Mini #682: C9++ (Game Over!)

[Artem]

Hey everyone.

This is my second game outside of newbie games, and first time playing C9++, so bear with me.

The discussion about the setup is interesting but I don't understand several things.

With 12 alive, it will take 7 votes to lynch.

Why is 7 the majority and not the usual 5?

The point is the mafia already know their own makeup, therefore they can already roughly determine the number of power roles in the game. For example, if the mafia is composed of a goon, a blocker, and a godfather, they already know we are in a TTT or TT situation. Which means they already know the town has four power roles (XXXXTTT) or five power roles (XXXXXTT).

Why does TTT or TT guarantees five power roles? What if the setup is MMMMTTT - which gives us three masons?

If so, then my current knowledge of the game setup is 2 "power roles" (including myself), 3 mafia, and a maximum of 7 vanilla townies. If someone else reveals a similar role, then the game setup is 4 "power roles," 3 mafia (1 guaranteed blocker), and a maximum of 5 vanilla townies.

Correct me if I'm wrong but we also have a minimum of 5 vanillas, since only 7 letters are drawn.

I will not reveal my role, but it does guarantee the existence of another, similar role. We have one of the following situations: DD, DDDD, VV, VVVV, MM, MMM, MMMM, MMMMM, BB, or BBBB. To clarify further, I am one of the following roles: nurse, one-shot vig, mason, or backup blocker. I am not at this time claiming which.

If we have a vigilante(s), I suggest they don't night-kill, because (a) this is a 12-person game and we have too few townies to allow for a mis-kill and (b) we have no way of distinguishing a vig kill from a SK kill; since SK

has

to kill, i vote vigilante(s) don't (if we have them).

In essence, you are rolefishing with a convoluted claim in order to draw out backup power roles. This helps the scum, because it narrows down the list of people who could be full power roles by quite a bit. According to you, there are approximately 4 full power roles and 3 vanillas. If everyone does as you say, then instead of looking at the game and having 12 (minus lynch and scum members) people to choose from, the scum have a 4/7 chance of hitting a town power role during the Night.

I think you knew that though, so I will unvote and vote:germy until you can explain yourself.

I think I'm going to

Vote: Kairyuu

because he's contradicting himself. If you're arguing that somebody is helping scum by narrowing down the set of players that have full power roles, then you're assuming that the said person is town, but if they are town, you shouldn't be voting them.

I'm not entirely sure if I believe germy's claim because it seems all too easy for him to be scum and make a WIFOM argument of "The scum is obviously trying to find full power roles, so they are not interested in night-killing me" to explain his survival of each night.

[Artem]

@CF Riot: Thanks for explaining the mechanics.

I think I'm going to

Vote: Kairyuu

because he's contradicting himself. If you're arguing that somebody is helping scum by narrowing down the set of players that have full power roles, then you're assuming that the said person is town, but if they are town, you shouldn't be voting them.

I don't really think that's true. He can assume he's helping scum while being scum himself, or be helping scum while being a SK.

Oh, I forgot about the SK. I don't think you can argue that the person is eliminating power role possibilities while being scum, though. Scum already know their buddy is not a power role.

I'm not entirely sure if I believe germy's claim because it seems all too easy for him to be scum and make a WIFOM argument of "The scum is obviously trying to find full power roles, so they are not interested in night-killing me" to explain his survival of each night.

Do you really believe we are that stupid, or you are. I don´t think germy would survive that way, without anyone noticing it. Let´s see if he does that after the first night.

He doesn't have to state it explicitly. What are we going to do if he survives the first night... and the second night.... and the third? Notice that he didn't specify which secondary role he is. I'm not saying he should (i.e., I'm not role-fishing), but as scum, it would be very convenient to leave yourself some flexibility.

[Artem]

@Artem: I really don't understand what you mean by my contradicting myself. I did not. If germy is scum, he knows part of the setup already. If he also claims backup power role, and gets other people to do so as well, then he narrows things down even more.

If you are arguing that somebody is narrowing down power role possibilities with their claim, then you are assuming that they are not mafia (since mafia already know their buddy is not a power rule). If you are assuming that they are not mafia, then why would you be voting them? That's the contradiction.

However, as CF Riot explained, it's getting others to claim that helps the narrowing down, in which case, yes, the vote against Germy is well-justified. So,

Unvote

.

since the scum should already have a good idea about it since they already know 1/4th of the roles

Where does the number 1/4th come from?

[Artem]

I find it amusing that you repeated the same thing you said earlier about my having a contradiction while saying that you now see my point. In my post responding to germy's first post, I said he was narrowing down the town power role possibilities for the scum if someone believed him and did the same thing.

I never contradicted myself, and you should be able to see that now. I can see your response as coming from a misreading of what I said, or as an overeager scum trying to start a weak wagon. I'm leaning toward the misread option because of the unvote, but I'll be watching you a bit more closely now, if only because of your snap decisions.

I re-stated the contradiction because you didn't seem to understand my argument and I said I now see your point because CF Riot pointed out what you meant.

I don't think my decision to vote you was any more "snap" than your decision to vote Germy. In my mind, I had a good reason and it seemed to be a good reason until CF Riot pointed out the flaw.

To be frank, the reason I thought you were arguing what I said you were came from your computations:

According to you, there are approximately 4 full power roles and 3 vanillas. If everyone does as you say, then instead of looking at the game and having 12 (minus lynch and scum members) people to choose from, the scum have a 4/7 chance of hitting a town power role during the Night.

First, the scum always have "12 (minus lynch and scum members)" to choose from during Night 1 so that statement says nothing.

Second, where does 4/7 come from? When I first saw that, I thought that, assuming that there are 3 scum and a non-scum gets lynched on day 1, you're arguing that out of the eight remaining non-scum, only seven will now be targeted by the mafia because of Germy's claim. So, I thought you were making two assumptions:
-A non-scum gets lynched;
-Germy is town and mafia will not be targeting him during night 1;
Hence, my vote.

I personally have a problem when players post numbers that are not immediately apparent and don't follow it up with an explanation, because:
a) They could be wrong;
b) They might be making some assumptions that should be stated explicitly. What's more important is they might be making some assumptions that only make sense from the mafia's point of view.

For example,

...since the scum should already have a good idea about it since they already know 1/4th of the roles.

Where does 1/4th come from? Is that referring to 3 out of 12 players being scum? In which case, why does afatchic assume we have 3 scum?

After thinking about it, I agree that it makes sense for there to be 3 scum, because either Germy is a townie and is telling the truth or if he was scum, he wouldn't be fishing for back-up roles knowing there were only two mafia (which would mean the setup doesn't have back-up roles).

But the fact wasn't immediately apparent to me.

