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

[Kairyuu]

vote: afatchic

for stalking me from Newbie 661. You were scum then so you

must

be scum now.

[Kairyuu]

Forgive me if I completely disagree with your ideas germy. The sentiment was nice, but I don't like what you are doing.

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.

As a sidenote: I like random voting. It's fun. Fun that has been stolen from me in three of the four games I have been in. Because of that, I passionately desire your death, germy.

[Kairyuu]

@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. Try to actually

think

about whether your argument makes sense before making it.

On a related note, there is no scenario this early in the game where knowing the layout of the power roles helps the town at all. I am extremely surprised that so many of you didn't notice that.

@Germy: I must have misread the part in your first post about the full power roles. I thought you said there were four of them. Sorry about that.

Other than that though, everything I said stands against you. You may consider the 'small increase' in the scums' chance to kill a power role to be negligible, but that chance increases

exponentially

as days go by.

Consider this scenerio. Scum kill the doc N1. Two people (including you) have claimed backup by then. Now, it is likely (though I don't really understand the math) that killing a doc would break the setup for them enough that they will know whether or not the is a nurse. If they can figure it out, N2 will give them a

50% chance

to hit the new doc, as compared to a maximum of 1 in 6 (assuming best case scenerio of no SK or SK kills scum) or worst case scenerio of 1 in 5 (assuming SK kills town). I would have to say that a scenerio like that would

not

be beneficial to the town.

If you are not scum, you have a very poor way of helping the town.

[Kairyuu]

@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

. This is what I said specifically (important part bolded).

In essence, you are rolefishing with a convoluted claim

in order to draw out backup power roles

.

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.

@germy: In my opinion, your actions hurt the town quite a bit more over time than you are trying to convince people, but I have been seeing activity that worries me more than you do right now. 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. I am liking the ramped up discussion though, and see you as slightly more town because of it, since scum like to hide in the chaos of D1 to avoid suspicion.

To comment on your cases:

I am hesitant to believe that mykonian is scum simply because he hasn’t taken a decisive stance on your claim yet. There are three votes on you already, and him tossing his own on would make it four, so it is completely understandable for him to be hesitant to take you to one vote away from the threat range of L-2 to L-1. I think you are simply overreacting to what is likely a townie trying to avoid a mislynch.

I don’t like Edify’s vote any more than you do, but I don’t like your reasoning. Edify did not come up with any reason for his vote, claiming it to be random. By that point there was plenty of information to make a decent case floating around, but he ignored it and told you to chill out. Sounds to me like he’s a member of the scumtype I mentioned earlier in this post, trying to reinstate the usual chaos so that he can be written off as harmless. Also, you base Edify being scum on mykonian being scum, when mykonian never had a vote on either you or edify before Edify voted you. His was on Nightwolf originally, and moved to Edify because he was the only one voting you who had no case, unique or otherwise.

I think that you have the Springlullaby thing reversed as well. She has been attacking someone who she seems to think is scum based on the fact that he is not scumhunting. This is scumhunting itself. I would look much more closely at sekinj for failing to post any content, effectively active lurking.

As for your likely town section:

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.

Now for my alternatives:

I think Edify is scum for the reasons I mentioned above (No reason for his vote, trying to send the town back to the rvs that lasted all of one post). He is not the most helpful lynch in my eyes right now though.

FOS: Edify

I think afatchic is scum because he instantly latched onto you without question, and then when further points began to be raised against you, he continued to say he supported you, but started trying to pull away, advocating only the miller claims rather than supporting you completely as he began. I think this could be scum latching onto a townie and then trying to back off when that townie was put under fire. 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.

vote:afatchic

I think that sekinj is scum for the reasons mentioned above (no scumhunting, no content, active lurking to the extreme). Again, not a whole lot of information we can gain from this, except that if sekinj is scum, then Springlullaby is somewhat more likely to be scum as well because it is not at all uncommon for scumbuddies to distance themselves from each other during D1.

FOS: sekinj

As for my views about townies:

Mykonian is town in my eyes because he seems worried about putting someone reasonably close to a lynch without being sure about their scumminess, but instead pointing out all of his thoughts on the matter for the town to see.

Nightwolf is town in my eyes because even though he has made only one post so far, that post has been entirely logically sound. Not one thing he said was untrue, and he made some very good points against you.

There are a few more people who I can make judgments on, but each of those people are linked to another person turning up scum or town, so I will not presume to make idle conjecture.

@sekinj: You keep saying that you don’t have anyone to make a case on. Umm . . . right, sure. We’re well along, and there are plenty of people who can have cases made against them at the moment. Either you’re spending too much time in your dialogue with Springlullaby to be able to focus on anything else, or you are having trouble making a case against anyone, because you know their alignments and can’t figure out how to make a case against a townie when you don’t believe it yourself.

@Springlullaby: Tunnelvision is not good. Care to provide some more thoughts on who you find scummy or who you think is town?

@alvinz: I have heard from several sources that you have a tendency to lurk for extended lengths of time. This will not be tolerated. Unless everyone is active, the chances that we catch scum are lowered significantly. You have made one post, and a short one at that. Kindly participate.

@CF Riot: I understand where you are coming from, and am leaning towards germy as a townie hurting the town more than he realizes, but I think that saying he is either town or scum for sure is contingent on whether afatchic flips scum.

@ChuckNorris: Can you explain your opinions a bit more? Why do you think that germy would do what he did as scum? As town?

@Edify: You also have made only one short post, except that yours contains absolutely no information at all, which is even worse than alvinz not having a vote attached to his. Share your opinions.

@mykonian: I like your ideas, even if I prefer a more aggressive playstyle myself. Do you have any opinions about people other than germy? Questioning one person is good, but multitasking in scumhunting, especially this early on, benefits the town much more.

@Nightwolf: The only comment I can make about you is that you have only made one post. It was a good, solid post, but it was still only one over the course of 3 days. It would be much appreciated if you would pick up your activity levels.

[Kairyuu]

@germy: Your case against mykonian is weak. You are looking at everything he is doing as if he is scum, without taking the time to consider if his motivations could be pro-town. The fact that you are basing your views of Edify on mykonian being scum means that your case against him is even weaker, and I cannot support your opinions even though I have my own case against him.

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?

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. This makes them slip up. I like to gather reactions, and the best way to do that is to play in a way that stands out (in your case, softclaiming on your first post, in mine, pushing for lynches on page 3).

@afatchic: I love it when the scum react in exactly the way I expect. To answer your question, here is what I'm saying:

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 also agree that miller should claim now and it may help catch a scum early on.

Bolded: You issued a blanket statement saying that germy's initial post was good, that you agreed with it, and that you liked his ideas.

i actually like the claim like that, however i don't think any other backup roles or anything should claim, but i still think miller should claim.

and i don't really like how a couple people have attacked him because they think its more useful to the scum. all it does is give the town a better idea of the setup, since the scum should already have a good idea about it since they already know 1/4th of the roles. while it does give them a better idea later down the road on who a backup role might be,

i don't think it hurts that much right now. and if he does get targeted tonight, then thats fine since a backup role is just a vanilla until the real PR dies.

Bolded: You suddenly move from "I agree with what germy says" to "I liked the claim, but I don't like everything he wants us to do, so only millers should claim." A number of people had said by this point that germy was wrong, and that backups shouldn't claim because it would help the scum, so you say that you now don't think that backups should claim. But they had also stated that miller claims are a good idea, so you decided it was fine to continue agreeing with that part.

Italics: I can't believe I didn't see this before. That is exactly the attitude that lets scum skate by. Just because something doesn't hurt the town 'too much' or 'right now' does not, in any circumstance, mean you ignore it, especially with something like germy's idea, where it is quite clear that while it has no major negative effects (but no real positive effects either) on the town

right now

, there will be a time, in a game day or two, where it can mean the difference between a town win and a scum win.

And your bit about it not mattering if a backup is NKed because they can't do anything yet, that is one of the most antitown statements I have ever read. Killing a townie is

never

a good thing, and suggesting that it's fine to kill a backup power role because they don't have their power yet is like saying that you want to lose all investigative power if the cop dies, or lose all protection power if the doc dies.

Not thinking ahead is a major mistake that scum make, and it leads, more often than not, to them suggesting a scenerio in which the town's chances are severely reduced, and then getting caught for it. I think you made that mistake.

I'm also just

loving

the fact that you turned your vote on me from random OMGUS to full out OMGUS just because I made a case against you. I am about 80% sure you are scum right now.

Confirm vote: afatchic

for revealing even more scummy actions when called out on the first ones.

@mykonian: A reasonable post?!? He told people to start scumhunting when he hadn't even cast a vote or said anything of consequence all game. And he

still

hasn't posted substance yet, only argued with springlullaby.

@alvinz: If you're only going to post infrequently, then it would be appreciated if you would put more content into the posts you do make. Otherwise it is much harder to get any sort of read on you, because there is little to no information to go on later in the game.

@Artem: My vote on germy was a 'snap decision'? How so? He put up a post that had the potential to severely damage the town, and I called him out on it, because I could see scum trying that exact thing to make themselves look town. My opinion hasn't changed. I still think that germy hurt the town with his post, but I'm more interested in afatchic than him right now, so my vote moved (it has a tendency to do that alot).

Now to where you are calling me out for something I already explained:

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.

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 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.

I have a problem with that too, which is why I did not do it. When I am making an assumption, I will state that it is an assumption, and when I post numbers (apart from scum percent chances, which are personal opinions which are likely to change from post to post) I give a reason for why they are there and what significance they have (in this case I was using what I thought germy's numbers were, which I

did

explain).

Your example is simply a case of nitpicking to the extreme. The meaning of the numbers was implied by the fact that people had been talking about there being 3 scum if germy was not lying. 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

[Kairyuu]

@Germy: Ok, the playstyle bit was a stretch, you are right, but I still take it into account when guessing at alignment, because oftentimes a player who hasn't been scum before (or recently) will have some difficulty keeping up a townie persona, and may assume some things to be good ideas that are obviously antitown. So, while playstyle isn't all that important, I believe it is definitely a factor.

As for your SK idea, I agree with you, but I also agree with mykonian. I don't think that we have enough information yet to determine whether or not there is a serial killer. We will have much more information regarding that on D2 than just the way you think one would respond to your post.

Consider a newbie SK, or even one who didn't spend all that much time thinking about the setup. They probably would not figure out how much info the knowledge of backup roles would give him, and may not have reacted like you expected. Also, I will state again, knowing the setup helps no one but the scum at this point. So the SK knows how many power roles he is looking at. So what? If he has any sense he will be looking for the scum right now anyway so that he can look good to the town.

Your obsession with the setup is not at all helpful to the town. This information becomes much more useful to the town in later days when we have the results of a few deaths and night actions, but until then only the scum really want to know what they are facing on the town side, because then they can prioritize their kills better. I cannot believe that you haven't figured that out yet.

[Kairyuu]

@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.

Either way, germy's claim

changes the way the scum will treat the NK

.Germy's alignment and whether or not he gets NKed has

nothing to do with it

except to determine whether or not someone else needs to follow his advice.

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.

Bolded: When the numbers that are given refer to a probability, then yes, you should treat them as one. What I had (mis)read from germy 's first post was that if one more person claimed as he did then there would be 4 full power roles, 2 dependant power roles, 3 vanillas, and 3 scum. That adds up to 12. If the scum ignore the dependants (and themselves of course), and attack the unknowns, then they would be choosing from 7 players (there's the denominator), of which 4 would be power roles (and there's the numerator). That gives us the 4/7 probability that I mentioned. Which means that if the scum decided to choose their kill from the unknowns, they would have a 4/7 chance to hit a power role. Is that difficult to understand? No.

Again though, it doesn't matter, because it was a case of my misreading what germy said. Those numbers mean nothing at this point.

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?

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.

@afatchic: Still waiting on your defense. I pointed out where you did exactly what you denied doing, and I have yet to see your response to it. Plus there are several others who are looking at you as scum too. I'm still happy with my vote. Die scum die.

[Kairyuu]

@sekinj: I agree wholeheartledly that I am agressive; but rash? Seriously? Also, where have I gotten frusterated when someone pointed out a mistake I made. The only one that someone pointed out to me was the numbers I misinterpreted from germy's first post, and I had no problem with it. If you are referring to the times when Artem 'pointed out my mistakes' then you really need to look them over again. Artem has attacked me for things that

he

misinterpreted repeatedly.

And where exactly do I misrepresent people in my posts at all, let alone frequently? If you are going to accuse me of something, then you had better be prepared to back that up with evidence.

[Kairyuu]

@CF Riot: So you are attacking me because I'm actually scumhunting? Because I'm confident? Because I'm attacking scummy people? Afatchic buddied up to germy, and then backed off part of the argument when it seemed a bad idea. I think that is enough to warrent a vote. If you don't, then that's your prerogative. And Edify I FOSed because he tried to reinstate random voting after it was over. The time they have been around means nothing, because Edify joined 2 days

before

me, and afatchic joined less than a week after me. Calling them newbies is useless, when I am just as new as them. Plus, join dates mean nothing, because you don't know how much mafia experience people have off site (I have none). And as for my attacking germy, so did everyone else except afatchic and edify, so why is it only me that strikes you as suspicious for doing so?

I am really going to need to put 'aggressiveness is not a scumtell' in my sig sometime soon, because I had the same issue for awhile in my newbie game. Meh, whatever.

@Sekinj: Alright. I can sort of see what you are saying. I'll explain as best I can.

You seemed to get VERY annoyed when anyone brought up the numbers thing again. I wasn't talking about the Artem thing, if you look at my commentary on him I mention that it was a good discussion (in fact the only one he has had besides setup mumbo jumbo).

It wasn't the numbers thing that annoyed me. It is just Artem in general. Everything he says has been him looking at my posts and ignoring everything I say so that he can try to tell me I'm doing somethng that I am not. Look back through out conversation. He is the one misrepresenting me at every turn. I tried to point it out and move on, but he just won't get it through his head that his logic is flawed. He had no real reason to bring up the numbers, yes, considering that he ignored them for two pages before mentioning them (even after I said I was mistaken) but I was much more irritated by the fact that he calls me out for my numbers when he let's afatchic slide on his.

I think the biggest victim of misrep right now is afatchic. I don't feel like you are representing my comments correctly either, but maybe I havn't been clear enough. in any case, I'd like to see what clarification afatchic can bring.

I don't see how you can accuse me of misrepresenting afatchic. He made two posts that conflicted with each other. I pointed that out. Can you explain how that is misrepresentation?

And as for you, until very recently you were merely chatting with springlullaby and posting no actual content. That was not misrepresentation, it was fact. Now that you actually are I will remove my FOS on you until you give me a reason to put it back on.

@ChuckNorris: Why is it that you continue to post filler posts? If you have not been absent for overly long then there is no reason that you should need to post filler.

@Artem: Please look up the uses of the phrase 'instead of,' because generally speaking, 'instead of' refers to

the norm

when the norm has been changed. As in, 'this is the way it was, but instead of that it is like this now' You are

agreeing with me

and then telling me I'm wrong.

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?

You automatically assume that afatchic's numbers are legitimate, and make an assumption as to where they come from. However, for me you take numbers that were shown to be misinterpreted in the first place and say that I shouldn't be just assuming that people can see that I am using a probablility when I state I am using a probability.

I

gave reasons for my numbers and you attacked me for using numbers "not immediately apparent" while

afatchic

used numbers taken from other people's posts and

didn't

reference where he got them from, but you automatically assumed that they made sense, so they didn't need to be given sources. Do you see it now?

