Mini 703 - A Roccisi Autumn - Over

[Korts]

Vote: Ectomancer

For being my IC way back.

[Korts]

Can't I get a good night's sleep without you guys starting? Just couldn't wait for me.

Wombat seems earnest in his newbness. Rage, however, acted very aggressively opportunistic. I may venture as far as stating that his call for a roleclaim was a bigger fish than Wombat's call for massclaim.

unvote, vote: Rage

I can understand Ecto's gambit, but his post 16 seems slightly more like backtracking than revealing the gambit. I'd have expected him to wait for everyone to check in before finally revealing that he was only fishing for reactions, otherwise the gambit's efficiency isn't really big.

Puta, who the hell is Marcunt, and what have they done to you?

[Korts]

So who are your suspicions from this incident, ThAdmiral?

[Korts]

Wombat seems earnest in his newbness.

How?

Massclaim may be considered a valid strategy for beginners. I've seen RL mafia played so, although it usually ends up being a game of "follow the cop". Considering his join date, it's more than reasonable to assume that Wombat doesn't know the MS meta.

Rage, however, acted very aggressively opportunistic.

Again, how?

You jumped on a blatant scumtell, which is by itself valid, but the problem I have is that you actually pushed for an immediate claim on Wombat's behalf. From a scum perspective, I can see a clear motivation for that (draw a power role claim or otherwise narrow down the pool of possible power roles). From a town one, not so much.

1) You're giving Wombat wiggle room by handing him the Newbie Card

Considering meta outside MS, it's justified.

2) Your venture is opinion, so there's nothing I can effectively rebuttal here

Let me put it this way. Your request of a claim was way bigger a rolefish than Wombat's proposal of massclaim.

Macavity, what do you have against role-fishing so early in the day?

What? Let me ask you, do you think it is actually pro-town to be rolefishing?

One more thing, MacavityLock. According to Tarballs, he has brought me to L-3 on page two. How is that much different?

Oh, he only had 3? Well then, Vote: Rage. That's L-3, so were not in the danger zone just yet.

Hey now. Deflecting suspicion much? There is an obvious distinction--you called for a claim.

@Darkdude, MacavityLock, Tarballs, Korts, do you have a purpose for your votes? If so, what is it? If not, please say so.

Definitely have a purpose for it. I think you are, after so much discussion, the most likely to be scum.

BTW, IGMEOY on everyone who jumped on Rage solely for using a quote from Wombat "out of context", since it was obvious he was misusing the phrase. I will look it up later to see who exactly those people are.

Gotta go to class now, will read the rest later.

[Korts]

I promise Rage I will answer tomorrow definitely, but at the moment I have a lot of things on my hands.

[Korts]

BACKTRACK ALERT

MAN YOUR STATIONS

THIS IS NOT A DRILL

[Korts]

I also don't like the "just an average townie" soft claim by BoW.

What gorckat said to Mac goes to you, too. Put your rod away. (nudge nudge, wink wink)

[Korts]

I want to hear from him to be certain of his intentions, instead of other players jetting in to say that he's just a newb and not to take his actions seriously, as though they want to defend him merely to put suspicion on me. Which is precisely what you are doing.

I have the notion that your suspicion of me roots in my suspicion of you. I am not defending BoW, I am just trying to highlight that there is, I think, almost equal motivation as newbtown and newbscum to call for a massclaim early on, and you are ignoring that fact.

(and if he's a mason setting up someone for starting a case on him, there's the possibility of a scum Neighbour)

Why are you even speculating about his role? You mentioning him being a mason for the sake of proving that he could be an unconfirmed one is, well, pointless unless you have every intention of painting him as black as you can. Which isn't something I'd understand at this point in the game.

I understand. I have a meta with darkdude outside of MS, too, but he's not a newb.

Granted. How long have you two been on MS? On the other hand, my point was that I am aware of such plays as BoW proposed, i.e. massclaim early Day 1 after night start, and his join date doesn't reinforce the assumption that he knows the mentality about such things on MS. I don't see how your and darkdude's outside meta was relevant to the quoted point.

