Open 474 - Friends and Enemies - Game Over!

[serrapaladin]

VOTE: Josh Lyman
because you ain't no Leo.

Is Klick scummy or just odd?

[serrapaladin]

"Ouch" to whoever is calling my first post's scumhunting bad. I was genuinely wondering whether Klick usually does "odd" things like self-RV, but decided to do so flippantly as it was still an RVS post. Anyhow, on to business:

Docteur: Nice job setting up your vote on me over three posts.

KX's last four posts aren't great - he's really trying to set up a scum defense. "Sometimes I'll post things which don't exactly look the best, or which contradict things I've already said or the facts" may be one of the worst sentences I've heard in a game of Mafia. To me, it reads as "I know I'll scumslip, but it'll totally be because I'm a VI." I'm not yet sure if he's self-aware VI or scum, but a wagon on him is probably a good thing.

Venrob: Misrepping your own meta is some grade-A bullshit. Messing up a game number I understand, but the mod posted the list of targets in 470 and you did not attract a scum shot. That's not something you accidentally forget or misquote, that's deliberately giving people a wrong impression of you.

HD and Klick wagons don't seem great (read: completely unsubstantiated) - Venrob planting his vote on Klick with no original input is bad. I think I'll:
VOTE: Venrob

[serrapaladin]

KX: Town tends to have no incentive not to be genuine, particularly in an open setup like this one. Scum is trying to avoid detection and association with their scumbuddies. They have information and intention beyond that of townies, so scum is more likely to lie about or misrepresent what is visible in the thread. If someone blatantly contradicts themselves, that's a scum slip. If a townie is genuine about their train of thought, they should come up with pretty much consistent conclusions across multiple posts. Scum can get metaphorically tangled up in their web of lies, or simply forget about what lies they told.

Preemptively explaining inconsistencies between your posts by saying it's part of your playstyle strikes me as scummy, particularly as you have no meta we could check that against.

[serrapaladin]

Also serra is a decent wagon, her posts focus on KX's scumminess but her vote doesn't reflect that; rather it seems like she's wagoning just to wagon.

I made an argument for both KX's and Venrob's scumminess and voted Venrob. KX responded, so I gave a clarifying post. Seems like a legit reason to base a wagon on.

[serrapaladin]

It's been established that self-voting is something Klick does, so Venrob's vote had the quality of an RVS vote on page 3. Rather than being constructive, his posts have been this vote and some self-meta.

[serrapaladin]

Who is Serra?

*waves*

(also, I'll say that I'm very easily readable - whatever you feel first, I'm the opposite alignment. )

But I feel your town....

VOTE: Klick

Then what do you think of this?

It's not particularly great either, but not as concerning, as Jacob has actually been making a few somewhat useful statements so far. Venrob has said to basically ignore him for the first few days, which makes me pay more attention to him.

[serrapaladin]

Quote the statements you find useful please.

49 and 55 are decent enough. At least he's somewhat engaging with the game. He's done more than Josh, NicCage, Spencer and Venrob, so I didn't find his Klick vote particularly concerning at this point. So what's the rationale you promised in 97?

[serrapaladin]

KX is town, as in

NEVER

should be lynched under any circumstances. Scum do not stay up til 3am making a big post listing all of his reads. Scum try and avoid giving them so the fact 1. he gave them voluntarily and 2. he did them so late at night when sleep is far more important. Either he's town or he's scum and didn't read his Role PM.

WIFOM from hell.

I'll post something substantial later tonight, but here are some preliminary thoughts:

• Goodmorning
  and
  ArcAngel
  both seem town, although ArcAngel's vote on Josh seems a bit odd, after admitting he's only been null so far. Input from both of them seems genuine and is somewhat helpful.
• Cheery
  and
  NicCage
  are probably townie too, Cheery has been contributing quite well and NicCage admitting to be sheeping doesn't seem like a scum move.
• By now, I'm afraid I think Josh is wrong about
  KX
  . I still don't like his play, but can see it coming from a town motivation.
• HD
  has been posting well, but I get the feeling he wouldn't play much differently as scum. I'll have to take a closer look at him.
• Spencer
  needs to post more.
• Venrob
  should probably explain his meta-misrep
• I haven't gotten a good read on
  Klick
  ,
  Jacob
  or
  Docteur
  yet. I think I might have to leave reading Klick to someone else, but the others I'll also take a closer look at.

[serrapaladin]

Less input than Spencer?

[serrapaladin]

Hey Venrob, wanna comment on your meta-misrep? :/ How on earth is a null read on Josh enough to put him at L-1? Also, saying "can I not be lynched for this" is bullshit and makes me want to lynch you.

I'm not a massive fan of the Josh wagon, since the majority of reasons seem to be that he should be doing better than just looking null.

