Mini 594 - Satin Doll Showdown - {GAME OVER}

[Glork]

/coonfahrm!

[Glork]

PS, I am definitely the hottest dancing girl in the club.

[Glork]

Vote: Patrick
FoS: Ether, Mizzy

[Glork]

My vote wasn't random.

Just saying.

Arbitrary, random... same thing.


You're just jealous of my incredible hotness.

[Glork]

EBWOP: I know it's not the same thing; my point is that "random" in this stage of the game almost always means "arbitrary." Just don't want to confuse anybody...

[Glork]

I do "what you were getting at," but I think you're confusing some harmless pre-game banter for fishing and subsequently making a DD out of an A.

[Glork]

Ether, if anything, my comment would have stated more about my own role than seeking reaction from others.

I assure you. I was goofing around.

That is, unless you think I'm actually a gorgeous exotic dancer.

[Glork]

[Glork]

Er, something got lost in translation. I "got what Ether was getting at" as of Post 40, when whe posed the rhetorical question in Post 39. Beforehand, I thought it was an "arbitrary/random" thing. I hadn't even realized that the first post never contained the Vanilla PM until Ether mentioned having requested that OGML post it. Naturally, I don't expect anybody to take this assertion at face value, but meh.

[Glork]

Why an FoS, hasdgfas? I've taken Ether's behavior so far as a slight protown sign...

[Glork]

Point: Incognito.


Hascow? Response?

[Glork]

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

[Glork]

Glork, did you find hasdgfgs's explanation satisfactory?

Not especially. Why?

[Glork]

Early Protown Indicators: Erg0, Ether, Glork, Mizzy

Unvote, Vote: PokerFace

[Glork]

Why is discussing theory without showing person insight scummy?

It implies that you're appearing to contribute without actually helping to hunt for scums.

[Glork]

idk... gut?

[Glork]

Making a point does not, by any means, make someone more or less likely to be protown. I can name dozens of players who can play extremely logical, thoughtful games as scum.

"Point: Incognito" means exactly what it sounds like it should mean. You made a valid point that took away from whatever argument has seemed to be making at the time. And I wanted Has to respond to your question.

[Glork]

I noticed that, too. Good feelings evaporating based on "I want to give myself every possible out to 'suspect' Ether later on."

[Glork]

Glork, interesting time stamp: were you waiting for me to react first?

(Mizzy's response doesn't reassure me, for the record.)

No. I checked the thread when I saw you were the most recent poster in Little Italy, read Mizzy's post first, then read yours and simply agreed with it.

[Glork]

I thought he was trying to use things people were saying within thread to formulate his reads on people and not actually goad from the sidelines.

The thing is, that comment wasn't "goading from the sidelines" either. I was genuinely interested to see Has's response, because the inconsistency he displayed may belie malicious intent.

If I had said "Hmm, Incognito makes an interesting point. I'd like to hear what hasdgfas has to say about this alleged inconsistency" would I be "goading from the sidelines then? I think you're mistaking presentation for intent. I don't always speak my mind, but the gears are constantly cranking inside. Well, xcept in really, really, really, REALLY boring games. But this isn't one of them.


In other news:
Something about Patrick seems very slightly off, but I can't place my finger on what that is. Let it suffice to say the vote will stand, and I'll keep an eye on him. One reason might be the fact that he hasn't mentioned scot even once, and just asked for content from SSK and PokerFace.
Roland seems protown.
Ether is 99% protown.
Need user input from: scotmany12 (see above)
Erg0 seems closer to Final Stand than Methodical, which is a good sign.

[Glork]

You mean the "badgering into voting" post?

I was merely debunking his point there. Need I count the number of times I have told X to vote Y for no reason?

[Glork]

Yeah, I forgot that I moved my vote.

Meh. Whatevs.

[Glork]

Roland seems protown.

I'm not understanding how you can see this. I haven't seen roland really make any comments on anything this whole game.

Quality over quantity, baby.


Also, he used the word "rudimentary."

[Glork]

If I use the word "hebetudinous" to describe your brain when you made the correlation between big words and pro-town, does that make me pro-town, too?

You're welcome to try.

Now, what do you think of some of the other players 'round here?

[Glork]

It's actually the fact that even though he said nobody really stood out to him, he still weighed in on the most relevant three individuals at the time, asserting that they are all protown. Experience tells me that a scumbag would've latched onto one of these three, or they would've left it at "nobody really stands out to me."

[Glork]

FoS: Patrick

[Glork]

You, mostly.

[Glork]

to be honest

Truly and honestly?

Are your other posts/statements/thoughts not meant "to be honest"?

[Glork]

I see people use "tbh" with reasonable frequency (in fact, I probably use it more often than most), but it's usually tagged with a sentence, claim, or statement of opinion which goes against the norm or might be unexpected. It feels more out of place here, because I think I may be the only one harping on Patrick right now.

[Glork]

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

I'm really drunk.

Srsly, I promise I'm not scum.

Like I said, I generally type and read "tbh" when people say something against the norm. I felt like I was 'against the norm' by FoSing Patrick, so the "tbh" by Incog felt out of place. That doesn't mean I'm going to go OMGINCOG IS SCUM.

p sure you're reading way too much into nothing at all.

[Glork]

Hm. What

was

the response you were expecting?

[Glork]

Hm. What

was

the response you were expecting?

Well, something comprehensible mainly.

p sure what I said was perfectly comprehensible.

How's your literacy doing?

[Glork]

PATRICK

EVERYONE

<3

Hi person whom I don't know.

Dear Kettle,

You should try making more useful posts and fewer of these posts. Also, you're black.


XOXO,
Pot

[Glork]

Glork's town tell

I am bemused. And mildly curious. You almost certainly won't tell me, though.


Anyway, PF's post seemed rather "meh" to me. Like Patrick, I'd like to see more from him down the road, if he doesn't perish today.

I could in principle support a hascow lynch.

In general, I am surprisingly apathetic with regards to this game so far. I plan on re-reading in the not-too-distant future.

[Glork]

Unvote, Vote: hasdgfas

Less than a week left; let's get some action going.

[Glork]

/prodded

I'm really sorry, I feel awful. I'll try and post something coherent tomorrow.

There is no try. Do or

do not

die.

[Glork]

Less than one week. Let's go cow-tipping.

[Glork]

No. When you're town, you try to play similarly to previous times you've been town, so it's understandable to find someone town for acting similarly to previous times they've been town.

Dude, have you

ever

played more than one game of mafia with me?

[Glork]

It was meant in general. I am a prime example of someone who intentionally varies his playstyle from game to game, regardless of alignment.

[Glork]

Elmo: I believe I'd had a busy week, hadn't felt like I'd posted much lately, but wanted to ding SSK for being relatively useless.

[Glork]

People I'm more suspicious of: hasdgfas, Elmo, Tarhalindur, Glork

I'd give you 25-50% on this one. Good effort, though.

PF: Mizzy is solidly neutral right now (I do remember from the one game we've played together that she is generally a commitophobe in terms of suspicions/voting); Patrick is still somewhat scummy. Hasdgfas is like my compromise lynch at this point... enough suspicion that I'm willing and able to go for it right now, but certainly not enough that I'd remove him if I were able.

My head's not really in this game. I'm going to be doing an extensive re-read of the game once we hit night, and I should be more organized from there on out.

[Glork]

I like how Glork has absolutely no comment about my vote on him or any comment about the fact that both Ether and me had come to somewhat similar conclusions to Patrick about our preferred lynches at this point.

....Not really sure where you're going with this one. Your vote on me is completely inconsequential right now.

You and Ether coming to "somewhat similar" conclusions as Patrick means absolutely nothing to me.



Well tharr ya go! Tricksy commentses!

[Glork]

I saw that he claimed vanilla. I remember somebody mentioning not touching the wine (in front of him).

I am not fully caught up on the thread, and that's entirely my fault. I will be re-reading overnight.

I haven't voiced support for Mizzy's case against Patrick because, quite frankly, I haven't read it in all its gory detail.

This game bores me. Thirteen-page Day Ones are seriously getting annoying.

Incidentally, Incog, you're probably the most obvious townsperson in this game aside from Ether.

Gut intsinct tells me that the ElmoWagon is chock full of opportunism and will almost certainly end in a mislynch. I'm levaing my vote on the Cow, and if Elmo turns out to be protown, I'll be looking at the last 2-3 who piled onto him, pretty much regardless of Cow's alignment.

[Glork]

Gut intsinct tells me that the ElmoWagon is chock full of opportunism and will almost certainly end in a mislynch. I'm levaing my vote on the Cow, and if Elmo turns out to be protown, I'll be looking at the last 2-3 who piled onto him, pretty much regardless of Cow's alignment.

Do you have any thoughts on why he's town besides "gut"? Gut's well and good, but it's not going to get people to listen to you.
If you're so worried about a mislynch, why not try to stop it? Why not comment on why you think it will be a mislynch? Why just comment about how you think it will end in a mislynch and you'll just look at the last 2-3 to pile on to him? This reeks of scumminess, Glork.

What is there to say? A bunch of people jumped Elmo in the last couple of days. It looks like a feeding frenzy.

[Glork]

Quick, Elmo!

Before you die, list off your most likely scum candidates in order! Gogogogo!

[Glork]

What is there to say? A bunch of people jumped Elmo in the last couple of days. It looks like a feeding frenzy.

This doesn't actually say anything. Scum can easily be rushed close to deadline. Heck, in the last mini game I played, a scum was rushed in the last 24 hours, and only avoided getting lynched by lurking then claiming cop 5 minutes before deadline. You're essentially bitching about something whilst not doing anything about it; and not for the first time.

Just about anything "can happen." In my 2+ years of experience, I can find a counterexample for just about anything.

