to make some real arguments.

I don't like this quote.

1. Khamisa also contributed nothing meaningful; did that make her scum? There needs to be more of a case on someone than being useless.

2. Have you read the arguments Ray tried to make? I feel like you're giving him credit for just making arguments, instead of judging the arguments on their content. His arguments have been very poor.

You said I may be understating lurking in this game, which could be true since I see it as more anti-town than scummy. I think to a greater extent, you're overestimating it's value.

[dank]

I guess the best way to put it is i'm looking for more "upper level" scum behavior. Simple lurking/uselessness is easy to spot, but its also easy to make mistakes with. I feel like we should be looking for more in depth stuff, like my posts on ray. Khamisa and Empking seem like those kinds of "easy" lynches, and I feel like they could be traps that mafia is walking us into.

You are pushing emp alot, Para. Have YOU properly considered the case on ray, because from your posts, it does not look like you have. If you dislike the case, could you point what you dislike about it specifically. Strawmanning the case to agressiveness and posting alot does not convince me you're even taking it seriously. Of all the posts I made in the last few pages building up the case, what don't you like?

[dank]

Ray's arguments haven't been bad, they've been scummy, and i've pointed out why. Empkings arguments are garbage, but I think thats more because his playstyle is garbage.

Ray, why do you suspect me? You honestly want me to be lynched merely because i pressured DO when he outed the doctor? You've been riding this one reason all day, and you've gotten so caught up in defending yourself that I'm not seeing any scumhunting. FOS Ray ]

Quote from dank two pages ago:

Paradox: Ray made an argument against him, poked at it a bit. He says the suspicions are solid and havent been well defended against. Yet he doesn't follow it up. Ray's basically let this "good" case drop, and instead of pushing paradox further, just announces that he had a good case on paradox, but not worthy of a lynch. Good scumhunting.

It's like you're fosing him for a little part of my case on him that you didn't seem to read. Interesting.

[dank]

oh, so

[qopte]Empking cuz he's distracting and making it harder for town to concentrate elsewhere.[/quote]

isn't a suggestion for a policy lynch that ray's been preaching against all day? The same kind of lynch that he led on khamisa D1 proving to be a mislynch?

[dank]

ebwop:

oh, so

Empking cuz he's distracting and making it harder for town to concentrate elsewhere.

isn't a suggestion for a policy lynch that ray's been preaching against all day? The same kind of lynch that he led on khamisa D1 proving to be a mislynch?

[dank]

Ray is a new player, and he openly said he wasn't a good scumhunter. But just because Empking has a reputation he is less scummy?

Empking has a reputation as being a pretty bad player, as you can see by reading his other games. Why aren't you discounting his play because of that?

[dank]

He wants empking lynched if we don't lynch you. That's putting his policy lynch case above four other players. Though its not his first choice, its still the choice he's making. That doesn't bother you?

[dank]

He wants empking lynched if we don't lynch you. That's putting his policy lynch case above four other players. Though its not his first choice, its still the choice he's making. That doesn't bother you?

No, not really. It doesn't look great for him, but I supported Khamisa's lynch and Empking's now. And how can you criticize anyone when Empking is one of your suspects?

Para:

I wanted your answer because I don't follow your logic on how you can, in hindsight, say it was

obvious

that he was the doc. It was reaching pretty far, imo, so I felt it was worth mentioning and pressuring you about. Your defense of me is appreciated, though I'm not completely sure about the why of you doing it. I'm keeping my vote on until you explain it, btw

I wouldn't say I'm defending you. Your reasons for me being your primary suspect are fairly weak and I think you've been sitting on them all day. I would be okay with your lynch.

It's not the fact that ray suspects emp that bothers me, but the fact that, despite there being valid reasoning, the only reasoning ray suggested for lynching emp was distraction.

[dank]

does "fine" mean you'd push for it or just that you'd be willing to perform a hammer at deadline instead of a NL?

aaaand... I have suspicion of dank, but it's kinda edged due to the fact it's partial OMGUS, I think lynx and DO are town, and empking is a neutral read. the only reason I'm pushing you is I have

something

to bug you about. As it is, all I could do with emp is rehash the same old same old, and I have nothing solid on dank other than tunneling (null tell).

This is a horribly lame rundown. DO and Lynx are town. Empking (your second lynch choice) is neutral. Paradox is suspicious because of "something", and you're not even building a case/pushing him to figure out if those suspicions are worth it. I'm suspicious, but you can't even name a reason as to why?

[dank]

Alright, though that's a bit weak, and what about paradox?

[dank]

Emp- 1. Haylen "legitimately wants to post", but still has yet to contribute anything to the whole game. She's said that she'll post before (even giving specific days) just like she did there multiple times, and has yet to deliver. Why, exactly, does her last post convince you of anything?