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).

So therefore, you cannot use aggressiveness as a tell either way, since both scum and town have good reasons to be aggressive. Thank you for refuting your own argument.

@Springlullaby: Thank you for the voice of reason. One thing to ask you though. If you think that afatchic deserves the pressure on him, why vote Artem? Saying someone needs pressure and then not putting it on seems somewhat odd.

[Kairyuu]

@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.

[Kairyuu]

Ok. I looked over my posts. I did actually say that you had a chance of being overeager scum looking to make a weak case. I

also

said that that was unlikely, and that I was pretty sure you were just misreading my post. I did not FOS you until later, and for completely different reasons, so my point still stands. And by the way, I still don't think you are overeager scum looking to make a weak wagon. Now I just think you are obvious scum trying to discredit your main attacker in the hopes it will allow you to make yourself look more pro-town.

[Kairyuu]

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).

Also, you did

not

treat each of our actions the same. You voted me (but had unvoted by that time) but you gave your own interpretation of afatchic's reasons, and didn't even bring it up until you were attacking me for my numbers. I can easily see this as your way of telling afatchic what he should say his reasoning was.

And yes, I am inferring that you two are buddies, and that you are bussing your partner by voting afatchic. It makes sense because you seem to have given up on afatchic. Or at least, you are willing to sacrifice him to make yourself look town. Other people have been suspecting him for awhile, and you probably think that if you are seen as one of the people originally pushing for his lynch, and he flips scum, you will be all but confirmed in the eyes of the town.

[Kairyuu]

@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.

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

.

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.

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.

Ok. Now that I got that rant out of my system, I'm still waiting for afatchic to post something in defense of himself.

[Kairyuu]

@sekinj: Why so quick to attack scigatt for posting his opinions? He replaced in very recently, and I would hope that he comments on cases as he reads them. It tells us that he is providing his opinions as he has them.

@CF Riot: Usually I would simply say 'hit me,' but I would much prefer letting afatchic provide his own case first. I am glad that you asked though, because I really dislike it when people answer questions for other people, because the accused can very easily adopt the provided answers.

@germy: You say that you don't find afatchic scummy, but do find alvinz scummy. You also say that you think it is too easy for scum to latch onto a lurking townie. Are you calling yourself scum? Because you seem to be trying to latch onto a lurker.

@Artem: Artem, Artem Artem. Where shall I begin? We'll start from the top ok?

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

Personal attacks? Nonexistant. I have attacked your opinions and your case. I never attacked you. I have a major problem with people using invective in mafia games, and have no intention of ever doing it. If you interpreted what I said as invective, then I apologize profusely, because it was not my intent at all. I play mafia to have fun, not to engage in petty ad hom arguments. I am actually having quite a bit of fun in this game, especially arguing with you. I don't agree with almost anything you say, but it's nice to have someone I can butt heads with that won't back down.

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.

Flawed logic. You know the though process that goes behind you being scum. As is quite obvious by the fact that we haven't agreed on a single thing all game, (except that afatchic is scummy) we do not think alike. You cannot base your decision about me on how you would react in any given situation.

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?

Bolded: There is a major difference between saying something explicitly and not doing so. The whole point of a Finger of Suspicion is to say 'I am suspicious of you, but not enough for a vote yet.' What I said, was not that. I said that I thought that a scenerio was possible, and that I thought it was unlikely. I did not suspect you of being scum at that point. I mentioned a possibility, to show the other side of the argument. It was not nearly enough for anything resembling FoSing you.

Italics: Well, considering that you did lie, I feel confident that I will continue calling you a liar. I didn't say you overreacted though, and don't plan to, because you didn't overreact, you falsely accused me of doing things that I didn't do, and built a case on that. That is manipulating evidence, and scummy, but not overreacting.

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.

It does not matter how you read it. If I was not stating it, then you were making assumptions 'about things that were not immediately apparent', which you said yourself that people shouldn't do. If anything, you have just called yourself a hypocrite.

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.

I find it funny that when I accuse you of ignoring the part of Nightwolf's post where he called you out for ignoring parts of my argument that don't help your case, you completely ignore what I accused you of, and respond to something you made up off the top of your head. You seem to think that you actually quoted the section that I pointed out. You didn't. In said section, Nightwolf accuses you of ignoring anything that does not help your case. If you had quoted that section, you would have realized that Nightwolf was attacking you, not agreeing with you. You find it irrelevant to your point, because it refutes your point.

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.

Bolded: Yes. You posted your logic on voting me, and while doing so, you also called me out on my numbers, which was unnecessary, because they were explained in the post I used them, as well as the fact that they had been proven faulty by that point.

Italics: Also yes, and I agreed with you, and explained how I was not doing it.

Underlined: According to your own logic, it does not matter if you did not state that it was directed at me. Simply the fact that you included it in the section where you were talking to me could cause me to imply that it was directed at me, and you could not refure that, or you would be calling yourself a hypocrite again. That said, all I did was agree with your opinion here and show why it did not apply to me, as you had assumed originally. I was merely clarifying why your original logic was wrong.

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

).

Bolded: I was saying that you called my numbers out in your post. At this point I had already explained that I was mistaken about them, so the point was moot no matter what. You questioned me in your explanation, so I answered your question.

Italics: And you have been. When you originally saw my post against germy you voted me for my numbers. You said that you didn't like afatchic's numbers. However, instead of voting him, you say that you understand the numbers he gave, and just move on without even FoSing him. That is the definition of a double standard.

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".

Bolded: Yes, you say that you were not calling me out, which I do not agree with, and then you continue to call me out.

Italics: You really want to bring this up again? Fine then. I never said anything about claims reducing the choices for the scum. I said that claims change the way the scum treat players when determining the kill, because they provide the scum with more information to work with, which determines how they prioritize. This changes the original setup, and therefore creates a prior situation, an 'instead of.'

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.

So it's defensive to ask for you to provide proof for a statement you made? That is the Burden of Proof logical fallacy. It is your job to provide evidence as to why you think I am scum. You claimed that I said germy will not be NKed due to his claim, when I actually said that the scum simply have different odds of hitting power going into N1 due to his claim. I never said that the scum would or would not kill him based on his claim. Making empty accusations and then calling me out when I ask for proof is just poor reasoning.

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

.

Bolded: Agreed, except that you are using a null tell to say that I am your number 2 suspect at this point. You admit that it is a good town strategy, but mention that it can also be used by scum. That means it doesn't work as an argument, and to use it as such is WIFOM. You have admitted to WIFOM at this point.

More afatchic discussion, followed by

you agreeing that aggressive behavior is a null-tell

.

Bolded: Funny thing is, at this point I was the only one saying that aggressiveness was a null tell. You were using it to say I was scummy.

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.

You are conveniently leaving out the fact that you invented a scenerio where I FoSed you as part of your explanation.

Kair calls me a liar because he FoSd me about my treatment of afatchic and not because of my first vote on him.

And this is entirely true. You did what I said you did and claimed that it doesn't count because you assumed it to have happened (with proof to the contrary).

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)

Bolded: Well, it could be because you are interpreting my asking you to actually provide evidence for your arguments as my being defensive. Or perhaps the fact that your explanations included attacking me for everything I said.

Italics: And this logical fallacy is called Correlation Implies Causation. Here are your premeses: 'These players were scum' and 'these players overreacted to suspicion.' You conclusion is that the players overreacted because they were scum. A third, less important premis you are using is that the players were mostly newbies. By your logic, all scum should overreact to pressure, and even more so if they are newbies. Here are the problems with your statement. Not all scum overreact to pressure. Not all newbie scum overreact to pressure. Townies overreact to pressure as often as scum do, and newbie townies even more so. Just because the data sample you can provide supports your assertion does not mean that another data sample cannot be acquired that refutes it using the same criteria.

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.

Bolded: I will answer them now though, because I thought I answered them in my last post, but I checked and the answers are not there. You would bring up the question because afatchic was already under some decent suspicion, and quite possibly find no problem with bussing your buddy D1 to look townie. If you were seen helping lead his lynch then you would look quite good if/when he flipped scum. You would answer your own question because then he could use the reasoning you provided as his own (which he did). The point of drawing attention to a glassed over number is that it hadn't been mentioned as scummy yet, and if you were planning on joining the move to lynch your buddy it would help if you had some fresh information.

Italics: I'm fabricating suspicion? I am suspicious of you, and I have mentioned why, repeatedly. That is not called fabrication of suspicion. That is called making a case against you. If anyone is fabricating suspicion about the other, it is you. You have twisted everything I have said into something you can call a scumtell, even going so far as to be hypocritical in order to make my posts seem scummy. I called you a liar for good reason, and I will not take it back.

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

But yet you are using it as part of what you say makes me scummy. If you admit that something can be used by both alignments, then it makes no sense to use it in your argument either way.

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

So are you trying to say that I am unaware of my own alignment? Because that would be a very strange thing to assert, as I would need to know my alignment to confirm my role. Also, if I were scum, there would be absolutely no need for me to townie hunt, because I would already know that everyone who is not in my scumgroup would be automatically townie (except for possible serial killer, who would be a mutual enemy). What germy though I was doing was asking for power role tells, which, as I explained, I wasn't.

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.

Key word is support. This request goes along with the view I have that no one should be asserting anything if they are not going to prove it. I told him that, and I have told you that repeatedly. Why you insist on calling a desire for people to actually back their arguments up a scumtell is beyond me.

My 'arguing semantics' in this case would possibly protect a potential power role from a Night Kill. Assume myself or Nightwolf were town power roles. If germy had said he thought we were town because we were logical then that would have given the scum no information. He said that he had a reason, which means that he does not want to give said reason, which implies that the reason could be power role tells. The scum see this, and NK one of us. Regardless of whether or not the one who died had a power, the semantics of germy's post would have drawn the NK based on implications he made. Semantics are important, and very few people realize that.

And your whole argument boils down to this:

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.

1. Asking for proof is not being overly defensive. Where you got that impression is beyond me. Besides, as of this point, you have failed to bring any evidence at all to support this claim.

2. I have not been fabricating suspicion. I have been scumhunting. When I see something that I see as scummy, I attack it.

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?

4. I agree. I have been arguing semantics. I have been arguing semantics because semantics can be the difference between losing a power role because someone said too much and keeping that power role because that person knew how to word their statement. They can also be the difference between a scum getting caught because they accidently imply that they know something that they shouldn't and that scum getting away because no one called them on their wording.

[Kairyuu]

@CF Riot: In my typical style, I will rant at you for something that doesn't make sense to me.

Just because town do it sometimes does not mean it cannot be used as a tell. You can argue that with me as much as you want, I flat out don't believe it.

The definition of a null tell is 'something that can be used by a player of either alignment in the same situation' (That was in my own words). You admit that townies can get over defensive, but that you can use it as a scumtell. Please explain how that makes sense.

@sekinj: Can you clarify this:

regarding art - you remind me of my husband who is a lawyer, I can never win an arguement with him.

Are you saying that you agree with me? Or is it just a fun fact from out of game?

@germy: It's always your turn when you post something that feels somewhat off, even if it's only a little odd.

I hardly believe, and I very much doubt that you do, that I have "latched onto a lurker."

You are absolutely right. When I posted that I was looking to see what your thought process was behind liking alvinz as scum more than afatchic. You posted it, and I suppose it makes sense, so I'm perfectly satisfied.

@mykonian: I resemble that remark . I don't like the fact that you say you are building up your cases slowly, but haven't given the town any of your thought processes while you are doing it. A townie should always keep what they are thinking out in the open, even if he is attacked for it (-waves at everyone-).

@afatchic: That is what you said two days ago. The filler posts are not helpful, since we're all still waiting for you to respond to what I called you out on last Saturday in post 73, and CF Riot can't post his suspicions against me until you have responded.

@Scigatt: Clarify please:

Kairyuu, while I lean town on him, seems to be more than Artem, and Artem seems more level-headed.

More what? I think you forgot a word there.

@Artem: But . . . pBp posts are fun, and allow me to respond in kind, and I <3 tons of discussion. -cries-

Oh well, I'll make do with what I have.

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.

Myko and I were the only ones who had voted (me) or expressed imminant interest in voting (myko) him by that point, but he was being questioned by others at the time who agreed with me.

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.

1. One word, distancing.
2. So that he would be able to wriggle out of a lynch, or at least so he could lower the chances that the wagon would get far.

You do make a good point though. No one else was calling the numbers out, so I think it was more likely distancing than bussing.

You were asking for reasons why Germy thought other people were town. Why would a townie do that?

I've already provided my reasoning. I do not like when people make statements that they do not back up with evidence. I do not care what the statement is, I expect there to be a reason with it. Germy did not support his statement, so I asked him to back it up. If you find that scummy, then it is down to a playstyle difference and I cannot really argue against it.

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.

You are making the assumption that I only go after easy targets. You don't really believe that after the last 6 pages do you? I would hardly call you an 'easy target.'

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

.)

Bolded: Fair enough.

Italics: Yep. I'm willing to agree to disagree for the moment though, because I am liking afatchic being scum more and more as time passes, and would prefer lynching him over you because he hasn't done a single bit of scumhunting, whereas you are doing a good deal of it.

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*)

-Grin- You know me too well. I want proof that I am drowning out the real issues. Semantics have been a component of my argument, but I would say that the other issues have been just as prominant.

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.

But I'm also attacking you, and you are far from an easy target. And you are also attacking afatchic, so what does that say about you?

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.

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.

[Kairyuu]

Thank you Scigatt. I disagree though, and would appreciate example(s) supporting your point.

[Kairyuu]

By the way, I'm going to have limited access for about a week. I'll still be around as often as I can, but I won't be able to be very active.

[Kairyuu]

Seems I forgot about the godfather and it led to two more votes on me. Oh well. I'm at L-2, so do you guys want me to claim now? Or when I get another vote?

I'll respond to the points against me thus far now:

@CF Riot:

Really? That's his mastermind attempt to stop all the pro-town conversation? Confuse us with random votes?

Really? You think I had an actual case against him? I FOSed him, nothing more. I like FOSing people. I do it alot, and not always to people I am fully convinced are scummy. I merely pointed out what, at that point, struck me as odd.

False. Edify joined September 29th, two days before the game began.

Accident. For some reason I thought I saw a July on his join date. My bad. But if you are actually trying to use that as a point against me, then you must not be confident in your case at all.

Surely you don't really believe this. They're not concrete of course, but almost nothing in this game ever is. Still, you can't seriously tell me a person's relative experience means nothing in judging their actions. Maybe Edify is a mafia expert who has played for years under a different handle, and made that account just to come play in this game with the advantage of appearing like a newbie. Maybe he actually is a newbie, and wanted to random vote because as far as he knows, that's what you do at the beginning of a game. Which do you think is more likely?

I stand by my point. The simple fact that both of your situations are possible, no matter how unlikely, means that you can't judge people by their join dates.

Also not entirely true. I didn't look it up but I know for a fact that I never attacked him on it, and I have thought he is more likely town than scum from his first post on. However that detail is minor.

The point that I need to refute here is, I don't find you suspicious because you attacked Germy. I would find it very strange if no one attacked him.

I find you suspicious because you attacked Germy AND Edify AND afatchic so hard over such weak evidence. I personally think Sekinj was your strongest case, but at the time you FoS'd him it was for "active lurking to the extreme" on page 3. You're trying too hard to make cases out of thin-air.