Jacob's town read on Josh (both 194 and 195) is some more sweet sweet WIFOM.

[serrapaladin]

...no, he's scummy. Where did I say he was null?

He's avoided current events in game and completely denied doing so. That's pretty damn scummy if you ask me.

Why do you respond to me making a general point about people on the Josh wagon?

[serrapaladin]

So does someone want to post some quotes from Josh that are actually scummy? He's not holding up or derailing town's scumhunting, as extensive or wrong self-metaing does. It seems to me his only crime is not having posted anything particularly pro-town, despite having made a few posts. I personally still prefer that to Spencer, who hasn't even given us a few fluff posts to base a preliminary read on.

[serrapaladin]

Do tell how Jacob's reasoning isn't WIFOM. KX is obviously self-aware enough to spend several posts on his own meta, why shouldn't he realize that pointing out his commitment gives him towncred?

[serrapaladin]

It's also documented by the ratio of town to scum in games that any player is more likely to be town than scum.

I chuckled a bit, although I think it's clear what Josh meant.

I'm going to keep my vote on Josh until he really proves to me he's town

Blatantly admitting you'll tunnel on Josh until you get a claim or flip rubs me the wrong way, particularly as I still don't feel your case is particularly well-founded. You may have a point about his avoidance of Venrob's and his own wagon, but I don't think that should give you the certainty about his guilt that it apparently does.

[serrapaladin]

So how does a fairly experienced player prove to be town?

[serrapaladin]

Hmm, fine, but your use of the word "prove" still throws me off.

[serrapaladin]

Cool, that question was only like 30 posts ago. How do you feel about reasons?

[serrapaladin]

Mehdi, I am not being blind to the reasons for the Josh wagon, I'm calling them weak. I have no idea how you think I'm trying to stop people from having town reads. I'm trying to prevent people from tunneling on Josh for what I feel to be inadequate reasons. KX's 212 is as WIFOM as his posts before that.

I'm not sure whether asking how people can be null on you at the moment is funny or stupid, but it certainly bothers me.

How can you find me scummier than Josh, if a major reason for my scumminess is my (bad) defending of him? If we lynch Josh and he flips town, am I still scummy?


Happy B-Day HD!

[serrapaladin]

As a general rule, mist early D1 wagons are town just due to the nature of them.

is bullshit.

Disagreeing with the reasons for a wagon is discourse. It forces people to make their accusations more concrete and substantiated. I'm suspicious of people that call others scummy because they disagree with a popular opinion before a flip.

[serrapaladin]

Yup, that'll be the time difference, I already see a slice of cake next to your name.

[serrapaladin]

Regarding 231, I disagree with it.

Regardless of KX's alignment, we want him to post stuff that isn't just about himself. If he's town, we get some genuinely useful input. If he's scum, he's much more likely to slip up if forced to make concrete judgments and connections. Josh pointing that out doesn't look scummy to me. I also find it too early to give him a scumread based on the potential hypocrisy of his read on KX, as the game really hasn't developed for long enough to gauge overall contributions.

Hey Els, in how far do you agree with Mehdi's list of scumminess?

[serrapaladin]

Lastly the read could be 90 percent dependent and it'd be fine.

So you're certain enough of Josh being scum that you're willing to base a massive scumread on me defending him. That certainty concerns me.

The full quote you're referring to is:

So does someone want to post some quotes from Josh that are actually scummy? He's not holding up or derailing town's scumhunting, as extensive or wrong self-metaing does. It seems to me his only crime is not having posted anything particularly pro-town, despite having made a few posts. I personally still prefer that to Spencer, who hasn't even given us a few fluff posts to base a preliminary read on.

I think I made it implicitly clear that I disagree with the reasoning from 199 and 201 being enough for a lynch, rather than completely ignoring it. I really wanted to hear a full rebuttal from Josh, so of course I wasn't going to be explicit about all of my objections (on that note, I find it rather concerning that there are few questions posed at Josh directly). Although I don't find him particularly scummy, I'm not certain either way, so it's still a better idea to let him answer his accusations. My 255 makes some of my objections more explicit, after HD gave me little choice.

As to my dislike of extreme townreads, I would like to remind you of the current game setup.

It's worth pointing out that forcing people to make everything explicit isn't necessarily protown. For example, I would contend that everyone giving a full ranking of scumminess, rather than individual town and scum reads, is actually advantageous to scum. I'll post mine if people insist, but genuinely don't think it's a great idea.

[serrapaladin]

No, it really isn't.