So, when afatchic says that scum know 1/4th of the roles, is that because he went through the same logic as me? Or is that because he believes Germy? Or is that because he

knows

there are 3 scum?

[Artem]

@Kairyuu: I was not nitpicking to the extreme or calling you out on the things we've already covered. I was explaining to you the thought process that went behind my vote.

There are a few thing though:

1.

First, the scum always have "12 (minus lynch and scum members)" to choose from during Night 1 so that statement says nothing.

Of course it says nothing. I said

instead of

, implying that that situation was the norm, and that germy had changed that in a way that affected the scum's choices.

There is no instead of. We should not assume that the scum will or will not night kill somebody because all it does is lead to WIFOM. In this particular case, we don't know if Germy is scum and if we start to assume that he will not be a night kill target because of his claim, then we're effectively getting into a mindset where it's ok for Germy-scum to survive each night. (I'm using <player name>-scum and <player name>-townie to differentiate between different scenarios.)

Same thing goes for Mykonian's

I don´t want germy to react on the following, but from what I guess, it isn´t the smartest move to NK germy.

because as somebody mentioned, the scum might want to eliminate a "confirmed" townie, especially now that the sentiment seems to be shifting towards Germy being town.

2.

It irks me when people say that I'm taking things out of context just because I quote a single sentence.

Second, where does 4/7 come from?

Look at the words

right before that

. You know, where i said "according to you (in reference to germy)." Don't take my words out of context. And besides, I already explained that I had misinterpreted what germy had been talking about right there (I thought he meant 4 full power roles when he meant 4 roles including backups), so the point is moot either way.

I saw the words right before that. You said that "According to you (germy), there are approximately 4 full power roles and 3 vanillas". But just because somebody gives you two numbers, doesn't mean you should mash them together and call that a probability, but apparently you're saying that it's what you were doing.

I agree. We've already covered the fact that the numbers are off/misunderstood, but don't say that I'm taking it out of context, when I'm not.

Same thing goes for afatchic's:

artem- not really good at quoting just one sentence out of a huge post like that, but this is for the last 2 paragraphs.
i just assumed that there are atleast three scum for a few reasons. first i think i saw it come out of one of germy's posts after all his math.
but second i think the only way it would be anything less, would be if it was a 2-10 setup. which if germy was scum, he would know that there are no PR and would not have any reason to fish for PR's, which makes me think if he is scum there are atleast three, or that he is a backup PR townie and he is really trying to help.
so yeah i think you had the same thought process that i went through.

Why can't I quote one sentence? More specifically, why can't I quote the one sentence that caught my eyes as being suspicious? I understand the point you were making in the rest of your post but I was specifically asking you about where you got 1/4th from. Of course, I gave you the answer and you diligently repeated that back to me.

If you need to have everything spelled out for you so that you can make absolutely sure of what people mean, then you should not be jumping to conclusions about what I said because you misread it, but giving afatchic the benefit of the doubt for what he did. That is a bit hypocritical. FOS: Artem

How am I giving afatchic the benefit of the doubt? All I've done so far is quizzed him about his statement that scum know 1/4th of the roles. What thin air do you pull that stuff out of?

FoS: Kairyuu

But speaking of afatchic... From the start, he appears to believe Germy's claim unquestionably:

okay i like the first post my germy.

i don't think he is giving the scum to much info, since most likely they have a good idea about the roles already. and i also don't think it was a bad idea to come out with it since from what i got out of his post, it wouldn't be a good idea to NK him N1.

i just assumed that there are atleast three scum for a few reasons.

first i think i saw it come out of one of germy's posts after all his math.

but second i think the only way it would be anything less, would be if it was a 2-10 setup. which if germy was scum, he would know that there are no PR and would not have any reason to fish for PR's, which makes me think if he is scum there are atleast three, or that he is a backup PR townie and he is really trying to help.
so yeah i think you had the same thought process that i went through.

Both bolded parts assume that Germy is town. (Granted, he also speculates about the 2-10 setup and germy being mafia, but then I don't understand the need to be believing germy's math). I think afatchic knew there were 3 mafia from the start and I think that at least one of the people who are saying that Germy is not going to be NK'd could easily be scum who's either already made up their mind about not killing Germy or trying to pre-emptively give a reason for their buddy Germy surviving the night. I also don't like how afatchic is repeating everybody's arguments, trying to appear consistent with what everybody else is thinking.

With that,

Vote: afatchic

I think that if afatchic flips scum, then it's a good indication that Germy is town.

[Artem]

Oh, and as far as the miller claims go..... from what I understand, we either have 3 millers or no millers. So the fact that nobody claimed miller at this point is probably a good indication that we have none.

[Artem]

@Artem: Do you actually read what I write before you make your misguided assumptions? It really doesn't seem like you do.

There is no instead of. We should not assume that the scum will or will not night kill somebody because all it does is lead to WIFOM.

In this particular case, we don't know if Germy is scum and if we start to assume that he will not be a night kill target because of his claim, then we're effectively getting into a mindset where it's ok for Germy-scum to survive each night.

(I'm using <player name>-scum and <player name>-townie to differentiate between different scenarios.)

Bolded: Please point out when I said

anything

about that.

Please try to comprehend this, as I'm making it as simple as possible. In any 12 person game with 3 scum the situation is that the scum have 12 players, minus 3 scum, minus 1 lynch, townies to choose from for a NK. If germy is scum, and he successfully gets even 1 townie to claim like he did then that gives the scum options. They can choose to kill the one who claimed, and guarentee that they hit a power role, even if it is a backup, or they can Go after one of the remaining townies, with

improved odds to hit a power role

. If germy is town, then the scum are

already in that position

with the chance to improve it if someone else claims too.

Do

you

read what

I

write? Yes, the scum can either choose to kill the claim or kill one of the remaining townies. (DUH!) That adds up to twelve minus mafia and lynch. There is no "instead of".

How am I giving afatchic the benefit of the doubt? All I've done so far is quizzed him about his statement that scum know 1/4th of the roles. What thin air do you pull that stuff out of?

This is where you give him the benefit of the doubt (same post where you call me out on my numbers):

After thinking about it, I agree that it makes sense

for there to be 3 scum, because either Germy is a townie and is telling the truth or if he was scum, he wouldn't be fishing for back-up roles knowing there were only two mafia (which would mean the setup doesn't have back-up roles).

See it now?

....and the rest of the post says:

But the fact wasn't immediately apparent to me. So, when afatchic says that scum know 1/4th of the roles, is that because he went through the same logic as me? Or is that because he believes Germy? Or is that because he knows there are 3 scum?

How does my arriving to the conclusion that there are 3 scum have any bearing on where afatchic got that information from? So, I ask you again: how am I giving him the benefit of the doubt?