Bolded: That bit is weak. I believe that I mentioned not going back and checking, so it's not all that surprising to me that I missed a person, but this tidbit from your first post:

Forgive me for keeping the possibility open that you're lying. =]

makes it seem like even though you were not attacking him, you were keeping the option open to do so. That doesn't sound like thinking him more likely to be either alignment.

Italics: Forgive me if I find more than one person scummy at once. It's the way I play. And by the way, it was quite early in the game, and there was very little strong evidence to go on. So of course my arguments were somewhat weak. Not everyone likes to sit back and not vote or FOS, or even take a real stance at all, for several pages.

Also, on the null tell thing. I think scum over-react worse, and more often than town to accusations made against them. I also think that in the context of the game, a person can reasonably judge whether the reaction is scummy or not by the way they do. I'll try to come up with an example of each, to show the difference if you want.

I would most certainly like the examples if you don't mind, because I would have to say that your opinion is merely that, an opinion. To prove that, I will also begin looking for an example of my own. Mine being of a townie overreacting worse than a scum in the same game. Will that prove to you that it is a null tell?

@Springlullaby:

Are you asking to be copped tonight so you can be confirmed?

No. I have something else in mind. There is more than one way to get confirmed.

Are you, in the same paragraph, stating that if you can't be confirmed, you are willing to be lynched tomorrow?

Yes, but more because I am confident I am correct, or that I can be confirmed. If I'm going to be lynched, then it will probably be today.

Explain in which situation it is ideal for a cop to come out D2 in the interest of revealing a negative investigation.

Look at Newbie 661. We broke the game by having the cop claim D2 with his investigation of a townie. I'd say that was a good idea. That's irrelevant though, because I am not insisting on an investigation, but something else.

Explain how any given cop should be taking such a risk for someone who have stated their willingness to be lynched if they can't be confirmed.

Never said that they should. I would actually suggest not investigating me tonight (unless things do not go the way I planned). Automatically assuming I'm asking for a cop claim is not the best move.

Explain why I shouldn't be voting you right now.

Is that a threat? Unfortunately, you do not scare me. I am reasonably confident in this town, and hopeful that if I am lynched, the scum will still be found.

To actually answer your question, I don't think you should be voting me for several reasons. I am aggressive, which, if you believe I am town, is a big help in finding the scum, because my method of scumhunting allows me to make the scum slip up more easily. Also, I have been actively scumhunting, whereas an unfortunately large amount of the town has not. And of course, the reason everyone would probably expect to be obvious coming from me, because afatchic is a much better place for your vote.

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

Well, I could most certainly see it as having come from the godfather if I was in your shoes, so I will concede that you are right, it does sound that way. What I find odd is that this is the only thing you bothered to respond to from my entire post. You seem to be trying to evade everything else I said by pushing a small part of what I said. I think you need to go through the wiki section about logical fallacies, because you seem to be using quite a few of them.

@sekinj:

Actually - as days go by there is more and more reason to vote afat instead of less, since he is not defending at all....

My sentiments exactly.

This is just a bad logic/thought process for a townie.

For a town person to want to an an investigation basically wasted on them or the alternative to accept a D2 lynch?

either way we've either wasted a power for the night or lost 2 townies instead of one.

I think this is more likely arrogant scum knowing they will invesigate cleanly and get a free pass to the end of the game. If he gets a townie lynched D1, and then gets cleared N1... He really will have a free ride until endgame.

It looks liek Artem thought the same, and that makes me think he really was just defending himself against and over-the-top attack by Kair.

Bolded: Firstly, I never asked for an investigation. I mentioned hoping I could be confirmed, which was my way of implying that I could be confirmed. Secondly, I said that I would submit to a lynch if I couldn't be confirmed, which I do believe I can be.

Italics: Or perhaps you could consider the alternative: A townie confident in his ability to get confirmed, and also confident that the person he is voting is scum. Because that is what I am.

Underlined: Artem said it sounded like a godfather speaking. Which has nothing to do with our argument. I'm surprised I have to mention this again after calling Artem out about it already, but that thinking is called Correlation Implies Collaboration, and is a logical fallacy. Just because Artem thought the same way as you did on a single point does not mean that everything he has said has been pro-town, and just because a single thing I said could be interpreted as something scum might say, does not automatically mean that everything I have said is scummy.

@Scigatt:

I one that I can think of right off the bat is when you made that implicit FoS and insisted on not making one.

You too? Firstly, that is not reaching by any stretch of the imagination, and secondly, I never FOSed him in the section he mentioned, implicit or otherwise. He was the one reaching by claiming that the FOS was there when it wasn't.

You also seemed a lot more emotional in the debate with Artem, and I know from experience that being overly emotional can hamper judgement.

I would appeciate proof of that if you don't mind. Because the way I see it, neither of us were being emotional, unless you count getting irritated as being emotional, in which case we both were, because both of us were convinced that the other was misinterpreting the other's entire position.

@germy:

If you are Town, you should always fight your lynch, no matter how much "sense" you know it might make to the rest of the Town that you look like scum.

I both agree and disagree. I agree in that a townie should try to prevent their own lynch in favor of one they think to be better, but I disagree in that if a townie is almost certainly going to get lynched, they should submit rather than flail to their death, because a flailing townie hurts the town more than a townie who realizes that they are as good as dead and doesn't fight against it.

I think you (mykonian) and Kairyuu are scum. If Kairyuu is scum, it would kinda clear afatchic, as well as implicate you for defending and agreeing with him.

And if I am town? Does that implicate afatchic? Does it clear mykonian?

I'm not going to say one way or another whether a cop should investigate Kairyuu, especially since I'm voting for his lynch. However, the problem is that Kairyuu practically asked to be investigated, and is now a large reason why I find him suspicious.

Wrong. I asked to be confirmed. There is a big difference, which you will understand in due time.

I believe Kairyuu is likely to be scum, at this point, and mykonian is his scum-buddy.

That amuses me.

@everyone: Personally, I agree with everything mykonian has said. He is the only person so far that has correctly interpreted my actions. Of course, he also irritates me, because he provided me with motivations, which means you cannot determine if I came up with this reasoning on my own, or just went with what he said.

All I am asking is that you allow me to claim before you lynch me, because mykonian is right, I have a power role (but won't claim it until it is called for).

On another note, afatchic comes back every couple of days promising a good post that same day or the next, and then, nothing. Never posts the information he is being asked for, and then comes back again later (to avoid a prod) to say essentially the same thing. So far all he has done is say that I was wrong when I called him out for contradicting himself, and then when I showed him where the contradiction was, all he said was "I'll get to it later" and "Everyone is ganging up on me." I am most certainly confident that he is scum, trying to hide long enough for a townie (me) to get lynched in his stead.

[Kairyuu]

@Germy: I can't really say anything to your first bit because you didn't disagree with me. Moving right along:

Second, you also further claimed that you are so "confident you are correct, or can be confirmed" that you believe you would not be considered a Day 2 lynch target. Then why say you wouldn't fight it? It's scummy to ingratiate yourself with the Town by pretending to agree with the majority, doubly so after you admit you don't expect the situation to occur and that you were only placating us. But, *deep breath,* let's say I accept this, too. Okay.

Honestly, I could have worded it alot better when I initially proposed it. There isn't a whole lot I can do about that now, but on the positive side it provided quite a few reactions for me to work with.

Why did I attempt to placate the town in the event afatchic is town? Dunno really. Mostly because I wanted to make it seem like I would be an easy target for the scum to jump on tomorrow. I was trying to set myself up for a quasi-Slayer's Gambit, but without the terrible play part. Here are the possible situations I was inferring:

1. Afatchic is scum. I have no need to gambit because one of the scum has been caught and I can use the info to try to find the next one.

2. Afatchic is town. A few people hop instantly on my wagon. I then get confirmed, and can narrow down my list of suspects dramatically.

3. Afatchic is town and either no one or far too many people jump on my wagon quickly. Either way the wagon fails. If it is none then I move on to scumhunting, and if it is too many then I get confirmed and then move on in the same way.

In either of the first two situations the town has the advantage of positioning, and in the third one there is no loss other than my own confirmation making me a likely NK, which I am willing to risk in order to find the scum.

Third, you repeated in response to sekinj, that you are "a townie confident in his ability to get confirmed, and also confident that the person he is voting is scum." Confident you can be confirmed and that you are voting scum? Hm. I fully admit that afatchic is lurking, and it's been annoying the hell out of me. But how do you expect to be that sure? But, then again, fine. You're sure, so be it. Okay.

Do you realize how much fun this is for me, especially working with you? I love how confused and worked up people get at my playstyle. It is hilarious. I am

always

fully confident outwardly. No exceptions. That is what makes me such a threat to the scum. They don't know if I'm bluffing or if I really have an ace in the hole. Do they let me live? Do they kill me instead of someone they suspect of a power role because I am dangerous? I will not say how confident I really am that afatchic is scum, but I will say that I do want him lynched. I want it very much, because if he is we caught an obvious one, and if we didn't, it is very little loss because he has provided nothing substantive for us to to work with.

The only possibilities I see working in your favor are either: innocent child or mason. However, in both of those cases your confirmation is guaranteed. Not "I hope to get confirmed," and neither leaves room for "in case I don't."

Ah, but you see, if I didn't leave room for doubt, then where would I get the fun reactions from the town and the possibility of surviving the night. I will come out and state it right now. I can be confirmed with certainty, and will if I get to L-1 or there is a call for it. I would prefer moving onto someone else (afatchic) for today's lynch and hoping for a doc protect tonight so that I can put the town in a slightly better position D2, but I am doubting that I will have that good of luck. No matter. My strategy still works out just fine.

The contrapositive is not necessarily true.

Damn you math logic. -shakes fist- I understand though, and just wanted to know your take on the reverse situation.

If you are Town, then my opinions revert to what they were before, with mykonian at the top of my list (in this case, trying to protect a townie to gain credence with the Town), afatchic could go either way, and everyone else on your lynch becomes suspicious. Only those on your lynch are implicated by your "townieness," not your own perceptions of other players.

Still on mykonian? Other than his WIFOM (which he was pretty much right about anyway) he has been playing quite pro-town in my eyes. The interesting thing to note here is that you seem to be fixated on him. If I flip town you say that you would suspect him as scum for defending me, but if I flip scum you will also suspect him as my scumbuddy for the same reason. Sounds like you just want him dead however you can get it.

FOS: germy

I'm really hoping that you are having as much fun as I am, because this game is one of the most enjoyable I have played. First I get to but heads with you, then with Artem, and then I get wagoned in a situation where i can turn it to my own, and therefore the town's, advantage.

[Kairyuu]

@Germy:

You shouldn't just go halfway. If you're Town it only helps scum. If you're scum, I want to find out if you're lying. So I'm calling for it.

Completely in agreement. I pretty much had to do the halfway thing in order to explain most of my reasoning. I wanted to see how people would react to my half-claim. That said, I will claim at the end of this post, and might I add that I came up with quite the flavor text if I do say so myself.

@Sekinj: I'm really on the fence with you right now. I think you are scummy because you just unvoted without giving any real reason, but I think you are possibly town for the unvoting part. I'm leaning more towards scum, because I would think that a townie would try to back off alot less obviously.

FOS: Sekinj

Ok. Saw your most recent post. I'll wait to pass judgement until after you explain further.

@CF Riot: My friend, you have finally allowed me to get a read on you, and it is not good. Let's dissect what you said.

Edify: Okay, your pretty much agreeing with me. My point is you're jumping on a lot of people for weak reasons, and you said since it was just a FOS, it was admittedly not very strong.

Yup. And that's the point now isn't it. This is pretty much just a playstyle difference, so I'll leave it there.

Join date: It's not supposed to be a point against you, I just needed you to know he was in fact a newbie. A fresh one at that.

Understood. It seemed to me like you were trying to use it against me, but since you weren't then I will drop it.

Oh, come on! I know you don't believe that. That's what this entire game is based on, judging how likely and unlikely two possibilities of the same situation are. You can throw out join dates if you want, sure. That logic is completely backwards though and you know it.

You are entirely right, but join dates are in a different realm of argument. Join dates are meta, and therefore not subject to the same rules. I despise meta, and will attack its use wherever I see it.

Who's attacking Germy: There doesn't have to be evidence that I thought he was town, I'm merely proving that not everyone you claimed was attacking him actually was. You made it seem like the only two not going after him were two of your suspects, and I knew that to be false. But, you've said this isn't really important and I've said this isn't really important, so I propose we drop it.

Consider it dropped.

My point: You're attacking what I consider (opinion) a large number of suspects with what I consider (opinion) very little real evidence.
Your own words: "it was quite early in the game, and there was very little strong evidence to go on. So of course my arguments were somewhat weak."

You think this is not a tell, I think it is. This is still why I'm suspicious of you.

Difference of opinion. I can't defend against it because I don't consider it scummy. Feel free to push the issue as much as you want. I won't argue, since I agree that I did do what you accuse me of.

And what is your opinion? Unchallengeable truth?

I'll look for your examples now, although I can already see that they won't prove anything. You've said if two things are possible it's a null tell no matter what the likelihood of either is.

This is where we disagree.

Over-reacting is just one manifestation of the larger form we disagree on. Also, I doubt your example will prove anything to me, but I'm hard-headed so it's probably better that you bring it up anyways.

Bolded: Nope. My opinion is an opinion as well. You are free to argue your points as much as you want, but if the evidence shows a null tell, then I go with the evidence.

Italics: We don't disagree nearly as much as you think we do. Probability is important in all cases but meta. I have been forced to drop points in other games due to evidence pointing in favor of someone else's point (the mod knows what I am talking about). I would link to the specific game, but it is still in progress.

I'll have the example game(s) included in my next post, but that may not be until Wednesday, when I come off of V/LA.

This is the part where I grumble a lot because I feel like I'm right and you're wrong, and yet I'm going to unvote you. Your whole claim situation seems very shady, but claims are claims and I think they carry weight. I'd rather you not claim today, but Germy has called for it. You're losing votes so I guess it's up to you.

I do not like this at all. This is what set my scumdar off. I made it blatently obvious that I had a power role, and you would rather let it go to the Night without knowing if I could back up my assertions? If you are town, you want to know what I am so that you can know whether or not to trust me. If you are scum though, you want me to give as little information to the town as possible so that you can kill me without as much risk of a doc protect (assuming there is a doc). That way, there is no possibility of my claim confirming anyone else (in the case of my being a mason).

HOS: CF Riot

My new top suspect is Sekinj. I thought the way Sekinj jumped on the Kair wagon was questionable and I think the bail off of it, with no questions asked and no new discussion on any point, is another scummy move. Vote: Sekinj

I don't really know what to make of this. Not getting strong feelings either way about sekinj based on just this.

I still think there is no case against Afatchic, but admit he is lurking badly. I will not vote him without some defense, no matter how long he lurks. (Day 1 anyways.)

I think afatchic is your scumbuddy right now. You have done your best to continually say that there is no case against him while he gets a free pass to lurk as much as he wants. And now you are even saying that you will continue to give him that free pass.

@everyone: Claim time:

I am Archibald Ebenezer Twillyfig, Master Mason of the Grand Lodge of Shuhullavah. I and Johnathan Hunter Forest (He should now reveal himself to confirm both of us), my second in command, have been sent to you quaint little town on a search an destroy mission. It seems that your town has been beset by an infestation of scum. We call ourselves the Masonic Mercenaries, or M Squared, and we are here to free you from that infestation which threatens to ruin the peaceful landscape of your pleasant town.

In other words, I am a mason, and my partner should claim to confirm the both of us now.

Now I and my partner will be at a serious risk of being killed N1, so if there is a doc among the rest of the town, please protect one of us.