You should really want even your strongest scumread to contribute as town. There's a good reason people are asked to give their last reads before they are lynched. If they do flip town, you can go over what they have posted as coming from a confirmed townie. If you have instead just told your scumreads to shut up, you won't have anything to go off, only one more dead townie. If the person is scum, by forcing them to contribute, you're making it more likely for them to slip. If someone self-meta's all game long, it's impossible to form any associative reads and very difficult to get even a normal read. Rather than calling my response scummy, please explain why you disagree with it. Do you not want your scumreads to be posting their reads?

Had someone you consider more useful than Josh told KX to stop being useless, would that have been equally scummy? Why is hypocrisy scummy?

Mehdi: I would again remind of the setup we're playing. There is by default a townblock of three. By trying to form an explicit townblock you are exposing the masons and giving well-played scum a chance to slip into the block, which is pretty much game over the way you are tunneling. You're also telling scum exactly how they're doing, so they can adjust their strategy accordingly.

I don't like blind trust, I don't like L-1 wagons based on a subpar case and I really don't like D1 overconfidence.

[serrapaladin]

I also dislike using numbers, but yours made me laugh.

I keep saying I disagree with the Josh case because I do. Most of the things you see as scumtells are really just nulltells. Why are you saying town shouldn't be stubborn if they believe in something?

Josh really didn't talk to KX as though he knew KX was town. You repeating this over and over doesn't make it any more true or logical.

Your answers 2 and 3 are mutually exclusive. If someone more useful than Josh telling KX to stop being useless is equally scummy, it's not Josh's hypocrisy you find scummy. Hypocrisy in general is not a scumtell, it just says that someone didn't think about their post carefully enough, which happens on both sides. Furthermore, I don't actually find Josh hypocritical at all, as his criticism was directed against unsolicited self-meta, rather than generic uselessness. Notice how he didn't criticize Spencer for not contributing, or Venrob self-metaing after Jacob asked him to.

[serrapaladin]

So the one thing Venrob comes back for is to say that someone who's been more active than him isn't posting elsewhere...

[serrapaladin]

I should probably give my scumminess list as well:

Town

goodmorning
Cheery
ArcAngel
Docteur
Nic
Klick
Josh
HD
KX

Null

Spencer
Jacob
Venrob

Scum

[serrapaladin]

goodmorning, what did you mean by AA9 asserting some really random stuff? It's definitely not a language thing.

[serrapaladin]

Of course, of the issue of Josh, HD's point still remains. Yes, he did try focus in almost exclusively on me, and with the supposed purpose of making me contribute. The problem for him, and what I think makes him scummy, is how he himself wasn't contributing at the time, and was using repetitive posting against as a way to avoid making any real contribution. That hypocrisy as the ease with which alternative motives can be given is what the problem, for me, is.

How is it scummy of Josh to call you scummy for being too introspective that early in the game? His post isn't hypocritical. It wasn't directed at a generic lack of contribution, it was directed at introspection. I really like repeating myself.

[serrapaladin]

Have you read his posts?

It's a way to focus not on the game and yet appear active.

He gave reasons why you're scummy and voted you. Just because you disagree with his reasoning doesn't mean he's not contributing.

[serrapaladin]

so can you just give up?

Nope.

[serrapaladin]

But couldn't Josh's posts about KX be equally used to not focus on the game?

It was focused on the game though. It took something KX said and pointed out that it was scummy. KX self-metaing is part of the thread, and pointing out an issue with it is a valid contribution. Whether you agree with it is a completely different matter. His reason for unvoting was agreeing with Jacob. He reinforced that by saying that kind of effort is very hard to fake. I have no problem believing that he genuinely feels that way.

First thing, why? Why are you so determined to defend him?

And second, by failing to present an argument, I think you did, even if you don't admit it.

Well, I don't particularly like seeing people I find innocent being lynched. I didn't present another argument because your post was just nay-saying and trying to turn the argument around as to why I'm defending Josh.

[serrapaladin]

KX: "I don't disagree with his reasoning. What I disagree with is his hypocrisy, tunneling, and attitude" does nothing to disprove my argument. You haven't been disproving what I've been saying, you've been disregarding it. I do want Josh to present his opinion, as I have said before. If his answers seem scummy, I am willing to change my opinion. I don't understand the point of your second paragraph.

My reasoning is very simple: I see many people tunneling on Josh for what I find to be unsatisfactory reasons. I wonder whether people may just have a different opinion to me, or an ulterior motive. I present some of my views in hope of eliciting some useful discussion. People reject my view without much argument and instead I am attacked for defending Josh without cause. If Josh does something I genuinely consider scummy, those reservations disappear, but until then I will be suspicious of people tunneling on him.

Nic: I questioned him to see whether he genuinely believes it. I may not personally agree with the reasoning, but his 213 strikes me as being his genuine opinion. I agree Josh hasn't played very well, but I am concerned by how certain that makes some people that he is scum.