Yup, I understood what your view on these events were, but now that you've said that, how is asking one player to claim scummier than asking investigative roles or for a mass claim?

In theory, massclaim is worse. In context, though, considering my point about BoW's possible meta knowledge, and your fairly well-established presence on-site, your action was scummier, because you were trying to force a player to claim with virtually no discussion having happened up until that point.

In this stage of the game, I think we have the best opportunity to see how much players' are opposed, or for, fishing for a roleclaim, and for whom. Right now I can see that darkdude, yourself (Korts) and Tarballs are opposed. I don't get a good read on who exactly is not opposed, but I'm sure that the people who haven't voted for me fill those spots up pretty nicely.

I wonder when people will stop doing scummy things and afterwards claiming to have fished for reactions. It encourages scummy play overall, and leads to possible false starts in scumhunting. Basically, every town player who does this is just hurting the meta by giving scum all over the site a valid cop-out.

BTW, IGMEOY on everyone who jumped on Rage solely for using a quote from Wombat "out of context", since it was obvious he was misusing the phrase. I will look it up later to see who exactly those people are.

I think I will have something to say about this quote when Korts answers my "you think this is scummier than this" question above. For now, though, it seems like you're setting yourself up for a good attack on one of the player's voting for me if I flip Town, but I don't think anything for certain just yet.

Okay, I've answered. Now you answer, how is that not justification for attacking those who voted you solely for that BS reason?

[Korts]

BACKTRACK ALERT

MAN YOUR STATIONS

THIS IS NOT A DRILL

You think I don't realize that? I'll own up to it. I just ask that you think about both what a scum would do in that situation and what a townie would do.

Basically, I'll accept the scumminess point about my question to Wombat. But not about the backtrack.

I fully understand. I was just making a point that it's been noted.

[Korts]

Furthermore, on the topic of claims, I am going to have to presume that puta has hinted at his/her claim with the lady macbeth stuff and the violent post about killing ecto's cat, and that he/she/it is somehow involved with the serial killer/mafia.

What benefit do you suppose he'd have by breadcrumbing to be scum, of all things?

Puta Puta, you obviously

can

post other than in Shakespeare quotes, as evidenced by multiple of your posts, therefore I'm ruling out post restriction. Thus, PRs not coming into play, HOW WOULD YOU FEEL ABOUT NOT HINTING AT YOUR ROLE? Unless you're scum, of course.

On a related note, Puta, HOW WOULD YOU FEEL ABOUT ACTUALLY HELPING?

[Korts]

unvote, vote: Puta Puta

Point blank refusal of contribution.

[Korts]

William Butler Yeats and Johann Wolfgang Goethe respectively. Puta,

please refrain from talking in quotes

.

[Korts]

Ok, so what is your opinion of the players? Who do you think is most likely scum?

[Korts]

Post 121 and 122 are a start, but can you explain

why

you think that based on those quotes?

[Korts]

A point in favor of Puta's honesty: I did meta him and I found a game (which you are also in, Ecto) and he does have one post with a Shakespeare quote, chronologically after he's supposedly noticed his mistake. However, not all of his consequent posts there are made in the form of a quote.

BTW I really don't like how Ecto has just jumped wagon and put Puta at L-1, at least not for those reasons. I don't see how Puta being anti-town is a definite scumtell.

unvote

[Korts]

Running the risk of referencing ongoing games, case in point: Puta's post no. 1 in isolation (Nov. 14th) in that other game. That would coincide with him realizing that he mistook the two games. However, his further posts and the lack of mod retaliation show that it's not a PR there, either. So my point wasn't that, in particular, I was just doing the others a favour and did a meta check on Puta.

My

actual

point is, which you casually ignore, is that your L-1 vote was on very shaky justification. Faking a PR isn't scummy, it's anti-town. Those two are not the same and anti-town shouldn't be a premise for a lynch. See Puta's most recent posts and you will notice that he has actually contributed with game relevant posts, listing suspicions and giving his reasons. You

acknowledged

this. I don't understand this sudden outburst by you.

I will not policy lynch you for advocating a policy lynch (although the irony itself would be worth it ). What does make your lynch one that I'd like is that you're pushing a policy lynch that has been invalidated by Puta Puta's most recent posts, actual contribution on his part.