Based on what I remember, Elmo was first suspected for not being around for nearly a week after replacing into the game. Given his predecessor's inactivity, I see how this can be irritating, but I don't see ElmoScum deliberately stalling. Minus points for thsoe who accused him of purposefully avoiding the thread.
He made some big long posts. First he threw out some gut reactinos to posts and asked pointed questions of seven other players. Lots of "whys" and "what are your reasons for" type of questions --

good scumhunting questions

. People sparred, and Elmo came back to the thread later that day with additional questions for Patrick, Incog, and reiteration of his Cow questions. At this point he had already stated that he was tentatively willing to vote for Cow.

PokerFace finally took the initiative and bolded a few anti-Cow comments by Elmo and out of

nowhere

decides Elmo is a better lynch candidate than Cow. You yourself, Patrick, admit that your interest in Elmo is "sketchy and gut-based," but apparently it's good enough -- better than Cow, Tar, or myself. You temper it by saying you'd "hate to string [Elmo] up wrongly based on just a couple of posts and what could be just my imagination." I'm curious to know what changes between that and your actual vote.

The real turning point is Tar's big anti-Elmo post. He flatly states that Elmo "should have been dogpiled" for said post, but I'm not particularly seeing what's wrong with it, especially in comparison to several other players in the game. He wants to run Elmo up for not doing enough quickly enough, but I simply don't buy into it.

Suddenly Ether's okay with an ElmoLynch. Mizzy posits "boring vanilla or scum" and leans towards the former.

PokerFace: Not enough analysis, "reaching" on hascow. Vote #2.

Patrick: Vote #3 without a word added.

Erg0: "Welp, it's Elmo or Has, so I guess it's Elmo." Vote #4

Incog rags on me and doesn't even

mention

either viable lynch candidate. Ether pipes in to notdisagree with ElmoLynch again. I call opportunism, Erg0 calls it "realism."

Seriously. This wagon is fucking atrocious. Maybe Elmo will turn up scum; if so, I feel like it'd be a total shot in the dark.

SSK has been more useless for far longer, and aside from a "Who's scum?" question from Patrick, he hasn't even gotten a

mention

out of anybody. I'm getting a free bye because I'm Glork and apparently I tend to do this D1 from time to time. Elmo's being run up due to a slow start failure to live up to expectations. It's bullshit.

[Glork]

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.

Tar's "contrived" reads are mostly focused on how Elmo has been insincere, yet you put Elmo at your #3. Could you please read through and elaborate on the Tar-Elmo relationship? How does TarScum affect Elmo's alignment? How does ElmoScum affect Tar's alignment?

[Glork]

Scot is dead on.

I re-read overnight, and your scumgroup is Tarh, Cow, SSK.

Vote: Tarh

[Glork]

EBWOP: Bouncer likely means "Governor," as in "one-shot lynch preventer." Somebody kept Elmo alive because they thought he was protown. I don't see what there is to be confused about.

[Glork]

What about Cow, Ether?

I assume you mean his failure to vote for Elmo. Elmo was already leading the race, so Hasdgfas didn't really need to pile his vote on. Nobody had indicated that they'd jump to Cow; Elmo was clearly going to "die" tonight.

[Glork]

And by "tonight" I mean "yesterday."

[Glork]

p much all of Tar's posts are p awful.

Lots of firespitting at Glork and Elmo for not contributing, when SSK has been at least as bad for longer.

Cow still feels like scum, but he's actually third on my list.

[Glork]

Incog, I think it meant "...from the people whom I listed as protown."

[Glork]

Post 75 is a doozie, too. I'm going to play the MBL card and just say "see if you can spot what makes me cringe."

[Glork]

Do

NOT

let Tar pull a Lepton's Gambit tomorrow. He is SCUM.

I am an exotic dancer, Jailkeeper. Obviously this explains my blunder at during confirmations when I blurted that I was the hottest person in the game.

As I was near-certain Ether is vanilla, and nobody seemed to suspect her in the least, I jailkept her last night.

Nothing more I can say, really. Apparently y'all are going to play follow the claimed cop. And Tar's doing his job. I don't even know if a counterclaim is feasable, because I'm not willing to bet that there's a regular Doctor in the game.

[Glork]

EBWOP: Since I'm likely going to be lynched, I might as well post the notes I took overnight. I was actually going to hold these; I was planning on being deliberately obstinate even today to see how people would respond, but it doesn't look like it's going to matter. At least hopefully it'll give you something to think about once I'm gone.

Post 75 by Tar - Ether "veiled attack" on Erg0, but Erg0's scummier. Ask Tarh about Ether/Erg0 relationship.

--Note: Incog asks a handful of good questions, and he later goes after people for lack of contribution, but I don't recall many suspicions based on what contributions people

did

make... steals "goading from the sidelines" directly from Erg0, which annoys me

Roland's plus point as noted in my Post 116 is another plus point for Elmo. Incidentally, the "Elmo > Glork/SSK" feeling makes me wonder if SSK was being shielded, as opposed to HoCow.

In retrospect, I think maybe I

was

goading Moo. I'm okay with that, though, because I like to goad. Putting people on edge makes them more likely to do something telling.

I know it's tacky to laugh at oneself, but 128 still makes me chuckle.

Interesting to note: Remember how I gave roland a protown mark for weighing in even though he didn't really have much to go on? Tar's first line of Post 145 is much more indicative of how I would expect scums to behave.

PF's 158 brings to mind an interesting follow-up that I'll be looking for, but not asking about. [/cryptic]

Re: Hascow's 164: I've run into a surprising number of people who don't like "protown lists," ongoing games included. Suffice to say, I use town tells. I think they are more than valid. On multiple occasions, I have pointed to Lights Out 2 (7 for 7 on my 75%+ protown list D1), and I will continue to do so EVERY TIME somebody questions why I make protown lists.

--Note: Elmo replaces in May 16

Ether: You asked what I think about PF's 158. The one thing I noted is that it really contains no actual suspicions. Peef asks questions to linked games, etc., and establishes that he plans on metaing. If that's his MO across the board, I'm okay with the post. If he's using "I want to read and meta before coming to conclusions" to skirt contributions and actual analysis/scumhunting, I'm going to throttle him.

Incog's Post 182 is brilliant. At this point, I suspect weak distancing between Has and SSK.

Scot's 192 is another post I'd like to steal and add to my repertoire to promote Has+SSK.


Tarprodded, pops in to vote fellow lurker Elmo. I am mildly amused.

Elmo posts May 21, apologizing and saying he'll "try" to post tomorrow. Glork is not impressed.

p much stopped taking notes at that point. Damn work.

[Glork]

EBWOTP (sorry, guys): The language indicates that it's pretty post-like. When I was taking notes, intent was to post. As of daybreak, I had changed my mind. So yeah. Take that fwiw.

[Glork]

Yes, Incog. I was goofing around. I erroneously assumed that everyone was a dancer or some such, so I was bantering about being the hottest. Once it was revealed that Vanillas were "Ordinary Patrons" or whatever, I had no choice but to back off. Claiming "I am a non-vanilla role" as of PAGE ONE of a game is

completely moronic

. I was trying to cover for a mistake made in my naivety.

[Glork]

Scot is dead on.

I re-read overnight, and your scumgroup is Tarh, Cow, SSK.

Vote: Tarh

I'm not a big fan of claiming who the scumteam is when :
A) We don't know the size of it.
B) We haven't found even one of the scum
C) There is no reasoning

A) I will attempt to find other games as examples in just a bit, but I default to "one scumgroup of three," because that is BY FAR the most common for minis, in my experience.
B) Correction: We haven't

killed

even one of the scum yet.
C) See my post with notes for details.

Cow still feels like scum, but he's actually third on my list.

So I'm third on your list now, was that the case yesterday? If so, why were you on me instead of one of the other two yesterday?

I re-read overnight, and I sat down and thought. That's a pretty significant change.

Incog, I think it meant "...from the people whom I listed as protown."

Defending a suspicious statement before the person who made it says anything.
In addition, Glork says he thinks SSK is scum. Why is he defending him?

A) I think people read too much into "slips," and I have a habit of interpreting them.
B) I 'defended' him because I don't think that he made a slip, and I'm not going to use a nontell as a point against someone, even if I think they're scum. Believe it or not, I tend to play fair.

Roland seems protown.

I'm not understanding how you can see this. I haven't seen roland really make any comments on anything this whole game.

Quality over quantity, baby.


Also, he used the word "rudimentary."

I think I've already commented on this, but I didn't see any quality from roland's posts up to that point in the game.

I already explained this, in Post 116. Note that in 118, Patrick acknowledged that this made sense.

Unvote, Vote: hasdgfas

Less than a week left; let's get some action going.

Doesn't really give any reasoning for his vote on me here or anywhere at all in the thread. I mean, in his post 45, he rags on the people on the Elmo wagon for not having sufficient reasoning, but he didn't give any when joining my wagon. How is it different?

I did my "be intentionally difficult, so as to stir the pot" bit. Ether has already pointed out that I have done this SEVERAL times before on D1, as town. You seemed like a pretty viable candidate, and the game felt so anemic to me at that point that a good old-fashioned "let's just lynch X" post seemed appropriate.

[Glork]

I mentioned some reasons for not liking Glorks play yesterday and I doubt a scum Tarhalindur would take a risk like this so early in the game. His claim being a lie would mean instant death to him tomorrow so I'm leaning towards voting Glork, but I think I'd like to see a claim out of Glork aswell before things go any further.

This actually makes me

FoS

.

Tarh was at L-2 and as Erg0 indicated, he had already been voting for Tarh yesterday.

At Lynch-1, a claim is absolutely necessary.

A scum who claims and doesn't expect to live will usually attempt to do as much damage as possible before dying. Bringing down arguably the highest-profile player in the game is a petty good way of doing some damage, especially considering I came out of the gates D2 with a fire in my eye and a thirst for dirty blood.