[serrapaladin]

serra, now you're being hypocritical; we've presented our reasons for the case, and you've disregarded them by saying "Not scummy enough"; you haven't disproved them in any way.

I find I have made a case against Josh's hypocrisy, which is a central pillar of many arguments against him. To find me hypocritical, you not only need to disagree with my case but also believe I have made no genuine attempt at making one. I know I haven't made all of my case explicit enough, but as has been pointed out I too am still waiting on a full reply (or any, for that matter) by Josh.

[serrapaladin]

I don't believe that it is though, there are far better ways of looking town

This is actually a decent response to an IMO bullshit post by serra.

Please explain what you mean by this.

I agree you're reading a bit much into some of Jacob's posts, but my read on him is slightly scummy.

[serrapaladin]

HD: Nope, I said no such thing. I was refuting Jacob's 164 by calling it subject to WIFOM.

[serrapaladin]

Jacob's 164 strongly read KX as town for putting in effort in the form of an unrequested wall of reads. I called WIFOM on this reasoning, as scum has at least equal incentive to put in effort. Jacob's 172 disagreed, by stating that "if KX was really scum trying to look town by putting in effort, there would be much better ways of looking town." In retrospective, I should have probably been loudly shouting bullshit at this point, but I was busy hating on the Josh wagon.

[serrapaladin]

I was going for something along the lines of: "if effort is seen as a town-read, scum will be more likely put in effort to look town. But then, putting in effort could be seen as a scum read, so scum won't want to be seen putting in too much effort, etc."

I'm used to referring to all types of reasoning which can be subjected to this circular type of 'reductio ad absurdum' as WIFOM. It's not a null-tell per se, it's just not a read that can be relied on.

I don't disagree with your general read of Jacob, I just think your PbP looked a bit far-fetched at times.

[serrapaladin]

Except the assertion up there came after my question. I see where you're coming from with your criticism of 294, but I was wondering what you based your earlier read on.

[serrapaladin]

I kind of see where you're coming from with the bold parts, but how was the vote OMGUS?

[serrapaladin]

Hmm, goodmorning actually makes a good point there.

ArcAngel: why did you mention Josh's RVS vote on you?

A few things that concern me about Klick's reads: he mentions in 79 how Venrob is going to be completely unreadable, but still has him quite close towards the scummy end of his list. His top scumread is HD, which he admits is a hunch. Most accusations against me have made in association to Josh - he thinks Josh is slightly town, but still has me as his second scum read.

Not sure what to make of this yet, but IGMEOKlick.

[serrapaladin]

Yay, content!

Jacob's intent to hammer was bad. Like really bad.

I can see Panzer being right about Hydra or HD, but probably not both. Not sure about the goodmorning wagon, I had an overall town feel, besides a few weird accusations - I'll see how that develops.

Voting Venrob isn't doing anything. Even if he is scum, we won't get anything useful out of him for now.

UNVOTE:
VOTE: Jacob

Also, what on Earth was KX's 367? If you think someone is reaction testing, let them reaction test. Most of the reason why HD and Hydra might look town to you is because they've been making the most vocal cases against others.

[serrapaladin]

You said "Panzer is trying to pressure SOME who are considered town." My point doesn't hinge on who you meant by that. Just because you don't agree with Panzer doesn't mean he doesn't have enough to go off.
If you think reaction testing is a town move, why would you sabotage it? Do you really think he doesn't know what he's doing?

[serrapaladin]

Josh is a person i am bit concerned about,

He randomly votes me first

and after 3 pages laters he made another posting saying that "every body is arguing over nothing" and later he gives bit lecture to KX , and right after he votex KX.

Over all 7 pages he has been nothing but "Null"

I don't know Josh before neither i have ever played with him I am wondering if this is how he play or he is scum and trying to avoid facing the game?

Unvote

VOTE: Josh

ArcAngel, this is the post GM and I were referring to. It's odd that in making a case against Josh you would mention "he RVS votes me" that far into the game. RVS votes are really irrelevant as soon as we've left RVS. Also, it's somewhat inconsistent that you decide he's been mostly null, but then vote him anyways. Your vote on Josh seems a bit fabricated overall.

I'm still leaning town on GM, although I'm interested to see how Jenn's case plays out.

[serrapaladin]

Scum read tend to want their reads to be consistent and flow more which is part of what makes stiff reads and part of why some consider tunneling a scum tell in the first place

says the person who won't let go of the idea that the Jenn/Josh slot is scum.

[serrapaladin]

Why the strong response to 394 Mehdi?

[serrapaladin]

Arc: Sure, you mentioned other stuff, but mentioning Josh's random vote on you is very odd. Everyone makes random votes without reads in RVS, that's really not something you have any reason to bring up.

