Mini 594 - Satin Doll Showdown - {GAME OVER}

[Erg0]

/confirm.

Is that pic from a Sigur Ros album, Incog?

[Erg0]

Vote: MafiaSSK

Making excuses already.

[Erg0]

It's intended to spark discussion and get the game rolling. Your vote doesn't need to be totally random, there's just a lower threshhold of suspicion attached to it at this stage of the game.

[Erg0]

My vote wasn't particularly random either, nor MafiaSSK's for that matter (at least I didn't think so).

[Erg0]

I can see the point that hasdgfas is making here - Incog's vote, although not random, was evidently not based on solid evidence of scumminess (nor was mine or MafiaSSK's, for that matter). Ether, on the other hand, seemed to be intimating that she had flavour-based information which led her to be genuinely suspicious of Glork's early comment.

hasdgfas' FoS on Ether probably was too strong, but I don't really see it as scummy.

Yes, hascow, because nobody has ever badgered anybody else into voting somebody.

This could equally be applied to early FoSes on weak evidence - they're not exactly uncommon. I'm not particularly fond of the way that you're goading hasdgfas and Incog on from the sidelines.

[Erg0]

I assume you mean my post 68, in which case you apparently forgot to read the last paragraph.

[Erg0]

Sorry for my absence, unexpected LA arose. Will catch up later today.

[Erg0]

Ok, caught up.

Tarhalindur: to what extent do you rely on the "Tarhalindur standard tells" that you link to in your sig? Others are welcome to comment on this from their own experience.

Glork: the difference between the two possible versions of your "Point: Incognito" post is tone. What you posted reads to me as being closer to "whatcha gonna say to that, hasdgfas" than "I would be interested to hear hasdgfas' response", hence my calling it goading.

Meh. I think I'm thinking too hard. This goes into the "for later reference" bin.

There are a bunch of people flying right under my radar right now. SSK can keep my vote for now as encouragement to post something useful, I think.

[Erg0]

Fun fact: I consciously stop myself from using the phrase "to be honest" when I'm playing mafia.

That said, it ain't no good as a tell. I know we're still in the early game, but that seemed like a really specious argument on Glork's part.

Unvote, Vote: Glork

[Erg0]

Actually, that last paragraph was the scummiest - the first sentence is mafia theory (IIoA), and the second sentence looks like a veiled attack on Glork (especially since it seems to be a bit of a non-sequitur). I could be misinterpreting you, however: could you please show how the comment about "early FoS'es on weak evidence" justifies your comment about Glork making you uneasy? (At the very least, give some post numbers.)

The hint is the quote above it, where Glork implies that hasgfas' FoS was unfounded because Ether was doing something that was not uncommon in mafia. I was making the counterpoint that what hasdgfas did was also not uncommon in mafia, and therefore the same could be applied to Glork's own statement. Thus, his statement was not especially applicable to the situation, and really only served to superficially discredit another's susupicions.

If you find summaries of others' positions scummy then you'll probably have your vote on me all game. I'll often do this in order to clarify opposing positions, but I only usually catch flak for it in newbie games these days. My question regarding your reliance on your tells is not theory - far from it, in fact. I'm not particularly interested in arguing the merits of the tells themselves, but I think that by standardising and documenting them you're placing yourself under a great deal of pressure to always follow them. Knowing that you'll play this way is instructive when looking both at your play and that of others.

Glork: that was

so

not the response I was expecting.

[Erg0]

Hm. What

was

the response you were expecting?

Well, something comprehensible mainly.

[Erg0]

I'm assuming (hoping) that we'll see a bit more from Poker once he's got this meta thing sorted out. I don't recall seeing him use meta as his sole source of information anywhere else. Yes, I'm meta-ing his meta-ing.

Glork does seem very disconnected from proceedings so far. I was kind of hoping for a couple more votes to follow mine, but that doesn't look like happening at this point.

I'm not a big fan of Tar's play so far, he looks a lot like his SK self from Mini 545.

I think I could see hasdgfas and MafiaSSK as buddies, based on the timing of hasdgfas' vote. Either that or hasdgfas is looking for a viable alternative wagon now that he's coming under pressure. I'm generally opposed to serious wagons on players like SSK at the start of the game, unless they have a history of only lurking as scum. I also feel like hasdgfas would have gone after Glork a little harder if he were town.

A week until deadline, time to get things moving methinks.

Unvote, Vote: hasdgfas

[Erg0]

I also don't quite understand the point Erg0 is getting at.

I'm assuming (hoping) that we'll see a bit more from Poker once he's got this meta thing sorted out. I don't recall seeing him use meta as his sole source of information anywhere else. Yes, I'm meta-ing his meta-ing.

Glork does seem very disconnected from proceedings so far. I was kind of hoping for a couple more votes to follow mine, but that doesn't look like happening at this point.

I'm not a big fan of Tar's play so far, he looks a lot like his SK self from Mini 545.

I think I could see hasdgfas and MafiaSSK as buddies, based on the timing of hasdgfas' vote. Either that or hasdgfas is looking for a viable alternative wagon now that he's coming under pressure. I'm generally opposed to serious wagons on players like SSK at the start of the game, unless they have a history of only lurking as scum. I also feel like hasdgfas would have gone after Glork a little harder if he were town.

A week until deadline, time to get things moving methinks.

Unvote, Vote: hasdgfas

If you think hasdgfas is scum with MafiaSSK then you seem to be implying that you suspect MafiaSSK. Aside from his general lurking and low content posting, are there other reasons you suspect him? If part of your case on cow is some association with MafiaSSK then wouldn't it make sence to pursue any suspicions you have on MafiaSSK aswell?

To answer your question, the reason I'm not pursuing MafiaSSK equally is that my main reason for finding him suspicious (i.e. hasdgfas' vote) is only a correct if hasdgfas himself is scum. They're kind of two separate things right now - I actually find hasdgfas' vote suspicious regardless of SSK's alignment.

It more so appears like you are giving up on the Glork wagon and trying to find a viable alternative.

"Giving up" is possibly too strong a term, but I recognised that I was probably playing a little too casually, given the deadlines that are in play here. I'm not sure that I like the idea of actually lynching Glork on day 1.

With the extra time OGML just gave us I don't think it is necessary to hurry a lynch on hasdfgas.

Probably not. He's nowhere near a lynch at this point, though.

[Erg0]

Glork, unlike SSK, has done other things besides just make a list of who seems protown. Glork also appears to be doing some scumhunting, which slightly makes up for his list of protowners. SSK has done absolutely nothing, which is unacceptable.

I'm not impressed with SSK's contribution so far, but I don't agree with this statement. Although Glork certainly has more posts in the game so far, I'd hardly say he's been scumhunting to any great degree. Most of his posting is pretty vague and reasonless. hasdgfas' statement here reinforces my earlier feeling - he seems to be kind of shying away from Glork at this point, possibly in fear of his reputation.