I think that if afatchic flips scum, then it's a good indication that Germy is town.

Funny that you are saying this now when I've been saying it since post 62, 3 days ago.

Post 62, 3 days ago:

I think we could gain quite a bit from this lynch because, if afatchic is scum, you are much less likely to be scum in my opinion, because I have almost never seen buddying up between scumbuddies so early in D1, especially not accompanied with a quick backing off.

My argument: afatchic acts like he

knows

Germy to be town. Thus, if afatchic is indeed scum, then Germy is very likely to be town because I think that we can trust a scum's "read" on somebody.
So, yes, same conclusion, slightly different reasoning. Glad you think it's funny.

Artem – lots of setup discussion. Had good discussion with kair. Seemed to jump on the afat wagon too quickly, maybe to appease Kair for mis-reading his post earlier?

Uh... nope. I think afatchic makes too strong of an assumption that Germy is town and attempts to be consistent with what everybody else is thinking. I like to use my vote and afatchic is a good candidate for it.
I think that it's a matter of the difference in playstyle preference. You, for example, seem to be content with not voting, which I find just as suspicious as you find me "jumping on a bandwagon".

Also, I don't have to appease anyone, especially somebody who seems to be perpetually dissatisfied with what everybody else is doing. (Post #62).

As for not thinking afatchic has posted enough to let me conclude that yet, you will soon notice that I am a very agressive player. This method is helpful in my opinion, because scum tend to be very shaken up about being attacked aggressively and continuously.

is a good point only if the aggressive attacker isn't a scum himself. Otherwise, aggressive attacks at everybody around them is a convenient way of keeping options open for building a "case" against a townie. The game that Kairyuu mentioned (http://www.mafiascum.net/forum/viewtopic.php?t=7891) I played very aggressively as scum and managed to rack up some votes on an innocent townie (springlullaby).

For this reason, Kairyuu is currently my #2 suspect.

[Artem]

One more thing.... Please don't name the people you think are town. Last thing we need is a bunch of lists for scum to go through at night to find the "most townie" player.

[Artem]

Artem (Hi btw, I wanted to say hi earlier but forgot Smile! ), I'm starting to lean scum on him, in the newbie game he mentioned, I remember him as quite well put together but here his content reads bubble headed or even inane when it's not obvious. I can totally imagine Artem thinking it a good idea to play newbie-ness to his advantage.

SL (Hi! ), that's because playing scum requires a lot more attention to make sure that nothing you say has a slip-up. I seem bubble-headed because, even though the game got serious on page 1, I'm still in the whole beginning-of-the-game-trying-to-figure-out-the-game-mechanics-and-wtf-we're-doing-here mindset, or at least was. Newbie games are easy: same thing each time. Here, I'm struggling with such simple things as what the majority is. Trust me, though, once I got the mechanics down, I'll be on top of things again.

Besides, don't you think it would be silly to try and pull off the "newbie scam" in a game where somebody knows me and when my stats are showing on the wiki? Total WIFOM, of course, but still.

I'm also not liking his defense.

That's because there wasn't a direct attack at me. Kair FoSd me, saying I'm trying to build up a wagon based on a weak reason (very jumpy/scummy reaction in itself), so I tried to explain to him the thoughts that went through my head when I was placing my vote on him. The thought process made sense to me at the time but I got caught up in the game mechanics somewhere in there and thought Kair was making an assumption that Germy is town, which I now see he wasn't. I tried to explain my reasoning behind the vote, but Kair kept thinking that I'm pushing an attack on him (who's really misreading who?), hence the whole argument with poor logic.

And I wouldn't say Kairyuu is being aggressive to everyone indiscriminately.

No, of course he's not. As scum, it's generally easy to see which targets are easy and which are impossible. In NG 588, I picked two targets and when Claus pointed out the flaws in my arguments against one of the targets, I went after you instead. Compare my play in NG 588 to Kair, Germy and afatchic.

Though it's impossible to have much of a read on afatchic, what little he post doesn't make him look good, and he certainly deserves the pressure.

I don't know...

i don't think he is giving the scum to much info, since most likely they have a good idea about the roles already. and i also don't think it was a bad idea to come out with it since from what i got out of his post, it wouldn't be a good idea to NK him N1.

reads like scum who's already decided to let Germy live on night 1. afatchic

is

assuming that Germy is town in the first sentence. Looking forward to an explanation from the accused though.

(Btw, for the record, I totally nailed Artem-scum in Newbie 588 Smile )

(Yea, you did. But we totally turned around the mess left by Dave and Grum. It was a fun game.)

[Artem]

I'm also not liking his defense.

Ugh. I just realized that you're probably talking about Sekinj's case on me, while I'm thinking of Kair's FoS.

However, I'm not entirely sure what more I can say there. I think afatchic made some statements that deserve further explanation, so I voted him, much like you're voting me right now. My vote is not an attempt to appease Kair.

@Artem: Way to lie flat out about why I FoSed you. I FoSed you because you were being hypocritical by using a double standard between my posts and afatchic's. Not once did I say that you were trying to build any case on me whatsoever. So you essentially answered your own question there. It is you that has been the one misrepresenting me. HOS: Artem If I didn't think afatchic was a better lynch right now you would be the one with my vote.

I never contradicted myself, and you should be able to see that now. I can see your response as coming from a misreading of what I said, or as

an overeager scum trying to start a weak wagon

. I'm leaning toward the misread option because of the unvote, but

I'll be watching you a bit more closely now

, if only because of your snap decisions.

It's an FoS, explicit or not.

Also, I gave afatchic and you exactly the same treatment. Here's my assumption on where you got the numbers from:

Second, where does 4/7 come from? When I first saw that, I thought that, assuming that there are 3 scum and a non-scum gets lynched on day 1, you're arguing that out of the eight remaining non-scum, only seven will now be targeted by the mafia because of Germy's claim. So, I thought you were making two assumptions:
-A non-scum gets lynched;
-Germy is town and mafia will not be targeting him during night 1;
Hence, my vote.

Here's my assumption (in the same post) on where afatchic got his numbers from:

Where does 1/4th come from? Is that referring to 3 out of 12 players being scum? In which case, why does afatchic assume we have 3 scum?

After thinking about it, I agree that it makes sense for there to be 3 scum, because either Germy is a townie and is telling the truth or if he was scum, he wouldn't be fishing for back-up roles knowing there were only two mafia (which would mean the setup doesn't have back-up roles).

But the fact wasn't immediately apparent to me. So, when afatchic says that scum know 1/4th of the roles, is that because he went through the same logic as me? Or is that because he believes Germy? Or is that because he knows there are 3 scum?

I asked both of you where

you

got the numbers from, and presented my speculation about where I think you did. Exactly the same treatment all around but I guess it's a lesson for me: don't give players answers to my own questions.