[Korts]

Hmm. I'd say Tarballs and Ecto may be scumpartners. Ecto started pushing Puta's wagon not when it was valid, but when more and more people expressed suspicion of Tarballs. Deflecting attention much?

vote: Ectomancer

[Korts]

Im pushing the policy lynch because Im pushing the policy lynch.

So? That wasn't the point. The policy lynch you're advocating is invalid even by policy lynch standards.

Do you opportunistically pair people much?

Not really. I just found the timing very odd, especially considering that you had pointed out Puta's contributions to another player posts before.

[Korts]

unvote, vote: Puta Puta

You are deliberately playing anti-town, and are, regardless of alignment, going straight against your win condition. That is also against Site Rules. In this particular case, I'm willing to consider a policy lynch in lieu of a modkill.

mod:

will you consider modkilling Puta Puta for breaking site rules?

[Korts]

It is clear that he doesn't have a PR in this game, nor is it likely he has one in the other one he's alluded to, therefore he's deliberately going against his win condition by acting anti-town, which is against the site rules. I'd rather not go with a replacement for the reasons stated by gorckat.

[Korts]

deliberately playing in a way that may well get you lynched benefits neither town or mafia, and the jester role or a role with a similar win condition isn't included in the possible roles for this game.

[Korts]

Fair enough...

I think I should do a reread tomorrow. Expect a fairly sized post, consider that a promise.

[Korts]

I owe this game proper effort. Unfortunately, I also owe the chemistry labs the minutes of an experiment for tomorrow.

[Korts]

Good evening, boys and girls, how are we all today? Glad to see we all survived the night.

Now rather than voting for people based on silly criteria like the length of their username , lets take a second and be rational about this. As we started with a night phase, did anybody get any useful information last night?

I hate the first day, nobody knows who anybody is and I don't want us to accidentally bandwagon into a mis-lynch. But since we started at night, lets wait and see if an investigator comes forward with some information.

Let's just exercise caution for the time being.

Rather than the massclaim proposition, which may be dismissed by insufficient knowledge of the game and/or the MS meta, I'd like to bring attention to the second sentence. It seems to me like a mutation of "oh no we lost an <inserpowerrolehere> last night" type of posting and was posted mainly because Wombatscum subconsciously was wondering why no kill happened.

Sure.

vote MassClaim

Ecto's first post is in open agreement with Wombat's proposition. This doesn't look in particularly anti-town, though, since it's obvious fishing for reactions. In fact I give Ecto very slight town points for not jumping on Wombat straight away but rather baiting others to join the massclaim wagon.

<randomreason>

OMGUS Vote: MacavityLock

Also, this:

Good evening, boys and girls, how are we all today? Glad to see we all survived the night.

Coupled with:

As we started with a night phase, did anybody get any useful information last night?

= Scum

At least, that's what I think of it.

FoS: Brain of Wombat

This post doesn't look exactly right. Rage votes randomly, and then cites a

non-random

reason and a pretty fair point against another player. I'm not sure why Rage didn't vote Wombat right there.

Yeah, Puta, you're going to have to explain those two posts. Like every word of them except maybe for "Vote."

Unvote Rage

. One of the best first posts I've seen. A+++. Would buy again.

Vote: Wombat

Ecto: Do you really want a massclaim, or are you looking for reactions? Because my reaction is NO!

Damn what a scummy post. First, clear buddying up to Rage, and then ruining Ecto's bait. Almost like saying "hey scumbuddies, don't fall for

that

trap".

Woah! Let's all calm down a second. That's exactly the kind of bandwagoning I was talking about.

What exacly was my crime there, Rage? I've never seen a game starton a night phase before and I was afraid the scum might pick off a townie before we even got started. I was glad to see that didn't happen, that's all.

I also thought, unlikely as it is, that an investigator could have discovered something useful last night that we could go on. However, given the numbers, darkdude makes a fair point and I can see why an investigator wouldn't want to risk their neck by claiming.