2. You're voting Para for defense of RayFrost. If you read the game, Para has Ray as his second suspect behind you, and has mentioned several scummy things Ray has done. Lynx has had a much more in depth defense of Ray, in which he both calls him town, and fails to give any specific reason as to why he thinks he's town (see post above yours, where he says "I can't really explain"). In other words, Lynx not only defends Ray more than paradox, sees Ray as more town than paradox does, but even fails to come up with adequate reasoning for why he thinks that. If you're voting for defense of Ray, why are you voting para and not lynx?

Ray's post 489:

If it isn't the only reason, would you mind pointing out the other reasons that you have available for it?

This is a town read for me. If scum is given a compliment that they look town despite pressure being on them, I cannot imagine where scum would actually want an elaboration on why they're town. Scum know they're guilty, and they'll take all the "town reads" they can for town points. They will not want to dwell on why, because they are guilty, and they do not want the spotlight on them. The fact that Ray actually chooses to dwell on whether reasons for his innocence make sense give him town points in my mind.

That said, while I see lynx's argument of a new player crossing up and trying to fix it, I'm not sure I want to let him off the hook. It could be a newbie issue, or it could be scum playing the newbie card (scum could easily say they're bad at scumhunting to get pressure off them). I'm ok with a Ray or Empking lynch, but I think I'll keep my vote on Ray in the meantime. I'm not fully sold on Ray being town, because I still say there's a good deal of evidence pointing in the other direction, but I can see the other side of the equation.

Empking is looking worse with every post.

[dank]

I've got an odd sort of feeling about lynx's last few posts.

He claims RayFrosts innocence with "vibes" that he can't explain as evidence. He gives me two large paragraphs commending my slight change of heart. I've got a weird feeling about it, its as if a RayFrost lynch has some sort of significance to him. I've played a few games with town lynx, and I cannot remember a case where he defends someone or makes an argument without even trying to get evidence, nor can I remember a case where he does something like the above post, which basically pats me on the back for coming to the right conclusion.

Thoughts from the rest of the town?

[dank]

It's not a misrepresentation if its a direct quote, where there's little context to misrepresent it. Your reasoning is weak, as scum could claim the noob card to get pressure off of them.

[dank]

Dank: The defence and suspicion is one of the factors that makes it more likely he's scum buddying than Lynx.

What is that even referring to?

[dank]

Empking's ISO posts:

ISO post 27- "I'm think(ing) of RF though.
ISO post 29- "I suspect Ray for hypocrisity in a scummy manner."
ISO post 31- "Its scummy because (Ray) either thinks its scummy yet is doing it or he doesn't think its scummy and he's faking his scumhunting."
ISO post 33- "if you look at it objectively (Ray's) posts don't have more original content (than mine)."

And suddenly on ISO post 37: "I've got a general town read on Rayfrost."

Mighty quick change of mind you had there.


Sigh, I still have my suspicions with Ray, but I can't ignore Emp anymore; he is spewing scumminess all over the place. I really can't fathom a town player going about this game the way he has, though my worry that he just has a poor style of mafia in general remains a bit. Nonetheless, there's no reason not to lynch Empking at this point.

unvote, vote: Empking

No need to claim, we've got townies and a doc, and under no circumstance should the doc reveal himself today; he needs to live till tomorrow. If emp fakeclaims doc, real doc won't cc. If emp happens to be real doc, then he's dead tonight anyway, whether its lynch or NK. Thus, no need to claim.

Also,

mod: I second lynx's request.

[dank]

ebwop: For the above post, I meant cop.

[dank]

I thought it was 4 to lynch, though the mod never specified.

[dank]

Vote: Haylen

For taking the time to post a nice-sized diatribe against empking, ray, and dank, but failing entirely to acknowledge the direct address made to her by Empking, right previous to her post. Why did you ignore this question, but still take the time to quote people and attempt to refute them?

---

VOTE COUNT

(2) Haylen - Empking, Deuxieme Octopus

(1) Paradoxombie - RayFrost

Not Voting: Haylen, Lynx The Antithesis, Paradoxombie, dank

With 7 alive, it takes 4 to lynch
DEADLINE: October 17, 12:01 PM PST

Nevermind, lynch happened.

[dank]

Why did you vote me if i'm not in your top suspects? What does it mean that im pushing you buttons? What reasoning do you have about anyone you just accused of guilt? There's more to this game than instinct.

Also, saying you wouldn't have been part of khamisa at this point is useless. Had you actually participated, it would not have been as easy to stay off the lynch as it is now when you know it was wrong. This is not an argument you should be making after you sat out d1.

[dank]

Did

I want khamisa lynched?

The fact that you seem to think I did, even though I spent all of D1 arguing against it, tells me you haven't fully read D1. So, in addition to not commenting on whether you'd be on a lynch after it was revealed to be a mislynch, please don't comment on lynches who's cases you didn't even seem to evaluate.

Rather than pressure voting me during twilight, please do something more useful and post suspects with

content

on why you suspect them; ie: not instinct. Properly catch up on this game or replace out, you've been inconsiderate enough to the players here as it is.