I nearly wrote "considerable prowess" there, but thought better of it.

[Erg0]

Kind of odd that nobody noticed that Scot's vote on hasdgfas was a very close echo of my post 210. Not that I disagree with his reason, but I would have expected some mention of agreement with me in there. For that matter, is there any reason that he was attacked for the comment and I wasn't?

What shys me away from Glork is that I know that he can be really useful and a great townsperson if he puts his mind to it, which is why I'm giving Glork a little bit more of a chance to stay.

This is a much more valid reason than the one you originally gave. I already said in 201 that I didn't like the idea of lynching Glork day 1, though, so no town points for you.

[Erg0]

Erg0, was the question below for me?

Kind of odd that nobody noticed that Scot's vote on hasdgfas was a very close echo of my post 210. Not that I disagree with his reason, but I would have expected some mention of agreement with me in there. For that matter, is there any reason that he was attacked for the comment and I wasn't?

That was pretty much open to anyone who cared to answer it. Scot's clarified his position above, so I'm inclined to leave this alone right now - there are more pressing matters at hand.

I'm inclined to agree that scumcow probably wouldn't have claimed vanilla this close to deadline. I don't think that Glork qualifies as a default lynch for a variety of reasons. Going to do a lightning re-read and put a vote on someone shortly.

[Erg0]

Forgot to

Unvote

.

[Erg0]

Erg0, the difference is that you didn't vote hasdgfas on 210.

This true, but only because I'd already voted for him. Or am I missing the point?

[Erg0]

Life ate my re-read, so I'm going to have to vote based on a skim-through and my recollection of events.

Tarhalindur is lurky and the reasoning behind his votes is pretty thin. Unlike SSK, he seems to want to appear to be trying to hunt scum. My previous experience with him leads me think he's playing to his scum meta. He's my strongest suspect right now.

MafiaSSK is being pretty useless - lynching him is an acceptable alternative to a no-lynch.

hasdgfas is a little less likely to be scum than he was before he claimed, but I could also live with lynching him if the alternative was a no-lynch.

I don't really consider anyone else to be a good lynch for today.

Vote: Tarhalindur

I think I'll be asleep at the deadline time, but I'll keep an eye on things until then as best I'm able.

[Erg0]

I'm a little concerned that I'm encouraging Glork's behaviour by tolerating it, but the free pass only lasts until the end of day 1.

[Erg0]

Erg0: Can you better explain why you think hasdgfas's claim makes him more likely to be town? I sometimes see premature claims as a protown tell, but this one didn't really strike me as premature.

I didn't particularly think that hasdgfas' claim was premature, we were nearing deadline and the pro-town play is to make the claim early so that there's time to build another wagon if the town accepts it. This is especially true given that his was the only strong wagon at the time. I think that scum would be more likely to hold out a little longer before claiming, and then claim a power role in order to force the town into a scramble for another lynch at deadline (see ChaosOmega in Mini 554).

Of course, it's also possible that hasdgfas did a good job of reading the flow of the game and deduced that he could kill the wagon with a townie claim. This player lineup is probably more likely than most to back off a claimed townie.

[Erg0]

Looks like it's basically hasdgfas or Elmo, then.

I've pretty much overlooked Elmo up to this point due to his general lurkishness and agreeability (perhaps that was the point). I'm very concerned by his lack of activity as deadline approaches, though. His summary posts certainly show that he's done the reading, so I can't see any good reason for him not to have voted by now. I'm inclined to think that he was hoping to just throw a vote on the leading wagon (as foreshadowed by his suspicion of hasdgfas), but now doesn't want to draw attention to himself by casting the vote that pushes hasdgfas over the threshold for a deadline lynch. I'm not sure that he's quite as obvscum as Tar would have us believe, but I want to at least see a claim from him before deadline.

Unvote, Vote: Elmo

[Erg0]

One man's opportunism is another man's realism.

[Erg0]

The town one, duh.

[Erg0]

I'm going to bed now, and I'll be asleep at deadline. Be aware that my vote isn't moving, but at this stage I don't think I'd move it anyway - a claim from Elmo this late wouldn't hold much water with me anyway.

[Erg0]

I probably would have voted Tar and/or asked for a claim when I came in anyway, and I'm guessing that Tar knew that after I voted for him towards the end of yesterday. I can understand his eagerness to claim, given that the person he says he has a guilty result on essentially started the wagon today.

I'm somewhat dissatisfied with the way that things ended up yesterday. Elmo was a waste of a lynch-block, and I'm still extremely suspicious of his disappearance leading up to deadline. The result of his lynch would also have made it much easier to discern the truth in our current situation, since we've now got one player who was on the wagon up against another player that was off it - and I get the feeling that there's much more at stake today than there was yesterday.

I tend to agree that we shouldn't get a counterclaim here, as a the existence of a second cop wouldn't necessarily disprove Tar's claim. If someone has information that directly contradicts Tar's claim then that would be more useful, but it's up to them whether they reveal themselves right now. Glork did have a reasonable amount of suspicion on him already, so if Tar's lying then a claim from Glork would probably be less damaging than a claim from someone with an important role who may have done a good job of staying out of the line of fire.

In any case, I didn't like either Glork or Tar all that much yesterday, and I could see either of them as scum at this point. I'd like to see a claim from Glork before I make a call one way or the other.

[Erg0]

I suspect that the likelihood of multiple cops in any given game has increased recently due to the attention that's been drawn to the standard cop-doc meta. That said, I raise this point in pretty much every game as a matter of habit, and it rarely turns out to be correct. Utlimately, a potential counter-claimant is probably in a better position than anyone else to decide whether they should come forward.

[Erg0]

A jailkeeper claim could be cover for a roleblocker, but I can't really see a scum blocker picking Ether as a target last night. Of course, if Glork really is sure that she's vanilla then he could be taking a chance on that with his claim. Ether, it's up to you whether you want to say anything about this or not.

I'm not sure about this yet. I'm going to re-read day 1 and see what I think about Tar's choice of investigation. Glork was a good investigation target in my opinion, but a more important question is whether or not Tar truly thought so.

[Erg0]

I'm in the process of writing a summary, but I'll comment on some of the recent stuff in the meantime.

Glork looks like he's given up on winning the argument on facts, and is instead going for the "hearts and minds" approach. The increase in his level of desparation is apparent over the last 24 hours. He starts off at least considering it possible that Tar really is a cop ("Apparently y'all are going to play follow the claimed cop. And Tar's doing his job."), but is now painting Tar as 100% certain to be scum. Instinctively I want to ignore this as an emotional issue, but that doesn't leave me with much to go on, since his contributions pre-claim were deliberately minimal.

Incidentally, I hold the same opinion as hasdgfas regarding pointing out your own meta, but I've seen town do this plenty in the past.