I disagree with your assessment of Tarh's claim completely. Now granted, I'm biased, but I don't think your train of thought makes much sense at all.

[Glork]

1) A guilty on Glork is the kind of result that can break a game in half. I was going to claim early today regardless of the wagon (I will NOT risk allowing a result like "Glork=scum" to be silenced by NK), and the usual reason for waiting for a bit to claim (trying to draw out scumbuddies) seemed pointless in the face of a fast wagon (which I'm pretty sure has one of Glork's scumbuddies on it) and a fairly strong read of a Glork-Ether connection.

Bzzt.

This doesn't even have to do with the fact that you're a lying, dirty scumbag -- I'm going to refute this on general play strategy alone.

First -- When you have a guilty, you don't blurt it out right away. EVER. You extract as much information from the condemned as possible, and then you wrap the noose around their necks. If I were scum and you had actually caught me, I'd let myself get run up to L-1, hammer myself, and you'd have gotten ZERO information out of Day Two.

Secondly -- You blab on about losing the result due to nightkill. Two things here. A) Given the push against you today, I find it very unlikely that you would have been nightkilled. If anything, you'd be worring about a Vigging, but there's no evidence of a Vigilante existing as of yet. B) You can breadcrumb such that, if you die overnight, I'd be effectively outed anyway. Vote me, make a case against me, put every essence of your being into making sure everybody knows that YOU THINK I AM 100% SCUM. Then, if you

did

get nightkilled, and you

were

a Cop with a guilty, EVERYONE WOULD KNOW and I'd be subsequently run up.

Thirdly -- Balanced games nowadays have ways of ensuring that "follow the cop" won't fly. Like I said, I'm pretty sure there ISN'T a Doctor, so the mafia can safely dispose of you once I'm gone, no questions asked. Secondly, there's zero guarantee that you are sane. Thirdly, roles to disable you (such as Mafia Roleblockers) exist.

2) I generally consider L-2 the correct time to claim in a game with 10 or more players, especially when an extremely fast (as in 0 to L-2 in 6 hours) scum-led wagon that is likely to draw more support is involved.

3) I was concerned that I might be speedlynched before I had the chance to dump my information, let alone make a defense.

I can't actually argue with these. I'd have claimed given the wagon, too.

As for sanity: Not given, but I've never seen a Paranoid or Insane cop in a mini normal, so I'm willing to bet my life that I'm Sane.

HOLD HIM TO THIS WHEN I DIE AS I HAVE CLAIMED.

5) See my reply to Incog - the key factor for suspecting Incog for the Glork case was that I thought that his posts attacking Glork were insincere.

Do you still think his attacks on me were insincere?

[Glork]

See...if you'd tried to paint this as a breadcrumb, I might cut you some slack. You're saying here that your train of thought was, "I'm a power role called a dancer. Everyone else must also be dancers!"

I didn't read any of the pregame flavor. I skimmed my PM, and saw some flavor about a VIP room, the words exotic dancer, and then Jailkeeper. Yes, I made an erroneous assumption that we were all dancing girls. My "breacrumb" was that I was the

hottest

dancing girl, being one who takes others to the VIP lounge (out of harm's way, and unable to cause any trouble).

Also, your bold red in 383 feels fake. You cannot seriously be concerned that he'll pull off a Lepton's Gambit.

I'm seriously concerned that he'll try. I KNOW that he'll be going "I must be Paranoid or Insane!" tomorrow, assuming he lives through the night. So yeah, I'm telling you ahead of time: I don't expect to live through today, but I want you to lynch Tar dead tomorrow.

[Glork]

EBWOP: Also, explain how my latest posts have "sucked."

[Glork]

It wasn't really intended as a full breadcrumb. I just threw it down, and it kindof worked in relation to my role, so I ran with it. Then you mentioned the Vanilla PM, I flipped a shit, and I tried to cover for my mistake.

Of course I'm concerned that he'll be taken seriously. People lately have had a habit of going "see guilty, run up target." If Tar is scum, very few claims are going to buy him ANY credibility with the way he was run up. A cop with a guilty on a player who voted him will automatically turn heads in the other direction.

So the red text constitues my "recent posts sucking"?




I've pretty much accepted that I'm going to die. But since I'm pissed that I finally got myself into this game only to have THIS happen, I have one request before you run me up:
Let me run through and absolutely GRILL everyone to my heart's content. I'm going to be harsh, I am going to be nitpicky, and I am going to put every player under maximum pressure. Once I've had my fill, I will pick revise my most likely candidates for scum.

After that, you can do whatever the hell you want. Things are pretty much out of my hands, otherwise.

[Glork]

Re: Lepton's Gambit. The only reason I could think of for a Tarhalindur-scum to use Lepton's Gambit at this stage of the game is if he felt like Glork was so dangerous to the scum that sacrificing himself tomorrow would be worth it just to have Glork lynched today. Otherwise I would expect a Tarhalindur-scum to simply claim FBI agent and then claim to have investigated someone as an "innocent" thereby allowing himself to potentially get more time to live and casting even further seed of doubt for tomorrow. I suppose that single reason for a Tarhalindur-scum to use Lepton's Gambit is somewhat plausible considering the fact that Tarhalindur mentioned what he mentioned with respect to my D1 attacks on Glork, but I find that more unlikely. I will say this: If Glork is today's lynch and does turn up town, then Tarhalindur should be lynched tomorrow pronto. There's absolutely no way I would believe a person claiming to be a sanity-challenged FBI agent in a mini-game. If this was a larger game where the margin for town error was a bit larger, then yes, I might believe someone who claimed to be sanity-challenged.

HE WAS AT LYNCH MINUS TWO AND WASN'T GOING TO DEFEND HIMSELF.

He is SCUM who is simply taking down the highest-profile PROTOWNER with him.

It's THAT FUCKING SIMPLE.

Just so it's clear where I stand, I'm going with this:

Vote: Glork

I highly, highly, highly doubt that vote will change today.

That's all fine and dandy, but have you nothing to say about my request?

If I'm protown, you only have information to gain by the interrogations of a former Paragon of Mafia Hunters. If I'm scum, I just might give something away about who my scumbuddies are (though at this stage, that'd be pretty unlikely).

[Glork]

As for your claim of getting no information out of Day 2: first, nice WIFOM, and second, BULLSHIT. I already got the biggest piece of information I needed - namely, an all-but-known scum, and on an unreadable player who was near the center of attention yesterday to boot. This is critically relevant because it means that I can use my best (a relative term, to be granted) avenue for scumhunting: connections to known scum. Take a look at my games as town (particularly Mini 467 and Mini 527 - sadly, the best example is ongoing) - I'm generally at my best at finding scum when I can connect them to other scum.

The only reason that my fellow townspeople are getting info is because I am fighting you TOOTH AND NAIL to draw as much out of everyone as possible.

2) This may be a valid way to play Cop with a guilty. It is not the way I have played Cop in the past, and it is not the way that I have played Cop in this game. More importantly, it partially deprives me of the chance to find scumbuddies through their reaction to the guilty.

You could not be MORE wrong here.

Suppose you are a cop and I am scum and you know this.

Since you're so ego-centric about how YOU scumhunt best, YOU can still look for connections between hypothetical GlorkScum and his hypothetical buddies. Even better -- SCUM ARE MORE CAREFUL AS THE GAME PROGRESSES AND THEIR NUMBERS DWINDLE. The LONGER I am alive, the MORE interactions I have with other players... meaning the LONGER I am alive, the MORE opportunities you have to find my scumbuddies.

You claim to find me undreadable, yet somehow you seem to believe that lynching me as scum will enable you to find my scumbuddies. I find this a very difficult pill to swallow, considering apparently YOU HAVE ADMITTED THAT DON'T EVEN FUCKING KNOW HOW TO READ MY PLAY. Seriuosly. Tell me. How do I behave around my scumbuddies? Can you even begin to answer that question? What fucking information do you gain by having me die immediately?

3) First, I just completed my two biggest goals as cop: 1) find a scum and thereby turn on the best part of my scumdar (the scum connections part), and 2) investigate any unreadable players. At this point, I should be able to rely less on my investigation and more on my scumdar.

You should NEVER RELY on your investigations to begin with. If you are indeed a cop, this game will become the CLASSIC example of why that is true. Good, solid, involved scumhunting VIRTUALLY ALWAYS comes before role abilities. I'm actually looking forward to seeing how you react tomorrow morning, after I've been lynched as a townsperson and you've had a full night to think about the incredible blunders you've made.

Second, I am perfectly willing to trade myself 1 for 1 with a scum of your caliber, especially since Glork-scum should reveal the rest of the scumgroup through interactions in short order. If the scum use a neutralizing role on me, so be it - I can still hunt for connections, and that means that any other power role we have is free to act.

Meh. Given your situation (Lynch-2), trading one for one is valid if you were as you said.

Third, it looks to me like you just admitted that I'm the real cop. I'm sure you'll try to explain it off as "this is what I would say if you were the cop", but the tone feels very, very off for that. (Well, that and the fact that you are scum.)

I made those points under the hypothetical that you were as you have claimed, hence the whole "ignoring the fact that you're a dirty scumbag" part.

In the extremely unlikely chance that you are telling the truth, then yes, I need to die tomorrow. But that's not going to happen, because you're going to turn up scum.

For your own sake, I hope you are scum. Because if you're an actual Cop, you are

NEVER

going to live this down with me. Ever. You will be on my bad list eternally.

(Actually, I think I'm more pissed at the fact that people KNOW that when I get this ballistic over a game, I'm always protown. CovertOps vs DGB; Kingmaker II vs Pooky; Face-To-Face vs MBL; Lights Out 1 vs Pooky. If there are three reliable Glorktells, one of them is that when I raise hell all over a thread, you can damned well sure bet that I am protown and that I am stirring the pot to make the scums do something they're going to regret.)