And in keeping with almost every post I have made thus far: Everyone should be voting afatchic. He is scummy.

[Kairyuu]

Well I haven't exactly been trying to hide it, now have I. Don't guess at it though. I would prefer if he comes forward without people having guessed.

[Kairyuu]

@CF Riot:

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.

Essentially what you are saying here is that you promote blind trust in claims, even vague ones with no backing. That is not pro-town, because that philosophy means that scum could claim power role and you would believe it automatically because it is a power role.

I (as town) would rather you not tell exactly what you can do, because that gives the mafia a better idea of how to deal with you. Example, if you were the cop, mafia might try to block you instead of kill you, knowing a doc may protect you tonight. If you were the doc, mafia would have the option of straight up killing you (with less fear of being stopped by a doc) or of blocking you to get to a higher profile target. If you reveal nothing, the mafia doesn't know exactly what to do.

In the event that you are a mason, and if you didn't claim, and if you got NK'd, we'd still know you were a mason when you died so it would still confirm whoever else claimed mason later in the game.

Basically he gains nothing by you being more specific. By admitting what you are and by asking him to come out with it too, you're just putting both of you in danger rather than just yourself.

Bolded: I realize that if I was one of those roles and the scum figured it out I could become useless, but in my situation I doubt that the scum can block me, because I don't think that masonship is a blockable power.

Interesting note though is that you seem sure that there is a scum roleblocker, which is something only the scum could know for sure.

Italics: But if I am dead, then there can be no corroboration between myself and my mason partner, and if it gets to LyLo then scum could easily counterclaim as my partner and win the game. The strength of masons is that they can confirm each other while still alive. Once one is dead then the other becomes little more than a vanilla townie if they did not claim first.

Underlined: Not quite. Yes we will both be in danger of being NKed by the scum or the SK (if there is one), but it still gives the town a massive advantage for the first approximately 3-4 days, because the scum need us dead, and will have to focus on us during the night rather than looking for other, possibly more dangerous, power roles. If they can't manage to kill us, and the game hits LyLo, having confirmed townies greatly damages the chance of a scum win. If we have a doc, and the doc protects the right one of us even once, then we can almost guarentee a confirmed if we get to LyLo.

Back to other business, the reason I'm defending afatchic is because I don't think you have anything at all against him. The lurking issue actually is bad, but you pressed him before that happened, so I took it as you trying to build a case on nothing. What I said simply meant that I'm not going to vote for him for lurking alone. If he starts posting and there is real evidence to go on, I could change my mind, but I don't think your case holds water and if that and lurking are the only two points against him at deadline, I'll have my vote somewhere else. Since you're almost confirmed now, I wish you'd broaden your scope a bit because that gives me reason to vote with you, but I positively do not like the afat case, even knowing that you're town. (And obviously, I'm not going to vote for myself either.) I think Sekinj could be a good lynch, and I'm considering Artem after a reread, now that you're claimed mason.

What I had on afatchic originally was merely a stab in the dark at an inconsistant opinion. When he denied what he was accused of, and then started lurking when I provided proof, my case became serious. I will continue to push for his lynch unless it looks like the day will end in a No Lynch unless I swap my vote, because I am convinced that he is scum.

I don't think that I really need to broaden my scope much more. I have FOSes on sekinj, Artem, and germy, and a HOS on you in addition to my vote on afatchic. That's five people I am suspecting at one time out of a possible 10 (myself and the other mason being out of the question). Just because I don't move my vote doesn't mean that I'm not looking at other people. It just means that I like one of them as scum over the others.

[Kairyuu]

@Mykonian: Personally myko, I think you have played quite well. I don't believe in trying to hide when you are a mason pair, because you have nothing to hide from the town. I'm glad that you defended me, (though I think you should avoid WIFOM in the future because it is scummy) and I think that having both og us claim now is a benefit to the town.

@germy:

I suspect a scum gambit. However, I always suspect a scum gambit. Neither Kairyuu nor mykonian were under particular pressure when Kairyuu alluded to his confirmability, so this mason claim wouldn't be a last ditch effort. Which means, if it is a false claim, they would have to have been planning to make it for some time. And I don't see any real evidence of that.

First of all, I like the way you play. I was surprised when you were the only person who mentioned the possibility of a scum gambit. What with the speed that this game got started though, there would have been no time to plan it, since myko couldn't even reply to whether or not he was a miller before we got going (it seems that he isn't since he hasn't claimed it). The claim is no fake though, but thanks for trying. I can't think of any way that we could be confimed by someone else without wasting a power role, but I think it will become obvious as the game progresses that we are telling the truth.

Kairyuu, I respect your gambits and attempts to draw out scum, mainly because your efforts seem like a more refined and developed version of the types of tactics that I try to use. Your conciliatory posts after several people pointed things out to you bothered me, but I can also see what you were attempting.

Thank you. I'm glad that you can see them for what they are now. My conciliatory posts happen sometimes. I have no problem ceding points to other people if I'm wrong and they can prove it. Otherwise, I would be stuck defending assertions that I don't believe to be true, which doesn't help the town.

@Artem: -pats on back for voting correctly again-

I don't think we can discount the idea of a cope quite yet, as there are a few situations where we could have one.

@CF Riot: I can respect your reasoning, but I'm keeping my FOS in place for now because I still don't like the early failure to take a stand and the defense of afatchic.

@sekinj:

no additional comments about your vote against me? You said you were waiting for my explaination and you have yet to address it.

That was me, and regarding my FOS. I'll address them now.

Simply put, I have no problem with that reasoning, because it is the exact thing I was attempting to get people to see. I'll downgrade my FOS to a

Minor FOS: sekinj

because I still don't like the early active lurking.

@Springlullaby: Don't be hypocritical. You are making filler posts accusing people of lurking while you have yet to respond to my comments. I don't like that. Possibly scum trying to pretend like their failed case didn't happen.

FOS: Springlullaby

@Scheherazade: First, your name is confusing. Anything we can shorten it to?

Second, to address your points:

I think that afatchic was merely being hasty. I know it’s hard to credit hastiness with producing “one of the most antitown statements I have ever read (73)” et al. but I think that you’ll see that a lack of consideration of the implications of the pseudoclaim lead to early support with increasing doubts like “i don't think any other backup roles or anything should claim” (44). He did stick to his guns in calling for a miller claim, though, rather than just running as far away from germy as possible.

The lack of consideration is the whole point. afatchic thought he could probably ride on germy's coattails for awhile originally, and then when germy started getting a few votes and several people attacked him for his suggestion of claims, afatchic backed off of the claims to avoid being incriminated by supporting them.

He stuck to his guns about the miller claim? Of course he did, considering that everyone else supported the idea. As I see it he was trying to ingratiate himself to the town in the hopes he would be overlooked.

He began lurking and eventually left because Kairyuu was rather too rabid and the majority of the rest of you rather too eager to play ducklings.

I am not rabid. -foams at the mouth- If afatchic had explained himself sufficiently, then he may have gotten me to back off. He didn't. Instead, he lurked in the hopes that it would go away. I have no respect for that, because it is against the spirit of the game.

Plus, if so many people were eager to play ducklings, how come he only got 3 votes on him at the peak, where one of them was me?

I’m still rereading and rereading to try to sort a likely suspect after Kairyuu claimed. I still think he’s been the most suspect player. I know that even if he and Myko were lying, they could be easily exposed in the near future (even tonight, if we’ve got a cop).

What? You say that I'm still the most suspect, even though claiming mason buddies as scum practically assures a scum loss if they are caught, which they would be simply based on the natural progression of the game. Plus you call for a cop investigation against one of us if we have a cop. Why argue for the wasted investigation? Is it so you can try to kill the cop tonight while no worrying about being targetted if you miss?

One things stuck out to me from your case against sekinj:

I do give her points for briefly defending a confirmed townie, afatchic, but that was just part of a criticism of Kairyuu.

And how exactly is afatchic confirmed townie? Because to me it looks like he, and therefore you, are the most likely scum currently.

confirm vote: Scheherazade

[Kairyuu]

@Scheherazade: Nothing to make typing your name easier?

I meant that you still seem most suspicious because I feel you tried to confuse the search. Understanding that you're a mason, not scum, I suppose you can be explained by not wanting to lose an argument on any points for any reason. That's fair enough, but I do think it became counter-productive at a point.

Explain how I tried to confuse the search. How was I counterproductive when I was scumhunting? From reading the game you should know that I don't take kindly to people failing to back up their assertions.

When I said that you could be easily confirmed, I see that saying "(even tonight if we have a cop)" looks like an encouragement to use it. I beg pardon. Instead I meant to use it to show how easily your claim could be toppled if you had lied.

Fair enough. Not sure if I believe you, but I can't prove that you are lying.

When I said "I do give her points..." I meant that I thought her defence of afatchic could indicate innocence. You see, I know that I'm town and if she were scum she would know that as well. While not a strong indication of innocence, I wondered if she-as-scum wouldn't have attacked afatchic as an easy target. Of course I realise that scum doesn't want to take out town perceived to be scum too quickly. Perhaps the remark was useless.

Saying "I'm town" over and over again is not going to convince me. Quite the contrary. Insisting on being a townie is rather scummy, because it comes off as being jumpy.

@germy: If you think that Scigatt is Scheherazade's scumbuddy, then why are you voting Scigatt? You agree that Scheherazade is probably scum, but have your vote elsewhere when there is only a week until deadline? Why?

Edit: Saw the response to mykonian. I can't blame you for pressuring a lurker.

I agree about Scheherazade, but I'm iffy about Scigatt. He reads neutral to me right now.

@sekinj: I would say that a week in a game that goes as long as mafia is not exactly a long time. I agree that you should probably have a vote on right now.

[Kairyuu]

@Scheherazade: I like Zade. You are now Zade.

In post 130 I didn't rant a bit. I ranted a lot. Quite a lot. With lots and lots of fun ranty stuff like bolding and all caps. I was mildly irritated.

As for 146: So I'm suspicious for making long posts? Too bad for you then, because I like long posts very much, and endeaver to make them as often as I can. The fact that we seemed to both know where we stood on the argument means nothing. We were both convinced that the other was wrong, and were trying to prove out points. Also, I am not afraid of attention. Townies need to put their necks on the line to catch scum. Otherwise the scum will lead the town around by its nose. I don't allow that in any game I play. Please explain how I was confusing the issues at hand.

My playstyle is aggressive, no two ways about it. It just so happened that for awhile it was a focused firestorm between Artem and me, because Artem is as stubborn as I am and didn't back down (that makes it more fun anyway, so I'm not complaining). Now that he and I are done arguing, I have branched out again and am suspecting more people. The fact that a heated debate causes people to latch onto points is an occupational hazard, and is unavoidable if you are active.

As for Artem being the victim rather than the aggressor, I disagree. Of course, he probably agrees with you, and several people have agreed with each of us, so I think that is probably a matter of perspective.

Finally, just because your predecessor didn't do it doesn't make it any less scummy for you to make up for lost time.

You aren't winning any prizes with me in the posts since you replaced in. I suspect you more now then I did afatchic, and combined with my suspicion of him, I am rather well convinced that you are scum, and that CF Riot is one of your buddies due to the repeated "there is no case against afatchic" defenses. It's nothing personal of course. I just think you replaced into a bad situation and are making it worse unwittingly while trying to fix it. That said, die scum die.

[Kairyuu]

@Zade: People don't seem to like aggression. I have no idea why, since it has such potential to help the town. The unfortunate side effect of that was my needing to claim D1, and needing myko to back me up to prove that claim. I agree that it gives the scum a better chance in some sense, but what could I have done different? I had to either confirm myself, or get lynched. I took the selfish way out and did what my role is meant for. I confirmed myself and my partner.

I disagree that it is counter-productive, because it leaves the scum at a crossroads, kind of like being hit by a fork move in chess. Either way you are at a loss. The scum could kill one of the claims (me, myko, or germy) and get rid of a power role that does not hurt them directly, but would be a massive problem to have during LyLo, or they could take a stab in the dark and hope they come up with a role that can hurt them directly/stop their kill, like a cop, rb, doc, or sk, none of which they even know about for sure past the fact that there is at least one of them.

Either way I see the scum being in a bad spot right now. If they attack one of the claims then they could be stopped by a doc, but if they attack one of the unknowns, they have a relatively low chance of hitting anything besides a vanilla. I'm glad I was forced to claim, even if I die because of it.

Next point: The whole point is that Artem and I didn't agree. That is the entire reason the points were argued. If we had just ignored the other's points, then we would be the scummiest players here.

Yes it was personal in that it was between just the two of us. No it was not personal in that I was not continuing the argument just to prove myself right. If it was merely a pride thing, then I would still be pushing it. In the end we pretty much just agreed to disagree for now, and continue later, assuming we are both still alive.

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

[Kairyuu]

@CF Riot: I apologize for not getting those examples up. I haven't had much time recently. I will, however, do my best to find some and get them up later today for you.

Does it mean anything to you that I also defended Edify, and the defense of both Edify and Zade (formerly afat) were small parts of the larger "You're attacking easy targets," argument?

It does matter, but you were quite a bit more adamant about afatchic having no case against him, when he was the one with the stronger case.

Also, would it help if I posted that bit that was going to defend afat that I cut out before so that I'm not just spouting a baseless defense of another person, or would that just make things worse?

Go for it. I would definitely like to see your reasoning on the matter. To tell the truth, I forgot about that entirely, so it could certainly change my opinion of you based on actual reasoning.

@Springlullaby:

Right, this game is starting to tire me and I think it is time to reach a lynch soon.

Hypocritical much? You have posted almost nothing for several pages, and yet you claim the game is dragging.

Kairyuu, I think you are not properly apologetic for what I see as bad play -if you are genuinely town - your 'trap' or whatever you call it was certainly not well thought out and didn't cover every possible interpretation, though I do take responsibility for jumping the gun.

There's a problem with your statement. I don't think I need to apologize for what you see as bad play, because I don't see it as bad play. My 'trap' was a gambit, and assuming it was meant to cover every single interpretation is not going to work. We are dealing with people, not statistics. Human error creates anomalies, and there is nothing that can be done to stop that. My gambit was made with the tools I have at my disposal, which are not perfect. I accounted for all the possibilities I could think of, and went with it.

How would you have done it differently so that it wasn't 'bad play?'

Concerning your claim in itself, I'm perfectly ok to let it go atm because yours and mykonian's names are linked now.

Yep. We're masons, and if one of us dies tonight you will have no choice but to believe it.

Although, if you are indeed town, Kairyuu, please take a deep breath and try to sounds less self-righteous, because misplaced confidence doesn't make you look good.

We have been over this already. I am extremely confident in my reads, always. No exceptions. I won't change that just because you think I sound self-righteous. Besides, a townie shouldn't care about 'looking good.' They should care about finding the scum, which I am attempting to do.

You mentioned question and failed case concerning me, explain and I'll answer.

You asked me questions, including "why should I not be voting you right now?" and I responded. I was expecting you to comment on that. If you don't plan to, then it affects nothing, since I have already claimed.

[Kairyuu]

@CF Riot: Got it. I see where you are coming from, but I must disagree with you on a few points.

I understand you seeing no contradiction, but I think it is simply an interpretation difference in this case. I read his first post as being fully in agreement with what germy had to say because he did not say anything to the contrary, and then pointed out, after the call for backup claims had been attacked, that he didn't want backup roles to claim. If it is not specifically a contradiction, it is at least an attempt to disassociate himself from the part of the post that people didn't like.