I'm just saying that, lacking any information, we should hold off on lynching anyone today, there's too much chance of us helping out the scum by lynching an innocent townie.

Okay, the second paragraph disproves my assumption that Wombat had previously played in an environment that promotes massclaims after night starts. Wombat gets slightly scummier upon the reread. Even so, the newbieness is something that can't be ignored, especially seeing as Wombat trips up in another newbie trap, the no lynching.

I want a role claim.

Rage's reactions are otherwise not an indicator in particular of alignment, but this demand is still off. After shooting down the massclaim proposal so hard, the borderline hypocrisy cannot be ignored in this.

People who attacked Rage for the "out of context" comment even though the intended use was of a different meaning:

darkdude (first one to raise the point)
MacavityLock (why am I not surprised? opportunistic wagon hopping. plus his reasoning's way off, it's clear he was skimming and only read darkdude's accusation)

ThAdmiral gets slight town points for this quote:

I think people are focusing too much on rage's assertion that he took BoW's words "out of context", which is admittedly a bad choice of phrase, but isn't necessarily what he did. A better description of what he did would be "focusing on this particular sentence from his post" or something.

Rage, you brought Wombat to L-4 on the first page. I don't have too much of a problem with that. But asking for a role-claim, given that usually they're asked for at L-1 (or maybe L-2), given that Wombat is new to MS, and given that a page 1 bandwagon usually still includes random votes, adds up to you role-fishing.

Why is it that MacavityLock didn't raise this point until I did?

Macavity, what do you have against role-fishing so early in the day?

Given that Rage was attacking Wombat for rolefishing basically, this question seems like Rage is setting a double standard.

Now that aside, as ThAdmiral explained, taking things out of context is not a very productive thing to do since the meaning is deliberately changed. If you truly are using a quote out of context then any critique on it would be meaningless as the quote did not suggest what you are criticizing in the first place. And I agree with ThAdmiral on one more point; I do not think your were really taking Wombat out of context, but rather focusing specifically. However, what interested me was your own labeling of this action as "taking out of context". Thus I felt it necessary to question you. I expected you to immediately correct yourself, but since you do not deny you are taking it out of context, I can only conclude:

1. You are misusing the term "out of context", or;
2. You actually meant to take it out of context but did not in fact do this

This is a weak retrospective justification of the initial vote on Rage (for the "out of context" thing. Rather than admitting he misunderstood Rage, darkdude makes up a reason that basically amounts to "I didn't really think you were doing what I voted you for, but I was interested to see where it would go". If he honestly was just trying to gauge whether Rage was misusing the term, that doesn't justify a vote at all.

UNVOTE

While there have been a couple of mistakes, I don't feel strongly enough about anyone to cast a vote right now.

I will say that a role-fishing expedition is bad stuff, especially so early.

weeeEEEOOOOooo--NO CONTENT ALERT--MAN YOUR STATIONS--THIS IS NOT A DRILL

I wonder how I missed this. The few things this post says are nothing more than sitting on the fence.

Unvote: Rage
Vote: tubby216

[...]
AFAIK tubby and gorckat are the only ones not to have posted yet.

Chuckrock has made two posts. Puta has made two posts. Neither had much to contribute.

I don't see the point in this vote, either. Since tubby hadn't even posted at that point, this wasn't even a

lurker

hunt, rather an inactive-hunt. Which is an even more flawed premise than lurkerhunting. Coupled with the previous vote and retroactive justification, darkdude is getting scummier.

(note: Wow. That was only up to the end of page 2, and there's so much material so far. I wonder why this game's stalling, of all things.)

And then there's the first Shakespeare-quote.

The argument between Rage and me doesn't devulge much.

BTW, IGMEOY on everyone who jumped on Rage solely for using a quote from Wombat "out of context", since it was obvious he was misusing the phrase. I will look it up later to see who exactly those people are.

I think I will have something to say about this quote when Korts answers my "you think this is scummier than this" question above. For now, though, it seems like you're setting yourself up for a good attack on one of the player's voting for me if I flip Town, but I don't think anything for certain just yet.

This point earns a slight town point for Rage, especially considering I answered the "out of context" arguments ca. a page later.