[Glork]

Cow, I don't fucking care. I'd give at elast 75% that I'm going to be lynched today in spite of whatever I say or do. I made that statement as a meta build for future games.

[Glork]

Not really. If I had gone 10,000 games having done that protown and never did it once as scum, yeah, it'd be

possible

for me to set up that one magical game where I steal a win by breaking the meta. But I hadn't yet, so what are the odds that time #10,001 would be the one? And would it really be worth it to get that one win?


The only real question is how many times I have to build meta before people will take it into account. You can believe whatever the hell you want, and I'll still ridicule you every time you refute the meta. I'm okay with that.



Anyway, none of this really pertains to this game. Get your focus back where it belongs.

[Glork]

Nothing new to add here but /prodded.
I mean all the reasons above noted for Glork make sense for why he's scum unlike Elmo.

What fantastic contribution.

[Glork]

Erg0, I'd argue that I'm making cases based on facts as well.

I've already pointed out Tar's awful Post 75 in which he accuses Ether of making a shady attack on Erg0, but then calls Erg0 scummier.

I've already pointed out how, contrary to Roland (now Elmo), Tar popped in after an absence and made a blanket assessment of players that is consistent with how scum tend to behave. (Post 145)

I've already pointed out how Tar's decision-making would be sub-optimal if he were a cop, including A) his failure to try to get a read on my gameplay (seriously.... does nobody find it odd that Tar never even TRIED to make an assertion on my alignment yesterday?); B) his reliance on his alleged result (though he defends this by saying he's never seen a non-Sane cop in a mini normal); C) Instead of trying to argue his way out of the wagon on him, he just claims and has been riding the claim since then (seriously? NO defense whatsoever, just a claim and immediate deflection onto the biggest name on his wagon?)

I've already explained how, despite lurking during part of D1, Tar voted for Elmo

for lurking

when responding to his modprod

I've already explained how his 'case' against Elmo was a double-standard regarding both Glork and SSK, and how it served to deflect hasdgfas -- both of whom I also suspect to some degree or another.




Just because I'm loud and angry does not mean that I'm not making valid points.

[Glork]

EBWOP: I never even mentioned the "FBI" flavor, and Scot has since then covered it in his Post 389. The "FBI agent" flavor was poorly thought-out by somebody (either the mod or the one making the claim), as presumably the agent would have been BRIEFED before ever entering a hot spot such as a mafia hideout/front location.

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.

[Glork]

If you were protown, you would have done this "Paragon of Mafia Hunters" crap on D1.

A) Day One, I was fairly disinterested in the game. I didn't

care

to thorougly analyze or investigate anybody.
B) Day One, I was also playing a deliberately obstinate, "lazy" game, so to speak. Citing that I've been a Paragon and going on lengthy interrogations yesterday would have completely undermined what I was trying to do yesterday.
C) Day One, I didn't have somebody claiming to have a guilty result, with nearly half the town buying his claim at face value. TODAY, on the other hand, I recognize that I likely won't survive the day, and I want to drill as many people as possible before I succumb. Provided you're intelligent to go back and read what I've had to say once I die as a Jailer, you just MIGHT learn something about who the scums are.

Another thing: Glork, at the start of today you mentioned that the scum team is Tarhalindur, hasdgfas, and MafiaSSK, but you specifically chose to vote for Tarhalindur despite the fact that the hasdgfas-wagon was the major competing wagon at the end of Day 1. Is there any reason why you chose him of the three? Because as far as I can tell, I was probably the only person who had taken that much of an issue with Tarhalindur's play. Yes, other people labeled him as scummy but most other people mentioned him more in passing whereas I actually "Huge FoS-ed" him. It just seems odd for you to have chosen him when there were three other people (Pokerface, Patrick (albeit he's dead) and Erg0) who were voting for hasdgfas at the end of D1.

Firstly, I've already told you that Has is third on my list, out of that group of three.

Secondly, Tarh being relatively under the radar, was EXACTLY one of the chief reasons that I voted Tarh instead of Has specifically. Would we have maximized discussion if everyone voted the same way they had at the end of D1 and we ended up in another Cow/Elmo stalemate? Hardly.

Thirdly (though related to "Secondly"), Tar needed more pressure on him so that we could see how he responded. Cow has been under the pressure of a potential lynch. Tarh had not.

Tell me this, Incog (and everyone else, for that matter): What do you think of the fact that Tarh has not bothered to defend against ANY of the points made against him so far? This guy just claimed a guilty and clearly expects to ride that claim by making blunt statements such as "well I know you're going to turn up scum" and "I'd bet my life that I'm sane." 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.

[Glork]

Oh, and to answer your question: Aside from the early page blunders I made, no. Not at all. I almost NEVER let my role affect how I play. I have been the most loud and belligerent and active player as a Doctor (in fact, in Sesame Street Mafia, I got the GF lynched D1 then got killed N1), I've been every variety of vanilla townie. How I play is determined more by A) the players around me; and B) how the first ~4 pages play out. Changing one's play based on one's role is ASKING to be read like a book. It's bad mafia.

[Glork]

After the first few pages, I was convinced that at least a few other players knew I was non-Vanilla. I tried to maintain a relatively low profile. I guess I was feeling playful, because I took potshots at a few players (like when Incog debunked Hascow early on), but I never really got in the mood to read over the entire game.

[Glork]

Yes, Incog; Post 100 was during my "lay low" stage, and people were still talking about my "banter" from Page 1. I'm not going to try to ballpark a date/time or post where I seriously lost interest in the game, because quite frankly, I don't remember when that occurred. As far as missing Tarh's Post 75 earlier, what can I say? People notice new things in re-reads all the time. It didn't strike a chord early on, but I pinged on it later.

[Glork]

EBWOP: Also, saying I was absolutely "very interested" at Post 100 is an incredibly misleading descriptor. I just said the game wasn't "really, really, really, REALLY boring."

[Glork]

Also, on Glork, he seems to be scum trying to act like town by not paying a lot of attention to me. He didn't do that much suspecting of me at the beginning-now of me. So I'll do a FOS:Glork

1) How does "not paying a lot of attention" to you translate to "acting like town"?
2) How do you feel I'm scum pretending to be town, rather than just being town?
3) Did you miss the part where I re-read the game overnight? Re-reads tend to create changes in peoples' suspicion levels?
4) How does suspecting you make me scum now?
5) What do you think of Tarh's claim?
6) What do you think of my claim?

[Glork]

1.Not paying a lot of attentions translates to them being town because they don't want to kill what is usually a townie.
2. It feels like your sneaking on with big posts on to the town wagon.
3. I believe I did. I'll try and read that.
4. Same as #1.
5. I find it believeable though I'm not that great at Mafia so who knows.
6. same as 5.

1) If every protown player didn't pay attention to others, how would we find and kill scum?
2) What wagon? I don't think anybody has voted you for some time, and my "why Elmo and not SSK?" comments came when Elmo/Cow were the leading wagons.

By the way, if Glork is lynched as scum, Scot should probably die next.

Why?

[Glork]

My bad, Elmo.

Glork: What is the reasoning behind being "intentionally difficult, so as to stir the pot" on day 1?

There are several reasons, actually. It puts some people in a situation that they haven't encountered before. It necessarily forces players to deal with a number of personalities and approaches. It gives me a chance to observe how people interact with each other from a somewhat more "objective" persepctive (in that I am highly unlikely to get into an extended, in-depth argument with a suspect) -- yet even so, it forces people to interact with me in a different way than they are generally used to. Basically, putting people outside their comfort zone makes them more likely to do something telling. That information can be used for future reference.

When you voted hasdgfas, what would you have estimated the chances of his lynch as?

No idea. I didn't think about it that much, and I'm not going to go back and speculate.

What specifically in your reread changed hasdgfas's position in your scum list?

Has' posts themselves were never

that

bad, and very late in the day the push on Elmo made me feel that somebody was trying to distract. When I re-read, I found that the actual

content

(or lack thereof, in SSK's case) made the others stand out more. Until I've actually found scum, using stuff like "somebody is deflecting from X" is generally weaker than I'd like it to be.

What was your FoS of Patrick designed to achieve? What was your read of him throughout day 1?

To let him know I thought he was scummy?
I thought he was scummy?

What was your read on Incognito at the time of post 130, and throughout the day?

I donno; Not sure, but pretty pro-town by the end of it.

I don't understand why you've made the transition to "if you're an actual Cop". What affected your view of this?

Well, I'm not going to put the chances of him being a wayward cop at

zero

. I just wanted to point out that relying on an investigation in lieu of actually trying to discern someone's alignment is pathetic.





Ether: So how would that make him my scumbuddy? He has openly stated several times that he is inclined to believe me more. Are you saying you'd expect him to be the one stand-out for his scumbuddy when my death one way or another is all but guaranteed by tomorrow morning? That seems unbelievably fruitless.

Also, I think Scot's attitude towards SSK is reasonable, although I wish more people (Scot included) would put more effort into making SSK talk so they can get a decent read. Note that by asking explicit, direct questions, I've gotten him to participate.

[Glork]

I have to say, I feel

leagues

better about SSK after the last few pages.

[Glork]

PF: Regarding 419 and 422 -- aside from the pseudo-breadcrumb, or whatever you want to call it, I didn't "almost state otherwise." My low-profile play was due much more to the assumption/half-claim than the role itself.


Now... given the lengthy analysis you just made, what conclusions (or even inklings) do you have right now?

[Glork]

Post #384, Ether shows a large flaw in Glorks claim

I am an exotic dancer, Jailkeeper. Obviously this explains my blunder at during confirmations when I blurted that I was the hottest person in the game.

See...if you'd tried to paint this as a breadcrumb, I might cut you some slack. You're saying here that your train of thought was,

"I'm a power role called a dancer. Everyone else must also be dancers!"

How is there a flaw in my claim?