[serrapaladin]

I'm still leaning town on GM, although I'm interested to see how Jenn's case plays out.

[serrapaladin]

Gotcha, i was confirming!!!

[serrapaladin]

But 357 was his retroactive justification. 315 defended a town read on Josh, 339 was willing to hammer, with no obvious reason to change in between.

[serrapaladin]

I don't agree with Mehdi. Making your posts flow logically is only easy if your posts represent your genuine opinion of who might be scummy. Scum is more likely to have logical inconsistencies. It's fine to change your opinion, but you should have any kind of logically inconsistent jumps, which Jacob is guilty of.

[serrapaladin]

ebwop: shouldn't have any kind of jumps...

[serrapaladin]

I'm inclined to believe both AA and GM are town, although the way they went after each other is slightly odd.

The Jacob wagon needs more votes. The certainty of his KX town read is off. His lack of scumreads doesn't look like his town-meta. Flipping from Josh being town to willing to hammer seems more 'careless scum' than town - 357 isn't a good justification and seems horribly fabricated (I mean come on, doing the mod a favor by hammering, who are you trying to fool?). Finally, his unvote on Jenn's replacement took too long.

Mehdi defending Jacob on grounds of "he's just town being silly, scum would play better than that" isn't cool either, but the rest of his game doesn't scream scum.

[serrapaladin]

And is it bad to change the argument when you show part of it doesn't fit perfectly?

Actually, I think it is. If you base a conclusion on an argument which is shown to be faulty (which happens - memory isn't perfect), you shouldn't slightly amend that argument to support the same conclusion, but you should consider whether your conclusion is actually valid. I think your case against Jenn has been pieced together quite artificially in order to fit the conclusion you had about that slot from Josh.

You may think her read on Jacob is more substantiated than that on goodmorning, but she doesn't have to feel the same way. I see nothing wrong with her vote on GM. Instead, I am rather concerned by you trying to push this.

[serrapaladin]

Jacob's posts about Josh/Jenn are horribly inconsistent. I like Els' posts, but not Mehdi's...I suck at playing with hydras.

Jacob, you said that you found Josh town, despite all of the reasons in 518 having applied. Why do you find Jennifer scummier now than Josh earlier this game based on the same evidence?

[serrapaladin]

I agree with them more and they make me feel like your slot is town.

[serrapaladin]

And why would that be?

[serrapaladin]

Jacob, why do you not have your 'jumpiness' as much under control this game as you have in others?

[serrapaladin]

After that drawing I kind of want Jacob to be town...

[serrapaladin]

KX, pretty much everything people are posting now are somewhat vague opinions based on circumstantial evidence. I would rather lynch someone who we feel somewhat confident about being scum and who won't contribute much as town than someone who you think will give useful association tells according to their flip.

[serrapaladin]

I'm getting the strong impression one of HD or Panzer is scum. I don't see the wagons on GM or Jenn. Despite his awesome drawings, I still think Jacob is a decent lynch.

[serrapaladin]

Why did you respond to that post?

[serrapaladin]

how is it bothering you Serra? In what way?

Why would it bother me? I just found it odd that out of all posts you would reply to some assertions of which wagon's I agree with. Why are you so convinced HD is town?

[serrapaladin]

So do you really think Panzer vs. HD was town-on-town?

[serrapaladin]

I kind of agree that we probably shouldn't lynch HD or panzer today. I still hold that one of them is probably scum, but I'd be happier if we agreed on someone less vocal for D1.

Nic seemed way too keen to jump back on the Jenn wagon after temporarily unvoting, his 530 is basically saying "she doesn't see the same things as legitimately scummy as I do - she must be scum," plus confirmation bias against the Josh slot in general. I like my vote on Jacob for now, but would consider Nic.

[serrapaladin]

Alright, listen up everybody.

PLEASE DON'T SKIP THIS POST!

Given the nature of the game we definitely need to get someone to claim in the next 48 hours to be certain we don't end in a No Lynch. Viable candidates at the moment are

Jenn, GM, Jacob, and Panzer

. Can

Klick and KX

please place their votes on one of these four.

I've already made my opinion clear that I'd be most happy with a Jacob lynch, but I am willing to comprise if it means avoiding an NL.

I would highly encourage everyone that would be on-board with a

Jacob

lynch to move their vote there, so we can assess whether we can get a majority.

Alternatively, please just

move your vote around

so see whether we'll get a majority anywhere. I would implore everyone to be willing to vote someone they don't have a strong scumread on come deadline to avoid a No Lynch.

Most importantly though, for the next days, we need

ACTIVITY

. So please do post often, and don't go on making any more excessive walls of reads. We need to figure out who is willing to vote for whom, and soon.