Tar's "I would have come out with the result anyway" feels a bit like a reach. His claim was justified in this situation, but I don't think that any cop would really come out with a guilty first thing on day 2. If you're worried about being nightkilled, drop a breadcrumb and keep playing. This is probably the biggest problem that I have with his posts since the claim.

A question to Tar and Glork: Was your play on day 1 influenced by your role?

[Erg0]

Also, Erg0, I called Tarh scum as soon as I posted after his claim. Hell, I called him scum BEFORE he claimed. Yeah, it's

possible

that he's as he claims (only not sane), but it should be quite obvious that I don't believe that to be the case at all.

Sure, it's obvious now, but at a certain point you stopped entertaining the possibility of him being a cop at all and committed fully to the "Tar is scum" path. In response to your previous post, I'm not saying that you're not making valid points - obviously I agree with you that Tar was scummy on day 1. It just looks to me like your main focus is on being persuasive and winning the argument, possibly because you're arguing from a somewhat weak position yourself. I dunno, maybe you're really as convinced of your correctness as you appear to be.

I'd like an answer to my question:

Was your play on day 1 influenced by your role?

I agree that Tar should not have claimed when he did (both on Day 2 and at only -2L) because now he's rendered himself basically useless for the rest of the game.

I don't think it was premature, for reasons previously stated. I do take issue with his statement that he would have claimed without the wagon, though.

I don't think that SSK is the play today. The only reason to lynch anyone other than Tar or Glork would be that you don't think that either of them is scum (which seems unlikely).

[Erg0]

Erg0, you say that

I'm

trying to "be persuasive" and just "win the argument." I challenge you to name ONE has Tar done to convince you of his innocence. He's claimed a guilty against a guy who had some flak at the end of Day One. That is IT.

That's a fair point, but it's more obvious in your case because of the somewhat aggressive tone of some of your posts, and particularly the fact that you tried to use your own meta in your favour.

Neither of you has really done anything post-claim to convince me of your innocence, but that's more or less a result of the situation in which you find yourselves - you both profess to be wholly convinced that the other is scum, and you both have claims which would appear to support that conclusion. As a result, it's difficult to take anything that either of you has said post-claim at face value - both of you are, on the whole, acting pro-town if I make the assumption that the other is scum.

I am a prime example of someone who intentionally varies his playstyle from game to game, regardless of alignment.

Next question: to what extent does the above statement apply to the current game? Was there any reason for your play on day 1 beyond laziness?

[Erg0]

Incog: Would you use Tar's points on players other than Glork if he turned up town?

[Erg0]

Basically, I'd like Tarhalindur to become more involved in the game in general and not just specifically to defend himself against the points you've made.

My question above related to this - the only reason I can see why you'd want Tar to broaden his focus is that you intend to use his observations later in the game if he turns out to be town. If he's scum then he's just going to use this as an opportunity to misdirect and make with the WIFOM. Either way, anything he says now is unlikely to be helpful in determining his alignment (which you seem to have pretty much made up your mind about anyway).

[Erg0]

Erg0: What precisely in 306 is sufficient to cast a lynching vote? Why are you 'not sure that he's quite as obvscum as Tar would have us believe'? Why, precisely, would ElmoScum shy away from casting a lynching vote near deadline after I've specifically stated I would probably do so?

For reference, this is the post Elmo refers to:

"Erg0"]Looks like it's basically hasdgfas or Elmo, then.

I've pretty much overlooked Elmo up to this point due to his general lurkishness and agreeability (perhaps that was the point). I'm very concerned by his lack of activity as deadline approaches, though. His summary posts certainly show that he's done the reading, so I can't see any good reason for him not to have voted by now. I'm inclined to think that he was hoping to just throw a vote on the leading wagon (as foreshadowed by his suspicion of hasdgfas), but now doesn't want to draw attention to himself by casting the vote that pushes hasdgfas over the threshold for a deadline lynch. I'm not sure that he's quite as obvscum as Tar would have us believe, but I want to at least see a claim from him before deadline.

Unvote, Vote: Elmo

I think I covered a lot of your questions within the post that you're referring to.

1. I did not cast a "lynching vote" as you so provocatively put it. As I said at the end of the post above, I wanted a claim from you before choosing between you and hasdgfas as the day's lynch. Your claim came so close to deadline that I never had a choice to make, being asleep at that point.

2. I was referring to Tar's post 293, where he seemed to think that your two summary posts made you the most obvious obvscum that ever obved. I didn't think much of his theory, but that wasn't the reason that I was voting you. I voted you because you failed to follow up on your promise to vote in a timely manner, despite apparently being caught up with the game at that point.

3. I thought you could have been shying away from voting when you said you would because the wagons shifted in the meantime and you didn't want to draw further attention to yourself by putting hasdgfas at a lynching number.

[Erg0]

I had a bit of epiphany whilst bussing from Sydney to Canberra yesterday - I think that it's highly unlikely that Glork is scum here. I've had the feeling that Glork's behaviour on day 1 was the key here, hence my previous line of questioning, but I couldn't quite get to the bottom of it. I think I've nailed it now, though.

Glork's deliberately obstinate play on day 1 doesn't fit in with what I would expect im to do on day 1 as scum vulnerable to an investigation. Glork is a night action magnet at the best of times (witness Mini 545), so he would have to expect that he'd be likely to draw a cop investigation if there was a cop in the game (which is usually a decent bet). As such, scum Glork would be on his best behaviour in order to try and deflect that investigation elsewhere. By playing in an obtuse fashion, he made it substantially more likely that he would draw said investigation, which leads me to believe that either he's innocent or he's scum but strongly believed that he would appear innocent to a cop. Since Tar claims to have a guilty on Glork, the second option is probably not the case, hence I believe it's likely that Glork is, in fact, innocent. As such, Tar's much more likely to be the scum here.

I haven't caught up with the last couple of pages yet, but if nothing in there makes me change my mind then I'm going to vote for Tar in the near future.

[Erg0]

Glork looks like he's given up on winning the argument on facts, and is instead going for the "hearts and minds" approach. The increase in his level of desparation is apparent over the last 24 hours. He starts off at least considering it possible that Tar really is a cop ("Apparently y'all are going to play follow the claimed cop. And Tar's doing his job."), but is now painting Tar as 100% certain to be scum.

Instinctively I want to ignore this as an emotional issue, but that doesn't leave me with much to go on, since his contributions pre-claim were deliberately minimal.

In some ways it did sound like Glork was actually considering Tarh was the cop. Also his comments saying he has certainty he will be lynched, does come off as a bit of a "hearts and minds" approach, but something about the last sentence here bugs me. Is the he in the last sentence refering to Glork or Tarh? The placement of the last proper noun gives me an odd feeling of wishywashness or undermined logic. Who were you refering to in that sentence, Erg0?