The thing of equal importance in that second post though, was him apparently not caring about losing a backup power role. This is rather scummy, because he said it even after I made my little rant about how damaging losing a full power role is when we have a claimed backup.

At this point I will cede that you were probably not defending afatchic to defend a scumbuddy, and will downgrade my FOS to a

minor FOS: CF Riot

for the early indecisiveness.

@SilverPhoenix: I like you. You are suspicious of me for halfway decent reasons.

Hyper-aggressive, but who cares? I seen way too many instances of aggressive behavior go against my view of the person so that isn't a good tell of anything. However, the player reactions have been somewhat negative against this behavior. To be honest, aggressive players work well, except when they target newbies (see Artem’s read below).

QFT

The worst statement Kai has made was Post 162 when he implied he wanted to be investigated. Kai, your actions/words make you scum or not, and since you have already said you are town, that would be a waste of the cop’s action. It’s a bad argument to make and certainly detrimental to the town either way. If you are town, you don’t need to try and prove it to make your argument valid. And rating people less for automatically assuming that you wanted when you didn’t does not fly with me. Any statements in this game are deliberate, and assumptions must be made, especially when words are deliberate. Overall, my view is mixed. I need a reaction of what I have said to get my vision straight

So it's detrimental to the town to imply hopefulness of confirmation? I don't see how it is my fault that people interpreted it wrongly, or how it is anti-town to try to gambit once I realized that they had done so. Could you explain please?

Mason, eh? I don't know...but at this point there hasn't been enough discussion to warrant questioning it.

By all means, question away. I know that it is natural to be suspicious of a claim that requires two people to confirm it, but I've been doing quite a bit of thinking in case I am scum and see the opportunity, and I have determined that the risk as scum is much to high to make it a worthwhile gambit, because if one of the two of you is checked out in any way (investigated, vigged, lynched) then both players go down, rather than just the checked out player.

That said, I do not make a habit of lying, even as scum. You can believe or disbelieve that as you wish, but lying in a game where your words are your only real tools leaves a bad taste in my mouth.

The only way your masonry is confirmed is if your other mason confirms so. Yes, I know that myko did, but the point is that I see this as an easy claim for two scum. You and others noted that myko was defending you, and due to the fixation that everyone (myself included) seem to have on the setup because it's semi-open, it's easy enough to make. Now getting to the actual claim:

The whole point is that myko confirmed it without being overtly told to. I did not say "mykonian should confirm me now" but rather that my mason partner should do so. If myko was not my mason partner, I would have said so, and I would have pushed for his lynch for lying (I like LAL).

What is the point of this? I think the Doctor (should there be one) would know this automatically, and therefore I think you are making too many steps to ensure the claim is true,

including that you also greatly elaborated on your mason role PM (unless that was just made up by you )

. I see, in this case, you "asking" for the power as "asking to waste it on a scum".

A lot of my analysis of you and myko made from the beginning/middle of the game seemed to anti-town (particularly myko), so this claim seems insincere to me.

That doesn't warrant a vote, however. I want you to examine what I've said and respond

Bolded: Bad experience in Newbie 661. The doc protected me rather than the cop (who was being extremely obvious) N1, and if afatchic, who was scum, (we lynched the RB D1) had not assumed that the protection would have been there (due to my requesting it to go to LF (the cop)) we would have been in a bad situation. So it's more force of habit than anything.

Italics: Yup. Entirely made up by me. I had fun doing it too. This is a mini normal, and role flavors are decidedly bland to avoid theming the game, so I thought I would take a little liberty with the flavor, and have some fun.

Underlined: I can't exactly quote my role PM to prove it, (as I do not want to get modkilled) so you are free to believe whatever you want. All I can say is that I did not lie. Myko and myself are masons, no two ways about it.

Anything else you wish to know?

[Kairyuu]

@SP:

Yes, since you are a mason. That's only truly confirmable through a cop investigation, and I would have rathered confirm (at that point) someone who seemed suspicious. If you were a doctor, vig, or cop, then you could confirm that through night actions. People would wait for them too, like you were asking, and if nothing happened, you would get lynched, again like you said. Again, it is good that your partner confirmed it and no one has said you lied, but it isn't good enough for absolute truth.

One problem with my not claiming. I was at L-2. It was that or get lynched. As for it not being absolute truth, I agree.

One question here though. Would you consider it absolute truth if one or the other of us were NKed and flipped mason?

While that is true, there is another situation where this is required: you need one of your scum buddies to go along with the ploy. It serves as a signal, but that signal is as easy for scum to make as masons. Then again, this would require a lot of preparation (impossible in D1) or luck, but I think it is capable of good players.

There was a pregame where myko and I were allowed to speak, but it was so short (under an hour I think) that he never even had a chance to tell me if he was a miller or not.

I can't speak for everyone, and maybe it's because I replaced in, but my role PM was identical to the role description provided by the mod in the first posts. Just saying.

-Smacks self- I completely forgot about that post. Yes, my role pm is exactly the same as the mason example with mykonian in the [insert name here section].

Are you willing to say if you have a third partner? The probabilities are pretty slim, but just to confirm.

No third mason. I would have claimed M Cubed if there were.

One more question for you. Have I responded to your points in a manner that is convincing? Or do you still require more evidence?

@wolf:

is it just me or are those last three quoted names in weird writting?

I think they're Kairyuu in Japanese, which would be pretty awesome.

Fun fact: Kairyuu translated to english means 'to find the cubic root of a number.' I did not find this out until a decent amount of time after I made the name up from scratch.

[Kairyuu]

EBWOP: Yay! I was right!

And you make a fair point SC. Unless the mod confirms it (which won't happen unless I die) then there is no 100% guarentee.

[Kairyuu]

Of course. I define absolute truth as confirmed by the mod. That doesn't mean your claim isn't truth, it just has less truthiness than absolute truth.

I can't argue with that logic.

For now, I suppose. I'm not entirely convinced, but there isn't much I can do besides voting for you to make my point, which I don't want to do. I'm taking your claim to be true for now, with this scenario in the back of my head in the coming game days.

Perfectly reasonable.

[Kairyuu]

Quantity=/=quality.

Exactly right, but requesting prods does not count as quality.

You weren't at L-2 when you made your 'I'll be confirmed' statement which put you to L-2. It amazes me that you are pretty much agreeing with me on the fact that you didn't think of all the possibilities, then say in the same sentence that it wasn't bad play. I just don't know if you are doing this on purpose.

I certainly wouldn't have half-claimed with three votes on me.

You have the order wrong. I was at 3 votes when I made my "I'll submit to being lynched D2 if I can't be confirmed" post. That was the post that brought me to L-2, at which point I had to half claim in order to explain my reasoning.

I did not institute my gambit until I was at L-2, and now I am confused as to what you meant by not considering all the possibilities. I thought you meant that I couldn't get the best read on the people who reacted to the gambit. Apparently you are talking about something else. Explain please.

Given how you have played and the possibility it leaves in my mind of you being a scum making a gambit, my sentiment now is that only a cardflip from one of you will convince me of your alignment but I do not think you are a priority today.

How I have played has been entirely consistant throughout. You just don't seem to like the fact that I won't apologize for not letting myself get lynched. You will probably get your wish soon enough when the scum kills me or myko, but until then you get to deal with the fact that claiming masons as scum is a stupid move because of how easily it could be confirmed.

I'm not talking about your read, I'm talking about the way you've been arguing in favor of you half-claim whereas there is no question for me that it was a bad move. You not being pissed at yourself for being obliged to claim make me doubt your alignment, because I think I would be.

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 could just as easily say that you are scum because you did not react the way that I would have to my questioning. It would equate to the same thing, that is, baseless argument that holds no weight.

[Kairyuu]

EBWOP: I'm looking for the games right now CF Riot. They should be up today, but tommorow at the latest.

[Kairyuu]

@Springlullaby:

I felt their absence was very suspicious at the time given that there was a claim on the table.

And you feel that this excused your posting nothing but prod requests?

My bad for being confusing, by half-claim I was referring to your 'if I can be confirmed' comment which in mind is definitively what brought you in a situation to claim in the first place, and which I definitively see as bad play because nothing warranted a statement of the sort at the time.

I felt it would help my case, as it did in the same newbie game I mentioned earlier (I did almost the same thing, minus the confirmation hope). It didn't. Oh well. There is absolutely no use crying over spilled milk. I am not going to give up and go home just because something didn't go as planned.

I don't like the passive-aggressiveness of this and the wifom but no, I'm not saying you shouldn't have claimed, I'm saying that your apparent refusal to admit any mistep in the process which led to your claim doesn't comfort me on your alignment. So yes, until one of you is cardflipped, you get to deal with the fact that that people are going to doubt you.

It's WIFOM to mention something that the scum all but has to do in order to win? Whatever you say.

And yet again you are saying you don't like the claim simply because I moved forward rather than dwelling on what you feel was a mistake. If townies got all pissed off and sulky every time something didn't work out for them, then scum would never get lynched.

And if by people you mean SilverPhoenix (who is being logical) and yourself, (quite the opposite) neither of whom feels strongly enough for a vote from the way it seems, I am not altogether bothered by being suspected, as your case has nothing to it, and he is currently satisfied with my reasoning.

This touch a point which I actually find interesting and think goes beyond what I'm starting to suspect is pointless bickering. I'll address it in my next post which with deal with my suspicions of Artem

-waits for explanation-

@CF Riot: Been busy. I'll get the stuff up tomorrow since I have much more free time on the weekends.

[Kairyuu]

Sorry for not posting in a few days. Been grounded. Will post opinions in depth tomorrow.

One interesting thing to note, is this, from Zade's last post:

You're right, putting someone at L-2

when both the scum are still hidden

isn't very opportunistic on its own.

Anyone else catch this nice little scum slip? This also puts germy's claim under heavy suspicion, because I'm pretty sure that germy cannot be a backup power role if there are only two scum, considering the qhole mason thing.

I will vote sekinj for deadline if absolutely necessary, but I am pretty sure that Zade just accidentally exposed the scum.

[Kairyuu]

@Sekinj: You each have two. I am much more suspicious of Zade than of you (especially after what I just mentioned in my last post) and think that it would give us much more info if we lynched Zade, but deadline is getting worryingly close, and we need a lynch to get any information whatsoever.

Again, I think lynching Zade is a good bit better of an idea for today than lynching you, and I will continue to push for it, but the no lynch at dealine thing bothers me.

@Everyone: Why are you all unvoting Zade? Just look at the scum slip! That may be the most damning evidence of the game thus far.

[Kairyuu]

-Punches self in face-

I really need to look at the possible setups before I make an accusation.

I forgot that it takes 6 Ts to make 2 scum, which would not be possible, so I apologize Zade. I got overexcited when I saw what looked like an accidental admission of scumminess.

[Kairyuu]

@SL:

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

QFT

Is missing the point, what I'm stating is I feel the prods I posted were warranted. I don't know what was Kair's intention since he didn't state anything clearly, but 1) I don't think I posted only prods in this game 2) are you accusing me of doing so? If it is the case, do state it clearly instead of borrowing other people's word.

Except that Artem is exactly right. Examples include:

Prod: afatchic

I'm putting my posting my thoughts on hold until Kayryuu's partner has claimed.

One thing though, I'd like to hear more from our lurkers: afatchic, alvinz95, Ku_F, Scigatt, and wolframnhart.

Five lurkers in a 12 people town is too disproportionate for my liking, especially with a claim on the table.

Prod: alvinz95, Ku_F, Scigatt

Comon guys, don't be annoying and lame, post.

I'll post something bigger later, I want these people to post first. I have to big suspects as for now.

Those are three entire posts from you, where all you do is prod other players.

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.

But yet you haven't explained why you decided to use it after I specifically pointed out to Artem that it holds no water.

@CF Riot: I've been giving my reasons to vote Zade/afatchic since around page 2. They haven't changed (though they have been added to). Here is a quick rundown:

1. Tried to partially separate self from germy once it was apparent that people found his claim request scummy.
2. Denied this when called out.
3. Expressed lack of caring about backup power roles (said they were unimportant).
4. Began to lurk when I pressed further, going so far as to complain about being ganged up on 'every time' he posts.

-Zade replaces in-

5. Goes after sekinj (an easy target).
6. Continually repeats "I'm town."

That clarify it for you?

@nonvoters:

SP, Scigatt, and Wolf really need to get a vote down, even if you're unsure of your read right now.

Deadline is running up on us, and right now everyone that's voting (except one) would have to be voting the EXACT SAME person for a lynch to go through

.

QFT

[Kairyuu]

@Kairyuu: I think that I've missed whatever it is that makes you think that Sekinj was an easy target except for the vote cast against her by CF Riot. Is one vote against a person enough to make her an easy target? Are you then suggesting that I should have fabricated a case against someone unsuspected thus far in order to distance myself from all "easy targets" and other players?

What about her made her an "easy target" before I came along? I ask, because it looks like you're grasping at straws. If you don't find my argument against her convincing, that's fine. But you and Myk are the only people besides Sekinj who seem to think that my suspicion of her was calculated to manipulate other people rather than to lynch scum. Why?

I really didn't have much for this bit, and I can't back it up with more than personal opinion, so I suppose I will have to drop it. I am pretty sure that even though there was only one vote there at the time there were at least a few more people suspicious. I dunno. I've probably got a bit of tunnel vision going here, which is why I am becoming irrational.

And "6. Continually repeats "I'm town"" is just flat out false. It was said once and defended. I used it to explain my logic, that Sekinj only took a stand to defend other players when she was busy trying to discredit the real targets of her posts. That was all. Where else in the five pages since I made that post have I said "HEY! I'm town!" or anything like that? When I teased you in post 327 for doing exactly that?

I could have sworn I didn't call you out on it until you had done it a couple of times. If I'm wrong I apologize.

Bold is mine.

It seems that I may be tunnelling, which would be bad. I'm gonna have a go at rereading the whole game to see what I can see. I still strongly dislike afatchic's play, and think that Zade is scum because of that, but after he was replaced I have seen very few scumtells, so I may need to reconsider my case for D1.

@CF Riot: It's not like I didn't expect you to disagree with me, as you did the same last time I brought up the full case. I think the case is reasonably strong, and you think it rather weak, which is perfectly acceptable, since we are both rather stubborn.

As for the whole you/Zade scumteam ideas, it is probably because you defended afatchic, and now are defending Zade, against a good portion of the points made. Personally, I think that if Zade flips scum, it would be a wise decision for us to look more closely at you as scum because of the defenses.

[Kairyuu]

@Zade:

If anything, Sekinj was an uphill battle because you had in no uncertain terms disagreed with CF Riot for voting Sekinj and in fact mentioned it when you HoSed him. Wolframhart had just declared that he didn't think that she was very strong. And CF Riot hadn't yet responded to Sekinj's defence of her vote/unvote for you, which made me think at the time that he was backing off.

I believe I already ceded this point to you. I can see what you mean and do not consider it a point against you right now. Still want you dead though.

You called me out after I had posted twice: one of those was my confirmation post. I didn't mention it again except to explain myself and once to point out that you've done the same in past posts.

Very well. I still don't like the fact that you did it at all, regardless of how many times you did it.

And I don't consider mine to count, because I had already claimed and had that claim as close to confirmed as is possible for anyone but an innocent child.

On the other hand, thank you for apologising. I appreciate your honesty, even if you're trying to kill me.