[serrapaladin]

I would be willing to lynch any of the four if it comes down to it. At the moment I would feel like lynching GM is the lesser of three evils if we can't get votes onto Jacob.

Who would you vote if we don't agree on GM?

[serrapaladin]

Big Scummy post. While I agree we need a lynch, what's really the point of claiming in Friends and enemies? Like we know the set up, so there really isn't even a point in asking someone to claim, cause only thing that's going to do is possibly out a townie.

Please think about this again. I don't want to get into theory-talk, but I will if you insist I'm scummy for that post.

[serrapaladin]

Cheery, besides Jenn, who could you see yourself voting for atm?

[serrapaladin]

Seriously guys, this isn't rocket science. We have just over three days left, by then we need to have decided on a lynch. If we bring a mason to L-1, he claims and we choose a different lynch target, hammering before allowing a claim is just silly. If scum fake-claims mason, the first mason to see the post CCs and the fake-claim is lynched. Lynching scum is worth losing one mason over. Cheery's suggestion of waiting the night makes no sense.

In order to give us time to decide on an alternative target should our primary target turn out to be mason, we need to start compromising now.

Docteur

, 8 hours before deadline might not be good enough.

Cheery, the reason I am pushing people on to wagons now is because I realized how close the deadline is and how far we are from lynching someone.

[serrapaladin]

If scum fakeclaims mason, of course he should be CCed. If there's already a non-CCed mason, he can just CC the fakeclaim. "Let's a wait a night and see if he gets killed" is a horrible strategy, as it allows scum too much room for using their NK to their advantage.

Mehdi, how is it not your problem if we end up no-lynching? Of course compromise involves some people not getting what they want, but that doesn't mean we should be stubborn and risk an NL.

[serrapaladin]

How does scum give themselves up by their choice of NK? Scum don't NK a true claim and town lynches their own Mason (or another mason is revealed to save him). Two dead masons is as bad as three, so it's better not to leave scum that option. It's a much better idea to CC fakeclaims as they happen.

[serrapaladin]

YAY SOMEONE AGREES WITH ME THIS IS THE GREATEST DAY OF MY LIFE

[serrapaladin]

Delaying CC's only gives scum more choice on how to play and basically guarantees a D1 VT lynch. I don't think that's worth potentially having a confirmed townie for a day longer.

[serrapaladin]

Alright, even if we stipulate that mason's won't CC, we still need to move quickly on deciding a lynch soon. We definitely need to allow people to claim before being lynched, so we need to leave time to find a second suspect if need be. Which means my post 651 about people hurrying up and compromising (the one you've all been giving me flak for to begin with) is still valid. It's been about 6 hours since then and we're not much closer to agreement.

[serrapaladin]

KX, please vote!

[serrapaladin]

You're not the deciding vote at all. The closest wagon at the moment is at L-3, but it would just be useful to have your vote on the table. There's been a lot of debating going on, but opinions haven't been moving much, so it's really about time to compromise rather than stubbornly try to convince others of an opinion they have been rejecting for a while.

[serrapaladin]

I'm not sure we'll have time for a NicCage wagon, but I would support it if enough people agree.

Also, the Panzer wagon looks to be basically dying, so GM, who's your next favorite lynch?

[serrapaladin]

For a Nic wagon, at the moment we potentially have: GM, Hydra, bork, Panzer, and me. That's more support than any other lynch so far.
What does everyone else think of this?

VOTE: NicCage

[serrapaladin]

UNVOTE:
VOTE: Panzer

[serrapaladin]

UNVOTE:
VOTE: GM

[serrapaladin]

Yeah I thought the Goodmorning AA9 stuff was town on town, so that was surprising, but I was expecting panzer to live the night, mason or no.
I have no idea at this point. Bricks have been shat.

Why would you think that he'd survive? He was a claimed mason, and scum had no reason to doubt that claim, plus he was instrumental in getting GM lynched.

I see the remaining two scum among Jacob, Nic, HD, and Mehdi Hydra, in approximate order of likelihood.

I'd like to see a Nic wagon alongside Jacob's.

VOTE: NicCage

[serrapaladin]

HD, this early in the day I'd rather see a counterwagon with another scumspect of mine.

[serrapaladin]

I'm not trying to draw votes away from Jacob. This early in the day, we probably won't quicklynch and we will have a competing wagon. I'd most like those wagons on Jacob and Nic, and the Jacob wagon has already started, so I went for Nic. We won't learn much from a single wagon and two competing wagons on scum is the optimal situation. I've expressed that Jacob is my top scumread and when it comes down to getting someone lynched I will vote for him. Even if you don't agree, why does this bother you?