That sentence refers to Glork. I don't think that Tar's day 1 effort could be construed as

deliberately

minimal.

[Erg0]

Ok, done reading.

Vote: Tarhalindur

[Erg0]

Saying that the last sentence "undermines" the rest of the post relies on the assumption that I was trying to make some particular point in that post. I was pretty much just thinking out loud at that point, looking for responses.

What is it that you don't follow in 463?

[Erg0]

Erg0, I have a tiny issue with the conclusion that you've arrived at with respect to Glork and his alignment.

I can understand the logic you've used to clear Glork in your mind but part of it doesn't make sense to me. You've set up Glork as this "magnet for night actions" and referenced a previous game in Mini 545 to help support this idea. However, I get the feeling that Glork's magnetism seems to be completely independent of his behavior anyway, i.e. it doesn't matter how Glork acts during Day 1, he will likely be a popular target during Night 1 anyway. In fact, in that very game you cited, you were the cop, and you chose to investigate Glork during Night 1. Did you choose to investigate him during Night 1 because you thought he was acting scummy during Day 1 or simply because he was Glork? If it was because he was Glork, then I think the conclusion you've arrived at to determine that Glork is likely town here because he was acting obstinate doesn't seem correct since it seems like no matter how Glork acted, he had to have expected some N1 activity in this game anyway.

I investigated Glork because I didn't have a clear idea of his alignment and I thought he was the most valuable person to get a (75%) confirmation on. In other words, a bit of both. I'll note that a number of the players in that game were less experienced than the group in this one, hence Glork's relative value was probably higher there than it is here.

I agree that Glork is always going to be more likely than most to attract night 1 actions, but that doesn't mean that there's nothing he can do about it. I doubt very much that he's going to just throw his hands up in the air and accept it, and I doubt even more that, as scum, he would consciously choose to play in a way that exacerbates it. Classic pro-town Glork could well have fallen below others in investigation priority for night 1, depending on the philosophy of the player with the investigative role. By taking the "obstinate" route, he ticked all of the boxes for any decent cop to target him:

1. Difficult to determine alignment based on posting
2. Known to be a good scumhunter when town
3. Unlikely to be killed overnight

I actually think that number 3 has more to do with this than Glork is willing to admit, but that's neither here nor there. Point is, I have difficulty imagining that he was unaware of the effect of his actions, and the only reason that I can think of for scum to deliberately pull an investigation is to sacrifice themselves in order to out the cop. I think it's far more likely that Glork is town.

Also, if you can find flavour in the first post then I'm pretty sure that scum could find it too.

[Erg0]

Buh?

[Erg0]

Meh. Everyone other than Glork and Tar is assumed town until tomorrow.

[Erg0]

WHOA! FUCKING TIME OUT.

until the mod confirms your paraphrase to make that judgment call.

Were you FUCKING FISHING FOR A MODKILL?

Major FoS: Incog

Pretty sure that's not what he meant there.

[Erg0]

I thought he meant that he was waiting for the mod to reply to your PM and confirm that your proposed wording was ok.

[Erg0]

What is it that you don't follow in 463?

I was half asleep when I read it before, but basically your logic states that a vulnerable to investigation Glork scum would not have played the way he did on day1. I admit that you know how Glork plays better than I do since this is my first experience with Glork in the same game as me, but I not sure I like the idea of he would play better than this as a vulnerable to investigation scum. Evrybody makes mistakes.

True, but I don't think that Glork made this particular mistake. Although he's weakened my argument a little with his talk of errors recently, he's seemed more and more townish as the day progresses, whereas Tar has regressed to his day 1 hunt-and-peck approach. I'm liking my vote where it is.

[Erg0]

Apologies, but my access had been non-existent for the last week or so, thus I'm heavily out of touch with mafia in general right now. I'll get back into things on the weekend, hold tight til then.

[Erg0]

Ok, I think I've got my access issues sorted out now, so I'm back in action. Let's start with the traditional DSA (Dead Scum Analysis) - Tar's posts about others are up first. I've stopped at the end of day 1, as his first post on day 2 was his claim, at which point we enter the Distancing Zone. After this I'll do analysis of others' posts towards Tar.

hasdgfas
1 - random vote
8 - "started pro-town but has become increasingly scummy", says he would lynch him at

deadline behind Elmo and SSK

PokerFace
3 - sees PF as town despite the wagon on him ("his early requests for comments from other

players looks town to me, and his explanation looks more like misguided town than scum")
4 - realises that PF did not actually ask questions early on, but still finds analysis pro-

town
7 - rates as town

Mizzy
7 - rates as town

Ether
2 - FoS for post 73 - "reads to me as a veiled attack on Erg0 (by claiming to find something

scummy using weak language and backtracking immediately thereafter)" - follows this with a

vote on me for a later post
7 - neutral read, thinks she has the same alignment as Glork

Incognito
7 - 3rd on scumdar

scotmany12
3 - explains IIoA and comments on roland in response to scot's questions

eldarad (MafiaSSK)
3 - explains his standard tells
7 - 2nd on scumdar

Erg0
2 - votes me for IIoA
3 - explains tell, sticks to vote
7 - 4th on scumdar

Elmo (rolandgarros)
3 - was under his radar due to inactivity, minor suspicion for IIoA
5 - "pressure" vote (looks wagonny)
6 - after re-read, sticks with vote on Elmo for lack of comment on who is scum/town
7 - 1st on scumdar, gives a case that boils down to Elmo failing to give opinions on other

players and his opinion on hasdgfas' claim (agree with the second part, not so much with the

first). "I mean, seriously, why doesn't this guy have about 5 to 7 votes on him right now?"
9 - "Now can we please get back to lynching Elmoscum, plox?"

Summary

Tar's behaviour at deadline is interesting, as my recollection is that we were effectively choosing between Elmo and hasdgfas for the lynch - he places hasdgfas third on his list of suspicion, allowing him to avoid pressure to switch off the Elmo wagon while still covering himself somewhat if hasdgfas is lynched and comes up scum. His hasty call-back to the Elmo wagon in 9 after calling hasdgfas scummy in 8 is also notable.

His early FoS on Ether for making a veiled attack on me is a little odd, given that he then votes me in the same post. The attempt to link her alignment to Glork's also rates a minor ping on my scumdar.

eldarad/SSK kind of goes from nowhere to second on his scumdar in post 7, though I suspect that he's mainly there to act as a buffer between hasdgfas and Elmo.

Others' posts about Tar are coming next.

[Erg0]

Erg0, how's it going there? Are you going to stop posting here entirely until you can do that analysis? Who's scum?

The Dead Scum Analysis is my jumping-off point for the rest of the game, so I don't have much to add until that's done. I'm not far off finishing my notes, so it shouldn't be too much longer.