Also, if you're saying that I'm giving afatchic the benefit of the doubt, are you implying that we're buddies? And if so, am I bussing my partner right now? Care to elaborate on the scenario and whether it makes sense? And if you're not implying that we're buddies, then

what

is the purpose of your accusation?

[Artem]

If I don't explicitly FoS someone, then they are not FoSed. I just said I would be keeping a bit closer eye on you to see if you did the same sort of thing again (which you have, repeatedly).

I'm sorry, but saying that you're watching somebody a bit more closely

is

an FoS, when it's directed at me. The wiki says that Finger of Suspicion is "Coined by Internet Stranger, and used to formally indicate "you're being watched.""

That's because there wasn't a direct attack at me.

Kair FoSd me,

saying I'm

trying to build up a wagon based on a weak reason

(very jumpy/scummy reaction in itself), so I tried to explain to him the thoughts that went through my head when I was placing my vote on him.

(italics/underline added)
That sounds pretty definite to me. This quote is saying Kairyuu

did

accuse Artem of building a weak wagon and was the reason for the FoS.

Well, yes, his reason for an FoS is definitely saying that I'm trying to build a weak wagon. Yes, he was also leaning towards me being town. I'm not saying he wasn't. All I'm saying is that this post is what sparked my explanation for my vote:

To be frank, the reason I thought you were arguing what I said you were came from your computations: ....<snip>....

I feel like we're getting lost in the semantics here. Let me go back to the root reasoning and state everything as clearly as possible:
1. I vote Kair because I think he's assuming that Germy is town;
2. CF Riot explains the flaw in my logic;
3. Kair asks why I'm voting him;
4. I state that there's a flaw in my logic (as explained by CF Riot) and unvote;
5. Kair casts an implicit FoS on me but also states that he leans towards me being town;
6. Because of the implicit FoS, I state the (flawed) logic behind my vote to explain what went on in my head, as well as reveal a relationship to a post from afatchic;

Did I have to do 6? No, since he was leaning towards me being town, I could have just taken it and moved on. But I thought it would be beneficial to post what went on in my head because numbers were being thrown around and I wanted to make a point that numbers generally imply assumptions.

Instead, Kair thinks I'm calling him out on something:

Now to where you are calling me out for something I already explained... <snip>...

I wasn't calling him out on anything. At the beginning of my post, I said:

To be frank, the reason I thought you were arguing what I said you were came from your computations: ....<snip>....

...followed by an explanation of the (flawed) logic behind my vote, followed by a related problem in afatchic's post.

That's it. End of story. But, now, Kair is all over me. Apparently, I'm giving afatchic a special treatment because I'm not voting right there and then but instead offering an explanation for the "Where did 1/4th come from?". If afatchic was my buddy, would I even be bringing up the question in the first place? Why would me-scum be asking afatchic-my-buddy a question and then immediately answering it myself? What's the point in drawing attention to a number everybody else glossed over?

So, Kair is arguing that I'm mis-representing him, but when I said that I was simply explaining my vote due to his FoS, he calls me a liar and says he FoS'd me for a completely different reason. Why so jumpy? Is Kair afraid that one of his "pieces of evidence" is falling through.

You're not my main attacker, Kair, you're simply scum who's building up suspicion on me, in case your attack on afatchic falls through and you need somebody else to pounce on. Notice how you jumped from Germy onto afatchic:

I will unvote for now until I have gotten a better read on you, because I'm not fully convinced that you are scum any longer. Of course, my suspicions are still higher than 50%, since I could still see your original claim to be a scum gambit.

Nice way of leaving yourself some room to jump back on Germy. Gotta keep those options open, huh?

This is exactly how I played when I played scum:

Unvote; Vote Kairyuu

[Artem]

@Artem: So I'm scum because I'm playing like you did when you were scum? That is the weakest thing you have brought against me thus far, and it carried your vote. If you find it a problem that I find more than one person suspicious at once, then you really need to stick to your newbie games, where everything is so much simpler. You are using

your own meta

to try to say I am scum! Honestly, I would be quite happy if either you or afatchic was lynched today, because you are the two most obvious scum I have ever played with.

Ok, let's take a deep breath and separate the game from reality. There is no need to make personal attacks.

Also, my own meta is a good indication to me that you're scum, because I know the thought process that goes behind being scum.

Most recent example of your making things up.

I did NOT FOS you until you began using your double standard.

I do not

care

what you consider an

implied FOS

.

If I did not actually say I was doing it, then I WAS NOT DOING IT! If I did not SAY that I SUSPECTED you, then FINGER OF SUSPICION DOES NOT APPLY.

Why are you so keen on arguing semantics? What difference does it make whether you meant it explicitly or not? Is it so you can continue calling me a liar or is it so you can say I over-reacted when posting my explanation for the vote?

I've already explained that I was realizing you were leaning towards me being town. Like I said, I could have just taken it and moved on but I thought it would be interesting to post my thoughts because of your FoS (notice here that it doesn't matter whether you think it's an FoS or not for me to read it as one) and because it related to what afatchic did.

Another funny thing to note, now you are taking arguments against you and twisting them around to make it look like they are aimed at me. You quoted where Nightwolf said I mentioned it was a

possibility

that you were trying to build a weak case against me, but you

completely left out

the part where he said:

Then you see that he only mentioned that this was a possibility, not that he is saying Artem did do it. Kairyuu says that he actually thinks Artem just misread his post, which is what I think I've seen a few times during this discussion.

However, Artem just focuses on the part that Kairyuu says in that same sentence he doesn't really believe yet because its what helps his case.

This seems to be a pretty large stretch to try to come up with an argument, though.

Seems like you're doing the same thing to Nighwolf in order to help your case again.

So, the concern is that I didn't address the rest of Nightwolf's post, and therefore, the rest of your post. I beg to differ:

Yes, he was also leaning towards me being town. I'm not saying he wasn't.

I did not bold the sentences when I first quoted them because it doesn't explain what the FoS was (yes, yes, I know, it wasn't an FoS, but I read it as one). But just because it wasn't bolded doesn't mean I wasn't agreeing with it. It was simply irrelevant to the point I was making.

Also, you keep calling me 'jumpy.'

I am not jumpy.

Not

one

thing I have said has not been backed up with evidence. I am

sick

and

tired

of your consistantly trying to tell me that you are

explaining your vote

while nitpicking and attacking

every single thing I say

. The best part, is that you have been

making things up to make a case against me

.