I've watched a couple of games, but this is my first time playing and I didn't properly think through my first post. I'll hopefully get better as this thing goes along.

I don't want to condemn Rage for his reaction, he could have the towns best interests at heart. You were talking about me being scum, or a mason, or a scum neighbour (?) or whatever. Quite simply, I have no interaction or connection with any other players. I'm just an average townie, that's it.

Remember this, don't claim until asked to. That includes dropping hints like you just did. All it does is give scum more information to work with. Town, on the other hand, rarely benefits from it.

Seems like everyone but tubby has posted at least once. Wombat, who is your top suspect at the moment?

I don't see much point in calling Wombat out for that. This isn't particularly scummy, but bad play still.

ok first off the rage vs brian debactle,

i believe both are town atm rage was hunting and called brian on some questionable play, brian was trying to be helpful but stumbled of some newbitis ( don't worry happenes to me all the time) will re-read agian to catch up more to follow perhaps tomorow

Calling both of them town immediately in his first read of things smells like buddying up.

also don't like the "just an average townie" soft claim by BoW. He's certainly becoming more suspicious, but it's not quite enough for me to change my vote yet.

Okay, so you had to bring the "soft claim" up again. Why? What does it prove in terms of scumminess?

As of now in the reread, Macavity is leading my scumlist by far, with Tarballs a not-very-close second. I'll continue later, but I have other things to do.

[Korts]

I need to reread again, from where I left off last time.

Vote: Tarballs,

because I remember being suspicious of him.

[Korts]

To be frank, I can imagine MacavityLock being a vigkill. He was under considerable pressure yesterday, therefore I don't think he fits the profile of a mafia NK.

I still haven't gotten round to a reread, though. Give me 'til weekend.

[Korts]

mod: consider me on V/LA for prod purposes until next Friday. I have some exams that I can't leave until later to study for.

I'll still do that read on the weekend; meanwhile, do any of you have suspicions?

[Korts]

Hi iH

[Korts]

I support Rage this time. Why did you return to the idea of investigative results being claimed, BoW, when the same idea had been shot down yesterday?

[Korts]

tubby, why do you need to assert your previous town read on BoW before attacking him?

[Korts]

Role on the front page:

You are a Gun Inventor. Each night you can give another player a gun (One-Shot Vigilante) to be used on any

subsequent

night.

Note bolded. So if Macavity was a vig kill, it was a vig from the start or the player he gave a gun to N0.

[Korts]

darkdude, I'm fairly sure I wasn't the only one who raised points against Macavity. Ecto and ThAdmiral spring to mind.

That said, I'm not setting up any kind of claim for myself. (Of course I would say that.) I think your theory makes sense from an objective point of view though.

Also, a couple of other things:

I'm also going to do a reread of all of Puta's posts to see if he left any hints/clues as to who he investigated and it's result.

No use. He was amnesiac cop. Which reminds me...

It seems like we should have someone here with his Night 0 result, unless it was Macavity. Needless to say, if it is scum, the person should come out immediately. But what is optimal move if result is town? I was just about to write "don't say anything unless that player is about to be lynched", but then remembered that this information may get lost if the player dies before saying it... so maybe breadcrumb first, and then reveal it when player number in the game lowers to have a large enough impact?

Unfortunately, there's two problems with this. One, now that you suggested breadcrumbing, it won't work most likely, due to multiple factors (scum breadcrumbing, scum searching for other breadcrumbs etc.). Two, we don't know when the player with the investigation result dies, because their revealed role wouldn't devulge that information. Thus it would be a pretty safe claim for scum to claim the investigation results. I'd treat such a breadcrumb/result with extreme scepticism.

[Korts]

Do you mean you would say this regardless of whether you were actually planning to set up a claim or not? (if you were the vig that is)

If I was the vig and wanted to breadcrumb, I wouldn't deny it. If I was the vig and didn't intend to say so, I'd have just messed with my own claim by basically forcing myself to immediately claim either vig or non-vig. My point was, if I was scum setting up a fakeclaim, I wouldn't admit to it, obviously.