[Erg0]

Others on Tarhalindur (pre-claim edition)

This stuff is probably a more reliable source of information than the post-claim chatter, but I'll do a round-up of that stuff tomorrow to see if anything good pops up.

hasdgfas
231 - re Tar's "pressure" vote for Elmo: "I find this to be a useless and hypocritical post."
298 - responds to Tar's criticism of his SSK vote.

PokerFace
158 - (round-up post) On scot's vote for Tar: "His vote looks to be more based on a disagreement then the theory Tarhalidur is scum." Thinks Tar's vote on me fits his meta, but wants a specific example of scum committing the IIoA tell.
239 - disagrees with Tar's example of IIoA tell; "Tar has stopped going after Erg0 at the moment to put some pressure on Elmo which is a little off considering he is not doing too much either."
278 - Agrees with Tar's assessment of Elmo's 246 as scummy. "Tarhalindur do you have any comments on the other wagons that are out there?"
300 - "Tarhalindur - I am rather pleased with his recent postings. Like me he is more active as deadlines get closer. We do need a more aggressive player in this game. His analysis of Elmo/roland makes sence to me."

Mizzy
211 - (recap post) "Tar opens with a good point about Ether's posting, which in retrospect does look like some veiled attacking, though again, it's not enough for me to find her suspicious yet."; "I don't agree with Scot's interpretation of Tar, especially since it's kind of hidden in his post #105 and there's not even any Tar quote in there."

Ether
270 - (responding to Elmo's 246) "Contradicting Patrick, he struck me as more active there--a quick comparison of his postcounts in the first 22 days of each game has 7 vs 18, which is actually a lower ratio than I'd expected. In general, he feels colder here, although I accept that his newfangled standardized tells would explain some of that." Agrees with Incog's list in 264, but can't decide on the order.

Incognito
230 - "It's a bit unsettling how I still have absolutely no read on Tarhalindur, Elmo, and PokerFace and the deadline is like... right there."
264 - (after voting Glork) "Other lynches I would support: Mizzy, Tarhalindur, and Elmo all for being uncharacteristically useless."
307 - response to Tar's case on him, defends Glork vote, points out inconsistencies in Tar liking Patrick's 280 (a really good point, in hindsight).
323 - "Confirm Vote: Glork; Huge FoS: Tarhalindur; Those two definitely stand as my scummiest right now with Elmo right next to Tarhalindur as well. Tarhalindur's reads look so fucking contrived it's ridiculous." (slight incosistency, as Elmo is third on Incog's list at this point - explained in 327)
342 - "I agree with Tarhalindur being scum for reasons that I've cited previously.", votes Tar (2nd after Glork)

scotmany12
105 - "I guess right now I have the biggest problem with Tarhalinder." Attack on Tar's reasoning for voting me, wants his opinion on roland. Votes Tar, but weakens it a little with: "While this is not especially incriminating by itself, it is the best lead I have at the moment."
124 - has looked up IIoA, but still disagrees with Tar's vote.
305 - response to Tar calling him "under the radar".
333 - (start of day 2) "Right now I am most suspicious of Tar and Hasgdfas"
346 - votes Tar (3rd after Glork, Incog) for bad attacks on Elmo, hasdgfas, Incog, me

eldarad (MafiaSSK)
78 - questions Tar's IIoA vote on me

Elmo (rolandgarros)
246 - "I don't agree with Tarhalindur's comment on Erg0, 68 seemed to take stances on people in a reasonable manner, although I see what he's getting at with Ether."; "I kinda agree with scotmany wrt Tar, hm."; "Tar's play seems very by-the-numbers, I'm not sure if that's in character."; "Patrick/Ether: What does Tar feel like relative to Farscape? I don't think I've seen them in a game before."
274 - "Tarhalindur: To what extent do you rely on your Standard Tells vs. thinking on-the-fly? How frequently do you get significant mileage out of them as town? How do you (ab)use them when scum?" (kind of a repeat of a question I asked earlier)
348 - "Tarhalindur: To reiterate: To what extent do you rely on your Standard Tells vs. thinking on-the-fly? How frequently do you get significant mileage out of them as town? How do you (ab)use them when scum? You didn't answer this before, opting to attack me instead; why? Do you believe the IIoA tell applied to Patrick, given Mizzy's stance towards him yesterday?", votes Tar (4th after Glork, Incog, scot) with a decent case.

Conclusions

scot was pretty much the leader in the Tarhate department on day 1 - he had him down as a suspect long before anyone else. As such, his vote on the day 2 wagon is credible despite being a little later than it might have been.

Mizzy and PokerFace were about the only people who had anything positive to say about Tar pre-claim. Mizzy's post 211 came before Tar got much attention, and I disagree with her points. Her comment on scot's case against Tar actually looks like a mild version of what Tar would call the "chainsaw defence", which is interesting. PokerFace does something similar in 158, and gives an overall positive assessment of Tar's "aggressive" play later on. I'll be interested to see how these two look in the post-claim recap.

I was just about to tick Incog off as obvtown for post 307 (which is a really good observation that I totally missed), but he messes it up a little by doing almost the same thing as Tar, placing Elmo third on his scum list after calling Tar's case against him (Elmo) "contrived".

Elmo seems to have some suspicions of Tar from the point where he replaces in, and the case he gives when voting him on day 2 is solid. The WIFOM part of my brain is whispering that he's trying too hard, but I can see why he'd want to give some good reasoning when putting someone within claim range so early on day 2.

hasdgfas, Ether and SSK are almost blank slates. In SSK's case this is probably due to lack of content overall, but Ether and hasdgfas expressed negative sentiments on Tar without ever really following up on them. Mild pings on the scumdar for this.

Analysis will be completed in my next post.

[Erg0]

Okay, I guess I was sort of asking for that with my challenge, but I predictably don't like where this is going.

Which post are you referring to here?

I'm just going to wait for Erg0 to finish failing to clear people.

Clearing people isn't really the point of this analysis - occasionally someone looks good enough to be cleared, but the primary goal is finding scum through their behaviour towards their late buddy.

Also, the post-claim stuff is thick as molasses, so that's going to take me another day to work through.

[Erg0]

I haven't got everything written up, but if I wait much longer to vote then it'll be too close to deadline, so summaries will have to do for now.

At this point, I'm feeling best about Elmo and scot, based on consistency from both and what appears in hindsight to be a fairly opportunistic wagon hop onto Elmo by Tar on day 1.

hasdgfas, Mizzy and eldarad/SSK are all borderline based on a failure to really address Tar at crucial points in the game. I think there's a good chance that exactly one of these three is scum.

I'm thinking that Incog is probably town, or else he set himself up really badly by having Glork and Tar as his top suspects at the start of day 2. A few specific posts have pinged my scumdar (particularly where he put hasdgfas forward as the best partner for Glork

and

Tar), but nothing substantial enough to make me suspicious of him right now. It's possible that he's scum if Eldarad is, otherwise I doubt it.