The last several mini normals that I have played in (Mini 545, Mini 506, Mini 463, Mini 358) have had ZERO correlation between flavor and roles.

Like I said, I just saw dancer, an innocent alignment, and my role, with the thread title referencing a made up gentleman's club. So

YES. I THOUGHT WE WERE ALL DANCING GIRLS.

That shows no flaw in my "claim" (which should actually read "breadcrumbing"). It shows a flaw in my failure to read flavor before.

Cow, I don't fucking care. I'd give at elast 75% that I'm going to be lynched today in spite of whatever I say or do. I made that statement as a meta build for future games.

I find it odd that someone who said:

It was meant in general. I am a prime example of someone who intentionally varies his playstyle from game to game, regardless of alignment.

Would want to build such a meta.

Okay, let me explain this one in a little more detail.

First and foremost, "varying playstyle" and "having a protown meta-schtick to fall back on" are

NOT

mutually exclusive. The fact that I only

OCCASIONALLY

ever want to use this "protown alt" actually SUPPORTS my claim that I vary my antics.

As a player, I want a trump card for when I need everyone to know that I'm town and not lying about it. Back in the day, Pooky had something strikingly similar (the Pooky Guarantee/Promise (I forget which it was called)). I vary my playstyle from game to game to try to acheive a certain degree of unreadability, but I want something to fall back on in a pinch that people can look at and say "Glork has said/done this a dozen times and been town each time." It's not the kind of "guarantee" I'd ever use at request, and something I certainly wouldn't

always

do as town, but something I can do

on occasion

to say "Yes, I'm protown, and you can trust this."

To summarize:
--I do vary my playstyle, even though I'm trying to build a protown trump that I can use on occasion.
--I don't plan on using the trump except on my own terms and infrequently when protown.




Looking at your analysis, those are really the only two minus points you throw out against me. Since you've stated that you're leaning heavily towards voting for me, and your reasoning on both points is fundamentally flawed, I felt the need to point out that you're either wrong or scum.

[Glork]

EBWOP:

First and foremost, "varying playstyle" and "having a protown meta-schtick to fall back on" are

NOT

mutually exclusive. The fact that I only

OCCASIONALLY

ever want to use this "protown

out

" actually SUPPORTS my claim that I vary my antics.

Fixed. Why I wrote "alt" instead of "out" is beyond me -- it is probably due to the fact that I traveled for 15 hours today and it's now nearly 1 AM and my brain is pretty much shot.

[Glork]

Grr. One last clarification before I go to bed. On the first point, here is pretty much exactly what went through my head when I read my role PM:
"Ooh, dancing girl. Jailkeeper. Time to go confirm."
*go to Little Italy*
"Satin Girl Showdown. Well clearly I'm the hottest, being the exotic jailkeeper and all. I'm going to go brag."



That there were potentially other people/roles NEVER occured to me AT ALL until Ether accused me of fishing once the game started. I had not thought about a hypothetical vanilla PM. I didn't think about other power role flavor. I made an assumption that apparently I should not have made. That's it. End of story.

[Glork]

This post REEKS of trying to deflect attention from Elmo through Chainsaw Defense. Note how Glork shunts into angry mode immediately after Elmo appears to be the default lynch. Note how Glork tosses in an attack on a lurker (SSK) in the process of attacking the wagon but does not follow up on it.

That's Chainsaw Defense, people, and it's defending a player who I think is scum for reasons I explained yesterday. When Glork comes up scum, Elmo needs to get squeezed (also Ether unless I find a major error in my original conclusion).

His recent posts (claiming a slip at the beginning of the game, claiming to try to be unreadable yet leave a supertell - direct contradiction anyone?) are further corroborations of the guilty.

As for Glork's recent attacks: As near as I can tell, Glork's attacks basically boil down to "your playstyle is bullshit". Note: Disagreement over playstyle does not necessarily mean that the other player is scum.

As for remaining complaints about flavor: There are a few issues with the flavor compared to real-life FBI, but I'd say that's a necessary side effect of using FBI flavor in the game flavor (similar to how the FBI Agent role does not, to the best of my knowledge, mirror how the FBI works in real life).

Misrepresentation galore here.

Pargraphs 1 and 2: I'm going to take an example from Kingmaker II to illustrate exactly why I look for things like what I found in the ElmoWagon yesterday. Early on Day Two, an innocent (bird1111) was

railed

for having lurked through D1 then coming out of the gates D2 with a lengthy analysis post. At least two scums (MBL and Pooky) were on this wagon, while another scum (whose name escapes me at the moment) had exhibited behavior VERY SIMILAR to bird111's. Whenever I perceive a double-standard such as this, I look hard at what everyone says about both X and Y, and why they might go after X but not Y. Given that A) the "case" against Elmo was pathetically weak; B) Roland/Elmo are likely protown; and C) there was IMHO a very clear double-standard with Elmo getting railed for like ten days of inactivity but SSK getting NOTHING for a full day's worth of uselessness, yes. I went after Elmo.

This is going to come down to nothing more than a "he said, she said" argument. I obviously believe my post was legitimate.

Now, to address the "but doesn't follow up on it" bit regarding SSK -- that's a BLATANT LIE. I put SSK in my scumgroup at the VERY START OF DAY TWO, then you claimed and caused a distraction, but as soon as the dust has settled, I've begun grilling SSK to try to get a firmer read on him. Lies and propaganda.

Regarding my "recent posts": I just explained how my misstep at the start of my game and my playstyle are NOT indicators that I am guilty. Yet instead of addressing my defenses, you just regurgitate exactly what PokerFace just summed up. I explained exactly my train of logic regarding flavor. I have also explained how "varying my playstyle" and "having a fallback" are NOT CONTRADICTORY.

A question to those who have issues with my claim... Given that I basically stated that I was a dancing girl in my confirmation post, which do you find more likely:
A) I am a scum dancing girl; or
B) I am not a dancing girl but chose to cement the flavor of my role/claim before the game even began?


Finally, my points against Tarh, are VERY MUCH NOT "your playstyle is bullshit." In fact, the only pure-playstyle thing I've dinged Tarh on is his decision to "investigate" me rather than to actually try to discern my alignment. Let's review the points I've made against Tarh:

I've already pointed out Tar's awful Post 75 in which he accuses Ether of making a shady attack on Erg0, but then calls Erg0 scummier.

In Post 75, Tarh attacks Ether for making an insincere attack on Erg0, but in the VERY SAME POST he attacks and votes Erg0. This indicates that his "case" against Ether at the time was nothing more than some hand-waving -- smoke and mirrors.

I've already pointed out how, contrary to Roland (now Elmo), Tar popped in after an absence and made a blanket assessment of players that is consistent with how scum tend to behave. (Post 145)

Tarh says something consistent with lazy, lurky scum. Protip: Townies tend to try harder when under pressure for lack of contribution. Scums just vomit some half-assed comments and then go on their merry way. Potential cases in point for the former: Glork, SSK.

I've already pointed out how Tar's decision-making would be sub-optimal if he were a cop, including A) his failure to try to get a read on my gameplay (seriously.... does nobody find it odd that Tar never even TRIED to make an assertion on my alignment yesterday?); B) his reliance on his alleged result (though he defends this by saying he's never seen a non-Sane cop in a mini normal); C) Instead of trying to argue his way out of the wagon on him, he just claims and has been riding the claim since then (seriously? NO defense whatsoever, just a claim and immediate deflection onto the biggest name on his wagon?)

A is playtyle; B can be argued as playstyle, too; C is very much NOT playstyle -- it is a reflection of the fact that Tarh is STILL a lazy scumbag who wants to avoid contribution and KNOWS that he's afraid to step into the ring with me because I'll ruin what he believes is a good enough claim to coast on.

I've already explained how, despite lurking during part of D1, Tar voted for Elmo for

lurking

when responding to his modprod

Hypocrisy at its finest (and again, not "playstyle" in the least).

I've already explained how his 'case' against Elmo was a double-standard regarding both Glork and SSK, and how it served to deflect hasdgfas -- both of whom I also suspect to some degree or another.

Again, not playstyle. Now granted, I've since then backed off on this reasoning because SSK is more town and Hasdgfas isn't a sure thing anymore. But I'm bringing this up to FURTHER illustrate that Tarh's "glork's attack is just that my playstyle is bullshit" comment is -- again --

A BLATANT LIE

.



So there. Take it or leave it, kids. I've exposed Tarh for who he really is. He is an extraordinarily lazy scum who is still riding his claim, makes assertions about me without bothering to read or think about what I've posted, and can't be arsed to PROPERLY defend himself, instead choosing to make ONE blanket statement that isn't even REMOTELY accurate.

The guy's scum. This should be a done deal already.

Glork: What does your scumgroup look like now? iirc, you protect people by taking them into the VIP section, but the flavour indicates kills happen after everyone's gone home - can you comment on that? Can you articulate why you thought Patrick was scum?

Not entirely sure.
Tarh is obviously on it.
I'm skeptical of PokerFace, though there may be a degree of OMGUS kicking in there. There's still something that feels off about his analysis and conclusion.
I guess Cow is still on the radar -- he seems solidly in "sit and watch" mode.
Super-gut says two scums are going after me and one is leaning towards (if not outright) defending me.

Firstly, I'm not sold on the idea that kills happen after everyone goes home. Secondly -- though my flavor doesn't state this explicitly, it is reasonable to assume that I give my target some "special attention" (if ya know what I mean) all night long, which would perfectly explain how they can neither harm nor be harmed.

I'd have to go back and look at Patrick in detail again. Usually when someone I suspect dies as town, I just go "meh" and move on.

[Glork]

EBWOP: Crap. I misremembered my Kingmaker example. Strike this:

Early on Day Two, an innocent (bird1111) was railed for having lurked through D1 then coming out of the gates D2 with a lengthy analysis post. At least two scums (MBL and Pooky) were on this wagon, while another scum (whose name escapes me at the moment) had exhibited behavior VERY SIMILAR to bird111's.