If you think BoW is a VI, what do you think is the possibility that he'd raise the idea of a cop claim after he'd been shot down for the same the previous day? There's a learning curve yes. But I'd assume even newbtown to have some sense as to raising a point he'd been attacked for fiercely once.

[Korts]

Still, I do not see why it would be a vig kill. No one died on Night 0, so that would make two nights without scum night kill? I don't see it...

This comment doesn't sit well with me. I'll come back to give it some thought tomorrow.

The presence of vigs do not suggest that it was a vig kill. We also know that we have scum in the game. Why would it be more likely the scum failed to kill and the vig did?

Misrep alert, man your stations, not a drill etc. plausible=/=most likely

[Korts]

note: I'm suspecting that by now any mafia that wants to quicklynch BOW is already on the wagon. I don't have the time to go back and check, but I think BoW's at around four votes. Don't put any more on him for a while.

[Korts]

Ecto makes a compelling case.

[Korts]

I don't get it. It seemed pretty clear to me that you guys were implying it was likely a vig kill since you're so eager to discuss it. What is the use of discussion if a vig kill is only plausible but not likely? Perhaps in this case I have made an incorrect assumption, but I do not think that it is unreasonable. Are you saying that you hoped to discuss whether or not it was a vig kill knowing that it was unlikely to be one?

I don't see how it's harmful in any way to discuss our possibilities.

Stifling the conversation...well I do not think the discussion is productive, and seemed like a distraction.

Then how come I don't see you pushing another line of discussion? You seem eager to explain how discussing a vigkill is unproductive, but you don't offer any alternative. How is that consistent with the thoughts you are trying to get through?

First of all, because I think it is unlikely to be a vig kill, we should assume it is scum NK unless there is greater evidence for the vig theory.

Stop right there. Just because you have a differentiating opinion, you say that we should stop assuming anything else than you are?

Second, it does not seem like there would be any hard evidence. Like I have said on the first day, if there is something to be revealed I am sure it would be self evident for that player.

And we have never imlied that we want hard evidence. Your point with this comment?

I am against what I see as a discussion that would be inconclusive and only serve as distraction, while providing room for scum to peak at the intentions of the players.

The majority of discussions that implicate players and lead to town forming an opinion to their alignments are inconclusive. There (almost) never is hard evidence through discussion only. Also, scum may indeed peek at the intentions of players, but they also would need to take a stance that they can be held to later on.

Chuckrock, why did you feel the need to unvote when BoW didn't even have a chance to reply between your vote and unvote? Also, where did you get the notion that it was L-1?

Rage, show me where I voted BoW, or retract that statement.

Define "valuable townie", please. Feel free to ask why, I won't find you suspicious for something as silly as that.

ROLEFISHING ALERT

MAN YOUR STATIONS

THIS IS NOT A DRILL

[Korts]

Funny. Do you not recall Ecto falsely accusing me of asking for breadcrumbs? That was me trying to discuss what a player should do if they have the investigation result from our amnesiac cop. Please read my posts again.

Alright, fair enough. So there was another line of discussion that you tried to start. Tell me, how is discussion about what the person with an investigation result from Puta should do any more constructive than a discussion about the likely cause of death for Macavity?

Obviously if I believe I am correct I will try to talk others into believing it too. What are you implying?

I am saying that you stating that the Macavity kill wasn't a vig and giving supportive evidence won't necessarily cause everyone to believe you, and there's nothing wrong with that. I don't see how disagreement on that would be such a big problem that you'd feel the need to push it so hard as to state "we should assume it is scum NK unless there is greater evidence for the vig theory."

Fair enough. I don't know if that outweighs the risks but why would you not explain the pros of this discussion first before saying that my actions are anti-town?

The pros of discussing this are the pros of any line of discussion: they give something to talk about for every player, and if every player is contributing, then discussing this gives scum the chance to slip up. For instance, by stubbornly arguing that Macavity was a scumkill (in the knowledge that it was/wasn't) and refusing to admit that there were multiple people suspicious of Macavity.

Also, what did Wombat claim other than "valuable townie"? That isn't a full roleclaim necessarily, and I don't want him to, either, at this point. Rage was trying to delve deeper into BoW's role, and I do not approve.