I'm a little iffy on Ether, but I don't think she's a good lynch for today. I'll expand on this in my final summary.

PokerFace was back and forth on Tar a little on day 1, but there definitely looked like a possible link existed. What I really don't like about him, though, is that he was the only person who found the obvious hole in my (stated) reasoning for believing Glork over Tar on day 2 (here), but he didn't do anything about it. His timidity in defending Tar makes me think that he knew Tar was scum and didn't want to be seen as directly supporting him.

hasdgfas is probably an acceptable lynch from an information perspective, especially if he's scum, but there's nothing about his play in and of itself that makes me think that he's any more likely to be a bad guy than Mizzy or eldarad. I have a much stronger feeling about PF at the moment, and that's where my vote is going.

Vote: PokerFace

[Erg0]

PokerFace was back and forth on Tar a little on day 1, but there definitely looked like a possible link existed. What I really don't like about him, though, is that he was the only person who found the obvious hole in my (stated) reasoning for believing Glork over Tar on day 2 (here), but he didn't do anything about it. His timidity in defending Tar makes me think that he knew Tar was scum and didn't want to be seen as directly supporting him.

Erg0, can you point out where specifically in that large post from PokerFace that he found the obvious hole in your reasoning for believing Glork over Tar? I could've sworn your change in stance on the Glork/Tar stuff came here: Post 463 which came two posts after PF's 461.

I'm referring to the fact that I voted Tar based on reasoning which contradicted Glork's answers to my questions. PF had just noted the conversation that I had with Glork on the subject, and noted that Glork's initial answer that his role didn't affect his play on day 1 was (at least partially) inaccurate. I let Glork's contradiction slide because I never expected him to answer me honestly, regardless of his alignment - but I never explicitly said that I was doing this. PokerFace never raised this as an issue, despite noting and commenting on my vote after I made it.

[Erg0]

Erg0, what led you to drop the counterwagon Tar pushed for hasdgfas's sake on Day 1 and put him on par with Eldarad and Mizzy in your final summary?

I haven't dropped it, but it's a little circumstantial. Of the three I'd rate hasdgfas as most likely to be scum, but I'd rather lynch PF before any of them.

Um, I believe I did later note (a little before day 2 ended) that some of your coments with Glork led me to think you would vote Glork until you had your epiphany.

That's pretty much my point - you noted it but never followed up. It looks to me like you were raising the points and then backing away, in the hope that somebody else would pick them up and use them against either me or Glork.

[Erg0]

I did actually vote Tar on day 1 - saying that I didn't take it further is incorrect.

Also, I already pointed out his inconsistency with Ether, which I had previously thought was a sign that she was potential scum (obviously not). It's hardly his only inconsistency, though - there are quite a few noted in my read-through.

I'll get to the rest of the above in a little bit.

[Erg0]

Pretty sure he is scum. His interaction with tar early day 1 (tar votes for him, while attacking ether for a "veiled attack on ergo"), tar was trying to distance here. Ergo then attempts to distance with tar during day 2. He places a nonchalant vote on tar for reasons i still don't understand. I had problems with him clearing Glork because of his day 1 actions. Regardless of how he acts, I believe Glork to be a magnet for night actions on night 1 simply do to his reputation, and as pf says, everyone makes mistakes. So I think ergo was just looking for a reason to vote for tar over glork.

I kind of foreshadowed this yesterday: my "epiphany" had less to do with actually clearing Glork and more to do with giving me a reason to vote for Tar while giving a explanation that wouldn't have a major impact on the ongoing argument. I did have a number of other reasons for suspecting Tar at that point (most of which were in my summaries yesterday), but I thought it would be more productive to stay out of the way and see what others did without a case to follow. I was hoping that the early vote would offset this and put me in the clear to some extent, but apparently that didn't quite work.

Last day, I wasn't thrilled with his dead-scum analysis (i didn't really see it as helpful) and him basically ignoring the cow wagon. Instead he places a vote on PF, a throw away vote. Despite calling cow scummy, he knew that he was going to come up town, so he stayed off the wagon.

Meh. The Dead Scum Analysis is absolutely the most reliable scumhunting tool I have ever used - if anything, I don't listen to it enough. To give examples: I had shaft.ed second on my scumlist on day 2 of House Mafia (I subsequently got distracted and he went on to win), and I had VitR in my top 3 on day 2 of Calvin & Hobbes (I died that night and he went on to win over the likes of Glork, LML, Thok, Pooky and Skruffs). Playing SK in a game offsite I used this analysis to kill 2 out of 3 mafia by day 3 (the other was lynched).

You

may not find it helpful, but

I

sure do.

Also, PF did have the second highest number of votes at the end of the day yesterday, and I tried to make a point of voting early enough to allow that wagon to build before deadline if people found my case persuasive. I ignored the cow wagon because I didn't have anything much on him one way or the other - he was scummy enough that I didn't mind him being lynched, but not scummy enough to warrant my vote.

There is also his activity issues, his vote on elmo, and yes, I believe it was a slip when he referenced Incog as town when they were discussing the opening flavor.

My activity has been down site-wide for at least the last month - check my other two games and you'll see that I'm not posting there any more frequently than I am here.

I'll talk about the Elmo vote in a minute.

My "slip" with Incog was simply a case of me responding to him within the framework of his own argument - he was presenting a case that relied upon the assumption that he was town, and I responded by rebutting it on the same terms.

[Erg0]

In addition, the point that Ether was trying to get at yesterday with respect to Erg0 seems particularly damning on its own. Erg0 seemed to have a really difficult time clearing people as town. Now, obviously when a person is scum-hunting, he/she should be fairly leery/critical of each person individually to make sure one is making the right choice concerning a person's alignment but there should come a point in time in a game where you begin to lean a particular direction on people (including leaning town) and Erg0 failed to do this with a large portion of the players in the game. This was the highest praise Erg0 provided for anyone in his wrap-up of players:

At this point, I'm feeling best about Elmo and scot, based on consistency from both and what appears in hindsight to be a fairly opportunistic wagon hop onto Elmo by Tar on day 1.

but prior to this praise, he still managed to cast little seeds of doubt about Elmo in particular here:

Elmo seems to have some suspicions of Tar from the point where he replaces in, and the case he gives when voting him on day 2 is solid. The WIFOM part of my brain is whispering that he's trying too hard, but I can see why he'd want to give some good reasoning when putting someone within claim range so early on day 2.

Games oftentimes become like an aperture where the number of viable suspects available to scum for mislynching can decrease as the game goes on so scum have a tendency to try and make that "aperture" as wide as they can by continuously planting seeds of doubt in the minds of players instead of attempting to clear people as town. I feel like that's what Erg0 was doing with a number of players in his summaries post.

Firstly, that summary technique is not something that I just made up for this game. As noted above, I've used it before to good effect. As I said to Ether yesterday, the point isn't to clear people - it's very rare that anyone will get through a whole game without doing

something

that looks potentially suspicious in hindsight.