...because Bird was scum, and MBL was town.

(For those who don't know, there was a period of like four or five days -- and several pages of discussion -- that got lost in a site crash and consequently caused me to misremember game details.)

Here's where the double standard was:
MBL goes after bird.
Wagon springs up against Bird, driven primarily by MBL (town) and Pooky (scum)
Scum-driven counterwagon builds on MBL (town) but Pooky (scum -- similar play to MBL) goes largely ignored.

[Glork]

By the way,....

And despite his acclaim, I wouldn't call Glork the highest profile player in this game.

...you may be entitled to your opinion, but fact is, Erg0 (referring to me as a "night action magnet at the best of times") knows I'm one of the highest-profile players.

Even more importantly, Tarh himself said this just now:

2) I had a guilty on one of, if not THE most prominent player in the game.

This is HUGE, PokerFace, because it exactly supports the point I was trying to make. Regardless of whether YOU think I'm high-prof, the

player

lyingdirtyscumbag who claimed a guilty on me thinks I'm top of the line.

Thus, as I said before: If he's going down and wants to take someone out first, he'll take high-profile. He just stated that he thinks I'm very high-profile.

I rest my case.


(By the way, PF. Who do/did you consider the most prominent player in the game? Since you stated you don't think it's me, I'm just curious, off-hand.)

[Glork]

Incog, you haven't answered my question:

A question to those who have issues with my claim... Given that I basically stated that I was a dancing girl in my confirmation post, which do you find more likely:
A) I am a scum dancing girl; or
B) I am not a dancing girl but chose to cement the flavor of my role/claim before the game even began?

[Glork]

To me, it seemed funny coming from you because you're a guy and you're claiming to be a hot dancing girl in this strip club theme type of game.

So you find it unusual that I, a guy, claim to be a hot female in a strip-club themed game, and you think there's zero chance that I was breadcrumbing?


That sounds a little sketch.

[Glork]

I'm talking after the fact, you git.

So you're telling me that this is what you currently think:
--Upon my confirmation, I pretended to be a female dancing girl just for shits and giggles
--When I decided upon my "fakeclaim," I retroactively used that completely pointless roleplaying to make the claim more believable


The second I can understand if the first holds. However, I don't understand how you can possibly agree with the first statement. Are you seriously, honestly telling me that I had NO reason for having insinuated that I was a dancing girl in a game called the Satin Doll Showdown?

[Glork]

I don't want to start a discussion on this:

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.

...because it has very little to do with this actual game, but empirical evidence suggests that me behaving ridiculous doesn't buy me any more time. (I was double-nightkilled AND recruited N1 in that game, after being COMPLETELY off the walls D1 as a vanilla townie.)

[Glork]

Bzzt. Let's go ahead and take a look back at the first two pages of the game.

PS, I am definitely the hottest dancing girl in the club.

Breadcrumb #1.

Arbitrary, random... same thing.


You're just jealous of my incredible hotness.

Breadcrumb #2.

"Jealous." Glork, do you think that my role necessarily needs incredible hotness in its day-to-day existence?

Ether makes Glork aware that not everyone is a dancing girl. Glork's jaw hits the floor, and he realizes that he's basically pseudoclaimed his role.

I do "what you were getting at," but I think you're confusing some harmless pre-game banter for fishing and subsequently making a DD out of an A.

Glork replies immediately with some damage control, citing it as "harmless pre-game banter" but makes a play on "mountains out of molehills" using cup sizes -- an indicator to anybody who is paying really close attention.

Meh. I still don't feel comfortable, considering you said that before the vanilla PM was common knowledge.

Ether points out that Glork was a dancing girl before the vanilla PM was common knowledge. This further implies that Glork is non-Vanilla. Ether interprets fishing -- reality is, Glork assumed dancing girls all around.

Ether, if anything, my comment would have stated more about my own role than seeking reaction from others.

I assure you. I was goofing around.

That is, unless you think I'm actually a gorgeous exotic dancer.

Glork TWICE HINTS AT HIS BREADCRUMB WHILE DOWNPLAYING ITS SIGNIFICANCE.

"....my comment would have stated more about my own role..."

Stop, THINK, and let that sink in, Incog.

...

...

...

Done? Good. Now let's look at the smalltext, enlarged and placed in red for your viewing pleasure:

I assure you. I was goofing around.

That is, unless you think I'm actually a gorgeous exotic dancer.

Again -- damage control but with heavy crumbing for those who are paying attention.



I tried to obfuscate what I thought was The ObvObv by repeatedly saying that I was joking, but I also REPEATEDLY LEFT HINTS that I was oozing information about MY ROLE. I referred to myself as a gorgeous "exotic dancer" -- the role I would later claim. I flat-out TOLD YOU that my "I'm the hottest" comment was me GIVING INFORMATION ABOUT MY OWN ROLE.


This is exactly the POINT of a breadcrumb, Incog. I wasn't just doing it for shits and giggles.

[Glork]

EBWOP:

This is exactly the POINT of a breadcrumb, Incog.

The "this" that I am referring to is basically what I accomplished.

I made a handful of statements that were extremely difficult to discern at the time (based on people's reactions to my claim, I don't think anybody knew/assumed beforehand that I was an exotic dancing girl), but which make LOADS more sense when explained given the context of a full roleclaim.



I set this up from that first "PS" post I made. The "blunder" to which I alluded was my assumption that everyone was a dancing girl of some kind, and my "I was only kidding around" comments were an attempt to distract from the fact that I felt I had basically claimed one of {roleblocker, jailkeeper}. Seriously. Read over the first few pages of the game and piece it together. EVERYTHING fits.

[Glork]

...the afore-mentioned VIP Lounge. I'm sure you can guess what *ahem* "doesn't happen" in the VIP Lounge that takes up my patrons' ENTIRE NIGHTS.

Furthermore, if you've ever been to a strip club -- or, hell seen a movie with a scene at a strip club -- you'd probably be able to guess that each girl is very unique. Consider the 1996 movie Striptease where one of the dancing girls used a boa constrictor (or a python or something... I forget exactly) as part of her act. There are girls who dress up and dance as cops, nurses, firefighters -- you name it, they exist.

I fucking guarantee you I could create a mini normal out of dancing girl personae.

[Glork]

Posting links, rather than pics. Nothing profane, but probably not technically 'safe for work':
http://www.adultcostumeshop.com.au/cont ... ostume.jpg (obv)
http://www.adultcostumeshop.com.au/cont ... ostume.jpg (obv)
http://www.adultcostumeshop.com.au/cont ... 0dress.jpg (inventor)
http://www.adultcostumeshop.com.au/cont ... ostume.jpg (LOOK! EVEN A MAFIA MADE OF DANCING GIRLS!)

[Glork]

MOAR POSTINGZ:

Vegas Showgirls Mafia. Look at the Role PMs from the game, Incog. I was IN this game.

You're getting all incredulous that I could have imagined that everyone was a dancing girl. But you're just being stubborn, ignorant, and obtuse.


I cannot WAIT to see your reaction to this. If "I can't believe you could think that everyone was a dancing girl" is your only reason for disbelieving that I was breadcrumbing, you've got another thing coming, Buster Brown.

[Glork]

I've PMed my paraphrase to the mod to ensure that I don't get modkilled for being too close to wording/structure of my role PM. In the meantime, I'd very much like an initial reaction to my defense. You claimed that because I am a "smart player," I should find it unlikely that an entire game would consist of dancers at the club. I have blasted your argument to smithereens. What do you have to say about that?

[Glork]

Oh.

Exotic Dancer.

[Glork]

EBWOP: And both words were bolded, fwiw. "Exotic dancer" is effectively my rolename.

[Glork]

Oh.

Exotic Dancer.

This is the paraphrase?

No. That is the fill in the blank to "You are ______."


THIS is what makes me think you are being intentionally obtuse, which is definitely not a protown sign in this type of situation.


Anyway, OGML approved of what I sent him, so here is my full paraphrase:

I'm an EXOTIC DANCER at the thread's namesake. Once per night, I can bring a single person to my VIP lounge, preventing them from causing or befalling any shenanigans.

I am a Jailkeeper. I can target a player, simultaneously blocking/protecting them, and I have the same win condition as listed in the sample vanilla PM.

[Glork]

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

[Glork]

Seriously. I'd vote Incog just as easily as I'd vote Tar unless he can reasonably explain that comment. That's BULLSHIT and he knows it.

[Glork]

You haven't blasted anything to smithereens yet, buddy.

Again, bullshit.

Here is

EXACTLY

what you said against me:

I find it ABSOLUTELY HARD to believe that you would think that all of the roles within this game, including the Vanillas all happen to be beautiful, exotic dancers like yourself.

I gave

BUT THREE EXAMPLE

of how power roles could be created out of dancing girls, and I linked to a game in which protown roles were Showgirls with ORIGINAL FLAVOR and the scums were Drag Queens and a Ghost. That provides TWO potential counterexamples to your "it's hard to believe that a game could be made out of dancing girls"

JUST OFF THE VERY TOP OF MY HEAD

.

Yet

INSTEAD OF ADDRESSING MY EXAMPLES OR MY DEFENSE AT ALL

you choose to

FISH FOR MORE INFORMATION

, insinuating that you want to wait to see if I get modkilled or not.

I made an ENORMOUS mistake in believing that you were protown earlier. You recent attacks against me have been absolutely ATROCIOUS.

[Glork]

What did he mean?

[Glork]

...oh. That makes more sense.

[Glork]

First of all, Incog, I never put nearly this much thought into flavor, hypothetical role PM wording/structure, or any of this kind of debate and analysis when I read my PM or made my assumption. You seem to think that I analyzed my PM and came to the conclusion that everyone was a dancing girl. That's not what happened. It's just the conclusion that my brain naturally arrived at. I have stated at least once prior that I skimmed my PM, said "hey cool" and went to post.