Anyway, those are my thoughts. We've got two days to decide a) whether we want to lynch (yes, I assume), b) who we ought to lynch, and c) who's willing to compromise to achieve that lynch. I have hope that we'll reach a compromise because not a few people have expressed willingness to vote for multiple players.

a)of course
b)you or SL
c)I will move my vote to SL at deadline if necessary to achieve a lynch. I would also move to sekinj, but would prefer not to, as I feel that she has explained herself well enough for the moment.

(Note: If you are willing to compromise and vote with me I will move my vote as soon as you do, because SL is currently my second choice and not helping herself with the fact that she refuses to give me a straight answer. This would make it a much easier choice for today's lynch for others)

And before people jump on me for being willing to vote with my top suspect, I have precedent for this from Newbie 661 as I do with most of my actions.

@Springlullaby:

I already told you that I think my prodding them was justified at the time. And I posted content as I said I would.

Even if those posts hadn't been essentially all you posted for 2-3 days, you are ignoring the entire point of my quoting them. You claimed to have never made a post that was nothing but a prod. Those three posts are perfect examples of just that. You ask for lurkers to post, and then say nothing else. Plus, these posts spanned 2-3 days, with no other posts between them. The fact that you keep trying to dodge the issue does not sit well with me. I would seriously consider switching my vote to you at deadline if I can't get people to join my case instead.

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.

Two things: First, you still haven't explained why you used the argument when you knew that it would amount to nothing. Second, the bold is serious WIFOM, especially since, as I explained to Artem, what you would do in one situation has absolutely no effect on determining the alignment of someone else when they do something in the same situation, because people have a tendency to think differently from each other.

If they didn't, then there would be no point playing mafia because every scum would act the same and every townie would act the same in any given scenerio. The scum would therefore not be able to hide and the town would win every time.

[Kairyuu]

@Zade: Whoops. I guess I got my timeline confused.

Yes, I am being a meanie. No I won't drop it.

My new angle is this: I knew I could prove it (as well as can be reasonably expected) if called for, and you can't.

But yes, I have pretty much given that point up, so I'll back off on it now.

As for the reread, I haven't had much time recently (5 AP courses are beating me into the ground) so I haven't gotten a chance. I will hopefully have a decent amount of free time tomorrow, so I will try to do it then. (key word try, as I'm still trying to find time for the cases for CF Riot, which I intend to find as soon as I can)

[Kairyuu]

Alright. I'm just going to go for it, as I can't see getting enough votes on Zade for a lynch in just 1.5 days.

unvote

and

vote: Springlullaby

[Kairyuu]

Either we have a doc, or someone wants the claimants to get lynched to save themselves some trouble. Of course, there are several other possibilities, including:

-RB blocks scum who sends kill
-scum forgets to send the kill
-the ones already mentioned (sans me and myko being scum of course)

I won't deny that I am surprised at this development, but given the number of possibilities, I don't think we have much to gain from trying to figure out what happened. It allows the scum to try to get us to lean one way or the other subtly in order to serve their purposes better. The only way we can really know is through claiming, which is a bad idea right now.

vote: Scheherazade

because you knew I was gonna do it. I didn't like the reasoning behind the wagon jump, and it was a common scum position (yes, so was mine, but I had merely given up on getting zade lynched for the day because deadline was so close and any lynch is better than none D1).

@Wall-E: Welcome, welcome. Hope to see your reasoning become clear in due time.

I would be semi-willing to move my vote later in the Day for a few reasons I'll point out then, but for now I think Zade is a much better choice, and would like to know your opinions on this matter.

[Kairyuu]

Also, I'm at reduced (probably severely) post frequency for the next 1.5 weeks. I doubt I will fall behind, but I will unfortunately not be able to post much.

[Kairyuu]

@Zade:

As far as my reasoning for voting springlullaby, my reason c was the same reasoning you gave. Therefore, your problem isn't with insufficient cause. That indicates to me that one of the other reasons I gave seemed scummy to you. Which reason is it and would you care to elaborate?

Gladly:

a) because I think springlullaby's posts over the past few pages haven't actually given me much insight into her thinking despite being asked questions I too want answered, which might be a tactic of scum, b) because she's reacted poorly to the criticism offered so far and to the votes against her, c) because I want to work out a compromise, and d) because my number one suspect, Sekinj, has gone on record strongly against springlullaby and I hope spring's alignment might strengthen or weaken my case against Sekinj (I'm keeping bussing in mind, too, don't worry).

a. That was my inital reasoning for being suspicious of her, so this could just be latching onto the reasoning of the "confirmed" townie.

b. This is valid.

c. Also valid, because otherwise there would have probably been a No Lynch.

d. This could very easily be a scum reason. Essentially you say that you are going to lynch SL, who (as scum) you know is town so that you (as scum) can go after sekinj D2.

I'm calling this right now. If Zade is scum, then sekinj is most likely town. If sekinj is scum, Zade is probably town. If Zade is town, it tells us nothing about sekinj, and if sekinj is town, then Zade is above 50% for being scum. I see more information in the sekinj lynch, so I will seriously consider moving to her soon.

And not to put more pressure on you (the APs are well worth your time, if you ever doubt that, believe me), but I just wanted to mention the rereading you promised, lest you forget it in the excitement of the new day.

I forgot. I'll try to do it soon when I have time.

@Scigatt:

Okay, what the heck is the case on Scheherazade? I've read hers and afat's posts but nothing seems scummy enough to warrant this attention.

Read my and myko's posts from D1. Both of us outlined out own specific cases several times.

@Wall-E:

What do you mean by this? Who is the bolded selection referring to? Who is the underlined bit referring to?

Are you serious? The "someone" is the scum, and "the claimants" are me, myko, and germy, you know, the people who have claimed their roles. That could not have been more obvious.

@Everyone: I am almost positive that there is no SK. The SK automatically has the DI and BI abilities, making it's kills almost inevitable. The fact that there was no kill last night means that we either have 2 docs and the mafia failed to kill (or we have 1 blocker) in which case germy is either a backup RB or lying scum, or we have a doc who protected the mafia's target, and two town RBs (or one and one) blocked the SK in ehich case germy could be either backup doc or RB (or lying scum). There might be some other possibility that I missed, but I think that the much more likely scenerio is that there is no SK, and we merely need to find the scum. Keep in mind that the SK would be obligated to submit a kill.

[Kairyuu]

@Zade: It's all in the intention really. I would prefer to lynch you, and then have that determine how I see sekinj, because I don't really want to lynch her when I am confident that you are scum. She gives me mixed reads, and I wish to use your lynch as a clarifying point about her, whereas you wanted to use SL's lynch to further you own agenda.

Yes, I know I said I would move my vote, but I would really rather lynch the one I actually believe is scum. I will however, still vote sekinj if it looks like that is going to be the play for the day and nothing i do will change it (because I agree with germy about the whole unified town thing).

The comment about her lynch providing more information is just that if you turn up town it won't really tell me anything about her, since she hasn't made her stance on you very clear. The fact that I think you will flip scum means that I am willing to bank on that chance, but that you may win again and survive the day if the rest of the town wants you to.

So essentially they are the same thing, and it is merely the implications of each that differenciate them.

[Kairyuu]

@Zade: What it really boild down to is, like I said, the implications of the statement. Yours gves me the impression that you somehow know of SL's towniness, which implies that you would be using it as a way to fabricate a stronger case against sekinj. You also implied (seemingly, correct me if I'm wrong. I don't want to be a hypocrite) that even if SL was scum, you would be going after sekinj (because 'weaken' would mean the case was still there). The fact that you would be going after sekinj even if SL was scum seems to indicate that you already knew the result of the cardflip.

I probably just made it more complicated for you rather than clearer, but that is the way my mind works. It's like a convoluted series of cause and effect, so if you can follow it feel free to comment, and if you can't, then I'll pick it apart myself and try to explain a bit better.

@Wall-E: Fair enough, except for the part about you only building cases against scum, because that would imply that you are always town, and always right (which cannot possibly be the case).

Any comments on my arguments against Zade?

[Kairyuu]

@sekinj: Where do you get that your lynch will confirm Wall-E as scum? I never said that. Wall-E is completely unrelated to your lynch as far as I can tell.

[Kairyuu]

Wait. I missed that he was voting you.

It still doesn't change anything, because if I said that both he and Zade were scum if you flipped town, then I would have to say that so is everyone else who ever votes you, and we can't have that many scum.

[Kairyuu]

@Wall-E:

I was being facetious.

Tones get lost over the internet. I wasn't actually calling you out.

I agree with your comments about zade. It may be a misunderstanding on zade's part, but I'd have to hear how from him/her before making that judgment call for sure.

Elaborate please. Which comments are you agreeing with (I've made quite a few over the course of the game)?

[Kairyuu]

@Zade:

If springlullaby turned up mafia, I'd still suspect Sekinj a little. I'm not treating anything as certain. I don't think that's any more suspicious than those who suspected you mentioning the possibility that you and mykonian are playing a scum gambit. It's highly unlikely, but it's something to keep an eye on, wouldn't you agree?

Sekinj going after SL until the lynch if they were both scum would actually be a rather good example of the newest addition to the mafiawiki's gambits section, which one of our very own came up with and implemented to win in his first game on MS as scum (germy's gambit).

I didn't mean to imply that I'd pursue a case against Sekinj no matter what. I said weaken because, honestly, I'd reexamine Sekinj, not drop the case entirely. I don't like absolutes. I think that got me in trouble before.

I suppose this is a good enough explanation for me. I still don't really like what I read as the implications of your point, but I've run out of things I can say about it to try to explain it to you. At this point I'll reduce it to more of just a feeling I got when I read it.

This seems shaky to me.

If I knew the result of springlullaby's lynch, then why exactly do you feel that examining the course of action I implied I would have taken in the case opposite of that you suppose I knew to be true is worthwhile?

Further, what about saying "I'll be going after Sekinj even if springlullaby is scum" implies that I know that springlullaby is town?

Bolded: Because if you didn't at least appear to consider the alternative, then you would appear even more committed to the movement from the SL lynch to the sekinj lynch, and you would definitely appear to know how the flip would go.

Italics: It implies that you know because it looks like you are just trying to find reasons to go after sekinj D2, regardless of her alignment. This tells me that you don't care about her alignment, which in turn tells me that you already know it, which would mean that you are scum, and would therefore mean that she is town.

I apologise if I'm simply misunderstanding you, as you and Wall-E have suggested.

I didn't think you were, or I would have pointed it out.

I like you play actually. It's quite good, and has been getting better as the game has gone on. You are very logical, which is the quality I prize most in someone who plays mafia. This makes you very dangerous if you are scum, because it is much harder to make a case stick (as is obvious by my many ceded points). You actually remind me of another player who I liked playing with very much, Save the Dragons (STD), who was one of the ICs in my newbie game.

I am seriously considering swapping to sekinj to see the cardflip, because if she is scum then there is little chance that you are too (which would mean I was chasing my own tail since page 2 ).

@Wall-E:

First of all, I loved post 48. ++town points there.

Second, you've claimed, and I have yet to see strong evidence you lied, so I'm on your side (face-value until proven scummy?).

Third, you have been pushing for a zade lynch for nearly 8 pages,

starting when you first asked him for a way to shorten his name, extending through your nicknaming of him... you almost obsess over his posts.

If your assessment is accurate, town wins.

If it's not, I'll probably build my case against you.

To start,

There don't seem to be very many people who actually like the way I play. Hell, I'd have been lynched if I couldn't confirm myself in this game. To find someone who actually agrees with my playstyle is quite nice.

Bolded: I don't play for town points. I play to catch scum. While it is nice that you find me pro-town, please do not let that affact the way you play the game. If I do something you find scummy, call me out for it.

Italics: I like that phrase (pro-town until proven scummy). It's the way I generally play, so I can't fault you for it.

Underlined: More than that. I've been pushing for Zade's lynch since I called out afatchic on page 2 or 3. Afatchic's responses made me convinced that he was scum, but Zade's play is good, and I'm leaning towards confirming his alignment indirectly through his (and much of the town's) top suspect, rather than the other way around, because if he is town and I've been jumping at shadows the whole time, then I'll be really pissed at myself for getting a very logical player lynched.

Bold and underlined: And how is that? It would mean that we've caught one scum, and that two more remain to find. I'd say that we wouldn't be overly close to winning yet.

All three: So you think that townies can't be wrong about something they feel strongly about? That makes no sense logically. If anything I would say that I look more town simply by sticking with the case so long, even though it has become almost impossible to get new points to stick. When I look for scum, the players that hold strong convictions for a long time generally don't ping my radar, even if they are wrong. Probably just a difference of playstyle.

@sekinj:

Tell that to SL

One problem though. As far as I can tell, no one tried to 'trip up' SL, and (at least for me) the reason that she was suspect was because she was doing exactly what you are sort of doing, dodging questions and trying to turn everything against her questioners. The fact that she flipped town doesn't make the action any less scummy.

FOS: sekinj

[Kairyuu]

@sekinj:

Hint: Kair had the biggest case, but is now wussing out.

Naw. I'm

seriously considering

wussing out. Not the same thing.

I just like the way Zade plays, that's all. The majority of the town is leaning towards your lynch, and I agree with germy's idea (though I still hold onto the distant hope that people will actually side with the closest things to confirmed townies we have in this game).

Let's put it this way. I don't really think you are scum based on your play, but others do. If you and Wall-E (who claims to be following my lead but isn't voting with me) vote for Zade, who myko and I think are scum, then germy's stated hopes (and his previous vote) will likely lead him to move his vote as well. That brings us to 5 votes on Zade, with 6 to lynch. Then, if Artem wants to put a vote on his two time biggest D1 target, we have a lynch (I will unvote and then be the hammer if people are too afraid to).

So you see, if one or two things shift my way, then we are looking at an avalanche of votes going where I think they belong. Get it?

[Kairyuu]

Oh yeah, and I've solved the problem with Mini 681 by offering to replace in, so you'll get to deal with me in two games at once. Lucky you.

[Kairyuu]

"What makes you think examining what you can only think is a lie is worthwhile?"

I apologize for misreading what you asked me, and apologize again because I'll need you to ask again. I don't really understand the wording of the question. To me it seems like you are asking the question I already answered again. I know this to not be true, so I'll need some clarification here.

Oh, and I'm glad I remind you of a STD you encountered once.

Yup. You should read the game (Newbie 661). It was a good one. We lynched the scum RB D1 (mostly because I'm more stubborn than almost anyone you will ever meet ) and then that broke the game for us, netting the town a perfect win in my first ever game of mafia.

[Kairyuu]

One more thing before sleep.

@Wall-E: Can I put this:

If your assessment is accurate, town wins. If it's not, I'll probably build my case against you.

and this:

Your sureness I will follow like breadcrumbs, and based on where they lead us, I hope to learn something.

in my wiki page?

[Kairyuu]

@Scigatt:

Looking at the and the posts they refer to, it seems to me you have overstated your case. Reading Afat's first post after Germy's claim I see no implorations for others to claim, not even millers. Personally, I think you were reading way too much into the text than was there.

I overstated my case? Just because I say it alot doesn't mean that it is overstated. Hell, I'd shut right up about it if people would move their votes over. I can't lynch someone with only myko voting with me. So I will continue to point out every little scummy thing I see (and have most of them explained and drop the points).

I'm wondering what would you have accepted as an explanation. Also, whether you think that a player's actions violate the spirit of the game has nothing to do with whether they are scum or town.

Afatchic never actually responded, so I can't say what I would have accepted, but silence was not it.

And I believe that you are wrong about your second bit. Generally speaking, scum are more likely to lurk than town are. Since lurking goes against the spirit of the game, then it

does

actually provide itself to be a way to find the scum.