[Korts]

It isn't L-1, chuckrock. Sorry, but no cigar.

[Korts]

Now here's some meta for you. In another game, when there was an obvious vig kill (I was modding and gave it away) and darkdude was the Vigilante, he asked for the Vigilante to come forward. He was setting himself up for a counter-claim. However, as likely as it may be that he is the player with the investigation result, I doubt it because he said the above statement: "if it is scum, the person should come out immediately". So my point here is, either darkdude is scum and withholding the result, or he's town and doesn't think it's a good idea to reveal the result so soon after Puta has died. I think the latter is more likely.

This is a fallacy, although I can't put a finger on what specific kind. You have meta that darkdude did, on at least one occasion, try to draw a claim of a role that was actually his, and thus, you say, he is doing this in this instance, too? Tell me you just got confused.

If the Investigation Result was given to Scum or Town and Darkdude is Town:
1) Nobody will claim the information today because Darkdude said that scum would claim it immediately, and nobody has argued this.

I'm pretty sure that's not what darkdude said. He said that if the

result

is scum, it should be claimed.

@Ectomancer, what do you think the chances of Darkdude having the Investigation Result, and if you think he does, what do you think of his alignment based on his play so far?

The first half of the question has no benefit to town and only serves to gauge Ecto's support of the theory of darkdude having a result.

We get to our request for breadcrumb, phrased with hope for town's approval.

This doesn't mean he's scum.

A Pshaw argument. As scum you get a guy to breadcrumb that he has information so you can kill him for it! In your request for the breadcrumb, you specifically asked that the player give the breadcrumb and then wait until we have lower player numbers to reveal it!

I do think that the action of asking for someone (no matter who it is) to breadcrumb in the game thread is scummy.

Self-contradicting much?

@Ectomancer, do I have a pretty accurate read of what's going on?

Asking for feedback, slight scumminess.

I agree with Ecto here on darkdude. darkdude has shown scum motivation in his inquiries, and Rage jumped to his defense with a dissection of the "likeliest" possibilities, and going into a contradiction in his expressed stance on a particular point. In the event of darkdude turning scum, Rage deserves considerable pressure.

unvote, vote: darkdude

Also, fun fact for those who didn't know, and I also just found out reading Site Ideas, Puta was the most recent incarnation of our Gimbo. So that explains it somewhat, at least.

[Korts]

1) Why did Korts suspect that scum was already on the wagon? What's he basing this on?

It was an assumption derived from the wagon's speed relative to the game. Plus I thought there were more votes than three on Wombat.

Now that you've pointed his revote of Wombat out again, I'm reconsidering his motives. Especially because his stated reasons were that, paraphrasing, "it was the only good response to the accusation".

[Korts]

Hi, Lionheart.

[Korts]

Sorry about that. Had some other stuff going. I still stand by my opinion that darkdude is the lynch.

[Korts]

a quick question: who thought that Puta Puta might be Gimbo before he was lynched?

I don't know who gimbo is...

Can somebody tell me who gimbo is?

Gimbo is a player who was banned for ruining multiple games, I think. Claiming scum complete with scumpartner out of frustration, the lot. He was notable for posting every alternate minute, usually partly or fully off-topic. Also had a manic style. And when he was banned, he tried to come back multiple times with several alts. Unfortunately, he had a very recognizable playstyle. You missed out on all this?

Also, I shamefully admit that I didn't even suspect Puta of being Gimbo.

I'll try and summarize the darkdude case sometime tomorrow.

[Korts]

Tarballs is mentioned far more times on page 6 than on any other page. He picks up one vote, and then people stop talking about him. Why is that?

I have no idea. I was behind in my reading at that time, so that's a reason for why I didn't continue the Tarballs discussion at that time, I don't know about others.

Korts: why did you focus on and vote for Ecto instead of Tarball at this point?

Because it was Ecto who seemed to be deflecting, and not Tarballs.

about 2.5 hours after tubby placed Puta Puta at lynch -1 with post 210, Korts made the very next post:

also don't like the "just an average townie" soft claim by BoW. He's certainly becoming more suspicious, but it's not quite enough for me to change my vote yet.