For all I knew or thought (or didn't think, really), the wording could have been different for a

cop dancer

or a

nurse dancer

with appropriate flavor. I'm not going to say that I made the conscious connection between "exotic" and "VIP lounge" and "Jailkeeper," because that'd be a flat-out lie. But I don't see how you still can't believe that someone could arrive at a wrong conclusion given the role PM I outlined above.

Secondly, I don't see why you're expecting perfection from me. This isn't Burden of Proficiency by its classic definition, but I'm miffed that you can't seem to accept that good players can make dumb mistakes. EVERYBODY does it. I guarantee you that every Glork, Thesp, PJ, Thok, Yos, and LmL in the game's history has made a bad play or an erroneous conclusion, and if it weren't against the spirit and rules of the game, I'd ask each and every one to highlight such a mistake so that I could post them and show you this.

Alternatively, I don't see how

exotic dancer

can't be the alignment -- followed by Cop flavor with

Cop

as the role isn't feasable. When I stop and think about it, yes, I see the point that you're making. But A) I can also continually come up with counterexamples; and B) More importantly, I keep trying to make you understand that it's not something I put hardly any thought into to begin with.

Thirdly.... you criticize my play for not being as tight as you believe it always should be. I do NOT play tight. I almost never have, and I rarely ever will. I'm sick of seeing people try to cram their own playstyles into others, which I have seen happen disturbingly often in the last few months.

Fourthly, I'm irritated that you seem to think I'm going to be mislynched due to the mistake. Regarding this:

If you really are telling the truth here and really did make that big of a mistake early on then seriously, you need to straighten up your play in a major way. It would be really, really stupid for you to be mislynched as a pro-town power role of your supposed stature, Mr. Paragon.

I happened to do the ONE thing that caused my assumption to blow up in my face later on. If I'd said nothing, I could easily have revised my assumption without having said anything about my own role/flavor. 95% of the time, making a bad assumption such as the one I did amounts to nothing, because as soon as the first other player dies (or, hell, as soon as the first other player even CLAIMS), the player making the error goes "oh wow... good to know" and rights the ship.

Now, here's what I'm thinking: If you're telling the truth, what would this say about the bodyguard? Would this somehow indicate that the bodyguard might just be scum? The bodyguard is a form of a protective role and a jailkeeper is also obviously a protective role. I have a hard time believing that two protective roles (especially ones like these that could either prevent a lynch or a night-kill simply if the role targets the correct person) would both be town-aligned and would still allow for the game to be balanced. Any thoughts on this?

I'm not really sure what you're getting at. What bodyguard? Do you mean the Bouncer? If so.... a (presumably) one-shot lynch preventer and a jailkeeper can very easily be balanced in a mini game. Jailkeepers are "fixed" Doctors because using them on the more powerful roles comes at the cost of negating those roles. Suppose things had played out differently and the real cop (assuming there is one) had to claim. I'd be stuck with a dilemma: Block/Protect the cop every night, thus making it effectively vanilla and potentially drawing incredible suspicion on myself upon my roleclaim; or leave the cop completely vulnerable to scum kills. Finally, the Governor role can hardly be considered a proper "protective" role. If used too often, they take away the town's best weapon in the game -- lynching. Furthermore, their power/success are directly determined by the alignment of the player(s) that Governor chooses to save. Personally, I think that the bouncer made a reasonable enough play. But even saving one vanilla townie would come at the cost of the information we'd get from having lynched Elmo. There are significant opportunity costs associated with using both roles protectively.




One last thought: You seem to "have a hard time believing" a lot of things, Incog -- my belief that everyone was a dancer, the idea of there being two "protective" roles, that I could be prone to making a mistake in all of my hundreds of mafia games played. Yet, for the rant you just went on about me "making a big mistake," your extreme narrow-mindedness will prove to be an even larger detriment to this town if indeed you are protown. I want you to stop and think about that later on, once I'm dead. Because as soon as I die, ALL THREE of these things that you find so very "hard to believe" will have turned out to be true. And you'll be the one stuck scratching your head wondering how YOU could have been so off-base yourself.

[Glork]

In fact, I can name two big blunders from great players.

Last day of Space Monkey, when PJ had the scumgroup -- Glork/Nightson -- in the very palm of his hand, he manged to talk his way completely out of lynching us outright. In an effort to test me, he put Kleibian at Lynch-1. I subseuqently hammered and won the game outright. That game

still

haunts PJ.

Thok's was the one that led to his title, though a big part of it was a great claim by another player. In Married to the Mob, Thok (the SK, obviously) believed a Psychiatrist fakeclaim by scum. Thok stated (heavily paraphrased) "hey, I'm the SK. Convert me to town." Guess what? He was run up as soon as he said that.



Anyway, I agree that other people need to weigh in. I feel that this "what was Glork thinking" conversation has gotten distracting to actually finding scum and that the scums would be VERY content to keep the focus entirely on me. This conversation should have ended at "here is all the breadcrumbing I did," you saying "I find it hard to believe that you could assume that everyone was a dancing girl" and me saying "well then you are an ignorant git."

[Glork]

Wow, Glork's either mega pissed or doing a very good impression of it. Less seems to be happening than I thought. Huh. That's weird. Glork, you were going to, y'know,

grill people

, with fire and laser beams and stuff. We've got deadline in like ten days now, and if you're town you're probably not seeing the dawn of day 3 either way, so..?

Yes, well, the day since then hasn't exactly panned out as I expected. Better than I had hoped, in some ways (because when I made my request, I would've given about 15% that I'd survive to night even), but I find myself trying to convince the insufferably stubborn Incognito that he's at least as bone-headed as he believes I am.

Frustration could go either way really. Scum are just as easy to get frustrated as town are.

While I agree with this, I would point out that frustration in scum usually manifests itself differently than frustration in town

And scot, you believed Glork before he even pointed out all of his breadcrumbing in Post 497 just because you thought Tarhalindur's flavor made no sense. That's somewhat opportunistic of you to label me as scummy just because you can't see why I'd have a hard time believing that Glork was actually breadcrumbing. If it wasn't for my repeated questions, you wouldn't have even known that what Glork did early on was supposed to be breadcrumbing to begin with.

You're strawmanning at this point. Scot's response (just because I agreed with him before knowing he had breadcrumbed doesn't mean he didn't breadcrumb) is perfectly accurate. You are the ONLY person clinging to this notion that I called myself a dancing girl or implied as such no less than FOUR times in the first TWO PAGES of the game.

And as far as your last sentence goes, A) that's not entirely true -- I was the first to initiate the discussion by directly asking you to answer my question about my own breadcrumb; and B) the fact that your attacks led to me pointing out the full extent of my breacrumbing does not make you any more or less legitimate, or right.

[Glork]

EBWOP:

You are the ONLY person clinging to this notion that I

had no reason to call

myself a dancing girl or impli

y

as such no less than FOUR times in the first TWO PAGES of the game.

Grammar FTW.

[Glork]

People, please place your votes, even if you're not sure that they will stay there. This may sound dumb, and we do have nearly nine days until deadline, but given how split the players currently are, this lynch will likely come down to who hit the higher number of votes first.

[Glork]

More posts, please.


PokerFace, I especially expect something lengthy and insightful from you, given your last post.

[Glork]

Okay. To try to clear up this "breadcrumbing" thing...


When I first crumbed my role, I had assumed that everyone was a dancing girl. The

breadcrumb

came in the fact that I kept referring to myself as gorgeous, the hottest, etc. That was intended as a breadcrumb, and given that context (my initial assumption), it still functions as a breadcrumb.

The "damage control" (aka, denial) came only

after

I realized that not everyone was a dancing girl, and I had believed that I had blatantly given my role away (as opposed to crumbing something).

Eldarad, I'm not sure I can satisfactorily answer your question one way or another. What I can say is that I absolutely INTENDED to breadcrumb my role, but when I came to believe that I has

pseudo-claimed

(as opposed to merely crumbing), that's when I pulled back.

[Glork]

Incog: I can't place exactly what puts Elmo as town. I have that random roland protown-tell, and I still think that the Elmowagon yesterday was VERY stinky. A question for you: How do you place Elmo's behavior and its implications with respect to the behavior of Mizzy and Tarh?

[Glork]

...but knowing the potential of you being lynched instead, and knowing your own alignment, why wouldn't you put an insurance vote on Elmo?

[Glork]

Ether, if discussion of the current conflict disinterests you, perhaps you can provide your own insights on everyone else, as opposed to just riding the Incogtrain?

[Glork]

Incidentally, Incog... could you explain the hypothetical relationship between GlorkScum and HasScum? Between TarhScum and HasScum?

[Glork]

Currently I am heavily leaning towards Glork as scum.

Reasons, much?

So what you're saying is that you were happy with an Elmo lynch, but did not want to be seen to support it openly. I find the difference between outright support and acquiescence to be nil in that situation, and that fact that you chose to hide your support for the Elmo lynch by simply letting it happen rather than place a vote makes me very suspicious.

I very much agree with this. Hascow, you sound like you're trying to be noble but perfectly content to save your own skin. The "I didn't need to vote Elmo because he was already ahead" and "I wasn't voting Elmo because I didn't think he was scummiest" are not technically mutually exclusive, but there's something that bothers me with that. The former seems to imply that you were okay letting Elmo die while you lived, and the latter seems to imply that you didn't want Elmo to die. Now, I may be interpreting this wrong -- if so, Cow, that's where I want you to explain.

For all other players, I think that my read of them is irrelevant at this point, since the Glork/Tar lynch is the only game in town.

No. Wrong. Failure. Bzzt. Unacceptable. Requires Improvement.