Ok, here's the sequence of posts when you're saying I'm attacking you.
Post 69: I post the (wrong) logic that motivated my vote. I then say that I have a problem with players posting numbers and not explaining where they are coming from. Note that this is a very generic statement, I'm not saying you are doing it. If anything, I'm quoting afatchic's post as an example.
Post 73: You're saying that I'm calling you out on something and basically explain to me (again) why my logic is wrong (even though we both agree that it is at this point). You're also FoSing me for giving a special treatment to afatchic (more on this later).
Post 88: I am explicitly stating that I'm not calling you out on anything but simply explaining the reasons behind my vote. I then go over things like scum always have (12-lynch-scum) possibilities and "we (notice that it's a generic "we", not directed at you) should not make assumptions that claims somehow reduce night choices for scum", hence there is no "instead of".
Post 95: You get even more defensive, asking me to point out a place where you're making any assumptions about night choice reduction. This is followed by some more discussion of afatchic.
Post 113: Some more discussion of afatchic. I am also replying to sekinj's statement about me trying to appease you and point out that aggressive behavior is a good pro-town tactic but can also be used by scum.
Post 119: More afatchic discussion, followed by you agreeing that aggressive behavior is a null-tell.
Post 120: My reply to SL. For the third time, I'm stating that my posts were an explanation of the (flawed) logic behind my vote, which I (mistakenly) thought was what SL was asking me about. Followed is some comparison to NG 588.
Post 121: Kair calls me a liar because he FoSd me about my treatment of afatchic and not because of my first vote on him.

That more or less brings us to here. So, a few things:
1. If all I was doing was explaining some of the (flawed) logic behind my vote as well as some discussion about what I have problems with, why was Kair continuously taking a defensive stance? In my experience, scum is paranoid about being suspected. Mafia likes to look as pro-town as possible and will over-react to any hint of suspicion. I've done it as scum, I've seen other players (particularly, new players) do it as scum. (I can provide links if anybody cares)

2. The problem that I

do

have with Kair is that he's making up me giving afatchic some sort of a special treatment. He says that we're scum buddies and I'm giving him the benefit of the doubt over the same issue that I voted him on. However, Kair still has to address the following:

If afatchic was my buddy, would I even be bringing up the question in the first place? Why would me-scum be asking afatchic-my-buddy a question and then immediately answering it myself? What's the point in drawing attention to a number everybody else glossed over?

Right now, I don't see why his "special treatment" case against me makes sense. All I'm seeing is a fabrication of suspicion, perhaps in hopes of pouncing on me if the attack on afatchic falls through. Fabrication of suspicion (especially, when calling somebody a liar when they are not) is a scum-tell in my book.

3.

The way I see it, it is more of a reaction against Kairyuu agressiveness. He attacks a few people hard on small things, and you think it is too much, overdone. I think it is his way of playing, and that it is his way of searching scum. You've got to admit, his attacks at least brought some action into this game, and it is also a fact that his attacks made people defend, and people react. Go look for information in that.

As I said before, aggressiveness can be used by both town and scum, and I

am

looking at how people react. I'm looking at how

he

is reacting and it has scum written all over it. Besides, scum isn't the only thing he's hunting for:

You claim that you think Nightwolf and I are town and that you have a reason to think that, but you don’t provide it. What have either of us done to affirm our towniness in your eyes?

You also claim that you think CF Riot, Artem, and sekinj are town, but don’t even tell us if you have a reason to think that. It would be much appreciated if you didn’t make unsupported assertions like that.

He's basically asking for justification behind Germy's statement that he (Germy) sees certain players as town. Germy correctly points out that we shouldn't be townie-hunting:

There is no reason to provide support for why I think particular players are Town. Scumhunting is good - towniehunting is bad.

Hypothetical example: I think mykonian is the Cop while sekinj and springlullaby are masons . I should not say in the thread, "I think mykonian is Town because he's made these cop tells," or "I think sekinj and springlullaby are Town because they act like masons." Unless it's endgame where such information is useful for narrowing down scum, I will not explain my reasons for whom I think is Town.

To which Kair backtracks to:

As for your reason for not backing up your assumed town section, you are misinterpreting what I'm asking for. I did not ask you to list all of the tells that we left, but rather support your opinions. Stating that "I like his playstyle, it's very logical" does not tell the scum any more than "I think he is town, and I have a reason for that." In fact, it tells them less, because by saying you have a reason you won't state, you are implying that you think they are a power role. Saying that they are logical just says that you like their opinions. I will never ask anyone who they think is a power role. Reading Newbie 588 (Hi Artem) shows why this is an extremely bad idea, because that is what made the mafia win in that game. I will repeat my question: Why do you think those of us you mentioned as town are town, in a general or playstyle related way?

I don't think there's any way to misinterpret what Kair was asking for. He was asking for support of Germy's view that certain players are town. What he's doing now is arguing semantics. In particular,

Stating that "I like his playstyle, it's very logical" does not tell the scum any more than "I think he is town, and I have a reason for that."

It also doesn't tell Kair any more about why Germy thinks somebody to be town. So why ask for it in the first place? You can slice it however you want, but Kair is townie-hunting while trying to cover it up with semantics. That's a scum-tell.

I've already said that we shouldn't be listing who we think is town. The best thing you can do for somebody who you think is town is not discuss them unless circumstances require it (for example, a cop having an innocent result on somebody about to get lynched, or an end-game scenario). We certainly shouldn't be having any townie discussion during day 1.

So, to summarize, I think Kair is scum because:
-He is overly defensive;
-He is fabricating suspicion;
-He is townie-hunting;
-He is arguing semantics;

All four are scum-tells in my book and the combination of these puts Kair at the place of my primary suspect. My vote stays.

[Artem]

@Kair: I don't think I have it in me to make a PbP reply, but I will address some important things.

1. The "special treatment of afatchic" argument.

If I remember correctly, the only people that were really suspicious of afatchic at the time of my "joining the move to lynch my buddy" were you and Myko. Two people suspecting a buddy is not exactly the best of motivation for mafia to start bussing their partner.

Also, if I provided the answer that afatchic adopted, why would I vote him? Or if I was going to bus my partner, why would I be providing a way out of my bussing? Notice that the answer I gave does not address anybody else's suspicions of afatchic, so something is not adding up there.

2.

3. The scum do not need to townie hunt to know who is town. My 'townie hunting' has consisted of asking germy to support his assertion. I did not ask for him to tell me who he thought had power roles. And your example about the cop with confirmed innocents does not work here, because this is D1 in a daystart game. The cop(s) haven't been able to investigate anyone yet. I do find it amusing that when you have no way of arguing a certain point against me anymore, you go back through the game to dig up another one. This 'townie hunting' thing happened on page 2 or 3 (I forget which) and you did not call me out on it then. Why wait until now?

Ok, good point. You would already know everybody's alignment if you were scum, but then again you weren't not fishing for the alignment. (Townie-hunting is probably the wrong term for it, but I blame Germy for using it ) You were asking for reasons why Germy thought other people were town. Why would a townie do that?