Frankly, I didn't really expect anyone to actually read my summaries in any kind of detail. I only post them to demonstrate that I'm not pulling my scum ratings out of my ass. In my experience, almost nobody is swayed by this kind of analysis - but, as JDodge has noted in the past, my specialty is being right, not being persuasive. As such, the idea that I'm trying to plant seeds of doubt in others' heads with comments like that on Elmo is something of a stretch.

[Erg0]

I did actually vote Tar on day 1 - saying that I didn't take it further is incorrect.

You left your vote on him only for one real-life day though, and you never really pushed your vote to the point that a wagon on him could actually gain traction despite mentioning that he was your strongest suspect:

Tarhalindur is lurky and the reasoning behind his votes is pretty thin. Unlike SSK, he seems to want to appear to be trying to hunt scum. My previous experience with him leads me think he's playing to his scum meta. He's my strongest suspect right now.

The very next real-life day you switched your vote to Elmo after Patrick reasonless voted for him where you cited that the day's lynch really boiled down to only two players: hasdgfas or Elmo.

Looks like it's basically hasdgfas or Elmo, then.

I've pretty much overlooked Elmo up to this point due to his general lurkishness and agreeability (perhaps that was the point). I'm very concerned by his lack of activity as deadline approaches, though. His summary posts certainly show that he's done the reading, so I can't see any good reason for him not to have voted by now. I'm inclined to think that he was hoping to just throw a vote on the leading wagon (as foreshadowed by his suspicion of hasdgfas), but now doesn't want to draw attention to himself by casting the vote that pushes hasdgfas over the threshold for a deadline lynch. I'm not sure that he's quite as obvscum as Tar would have us believe, but I want to at least see a claim from him before deadline.

Unvote, Vote: Elmo

Prior to your vote, Elmo only had two votes (Tarhalindur and Patrick) which would mean that if you truly felt Tarhalindur was scummy, you could have easily tried to push something further to try and help get him lynched. It's not like fully developed wagons were formed at that time; a good portion of the votes seemed fairly tentative. Further, if Tarhalindur was your strongest suspect, I would expect you to question the motivation behind the Elmo-wagon much more than you did rather than going ahead and actually lending your support for it.

A couple of points:
1. When I made that Elmo vote there were less than 24 hours until the deadline.
2. Elmo had three votes when I voted for him - PokerFace was also on the wagon.

At the point when I made my Tar vote there were still a number of uncommitted players that I felt might jump on the wagon if I started it. Given the complete lack of interest that my vote provoked, there was no way that I was going to be able to push a Tar wagon in 17 hours, especially with the gathering of votes on Elmo in the meantime. Your post above is a pretty serious misrepresentation of the situation, and it worries me that more than one person has apparently accepted it as the truth without going back and checking for themselves.

That aside, I'm perfectly happy with my Elmo vote in hindsight. I feel like the case on Elmo was valid at the time, and I still have difficulty understanding the reason that he held off on claiming for so long. We now know that hasdgfas was town, so he certainly wasn't a better target. Looking at the situation pragmatically, there were two possible lynches and I voted for the one I thought was scummier.

[Erg0]

Erg0: I can't remember precisely what it was, but apparently I was under your radar due to being agreeable. Could you outline exactly how that works for us?

What do you mean "works for us"? How it works for the town, or how it works for you and me?

Incidentally, I like how you just kind of shuffled into the lynch line there without really giving any reasons. Self hammer indeed.

As for Eldarad and Mizzy, I didn't really "get" their discussion on day 3. My own read on them puts them in my second tier of suspicion.

It worries me that PF is apparently the only person who's interested in actually having a discussion today.

[Erg0]

Perhaps I'm thinking more of Ether's comments later in the day, which led me to think that there was something about it that I was missing. I haven't posted the remainder of my notes yet (they're not quite finished, and I got a little sidetracked), but I did have a couple of notes on Mizzy's behaviour on day 2. I certainly found her SSK vote strange, but I've seen that kind of thing from town before. I'm more concerned about her suggestion in 447 that both Tar and Glork could be townies. I'll finish my read and post something more on this.

Regarding your position on my list, SSK's posts after Tar's claim were somewhat scummy in my eyes. He starts out suspicious of Glork, FoSes him for "paying attention to lurkers", then switches to saying that Glork is town, apparently as a result of a discussion on lurker theory. As someone said yesterday, it looks like he wanted to vote for Glork but couldn't find a good enough excuse to do so.

[Erg0]

Ok, I think I understand - I had a basic idea of what you were talking about, but I think I see the detail now.

[Erg0]

I don't understand your reasoning as to why you'd proxy your vote to me. Our deadline for this day is next week. Therefore it should follow logically that if I'd like to get more information from this day by preventing a self-hammer, I would be placing my vote on Erg0 closer to the deadline. Duh. Do you have any other reasoning that would make you want to vote for me?

By "proxy" he means he wants to just vote for the same people as you for the rest of the game.

Odd. I could have sworn that I too mentioned that I wanted to continue discussion today.

Allow me to rephrase: nobody is the only person who's interested in having a discussion about who to lynch. I've seen no reaction from you to the three big posts I made on the last page, so what is it that you want to discuss, exactly?

[Erg0]

Yes, 7 vs 2 does make a big difference in the level of scumminess in the analysis. Also, Jitsu did a pretty good job of keeping his nose clean in that game.

Regarding the switch to Tar's Elmowagon, I don't tend to think about scumteams too much in the early going - that close to deadline, I'll just vote for the scummiest person that I think has a chance of actually being lynched. I'm not so confident in my day 1 reads that I'll use a read on one player to determine which of another two players I want lynched - that's just going to turn one potential error into two.

I nearly voted for PF in my last post, then I realised that he was the only one asking me questions. As such, I'm not as sure of his scumminess now as I was yesterday. I'm picking between you, him and eldarad right now.

[Erg0]

Erg0, what led you to drop the counterwagon Tar pushed for hasdgfas's sake on Day 1 and put him on par with Eldarad and Mizzy in your final summary?

I haven't dropped it, but it's a little circumstantial. Of the three I'd rate hasdgfas as most likely to be scum, but I'd rather lynch PF before any of them.

In the context of answering Ether's question, what I meant was that I found hasdgfas scummier than you and Eldarad, but that I found PF scummier than any of you.

[Erg0]

I fell like we're talking at cross-purposes here. Are you saying that it was suspicious that I was ok with a hasdgfas lynch despite having PF higher on my list? I'm pretty sure that we have morew than one scum left at this point, so I don't see why that's a problem.

[Erg0]

I think you're getting confused, I thought PF was scummier than hasdgfas. hasdgfas was the scummiest of those three players, but PF was the scummiest player in the entire game.