[serrapaladin]

I think panzer's very first post about a GM, HD, Hydra scumteam may actually have been correct.

[serrapaladin]

From the back-and-forth between him and HD I had the impression one of them is scum. At the end I just wanted a lynch and before he claimed he looked like a decent choice.

HD: isn't it a bit early to hand out PoE townreads?

[serrapaladin]

They're completely baseless and no one has agreed with you yet. Stop tooting your own horn.

[serrapaladin]

Fine, so my town-read of GM diminished as the day went on and cases were presented against her. So what?

If I were scum, I wouldn't place my scumbuddy at the top of my townlist in my first reads-post and if I were bussing her, I wouldn't just reluctantly agree to vote her to prevent an NL - GM just had me fooled early on. Earlier HD attacked me for defending Josh too strongly and not changing my opinion, now apparently I'm scummy for changing my read on GM, you should really make up your mind.

Cheery: I had somewhat neutral reads of Panzer and HD beforehand. Their altercation just didn't look like town-town. Call it gut, if you will.

[serrapaladin]

HD, I was responding to Cheery's rep of your case. If you're gonna accuse someone of misrepping, it should be him.

As to your supposed case as stated now:
I have explained my Nic vote - you don't have to agree with it. I never said I am more sure of Panzer having been right about HD and Hydra, I just presented it as an option.

To begin with, I had GM as a town-read. It then changed as AA, Jenn and others starting making a case against her. My read moved towards scum and I thought it'd be obvious enough that I'd somewhat believed the case, or at least parts of it. I don't see the need to be explicit about every point I agree with. I was never soft-defending GM, I simply still had a slight townread on her, which diminished over time.

I was responding to Cheery as to why I voted Panzer. I am now less sure about it having been town-scum (although I never said I'm certain of it, just that it was an impression I was getting), as reflected by HD as my third scumread. I am not attacking him for attacking me.

[serrapaladin]

Bold 'may' and 'an option' instead. Had I tried to imply certainty, I would have phrased it differently and given it a vote. Stop arguing semantics. Just because you're convinced Jacob and I are scum doesn't mean everyone else gets should be beyond suspicion by PoE. Back in D1 you said you were something like 50% sure Josh, Jacob and I are scum. I see you as trying to convey too much certainty.

[serrapaladin]

It's just probabilities. When both were alive, I felt good about one being scum. Now that Panzer has flipped town, that's made it less likely.

[serrapaladin]

Look, if everyone just piles onto the same wagon start of D2, we won't get much information. I wanted a second wagon, so I decided to start it.

[serrapaladin]

Of course.

[serrapaladin]

@Serra

Can you point to the post(s) where you first thought GM was scum yesterday? I never got the impression that you thought she was scum, rather I got the impression you just thought she was less likely town than I was, thus preferring her lynch to mine as a compromise since you couldn't get the Jacob lynch.

Also, please answer my question here:

@Serra

What are your thoughts on why Hydra is/is not scum?

I never thought or said that GM was scum. My townread on her was diminishing. By 'my read moved towards scum' I didn't mean I actually ended up finding her scummy, just that it was less and less town.

Sorry for overlooking your other question. I think the Hydra could potentially be scum. I'm getting the feeling that the dissonance between their reads is fabricated. I didn't like the reaction to the NicCage wagon or the tunneling by Mehdi on you/Josh and me. So far I'd prefer lynching one of Jacob and Nic though.

[serrapaladin]

I have bad feeling about Cheery, how many of you think that he may be Scum?

Everyone can be scum. What makes you think he is more likely to be scum than others?

I don't like this comment. I think it's implied that if you have a scumread(/bad feeling) on someone, you have reason to believe they're more likely to be scum than others. AA was asking who agrees. I find "everyone can be scum" is quite an off-putting thing to say.

[serrapaladin]

All of D2 all you've done is try to divert attention via your argument with HD.

I would argue I have just been responding to accusations. If anyone has been trying to divert attention (what does that even mean?) it's HD, for continuously coming after me for my NicCage vote.

[serrapaladin]

So I'm deviously misleading town and diverting attention by placing a vote on my second scumread? Even if HD disagrees, he can point that out and move on. Instead he decides to argue about it for ages. Your case against me is ridiculously fabricated.

[serrapaladin]

I was responding to Nic, who blamed my vote...

[serrapaladin]

I didn't mean to present Panzer's statement as anything more than an option. He had been right about GM, so I didn't want to dismiss anyone else he implicated.

[serrapaladin]

Please stop rolefishing. It's really quite scummy.

So what did I have planned then for D1? I obviously didn't want Jenn/Josh lynched, so why should her better play matter? If I were bussing GM, why would I fake reluctance and a lingering townread on her?