It makes sense to do that for scum, especially with your playstyle. Knowing what townies think of each other is invaluable information for mafia, because it helps them narrow down their attacks on the weakest links.

Also, this caught my eyes when I was re-reading your posts while composing my last sequence of posts. I wasn't specifically "digging stuff up". I was re-reading your posts to make sure I summarize them correctly. (Even though we still seem to disagree on how we view things.)

3. Yes, semantics are important in nailing down scum. But scum also tend to argue semantics to drown out real issues, which is what I think you tend to do. (Of course, now you're going to ask me for evidence and start arguing semantics about arguing the semantics *facepalm*)

@Sekinj

@artem - do you really think kair is scum? and if so, why do you agree with him about afat? why would kair be attacking afat at this point in the game?

I think there's a good chance that Kair is scum. I think he's attacking afatchic because he thinks it's an easy target.

I also think that there's a good chance that afatchic is scum. I don't think that both are scum together (unless Kair is scum doing what he's accusing me of, i.e. bussing) but I think either one to be a good candidate for today's lynch and either one flipping scum will be a good indication about alignment of some of the other players.

In particular, if Kair is scum, then afatchic and Germy are likely to be town. If afatchic is scum, then Germy and Kair are likely to be town.

Some questions for you: what specifically do you not like about my posts? "has not really redeemed himself." is too broad of a statement for me to address, considering I didn't even know I'm supposed to be redeeming myself for something.

You're saying that I'm attacking Kair too strongly but agreeing with him about afatchic... but I don't suspect afatchic because Kair suspects him. I think afatchic made too strong of an assumption about Germy's alignment.

[Artem]

I think afatchic made too strong of an assumption about Germy's alignment.

(this is not an attack) does this make afatchic town? Couldn't he be scum trying to defend a town player?

Why do you think I'm saying that afatchic is town?

It is only that on this moment, it is hard for me to convince myself someone is scum, and that way I don´t suspect a lot of people on this moment.

We're on page 7 in a game that pretty much had no joke phase and you still don't have any strong opinion about anybody? Moreover, you're attacking the easiest (scummiest) target but at the same time don't suspect a lot of people???

You're also not paying very much attention, as per your afatchic question.

How is this pro-town play? You sound very much like somebody who has no desire/motivation to do scumhunting, i.e. a mafia.

FoS: Mykonian

Well, other than knowing my own alignment to be town, I agree with the idea. I think that if we lynch afatchic then if he flips scum germy will be more likely town, because of the buddying up and then backing down. If he flips town, then I will hope that someone can confirm my alignment, but if they can't then I will not fight against being the D2 lynch, because I was the one who proposed the case in the first place.

Ok, is it just me or this sounds like a mafia godfather talking?

[Artem]

And I do know this is a wrong play by me, but the way the Kairyuu thing is going is just plain wrong. And germy, because we don´t have enough wifom, if I were scum, wouldn´t I be bussing my mate in stead of defending him at this point? And what I say,

I don´t think Kairyuu asked to be investigated, that is the whole point.

You aren´t reading my posts.

And no, I can´t say the wine is in front of me. If it is, I´ll say it tomorrow. Today, Kairyuu wouldn´t be my lynch.

What? He's pretty much asking for it:

If he flips town,

then I will hope that someone can confirm my alignment

, but if they can't then I will not fight against being the D2 lynch, because I was the one who proposed the case in the first place.

Look at the way it's phrased. "Hopefully, somebody can confirm...

but if they can't

....". It doesn't sound too sure to me.

There's only a handful of scenarios where somebody can confirm Kair's alignment:
-A scum coming out with the information. I don't see this happening;
-A mason speaking up for their partner. In this case, it's not so much of "can't" as "won't".
-The mod confirming innocence of the little child. It can and will happen if Kair is one and asks for it.
-A cop investigation. This one may or may not happen, depending on whether there's a cop.

This scenario makes the most sense for somebody who's saying "hopefully, somebody can..., but if they can't...."

FoS: Mykonian

for fishing for power-roles and being overly defensive for another player.

@Mykonian: what if afatchic flips town? How will you decide if Kair's story is "good" or "bad" on Day 2?

[Artem]

Ugh. So much has happened in so little time.

I will

Unvote

because I highly doubt it's a scum gambit. If Kair was scum going down, his buddy Myko would have just let him go, and not bring himself to the foreground. I think the two are masons with very high probability but on the tiny off-chance they are not, it will become pretty obvious as lynches and kills reveal roles.

I will

Vote: Scheherazade

who was my #2 suspect and just became my #1 suspect due to Kair's claim.

@SL: I, too, would like to know why Germy was pinging your scumdar. Everything he said about Kair's soft-claim is exactly what I was thinking as I read it.

Also, I would include you in the lurker category as well. Thus far, you didn't post much content to go off on. So, in your own words, you should walk the walk.

@CF Riot:
I know it's been asked but you didn't really answer:

What difference would it make if you were specific or not? You already claimed "power role", which for me is enough to not lynch you. It wouldn't make the slightest difference to me if you were a cop or a vig or a mason, because all of those are on the town's side, and regardless of what you can do, if you're town I want you alive.

And it doesn't bug you that it could be a scum soft-claiming a power role without committing to one to leave as much flexibility for later as they can?

[Artem]

Sidenote: Now we know we have a mafia roleblocker (if we believe mykonian and Kairyuu, and myself). We at least have MMAAXXX (where A is my claimed dependent role, and X are the unknowns). So, a maximum of three T's, which means a guaranteed mafia blocker, and if we have a serial killer they can survive one kill attempt every Night.

If we believe all three of you, that also means that we have no cop.

[Artem]

Sidenote: Now we know we have a mafia roleblocker (if we believe mykonian and Kairyuu, and myself). We at least have MMAAXXX (where A is my claimed dependent role, and X are the unknowns). So, a maximum of three T's, which means a guaranteed mafia blocker, and if we have a serial killer they can survive one kill attempt every Night.

If we believe all three of you, that also means that we have no cop.

Btw, quoting this here for future reference. I do believe it is a scum slip.

Nope, it's not.

[Artem]

"If Kair is scum, I think afat and germy are town. If afat is scum, then Kair and germy are town"

Is is just me, or is germy auto-vindicated in this situation?

Ok, so this is pre-masons-claim but I'll still address it.

No, germy is not auto-vindicated because:
a) There's still a possibility that germy is scum if either Kair or afat are scum. I was just saying that germy is more likely to be town if either flip scum.
b) That statement says nothing about the scenario where both afat and Kair are townies, in which germy could be scum;

Now, concerning who I'm willing to lynch, I'm going to stick with Artem, because I still think the Artem vs Kairyuu thing was much ado about nothing, but I believe Artem's vote on Kairyuu was a pre-emptive and defensive OMGUS reaction to Kairyuu's mentionning the beginning of suspicion on him. But I have to say it's more gut feeling than anything else at this point.