I want opinions on every single player from you, and I want them now. Just because one of Glork/Tarh will be lynched today does NOT excuse you from making judgment calls on others. Afterall, you've already done so for Ether (if Glork is scum), Cow, and Mizzy. Why not comment on the others?

[Glork]

Oh. I didn't realize that was directed at me.

I don't really know what to make of it, because I find it difficult to evaluate "I don't see X doing Y regardless of alignment."

Given the context, I had assumed that at least one or two players had picked up on me being non-vanilla anyway, so I don't see how I gave anything else away -- in my mind, I had already (accidentally) locked myself out of a vanilla claim as of the time I made Post 48.

[Glork]

I find myself in a unique position now. Should Tarh be lynched today, it seems I become a very likely nightkill candidate, assuming no Doctor. The only two ways I don't die are:
A) The scums decide to try to off somebody else;
B) I successfully block the nightkill


I know that the scums have a general idea of the range of players I feel might be scum, even though my opinions have evolved throughout the day (and even since I last really got into how I feel). Since option B) is contingent upon two things -- me accurately picking out the remaining scums, and me successfully picking the right scum to block -- I'm not all that confident that I'll survive the night.

I guess my question to you folks is this: Would you rather I throw out my thoughts / opinions on the remaining players before day ends and essentially doom myself to a

maximum

50% chance of surviving, or should I take a chance and see if I can negate a kill attempt on me tonight?

[Glork]

Scummiest

Tarh
Poker
Mizzy
Cow
Ether
eldarad
Erg0
Scot
Elmo
Incog

Least


Notes: Mizzy, Cow, and Ether are all very close, and those three could be in any order, really... similar story with Eldarad/Erg0. I'm fairly certain as of right now that none of {Scot, Elmo, Incog} are scum.


More later, hopefully, but I have work/travel today, work/more travel on Friday, and will have no access during the day on Saturday/Sunday.

[Glork]

still think Glork is more likely to be scum than Tar. I just don't see what Tarscum has to gain from fakeclaiming cop so soon. Whereas Glorkscum - given a guilty result on himself - has a very strong incentive to survive the Day at the expense of Tar since mislynching the cop is a pretty good result for someone who must have thought they were a dead man walking immediately after the claim.
On the other side, Glorktown would recognise a 1 for 1 trade for a Tarscum as a pretty good trade. I don't see any indication that Glork acknowledges this.

What does he gain? Why would he claim Cop "so soon"?

Did you miss the part where he got run up to Lynch-2 with astronomical chances of being lynched D2, then claimed a guilty result on the very person he would later refer to as one of the most prominent players in the game? I've already explained what he had to gain by claiming to be a Cop -- especially one with a guilty result on

me

.

As far as "recognizing that a one-for-one trade is a good thing" goes... of COURSE I recognize that. But why not go for the gold of securing a SCUMlynch today and going after ANOTHER scumlynch tomorrow? Do you honestly think that my play as town would be to say "please lynch me then lynch Tarh once I come up town"? Because aside from the "please lynch me" (it was more like "don't lynch me, but since it's going to happen anyway..."), that's exactly what I said.

I cannot believe that you think I should settle for getting lynched today to have Tarh lynched tomorrow, when I can get Tarh lynched TODAY and force the scums to blow a nightkill on me tonight.

I'd sort of like Glork to elaborate on his meta on me, but only because I always want him to do that. Frankly, my highish position on the list is the most flattering statement made about me all game.

I wouldn't call it meta on you specifically, but your play seems bad since Tarh's claim:
-Your "if Glork is scum, Scot should die" thing seems way off-base to me, because I

strongly

disagree with the concept of scumbuddies going out of their way to defend me if a cop claims a guilty result on me
-Your admittance that you "don't really feel like doing" anything about the Glork/Tarh debate was very off-putting. This kind of avoidance is something I'd expect more from scum than from town
-Your suggestion that we lynch Cow instead, especially coupled with your "Incognito's 539 is extremely close to perfect" look like an attempt to make waves in another direction as you see momentum sliding away from Glork and onto Tarh. I don't think that you'd realistically expect anybody to lynch Cow over either Glork or Tarh, but the throwaway bothers me nonetheless. This is ESPECIALLY relevant since you tried to bring Mizzy back to Glork/Tarh earlier, when Mizzy voted SSK -- and momentum was against Glork

That about sums it up -- it's more than I have against several other players, and I think it puts you an a level approximately equal to Cow (who I really ought to elaborate on) and Mizzy's complete uselessness.


Now. I have about an hour left in my layover. I have to open up the mini I'm modding, get my Minivitational up and running, look at my other games really quickly, and if I have time after that, I'll elaborate on some of the other players whom I find to be scummy.

[Glork]

What I'm doing here is somewhat suboptimal as scum strategy, but it's better for me as a person, it's better for the game, and it reduces the amount of work for OGML. Besides, I've already exceeded the goals of my claim (actually succeeding in taking Glork down was a long shot at best, especially since I suspected he had a truly ironclad claim at the time of the claim) and I can't afford to sacrifice what I've already gained (on the off chance that my buddies are as bad at catching on as I think they might be...).

Eh... I'll take it.

Scotmany is the real Cop, and got a Guilty on me last night (seriously, why didn't everyone pick up on this about 5 pages ago?). I'd try to code this one if I wasn't 95% sure that Glork had already picked up on it.
Glork is obvious.
Finally - buddies? You know that player who I mentioned in the same parenthetical statement as I mentioned Glork in last night (yeah, that player)? That player's probably the bouncer.

Actually, I would only have given Scot about a 40% chance of being a Cop. And even then, there'd be nothing to say he had a guilty on you (he'd know you were likely scum by the simple fact that you have claimed to be a cop, and your flavor was shit -- not by any investigation result).

But thank you for confirming that Scot is protown. I will be protecting him tonight. (And no, I don't suspect a gambit here by Tarh. Based on his gameplay, I don't think he's nearly that clever.) Scot, if you

are

a cop and have a relevant result, it may be worthwhile to claim it tomorrow. You won't be getting an investigation tonight, but I see no reason to divulge the result today -- it can definitely wait until I'm dead and gone.

Thank you for also confirming the protownness of the Bouncer. Now granted, I'd have found a scum governor to be rather unlikely (though I was one, once upon a time), but that removes all doubt in any of our minds.

It doesn't really matter when the hammer happened; we derived enough information from today to figure things out from here. Besides, who's to say that Glork will actually get NK-ed tonight? Just because he was the competing claim with Tar doesn't mean he has to get NK-ed.

That's utter bull. This is the BEST thing that could POSSIBLY have happened for the town. Putting the game into night directly after Tarh's admission kills ANY AND ALL chance of ANYBODY discussing what goes on before night.

(Interestingly enough, Ether's fears about Tarh's self-voting were clearly well-founded. I think that's a significant plus point in her favor. And speaking of Ether -- I forgot about your stance on Scot, "not actually backing out" doesn't do much for me when it comes after the fact, and your context was very unclear.)

Anyway, back to Incog.... NO townsperson has ANY reason not to get 48 more hours of discussion out of Tarh's post. On the other hand, Incog, scum have EVERY reason to cut off discussion AS SOON AS POSSIBLE. Cow's

Major FoS

is spot on here.

Finally, Incog, now that we know I'm protown and that the Bouncer is also protown, I'd like you to comment on this:

One last thought: You seem to "have a hard time believing" a lot of things, Incog -- my belief that everyone was a dancer, the idea of there being two "protective" roles, that I could be prone to making a mistake in all of my hundreds of mafia games played. Yet, for the rant you just went on about me "making a big mistake," your extreme narrow-mindedness will prove to be an even larger detriment to this town if indeed you are protown. I want you to stop and think about that later on, once I'm dead. Because as soon as I die, ALL THREE of these things that you find so very "hard to believe" will have turned out to be true. And you'll be the one stuck scratching your head wondering how YOU could have been so off-base yourself.

[Glork]

Okay. PokerFace.


He pinged throughout D1 for general "meh" play. He commits the "nothing's really pinging" in his first real contentful post (106).

158 is, of course, interesting. Most relevant observations:
-These are all meta-reads. While they can provide insight, it bothers me nonetheless that Poker hardly looks at what people say/do in

THIS

game.
-He notes Mizzy's posting frequency as town in Newbie 520. I note Mizzy's complete lack of posts in a game that -- given the playerlist -- I would expect her to be very much looking forward to playing.
-Hmm. He actually looks at Ether's wiki for past games and asks both Cow and Ether for links to old games. This is actually a fairly significant point in Poker's favor.
-Veiled defense of Tarh by attacking Scot's case against Tarh
-Definitely pumps Tarh as protown, calling him consistent with an earlier protown game

I actually like his questioning of Erg0 in 199.

I still feel that he made bad noise against Elmo at the end of D1.

359 is more defense of Tarh (the wagon on him is BS though I wish he'd defended himself) -- this is the first post that began my slow shift towards thinking PF is scum

461 has a couple of things: He promotes Tarh's "breadcrumbing," but does notice a contradiction in Tarh's posted analysis, but makes it clear that he's sticking with pro-Tarh by stating he'll vote Tarh tomorrow if I'm town. But then he's back to "feeling better about" Glork.

Lots of flip-flopping, so Glork asks what he's thinking. His response, 472, puts him solidly in the "Lynch Glork" camp, though he refrains from pulling the trigger just yet.

Suddenly PokerFace starts to "see the light" so to speak on my claim and gameplay, just as momentum is starting to shift against Tarh. But even as of Post 581, he still indicates that he's 50/50. I saw that as indicative of scum wanting to distance from a buddy, but not wanting to outright throw him under in case Tarh still stood a chance.



Still, reading back on Poker's play, he does indicate that he's genuinely trying to read people. I'd move him down my list significantly, which would look more like this given the last few pages:
Tarh
Mizzy
Cow
Erg0
PokerFace
Ether
Incog
Elmo
Scot
Glork