[serrapaladin]

Not only that, GM, his strongest fucking townread who was still a townread 50 posts ago, is now his strongest scumread out of those being wagoned.

I never said GM was my strongest scumread out of those being wagoned. I said that Jenn and Panzer were being more useful, so would be a greater loss if mislynched D1. I was willing to switch to the wagons in order to avoid a No Lynch.

Openly speculating about who is and isn't a mason is anti-town, regardless of Nic's intentions.

I don't understand how you can think my intention was to lynch Josh/Jenn given my D1 play.

[serrapaladin]

1) Not necessarily. My townread on GM had been diluted, but I still held all 3 at slight town reads. GM was contributing the least of the three, so I figured mislynching her would have been a lesser evil than mislynching Panzer or Jenn.

2) That's a completely different argument. If both Masons claim that's fine, I guess, but you shouldn't be speculating about who it might be.

3) was in response to Nic. You are doing this a lot...

[serrapaladin]

How is that different to masons claiming to avoid being lynched?

My read on GM wasn't strongly town by the time we got towards the end of D1. I didn't post anymore full reads, so unfortunately I have no way of proving that, except through my action of compromising to her lynch, which is of course the very thing you're attacking.

[serrapaladin]

But you agree that Jacob might be scum. How is it scummy of me to push Jacob as a counterwagon to GM?

[serrapaladin]

Nic, besides the case HD has been making, do you have any reason to believe I'm scum?

[serrapaladin]

Also your defense of Josh while the Hydra was pushing Josh makes you look scummy to me.

So you're going on the assumption that the Hydra is also scum?

[serrapaladin]

VOTE: Serra

Already explained what I didn't like about his handwavy "let's start some wagons" thing.
#920 is self WIFOM. I agree with #987 that a serra scum-flip strongly implies Jacob town.

Hydra's defense of serra summarized in #983 (and introduced earlier) IS WIFOM and HD is correct for pointing that out -- additionally I think serra's read changes and jump on the GM wagon are much more telling pieces of evidence than the fact that HD straight up defended GM yesterday: I don't know that I see scum do that to each other very often at all, even in 3+ scum games.

I also don't think hydra is scum, as I've said, I just think he has an overly simplistic view of how yesterday went down.

@ArcAngel, serra: your wagons are not happening (nor is mine). Throw support somewhere else.

You can't just wave WIFOM around and call people scum or town as a conclusion. 920 was asking what scum-motivation I could have had in doing what I did. If you can't find an answer, that doesn't mean my defense is invalid WIFOM.

Also your defense of Josh while the Hydra was pushing Josh makes you look scummy to me.

So you're going on the assumption that the Hydra is also scum?

Not really, I was just bringing it up. Really you're the only person I'm absolutely sure is scum, the Hydra just seems like a likely partner for you.

So surely if I'm more scummy than the Hydra, associative tells between us should go the other way. I don't understand why I would be scum for defending Josh (someone we have all but accepted as a townie by now) while the Hydra was pushing him. You're trying hard to sound as though you aren't just sheeping HD on my wagon.

I still think Jacob, Nic and maybe HD and the Hydra are scummy.

I guess I'll

VOTE: Jacob

[serrapaladin]

@Arc + Serra: If Jacob is scum, who do you think his partner is?

Nic. Possibly you.

[serrapaladin]

Yesterday I pointed out how we should start compromising and got called scummy for it. I also said I was willing to lynch someone I'd been defending to avert an NL. I have no idea how Bork thinks 1019 is EXTREMELY TOWN for Hydra, but not for me yesterday.

If we can't get a Jacob wagon, I would also consider lynching Hydra.

Jacob was suspicious yesterday and was away most of D2. His last 6 posts back, instead of giving content, just point out small things here and there. Let's lynch him instead.

[serrapaladin]

Meh, we're probably both town, but whatever.
VOTE: Docteur Gudsight

[serrapaladin]

I'm VT, not that it matters. If you do end up lynching me, please stop listening to HD. He may or may not be scum, but his wagons haven't been well-placed.

I would look at Nic and Jacob tomorrow, as well as perhaps Bork. And force Jacob and Klick to contribute.

[serrapaladin]

HD is basically the only one pushing my lynch. I'm about to get lynched. So, yeah.

[serrapaladin]

I find Els less scummy than three other people, so he's still more likely town than not. I've now voted him because I'm more certain of my own towniness than his and it's obvious one of us is gonna be lynched.

[serrapaladin]

I'm off for now. If I'm still alive by the time I get back I'll give some slightly more substantial final reads.

Of course my 4th scum read in a game with 2 scum alive has more than 50% chance of being town...

[serrapaladin]

Majorly forgot that i can do this:

Bah!

x