I voted for Kair on two different occasions. Which vote are you referring to because, frankly, I'm not seeing either as "pre-emptive and defensive OMGUS"?

@Zade: Do you think your predecessor made too much assumption about germy being town? Reading afatchic's posts, does it feel like he knows germy's alignment? What do

you

think about germy and his soft-claim?

[Artem]

The kitten is cute, I will cede that point, but kittens are devil spawn, and should not be trusted.

*purr*

[Artem]

A general question to everyone: Do you believe the mason claim by Kairyuu and mykonian? My case may be a bit fantastic, I just want to see what other opinions about it are.

I think it's too far-stretched to be a scum gambit. Not only two scum would go down if one of them is caught, but also Kair-Myko scum pair would be gambling against Germy. Germy's claim included the possibility of him being a mason, so scum would be faced with a potential counter-claim. (Of course, this all assuming Germy is town, but if all three are scum, then I tip my hat right there.)

I just don't see scum taking that much risk, so I'm fairly confident that mason claims are true.

@SL:

I'm talking about your first vote one Kairyuu: of the Kairyuu vs Artem discussion, what struck me most was the back and forth over whether or not Kairyuu FOS'd you, with you accusing him of doing, and him denying it.

Well, if you look at that the other way, what you were doing was essentially voting him because you thought he FOS'd you; and that's called OMGUS.

Here are the reasons for my first vote on Kair:

I think I'm going to Vote: Kairyuu because he's contradicting himself. If you're arguing that somebody is helping scum by narrowing down the set of players that have full power roles, then you're assuming that the said person is town, but if they are town, you shouldn't be voting them.

Here are the reasons for my second vote on Kair:

This is exactly how I played when I played scum:
Unvote; Vote Kairyuu

So, to summarize, I think Kair is scum because:
-He is overly defensive;
-He is fabricating suspicion;
-He is townie-hunting;
-He is arguing semantics;

All four are scum-tells in my book and the combination of these puts Kair at the place of my primary suspect. My vote stays.

Can you please point out where I'm being pre-emptive or OMGUSy?

I have to agree with Myko. So far you are voting me because "it's more gut feeling than anything else at this point"... Are you saying that with everything that's going on in the game at this point, your strongest case (and hence your vote) is just a gut feeling?

[Artem]

Had unexpected V/LA over the weekend.

However, I am going to have to keep Sche near the top of my list, simply based on the voting patterns. Since Kairyuu and mykonian were the proponents of the lynch, my interpretations are either:

1. the claimed masons are mafia
2. Artem is mafia
3. the mafia were reluctant to cast a vote on someone a townie was gunning for
4. Sche is mafia.

So, I would hazard that: if Sche is Town => Artem is mafia. The contrapositive would not hold, because since Artem's vote was so temporary, I could envision mafia casting a quick vote on a scumbuddy.

germy, can you please elaborate on this?

I've been trying to figure them out all along.

I think the exchange didn't look right for two townies.

When Kair made the godfather remark, I jumped on him because it seemed that he was the scum. Now that that is cleared up, and I beleive Kair's mason claim, I think that Artem was the scum in that exchange. He is not my top suspect, but I do believe he is scum.

Can you please present some examples for the bolded part?

Also, Kair's claim has been cleared for some time already, yet, you didn't bring up the suspicion of me until a handful of posts ago. Why?

At this point, I'm becoming quite suspicious of SL. The majority of her posts are filler posts or posts promising content. She is yet to answer my question in #321.

Also,

I'm not trying to excuse myself for anything as I don't see what I have to excuse myself for, you seemed to ask why I prodded people, I'm telling you.

is missing the point. Kair is accusing you of posting nothing but prods, not asking you why you're prodding others.

I'm also going to throw out the possibility of SL and Sekinj being scum-buddies. The original argument was most likely a way of distancing and both have been largely ignoring each other recently. In particular, SL just hangs up on the whole argument:

@sekinj, what you say in #102 is not 'quite' ( which is to say, 'simply not true'), check post #34 in which I've explained my vote even before you dismiss it. That said , I actually like how you are standing your ground but not so much that analysis of yours which didn't say much.

But I'm more interested in Artem at the moment.
Unvote, Vote Artem

So, SL doesn't like the analysis post but likes the fact that Sekinj posted it? It feels like a scum patting their buddy on the back going: "Good job, you've posted something. I'm going to leave you alone for now."

FoS: SL

[Artem]

Can you please point out where I'm being pre-emptive or OMGUSy?

The post in which you vote Kairyuu is here:
http://www.mafiascum.net/forum/viewtopi ... 20#1299920

You see, in the above post the reasons for your vote on Kair are nowhere near clear to me. It is only one post later that you summarize your reason to vote Kairyuu. I think this is a scumtell because it is easy for scum to be argumentative, and scum often think they can get away with a vote when they 'win' a discussion point - however in this process they often forget to be assertive, that is to say to try to determine if the point they have 'won' can be in anyway indicative of the 'opponent's alignment.

First off, I don't understand what you're referring to as "winning" a discussion point.

(Let's call the post I voted in the "vote post" and the immediately following one, in which I outline the reasons, the "reason post")

I think it's pretty apparent why I'm voting Kair in the "vote post". I call him jumpy, I point out why his artem-afatchic-buddies case doesn't make sense and I'm saying that his keeping his options open is a scum play. All this is pretty consistent with the "reason post", in which I call him overly defensive and accuse him of fabricating suspicion. The two posts are consistent and less than half a day apart, so I didn't just come up with reasons for a vote after the vote. (I'm not sure if that's what you're accusing me of because like I said, I don't understand your "winning an argument" point.)

Notice here the deliberate use of the word scum in regard to Kairyuu in the post I linked, this is pretty scummy I think because even taking into consideration the reason you cited afterward, I don't imagine I would be that sure of Kairyuu's alignment at that point.

Uh-huh, at the time I was pretty convinced Kair was scum. Call it gut feeling?

Now, to explain why I said Artem's vote looked preemptively OMGUS-y, if you look back at the Artem/Kairyuu standoff, you can notice an escalation on both part, with FOS' and HOS' thrown in by both, but the origin of the dispute is Kairyuu's comment saying something along the line of 'I will keep an eye on Artem', right after Artem's first crappy vote on Kairyuu. I think Artem was simply frustrated he couldn't get Kairyuu to drop his suspicions of him, and this kind of frustration is more often scum's frustration than not.