[Erg0]

What Incog said above is correct - PF was out on his own as the scummiest, and he's the guy that I voted. hasdgfas was the leader in a discrete group of three players, but he was, at best, second on my scumlist and thus I voted for PF instead. I'm not too fussed about Incog answering for me here, as I felt I'd made my position clear in my previous posts. This is pretty much just a miscommunication, I think.

In other news, I'm not at all comfortable with the lack of discussion leading up to deadline. I feel like I'm doing a decent job of answering the arguments against me, but there's really no movement in any direction at the moment, and I strongly suspect that I'm in line to be the default lynch. Since nobody else is looking at alternatives, I might as well try something.

Vote: PokerFace

As I said before, the one weakness of the dead scum analysis is that I often don't trust it enough.

[Erg0]

Bah, that deadline kind of crept up. Better claim, though I'm not sure that this is such a good idea.

I'm a

suspicious patron

of Satin Dolls - I'm an ex-con that is, like the innocent patrons, here to relax, watch the girls and play cards. Unfortunately for me, my criminal past makes me appear suspicious to the Feds. In other words, I'm a Miller.

I shouldn't comment any further on the current situation, as I strongly suspect that it would be anti-town. I will say that I'm highly suspicious of the players who've tried to pass themselves off as "wanting discussion" while basically just slow-playing until deadline for the easy mislynch.

[Erg0]

Dammit, I got this game mixed up with another one - I thought the deadline was today (and I thought the deadline there was Friday ).

Of course miller's an ideal claim for scum, that's why it's such a tough role. Ideal miller strategy is to avoid being investigated, obviously. I don't recall ever being investigated in prior games, so I've been attempting to play as "normally" as possible. I did go out on a limb a couple of times trying to draw a nightkill, and that's probably been my downfall.

[Erg0]

Are you just asking questions for the sake of it? I'm even trying to create possible lines of inquiry for you to pursue, but you still don't want to have an actual discussion. All I've got from you (and scot) is "I don't believe the claim." Why not, exactly?

[Erg0]

Don't act all affronted, what was the point of asking me about miller strategy if you're not even going to acknowledge the answer? Even if you have some other reason to suspect me, shouldn't you be trying to persuade others to vote for me? You seem to have made the assumption that I'm just going to hammer myself when you put me at lynch-1, which I'll guarantee is not going to happen. I'm almost inclined to ask you to elaborate, as the only thing I can think of that you could possibly have against me is accounted for by my claim - hence it could not be a reason in itself to ignore me.

As far as your last question, I thought that my psychic prediction of Tar's scumminess on day 2 had about a 50/50 chance of making me look to the scum like I was a cop. I'm pretty sure that it ended up drawing the wrong kind of attention from the town.

Also, I really was pretty sure that Elmo was scum at the end of day 1. I had an inkling that the town wouldn't like my switch, but I did it anyway because I thought it would draw scum heat if I lynched one of them on day 1.

[Erg0]

*That was to Incog, obv.

[Erg0]

As far as your last question, I thought that my psychic prediction of Tar's scumminess on day 2 had about a 50/50 chance of making me look to the scum like I was a cop. I'm pretty sure that it ended up drawing the wrong kind of attention from the town.

I did go out on a limb a couple of times trying to draw a nightkill, and that's probably been my downfall.

Your response to my question makes no sense to me. The only people who could have known with absolute certainty whether or not Tarhalindur was lying about his claim would be an actual cop who had a guilty on Tar or the scum themselves. How could you possibly go out on a limb to try to draw an NK by making a psychic prediction of Tar's scumminess when, if you really are a miller, you simply didn't have enough information about Tar's alignment to be able to go out on this limb? "Going out on a limb to draw an NK" implies that you knew information as it was happening during real time.

That's where the 50/50 bit comes in - I thought that Tar was scum, but I wasn't sure. If I was right I'd look like I had inside info, if I was wrong I'd look like an idiot.

[Erg0]

Are you just asking questions for the sake of it? I'm even trying to create possible lines of inquiry for you to pursue, but you still don't want to have an actual discussion. All I've got from you (and scot) is "I don't believe the claim." Why not, exactly?

It's a miller claim; an ideal claim for scum that invokes a lot of WIFOM. Also, just like with tar, your claim does not erase the fact that you have been scummy in this game.

The fact that you haven't addressed my response to your case indicates to me that you're not really interested in how scummy I have or haven't been.

I'm just becoming increasingly frustrated, so I'm not going to continue to pursue this. It's becoming obvious that this is largely about the claim, and I can't do anything further to prove or disprove that, short of quoting my PM and getting modkilled. The pretense of asking questions for the sake of information is what's annoying me - what could you possibly expect scum to tell you at this point?

My judgement is probably a little clouded right now, but I'm most suspicious of those who are calling me scum but failing to actually vote. Eldarad, for instance, had no reason not to vote when he posted earlier. I suspect that there are some players who want to keep their grubby fingerprints off the townie wagon.

[Erg0]

Erg0, I'm already voting for you. (Hence no vote in post 799...)

Ah. Never mind then.

I just realised that I've never been mislynched in my entire MafiaScum career*. This kinda sucks.

*Newbie games and/or dayvigs don't count.

[Erg0]

Gah, so close. Good game, folks.

Yeah, night 3 was a bit of a disaster - Elmo had his thing and I had to rush out of town suddenly due to a family emergency, so we had basically zero discussion on the kill/frame and almost missed sending it in altogether. That said, I didn't necessarily have scot pegged as the cop at that point, so it might not have made any difference. I was pretty much expecting to die anyway, and the miller claim was really just a ploy to prevent scot from making a full claim in case he had an innocent result on a living player, since we couldn't afford another confirmed townie at that point.

Incidentally, the stat that I quoted at the end of day 4 was true. Considering how rarely I get lynched as town, I just can't seem to get a handle on how to play as scum. Practice practice practice, I guess.

Also, now that alignment isn't an issue: my comment to Incognito on day 2 was definitely

not

a slip. I use that sort of phrasing as town all the time.

[Erg0]

I called out Erg0 as scum(OGML can confirm this) due to his DSA, which really sucked.

LOL ouch. Obviously I was faking it here, but I do that analysis in pretty much every game, and it's usually reasonably effective. The typical reaction from the rest of the town is "huh, that's nice. vote: other guy". I think the problem was that I left it until too late in the day, but I was really struggling with access at that point so I couldn't get it done sooner.

[Erg0]

A lot of it was what you left out, meaning everything after claims, which can be very important in figuring out connections to dead scum.

Yeah, I'd normally do that too. As town, I'd assume that the scum would start consciously trying to avoid connections after the competing claims, so I'd expect the best info to be in the posts before that. Selective analysis is pretty much my playstyle, though I suspect that people haven't picked up on that very much.

[Erg0]

When I was running this club we wouldn't have stood for that sort of thing.