Making up time is scummy?

This point is moot by now, but I will explain my reasoning for making the statement.

I called Zade out for saying "I'm town," which I see as somewhat scummy. I thought that he had said it several times, and he responded by saying that afatchic hadn't said it at all, and therefore he was just making up for lost time. Since the action in and of itself I find scummy, giving the explanation that you are doing it because a predecessor didn't does not change the fact that the act is scummy.

@Zade: Sorry I didn't respond to this earlier, (Still V/LA) so here it is now.

So I was asking about what use you saw in examining the lie in the manner that you did. You assumed it was a lie, therefore you couldn't take the statements I made as part of it at face-value, right? But it seems like you did, partly, when you said "The fact that you would be going after sekinj even if SL was scum seems to indicate that you already knew the result of the cardflip." I'm not trying to wrestle you in to a black or white position--i.e. either it's a lie and none of it can be trusted or it isn't a lie and can therefore be used against me--I'm trying to figure out what that grey margin you saw was.

I see you as a good, logical player, that much is certain. When I read that reason, I saw "I'm saying that the cardflip of SL will affect whether I continue to push for a sekinj lynch, but I still plan to pursue it either way." I saw this because you

said

that you would base your decision off of the cardflip, and you

seemed to imply

that your case would still be there either way. This would mean that you were lying about the first statement, which would in turn mean that you knew SL's alignment to be town, and that you were scum.

The grey area was really whether or not I was misinterpreting your implications (hence why I asked if that was what you actually meant). The fact that you did not say that I was wrong, but rather defended your position told me that I was right in my interpretation, and therefore, more likely to be right about the assumptions that followed from that interpretation.

If that doesn't answer your question then I am apparently still misunderstanding it.

@Recent developments: I'm still sold on a Zade lynch, (but you guys no that already) but I would not say no to a Scigatt wagon/lynch for today (because the math says that we have up to 3 mislynches based on the No Kill last night, and it is always difficult to tell with lurkers). People have brought up some good points, and from my experience, lynching a lurker before LyLo more often then not nails scum (in LyLo it's usually the scum pushing the lurker lynch; see Newbie 588 for examples of both cases, and 661 for the scum-lurker case).

[Kairyuu]

(Still V/LA, so this will probably be short.)

I don't like the case on sekinj, not one bit. Its based on conjecture, misrep, and null tells. Her play thus far in D2 has been, if not extremely pro-town, at least better than neutral. I'm on her side for now, but may look into her a bit later (Some of this opinion comes from the reread that I finally got around to).

I'm becoming more suspicious of germy as well, for reasons that Wolf mentioned. He's being hypocritical in his behavior towards Wall-E. Not enough for a real case at this point, but I'm just putting that out there.

Scigatt worries me. I can see joining myko over there, but I disagree with myko's opinion on active lurking. It is quite the scumtell, because it makes you look like you are helping out without actually saying anything (this is one of the things I see as a misrep of sekinj. I do not agree that she has been active lurking after I called her out on it in my first LoS on page 2 or 3).

Wolf I see as solidly pro-town. He doesn't post all that much, but when he does it is always with some sort of evidence to bring forward (or a promise of such).

I maintain that if Zade is scum, so is CF Riot. Before it was for the repeated "there is no case," which I dropped, but now it is that those two are working rather closely together pushing for sekinj. I'm thinking scum driven wagon on a townie right there.

Wall-E is giving off very eccentric vibes. I like that. He seems quite wacky, which is fun, and extremely good natured, which is always nice to have. I also like his reasoning on sekinj, which leads me to now link Wall-E to my ever growing association tree (now I see either Wall-E and sekinj or Zade and CF Riot as scum, with the other group being town).

And of course, Zade is still at the top of my Most Wanted list, and I die a little inside when I log on and only see my own vote, all alone there. Oh well. Masons are better working together, so I suppose I can leave Zade for tomorrow (when I hope for a lynch).

unvote

and

vote:Scigatt

On a rather interesting note, this is the second player in this game that got replaced as suspicion of them was mounting. I find that odd.

[Kairyuu]

@SilverPhoenix: I agree with your vote wholeheartedly, and don't think you should have apologized for your hastiness. This is the second time that CF Riot is stepping up to diffuse a possible lynch (the first being repeatedly saying "you have no case" regarding afatchic before Zade showed up, which he noticeably stopped doing once Zade started defending himself, even though I was still pushing just as hard). I find that to reek of scumminess, and think that he just linked himself to Scigatt, which links Scigatt to Zade. I'm thinking that if one of those three is scum, all three of them are the scumteam.

I think that any of those thre (Scigatt, CF Riot, and Zade) would be a perfectly acceptable lynch for today, and that the other two should follow in successive days. Ladies and gents, we seem to have found all of the scum.

@Zade: I was referring to Wall-E moving straight from attacking sekinj to defending her. Whenever one player defends another, or tries to move suspicion around (something I did successfully in mini 658 as scum, on both D1 and D4) I put it down in my notes as a possible link. When there is an attack, I put it down as a possible opposed link (that they are on different sides). The defence part I generally see as a much stronger link than the attacking part, because townies attack each other all the time, but often don't defend each other without damn good cause.

Also, this:

You're going to die a lot on the inside if your wish comes true

is appeal to emotion, a logical fallacy. In jest, I would assume (as my comment was), but a fallacy all the same.

I'm glad you're interested in examining sekinj, another pair of eyes will help, I feel.

Where did you get that from in my post? I already did my reread of sekinj (as part of the larger reread of the topic), and found more evidence

contrary

to her being scum. I find that much of the case against her, if not all of it, is based on weak reasoning and misrep. I'm not going to actually point out the areas, because then she could claim them as her own, but I'm mostly seeing scum driven wagon that got derailed.

And yes, that can link me, and therefore myko, to sekinj, and therefore Wall-E, because we have all said that sekinj is most likely town. I am not excluded from my own linking patterns. I hope to eventually be able to compile a neat little list of town and scum, but I need the lynch of someone in one of my groupings to flip scum first, which I hope will happen soon.

@Everyone: My list thus far:
= : same alignment (direct connection)
=/= : opposite alignment (direct connection)
+=+ : linked by association

CF Riot = Zade
CF Riot = Scigatt
Zade +=+ Scigatt

Zade =/= sekinj

Wall-E = sekinj
Kairyuu = sekinj
Kairyuu = mykonian (confirmed)
myko = sekinj (confirmed)
Wall-E +=+ Kairyuu
Wall-E +=+ mykonian

I didn't put the opposite alignments by association because it seems obvious enough for everyone to understand.

[Kairyuu]

Hi Nat! So, are you going to try to go on a killing spree again like FDaT? Or are you going to self hammer (again, like FDaT)? You could do both if you want, as long as you knock off your buddies in the process.

Onward, to the current goings on and whatnot!

@Zade: Here comes the usual me realizing that I'm grasping at straws and correcting myself (Random note to everyone: As scum, I am very careful with what I write. As town, not so much).

I thought you were on her side before, making the "but" statement part of the new opinion formed from the reread. Therefore, I thought you'd moved away from support and towards possible re-examination. I'm sorry if I misunderstood you: I didn't mean to put words in your mouth.

In essence, what I was saying there was that if the link in the chain (you) flip town, I would be scrutinizing her play very closely. Since I don't see that as likely to happen, I am on her side for probably the rest of D2 and maybe D3, depending on her play from here out.

See, it seems like you're forming a two-way connection between people based on the behaviour of one. The statement that "townies don't defend each other without a good cause" aside, where do you account for mafia defending townies? Isn't the defence link one way, tying the defender's alignment to the defended's but not the defended's to the defender's?

You are entirely right. Some of the current links have gone in reverse as well, but for the most part the links

are

one way. For example, if I die, and flip town, it really has nothing to do with sekinj's alignment, but if she flips town, then (if I wasn't already a claimed mason) I would look more town for defending her.

The last thing I don't really like is that you've laid this out. I might be partly responsible, because I was curious about your thinking. But now it looks like you're giving the scum a map to manipulate your system. Are you going to be able to trust anybody who becomes linked to your system now? He could be mafia trying to get in bed with the two masons.

Meh. It's out there because I am a firm believer in laying out any and all information I have for the town to pick apart if I am town. I do a little bit of it as scum too, but only null tells or weak stuff. I just find it to benefit the town way more to have all of my reasoning laid out in the thread in the event of my death.

All that being said, if it works, it works. I think Scigatt is scum and being linked to him is very uncomfortable. However, if your drive to get me lynched will result in the lynches of two of my top suspects, I think that I can't complain.

Forward to the buffs then, don'cha kno'! Let's get some lynchin' done!

What? Is this a mistake? How do you see sekinj confirmed town? mykonian is more or less confirmed, but that doesn't confirm sekinj. He's just been defending her. And he has a "damn good cause" because he thinks that I'm scum driving a town wagon. So he's just playing well by defending her. There's no way she could be "confirmed" unless you know something that you haven't shared yet. Am I misreading this?

Sorry about that. I was supposed to have a confirmed marker next to any link with me and myko. It just means that myko is confirmed townie, and therefore his link will automatically have pro-town intentions in my notes.

@Shanba:

I defend people I believe to be town all the time. Or rather, I attack any logic which I don't believe to be sound - if that logic is part of an attack on someone, I will defend that player. It is my firm belief that any townie should do no less.

And that is called having a damn good reason. If you think someone is town, and you stick to attacking shitty logic and bad play against them, then that's perfectly reasonable, and doesn't even constitute a decent link in my book.

@germy: I agree with two of your scum, but I find wolf to be rather pro-town in my book. He seems to be truly trying to keep himself involved as much as possible. Your neutrals are fine, though I would move Zade to the scum section of course. And I agree completely with your town grouping. I would probably put you in my neutral section if I were to make a list of my own.

[Kairyuu]

I hate to be a bearer of bad news, but I'd say that we gained almost nothing from those claims for a number of reasons.

First, and probably least important, Nat is a chronological liar when it comes to claims. Read his wiki. It says he often fakeclaims as town.

Also, and I have no idea why no one has pointed this out yet, we decided quite a while ago that the scum

also

have a roleblocker, so no RB claim should be instantly taken at face value.

Personally, if I had to wager a guess, SP's claim strikes me as more likely town than scum, because he had to ask the mod if a roleblocker could stop a scumkill. I'm thinking that Nat is also a roleblocker, but the scum RB, not a town one.

I don't really know what that says about Zade, because if Nat thought he was a sure lynch, then he might claim to have blocked a partner in order to confirm them, but if he thought it was too risky, then he would just claim to have blocked the townie that he really did block.

Best play for today would be lynch Nat and go from there I'd say. Not much else would really make sense.

@Zade:

The reason I bring this up is the connection you see between me, CF Riot and Scigatt. If Scigatt or I flip town, how will it influence your suspicion of him? And given that the only connection you've mentioned between me and Scigatt is the fact that CF Riot has stuck his neck out for both of us, how much do you think our alignments will actually impact one another in your read of the game?

I ask because you seem, to me, rather absolute in your links. Reading your post, you seem to imply that if one person on a grouping flips one way or the other, you will assume that the others in that group will flip the same way. Your response to my questions imply that your read is much, much more nuanced.

If you or Scigatt flip town, then it would be a minor town tell towards CF Riot, but I've seen too many instances of scum picking out a townie to defend to clear him completely.

[Kairyuu]

@Nat: Nope. I want to lynch you because your predecessor wasn't doing you any favors, and because I think you're the scum RB. And if you're not, then Zade is likely scum (or shanba, or both).

[Kairyuu]

Edit: Stale window. I will certainly not complain about lynching Zade.

unvote

and

vote: Sheherazade

[Kairyuu]

And now we have new info, again.

I'm inclined to trust germy, because it would make no sense for scum to claim the backup of a role that hasn't already been claimed. This throws the entire thing for a loop, because it means that one of the blockers is DEFINITELY lying, and that the other blocker did NOT necessarily block scum.

The setup, if everyone is telling the truth, is MMDDBBB, which would mean that there is a serial killer. Since we can infer that this is not the case, we must have MMDDBTX, with X being either a third M or a V. We cannot infer anything past there, because there is no evidence for it (since there is no mod confirm, and no vig kill). We know that it is not a C, because there are no millers. Therefore, we have no cop.

I'll go back to what I said at the top of the page, and

unvote

and

vote: natirasha

[Kairyuu]

@Wall-E: The problem with your assesment is that germy just claimed nurse, so we may have had a successful doc protect instead of a successful block. Therefore, one of the blockers is lying and is scum (that or germy is a very clever scum on a massive gambit, but i doubt it).

[Kairyuu]

Wow. Another simulpost. There is still the problem of the doctor. We know that one of the blockers is scum. We do

not

know if one of the blocked people are scum. Therefore, we should go with the 50/50 play, rather than the unknown.

[Kairyuu]

I would hammer, but my vote is already there, so I must wait.

Also, in addition to NaNo (in my sig) I am grounded for about 2 weeks, which means I can only post at school and when my parents aren't around. I'll do my best to keep up, but I'll probably be rather lurky for awhile.

[Kairyuu]

Also

@Zade: 'I told you so' noted. I submit that you are using the appeal to emotion logical fallacy as my response.

[Kairyuu]

@Wall-E: To rephrase, I was saying that, in response to the statement, I was claiming it to be a logical fallacy. Sort of a joke, sort of serious, because this is the second or third time a similar thing happened.

@zade: Feel free to hammer. Nat is pretty much gone until deadline I would assume. I doubt we will get anything more from him.

[Kairyuu]

@Zade:

vote: Sheherazade

This is for a completely different reason than any of my other points against you.

Firstly, we have afatchic's play (which you don't need to defend against because it wasn't you).

Secondly, you had absolutely no problem hopping on a townie lynch D1 right before it went through, while staying off of a scum lynch the next day that had more than the townie lynch as evidence to back it up.

Thirdly, I went to try to dig up more dirt during the Night Phase, and I discovered (WARNING: META ALERT) that afatchic, during the time he was lurking in this game, had made 34 posts elsewhere on the site (Oct. 4 to Oct. 9). He averaged only slightly under his total post per day average from his entire time on-site. This leads one to deduce that it was him trying to wait out suspicion, and then when that didn't happen (because I'm overly stubborn), ditching a lost cause.

So yeah, I have a case, and will continue to push it until you are lynched.

@everyone: I'm still doing the math and analyzing the game again, but I'm pretty sure I have the other two power roles pegged (doc and vig/child). Also, if my approximation is correct, a massclaim makes the game a hell of a lot easier for the town.

This is a tentative proposal, and I will be running scenerios through to determine the success rate, but I'd like some feedback from the town while I do that to see if you guys want to go with it or not.

Also, at this moment we are in an adjusted F11 with the setup mostly revealed. We have 9 players, two of which are scum, and we have a doc. Only difference is, the town is stacked with power roles (2 masons, a nurse, and another power role indeterminate), while the scum's powers are useless or can be rendered such (godfather negated by lack of cop, and spy negated by a massclaim). I'd say we are in a very good position right now.

[Kairyuu]

@Wall-E: Yes and no. The tentative initial data points to it as beneficial, but I have seen initial data not stand up to further testing. If it doesn't, then I will revoke the suggestion.

Until then though, I would like for people to share their opinions on the matter.

[Kairyuu]

Alrighty then Zade, let's see what there is here for me to respond to, because I do believe you reacted in exactly the way that I figured the scum would.

I'm not going to argue the reasoning for the two different lynches, because you will probably try to get it so that I have nothing left but to say we have differing opinions about the available information. So, assuming you have already done that to save time, I will move on.