If I were better town, I would do an historic of the dispute with quotes, but I can't summon the righteous energy right now, so you'll have to go verify my say yourself.

I went to try and verify your say and I can't see where the FoS ties in with my vote. There's part of my post where I argue about the semantics of an explicit/implicit FoS, but I don't see why you think it attributed to my vote. So I ask you again: where am I being pre-emptive and OMGUSy.

You are doing exactly what Artem did at one point. You say that I played badly because I didn't act like you claim you would have. First of all, you probably can't prove that you would have been irritated at having to claim. And secondly, I don't have to conform to your standards in order to be playing properly. Besides, I'm having too much fun in this game to put myself down because one player says I've made a bad move.

I think you are referring to Artem's 'this is exactly what I did as scum' comment addressing you. Well you see, at the time he made it, it struck me as strange because I used the exact same argument against him in Newbie 588. But you see, in Newbie 588 he wondered at my using that argument the same way you did, and I think he was being sincere, because it is certainly not a 'standard' argument coming from town and my using it is kinda an anomaly- this makes me think that him using that argument is more likely a scum 'copycatting' an argument town once used against himself than genuine thinking.

Why would I "copycat" an anomalous argument that only you would pick up on? To look more townie?

Sure, you've used "I did this as scum" argument before, but I fail to see how me using it also is a scum-tell. If somebody is playing as I did when I was scum (which is keeping their options open and then pouncing on the weakest target, as I thought Kair was doing), I'm going to point it out.

Oh but I think it holds water, I think that something you have done yourself as scum is a good indication of what another scum may do in the same situation, but I'm pretty sure my view on that is controversial. The point is Artem expressed the same view as you in Newbie 588, and -though he was scum, and I was right about him - I think he was sincere, which make me suspect him possibly

using this argument as town.

Scum slip? I thought you were pushing a case for me being scum and now I'm town all of a sudden?

(Love the cartoon in #427 )

I didn't post it to defend Artem, as I feel he doesn't need to it, and if he hasn't done by now, he has had enough time.

I apologize for not responding earlier. This week has been hell so far. I will try to keep up with this game today since we're so close to the deadline.

So, my biggest problem with Zade/afatchic was afat assuming Germy's alignment and while I'm 100% happy with Zade's defense against that, I think it's the best a replacement can give for their predecessors actions. Nothing struck me as scummy about Zade's own play and I'm going to

Unvote

I'm not happy with a Sekinj lynch, mainly because I don't understand the case against her. Thus far, it's been pages of "This is a contradiction" and "Nuh-uh, it's not". Can somebody please summarize the case against Sekinj?

I will

Vote: springlullaby

. She actively lurks, votes me based on a "gut feeling" and doesn't present the reasons for a vote until called out on it, and the reasons are not even that great. SL, you're essentially guilty of what you were accusing me of: voting with no immediately apparent reasons.

Besides SL, I also find Scigatt scummy, who lurks for several days and then comes up with a vote out of the blue and for no good reason what-so-ever.

[Artem]

*grumble* Germy voted while I was writing up my post.

I guess that makes me the hammer.

[Artem]

you didn't think your case was good enough for a hammer? just a vote?

I'm grumbling because there are unanswered questions in my post now, not because I'm the hammer and not an L-1 vote.

[Artem]

1. Doctor saved the target.
2. Mafia is scared of killing an obvious player.
---I'm not sure I follow here, though. What would they lose by killing germy?
3. Myk and Kairyuu are mafia and have refrained from killing to put off the time when we have any solid evidence that they're a scum-team not masons.
---Even if this were the case, germy seems like a safe choice, unless germy is the third mafia player.
4. The mafia has refrained from killing to cast suspicion on Myk and Kairyuu.
5. The mafia is content letting all the town live due to the suspicion of town players.

There's also a whole host of possibilities involving a serial killer and pro-town blockers.

I've been looking over the thread again and I've been getting a bad feeling about Artem...
He begins by making his arguments against Kairyuu and afatchic (to a lesser extent) over isolated Posts 0-7, 9-14. A lot of the argument was semantic stuff (small contradiction for the opening vote, pulling 1/4 out of thin air, reacting at Kairyuu for defending afatchic's 1/4, etc.)
Artem wrote:
You're not my main attacker, Kair, you're simply scum who's building up suspicion on me, in case your attack on afatchic falls through and you need somebody else to pounce on. Notice how you jumped from Germy onto afatchic:

He isn't? Then who was? I know this quote is from a while ago, but then you "jumped" from Kairyuu to Zade in order to deflect suspicion since the guy that you built your entire case against claimed town. You then were largely out of discussion for the time up until your hammer (I know you where V/LA for a couple of days), in which you immediately regretted. Publicly stating your regret is not town-like at all, as it means you worry too much about how your vote sounded and how the lynched is going to affect the town. Considering that springlullaby's main suspicion was on you, I would definitely be worried about my image too. Just not publicly.
Vote: Artem

1. Kair was not my main attacker because I was convinced he was scum. Why do you assume somebody had to occupy the role of a main attacker?
2. I didn't "jump" on Zade. I was suspicious of afat before Kair surpassed him in scuminess. (You yourself said that I was suspicious of afat.) After Kair claimed, I went to my #2 suspect at the time. It makes sense to me.
3. I didn't regret my vote. I regretted the fact that I asked all those questions of SL, when my vote ended up being the hammer. Frankly, I forgot that players that got lynched could speak during twilight, so she could really have answered them there. She chose not to.

Artem: What do you think about the lack of a nightkill?

In general, I try not to speculate about lack of a night-kill, unless it makes sense (For example, using the no NK, I've caught inactive scum in the past: http://www.mafiascum.net/forum/viewtopic.php?t=8999)

But in this setup, there are simply too many possibilities to make any kind of a good educated guess. Could be a lucky doc, could be a lucky pro-town RB, could be a missed deadline. *shrugs*

[Artem]

(Hey folks, the game is moving faster than what I have the time to spare for. I pmed the mod requesting a replacement. Good luck, all. It's been fun.)

[Artem]

Good game, all.

I'm willing to lynch Artem, Sekinj and Scigatt, int that order.

Artem: see above.

Sekinj: I think her posts are lackluster, nothing to make waves, but rather going with the flow, this in itself is scummy. Plus I don't like her rapid vote and unvote on Kairyuu looks like wet blanket scum, seeing an opportunity but rapidly retreating when faced with a claim.

Scigatt: scummy lurking, he is posting elsewhere too.

Good detective work there, SL. You just need to work on swaying the town in your favor.


I hate playing a mafia role.

[Artem]

Yea, I decided to play the spotlight WIFOM and thought that if I took center stage and tunnel-visioned on somebody, players will view me as a misguided townie. I'm sorry if I was annoying, but it was kinda my intention.