Before I support this, what specifically will make it easier for the town? What scenarios do you envision?

I would like to say that, but I won't. Why? Because if I do then the scum know exactly what I am looking for. Besides, having the possibilities open makes it more likely for the scum to figure out a possible way around the trap.

By the way, I noticed something odd about what you said. You didn't include the possibility of a mafia role-blocker. You said:

while the scum's powers are useless or can be rendered such (godfather negated by lack of cop, and spy negated by a massclaim)

Where's the role-blocker? Clearly, based on the assumption that we have the set-up...

MMDDBTX, with X being either a third M or a V.

...then we have all three, mafia spy, role-blocker and godfather. And clearly, the mod isn't telling us which one Natirasha was. Why have you left role-blocker off of the list? Do you know that Natirasha was the mafia role-blocker? How? 0.o

Furthermore, the role-blocker would actually be helped a bit by the mass claim, wouldn't he? So if he's still in the game, he would be one mafia player whose powers aren't useless. Instead, he'd be more effective because he'd know who the doctor is.

Right then. This is obviously a mistake on my part right? Not at all actually. Remember Nat's claim? He claimed blocker, because he was probably hoping that he wouldn't be counterclaimed and could ride out the game looking like town. This would imply that he was, in fact, a blocker, but the scum blocker. I did not include the blocker in my plans because I am of the opinion that Nat was the blocker, and therefore there is no blocker remaining. That is what I am assuming, so therefore that will be reflected in my posts.

In fact, a mass claim would be excellent for the mafia if the role-blocker is still alive, because if we didn't lynch one of them, then the role blocker could block the doctor and the mafia could kill the vig, if he exists, or the innocent or the nurse followed the next night by the doctor, demolishing the town's advantage.

On second thought, isn't it kind of scummy of you to be asking for a mass claim?

Nice one. The whole "start at agreement but turn it around to suspicion" play. I like it. Unfortunately for you though, it doesn't matter. My plan has absolutely nothing to do with using the roles to secure a win. If Nat wasn't the blocker, then the blocker can block whoever he wants before he gets lynched. My plan will still work fine.

So, to answer your question, no, it is not scummy to suggest a massclaim, but from my experience it is a pretty decent indicator of scum to directly oppose one (example: In mini theme 568 all three of the scum, and only one of the townies opposed or were on the fence about a LyLo massclaim).

[Kairyuu]

I ran the numbers several times today, and I got an 87.5% town win rate if we massclaim, and that was assuming a low estimate on one scenerio.

unvote

because I want to see the claims now.

I think we should assume that I started, followed by myko, and the germy, because we have all claimed fully. I propose a popcorn style claim for the rest of you, starting with Zade (if no one has any objections).

[Kairyuu]

@CF Riot:

Everyone place your bets now and we'll see who guessed right at the end. I'm putting one lot on Zade/Wolf, and a smaller lot on Shanba/Sekinj.

Are you

trying

to give the scum more info than they need right now? We might have them on the ropes with the massclaim idea because they may not have planned for this situation, but now you want to give them the information about how each member of the town views the other members? Not a good idea in my opinion.

[Kairyuu]

Well then start, unless you have an alternative starter who you want to propose as an alternative.

[Kairyuu]

I would assume that 'VT' stands for vanilla townie, correct?

[Kairyuu]

Kairyuu, go!

. . . seriously? You're asking one of the claimed masons to claim?

[Kairyuu]

Generally speaking, when you popcorn claim (and I learned this last game I was in, ask the mod, 'cuz he was there too) the town decides who goes first, and then that person choosed who's next, and so on, with people who have already claimed making no sense as picks, because, you know, they have already volunteered the info.

[Kairyuu]

might i suggest wolf, as he is currently online?

[Kairyuu]

Aww. I checked back and he was gone.

[Kairyuu]

Just a note in case it wasn't obvious, if we have a child, they should get the mod to confirm them when they claim.

Also, wow. My assumptions were totally off kilter. Once the last 2 claim I'll tell you who I though was/would claim what.

[Kairyuu]

Oh well.

As you said. Semi-open setup means it doesn't matter much anyway.

[Kairyuu]

This situation makes NO SENSE whatsoever. It does not matter what situation we are in, there should NOT be 5 vanilla claims. Either we have 4 vanillas, a V or M, and the scum claiming doc and backup, or we have 2 vanillas, a V or M, and a doc and backup, with the scum claiming vanilla.

IN NO SITUATION should we have 5 vanilla claims. IT DOES NOT MAKE SENSE.

I'm so confused.

[Kairyuu]

The only problem with 815 is that it is wrong Wall-E. If there is a townie who is lying, they may cost us the game. Better to claim fully as town than to lie, because lying as town is always poor play. I'll elaborate once wolf claims.

[Kairyuu]

Ok people. Here's the deal. We know for sure that two scum, and AT LEAST ONE TOWNIE, possibly TWO, are LYING.

I expect the townie(s) who are lying to TELL THE TRUTH IMMEDIATELY, as by lying you are SCREWING THE TOWN OVER.

If all of the townies would have told the truth, then we would be looking at 4-5 vanilla claims right now. 5 would mean that germy is automatically scum and that his buddy screwed him over by not claiming doc. 4 would mean that the two scum are hiding in the vanilla claims. 6 means that we have lying scum in addition to lying townies. Here's why:

What we know: MMBTXXX

We know this due to myko and I claiming and confirming each other (which I suppose you could disbelieve), SP dying and flipping blocker, and the fact that we logically ruled out a serial killer.

What is claimed: MMBTDDX

If this is true, then since there is no serial killer, there MUST be either a child or a vig. The problem here is that we are MISSING TWO OF THESE ROLES. This means that we would have TWO TOWNIES LYING to hide their power role. YOU POWER DOESN'T MATTER. ALL OF THE POWER ROLES BECOME CANNON FODDER FOR A GUARENTEED TOWN WIN. THE USE OF YOUR POWER SHOULD NOT MATTER AT THIS POINT.

The other possibility: MMBTTTX

This would imply that germy is lying and was pulling an absolutely massive gambit all game. The lack of a doc claim seems to reinforce this idea, which means that either Shanba is germy's buddy (and was blocked), or the scum no killed to make it look like a successful doc protect. However, this STILL means that THERE IS A TOWNIE WITH A POWER ROLE LYING.

WHOEVER IS NOT TELLING THE TRUTH ABOUT THEIR ROLE

MUST

CLAIM THE REAL ONE NOW, OR THIS MASSCLAIM HAS DONE ABSOLUTELY NOTHING.

[Kairyuu]

Damnit germy. I believe you, because you would be screwed if you were lying.

Shanba is the play for today. If he somehow flips town, then germy is scum without question.

Unfortunately, that means the massclaim was never going to yield much information. If you hadn't lied about being the nurse, then there wouldn't have been a breaking strategy available to us. However, we may be able to still keep our odds high. It relies on you though. If shanba is indeed mafia, then there will be only one scum left to submit the kill. If you tell us who you are going to block, and then you don't die, that person is confirmed scum. If you still die, they are confirmed innocent, leaving only 4 unknowns remaining, with 2 mislynches available. Still a 100% win rate.

Agreed?

[Kairyuu]

Wait. No. Not 100%

We would be left with 2 unknowns in LyLo in that case. It's still better than what we have right now.

[Kairyuu]

BEFORE WE LYNCH SHANBA, we need to know who germy will block tonight, so that we have that information available tomorrow.

[Kairyuu]

Edit: similposted

Please unvote until the above situation happens.

[Kairyuu]

The 'agreed?' was addressed to everyone.

And yes, you are absolutely right. If we go with this plan, then the scum are forced to try to kill germy, or else he gets another shot tommorrow, which would mean a 100% chance of town victory

[Kairyuu]

I was hoping no one would point that out, and that the scum would take it at face value.

[Kairyuu]

Hooray! After 8 total game days I've been alive in, I finally have the chance to be the hammer!

vote:Shanba

[Kairyuu]

That could not have been a more obvious outcome. I'll outline a few things we know before we get around to today's lynch.

1. The masons are completely confirmed now, because there are two of us, and only 1 scum left, so it is impossible for us to be lying.

2. germy is guarenteed to be telling the truth, because if he wasn't we would only have 1 B, leaving 4 Ts, which would mean a serial killer.

3. The scum, as long as germy calls out who he is blocking each Night, cannot win, because if they kill germy, then there are 4 more unknowns (because the blocked player is then confirmed by the fact that the scum were able to kill). Since we have 2 more mislynches, we are assured victory. If they don't kill him, we continue to lynch until it is left with me, myko, germy, and one unknown. This means a town win also.

4. Regardless of the last point, I think we should lynch Zade instead of CF Riot, because Shanba flipping scum means that Artem was scum, and gives us several new bits of info (which will be the following points).

5. sekinj has had Artem in her sights almost all game, so she is likely town (Zade had sekinj as a major target all game as well, and is therefore a small margin more likely scum).

6. My points about Artem misrepping me during out argument were completely valid, and my points about him attacking me while giving afatchic the benefit of the doubt also have a higher likelyhood of being valid (this would imply slight distancing mixed with an attempt at coaching a buddy).

Therefore, I think Zade should be the play for today.

vote: Sheherazade

[Kairyuu]

@Zade: If, after all of this work to finally get you lynched, you flip town, I sincerely apologize.

Also, point five was a very minor tell that popped into my head as I was typing up that post. I'm more concerned with 6.

[Kairyuu]

I agree with myko. I think CF Riot is a good play for tomorrow if Zade isn't scum.

@Wolf: Unless germy (or anyone else) actually dies, the block tells us absolutely nothing, as the scum are not required to submit a kill. I decided to suggest Zade as the play for today because I have been convinced of his scumminess since pg. 2, and would REALLY like to be right (and if I pursued a case for 33 pages and didn't manage to get the lynch I would be quite irritated). Plus Artem flipping scum (and the reaction to the proposed massclaim, which I forgot to mention in my first post today) gives us a whole wealth of information to work with, and it seems to point squarely to Zade being scum the way I see it.

[Kairyuu]

By the way

unvote

. I wanna hammer.

[Kairyuu]

@wolf: Yup. I claimed the hammer, and I don't plan to do it until germy has said his piece.

In case anyone doesn't realize this:

ZADE IS AT L-2. NO ONE ELSE PUT A VOTE ON UNTIL GERMY SAYS WHO HE IS GOING TO BLOCK TONIGHT.

ALSO, HE WILL PROBABLY INCLUDE A VOTE WITH HIS CHOICE, WHICH WILL BE L-1. I WOULD LIKE TO HAMMER, AS ZADE HAS BEEN MY TOP SUSPECT FOR 34 PAGES NOW, AND I WOULD NOT WANT TO BE OFF OF THE LYNCH I WORKED FOR SO LONG TO GET. SO PLEASE DO NOT VOTE.

[Kairyuu]

@Wolf: You're surprised that I want to be the hammer? I've been the strongest proponent of a Zade lynch since extremely early in the game. Now that it is finally going to happen, I want to be the one who makes it final.

I don't think we are focusing too much on one player. There is information to be gained from two scum lynches already, so if Zade somehow isn't scum, we can just look back over the game, knowing that Artem/Shanba and Edify/Scigatt/Nat are scum. Watch the interactions, and move from there.

Or we could go with the fact that the town can't lose. That could work too. If we screw up and lose our guarenteed win (which is unlikely) then we are still in an extremely good position. We have 2 mislynches, 3 confirmed townies, and only one scum to find. This is more than an uphill battle for the scum, it's a completely vertical, perfectly smooth, frictionless cliff face. The scum could, of course, save us the trouble of coasting to victory and give up. There is literally no way to win barring some massive screwup on the town side.

[Kairyuu]

Aww. You're mean to me.

I don't actually care all that much, I just wanna make a kill.

[Kairyuu]

@germy: There is a problem with your current plan. You say you will block Wall-E tonight, but then you also want him lynched today. That poses a problem, because if we listen to you and lynch him, we don't know who you are going to block.

Also (and I find this rather odd considering his vanilla claim), I was convinced up until the massclaim that Wall-E was a vig, because of the way he was posting. He mentioned soon after he replaced in that we are always "one good lynch and a vigging away from a really good position." I discounted that at the time, but when it seemed like we must either have a child or a vig in the game, I was convinced that it was a vig, and it was him. The fact that, as we were about to lynch Shanba, he said that if you were wrong, he was going to kill you (didn't say lynch), and that he just asked if you wanted him to claim makes me think that something is up. If he's town, then there's another lying townie around too, and if he's scum, he's caught.

@Zade: Yup. I'm stubborn, and I decided to tunnel on you because of afatchic. You've played an extremely logical game, and I have very much enjoyed crossing swords with you. I actually stopped believing that you were scum myself halfway through D2, so I kinda just stopped bringing it up much. D3 and the massclaim put me on your trail again (a vanilla townie should always support a massclaim, because it can give you nothing but info, it is only scum and power roles that should be iffy about it). The interactions between afatchic and Artem looked like distancing, with some coaching thrown in, which looks like scum interaction to me. So yeah, your play points to town, but your predecessor's play, as well as the cardflip info we have, seems to me like you are scum. So I'm confused, and, since you aren't confirmed either way yet, I'm falling back to the cardflips and my previous suspicion.

@Everyone: It is odd that sekinj isn't around when the town is assured a win. Especially since she disappeared when there is only one scum left. Perhaps she actually

was

scum, and decided to drop instead of giving up publically. Just a thought to consider.

[Kairyuu]

Ok. Simulposted. germy answered my question.

@germy: I still say there are others who have more on them to draw the block over wolf. He is actually the only one of them that I have absolutely nothing to convict him on in my notes. I could make cases (albeit weak ones in some instances) against everyone else in the game, including you, myko, and myself.

[Kairyuu]

I doubt that germy will change his mind, so wolf it is, and Wall-E for the lynch.

vote: Wall-E

[Kairyuu]

-sigh-

And here I was hoping for a one-two-three punch. Self-hammers yield town flips 99% or the time (the only counterexample was Natirasha in Mini theme 658, when he self-hammered as SK D2), so it's pretty safe to say we'll need to keep going tomorrow.

Zade D5 ftw!!11!!one!!

[Kairyuu]

Yup. Like I admitted to the mod, I was pretty much convinced by the end of D2 that Zade was town, but since we were essentially guarenteed a win anyway once things fell into place I decided to just keep pushing for it so I could just get the one lynch I had been pushing for. I knew I was tunnelling, but I figured that Zade was an extremely good player and would probably benefit from my constant pressure. Consider it my way of taching you how to handle pressure as town. Just survive 37 pages of constant attacks by a pit bull and you can handle anything!

I had quite a bit of fun, even though I didn't manage to do all that much that was overly useful (aside from the whole massclaim=win thing, which I don't count since it was just manipulating the math and convincing people of it).

Oh, and SL, I apologize for the "passive aggressive" thing from D1. I wasn't trying to act that way, so if I really was, I'm sorry.

Great game all!

[Kairyuu]

I must say Shanba, I personally would have never caught you. I had you down as solidly town in the mason quicktopic. I think you played quite well, and I agree that the setup played a pretty decent part in the town win.

Also, Nightwolf? What about me? I did the same thing too ya know, and before he did.

[Kairyuu]

[Kairyuu]

Good show Artem. I got so annoyed with you in the early parts of the game that I became pretty sure that you were another stubborn townie who was misrepping me by accident. Then when Shanba replaced you and played quite well I was totally convinced.