Okay, so you had to bring the "soft claim" up again. Why? What does it prove in terms of scumminess?

As of now in the reread, Macavity is leading my scumlist by far, with Tarballs a not-very-close second. I'll continue later, but I have other things to do.

the full post is very long, and Korts doesn't mention Puta even once. Note that Korts vote was actually on Puta Puta at this time.

@ Korts: why were you willing to leave Puta Puta at lynch -1 when Macavity was the scummiest on your list, and Tarballs (who actually had a vote on him) was a distant second?

You are conveniently ignoring the fact that this big post you speak of was a catching-up post and I adjusted my reads to that. Meanwhile, in the present, Puta was more than worthy of a lynch for his unhelpfulness; I just hadn't gotten to that point in reading up that it should've been worth mentioning.

Which posts show that MacavityLock was under "considerable pressure" during day 1?

I don't have the time to go back and find the specific posts, but I expressed solid suspicion on Macavity, and I remember Ecto doing so, too. At the time I posted the "considerable pressure" post, I also believed that ThAdmiral had fingered him as a suspect, too (apparently not, though). Three people is considerable pressure, no?

[Korts]

Right, I have no idea how to help this game along at this moment.

Adel, I will have the time to go back for those posts the weekend earliest.

Adel:

Who do

you

think has been vote hopping more: Korts or Darkdude?
Why do you or don't you count that as a scum tell against either of them?

[Korts]

chuckrock, please answer the questions posed at you.

[Korts]

Adel:

This post of Ecto's

Ecto, I'm not saying everyone on that wagon is suspect. Just a couple people. Given that you're not on any wagon, I'm also wondering why you're defending people without letting them answer on their own.

As for Tarballs, there is now a pattern of joining big wagons at opportune times. I don't know if that's deliberate, or it just happened that way. He hasn't posted enough for me to make a full judgment. The only time his one big/useful post mentioned Puta was about him being scummy for the "killing a cat" comment, which I took to be at best a joke on Tarballs' part. It feels like EasyWagoning at the moment.

Defending? It's called educating. You showed a lack of understanding regarding pressure votes being used to change the behavior of a player. Case, point, and example laid out for you right here in this game.
In any case, assume you could interpret my post as defending someone, what relevance would my lack of a presence on a wagon have to do with that defense?

Now a couple questions of you. If you are so sold on Tarball, why is your vote still on Rage, who is one of the recipients of Tarball's votes that you are using to make your case? Is that a sloppy bus? If not, isn't your case on Tarball dependent upon Rage being town?

Also of interest...why would you give Puta a clean slate? What comment would have inspired you to make that statement?

Summary: I see you mudslinging with seemingly contradictory premises. Your vote is sticking to Rage while you probe reactions to your statements about 2 other players.
Then, on the flip side, you give a "clean slate" to a player at L-2, whose alignment just might get revealed today.

Isn't that amusing?[/quote]

Expresses suspicion to me. I couldn't find similar posts from other players though, so it seems I was mistaken in the "considerable pressure" statement when it comes to multiple players pressuring.

[Korts]

Bah. Sorry about the quote tags, seems Ecto added an additional [/quote] tag when he quoted Macavity. It's Ecto's post 13 in isolation FTR if someone wants a little clearer post.

[Korts]

I agree. Bandwagon darkdude.

[Korts]

CHUCKROCK, PLEASE ANSWER ADEL'S QUESTION

IH too, preferably with something else on the game itself.

Sweeneytodd also needs to post

Meanwhile, everyone's welcome on the darkdude wagon.

[Korts]

I have no good suspects at the moment, but Korts stands out slightly as I think he's much more insistent with my lynch now than when he first voted for me, and his posts did not indicate a reason for being more confident that I am scum.

The game is in urgent need of something. A lynch, preferably. Every other case presented is far weaker than the one on you. Any case that could've been presented had more than enough time to be phrased. We need to stop milling around and do something.

Ecto, what do you mean that the game is lost if I'm town?

[Korts]

At least tell me which part to reread, I don't have time to do a complete one.

[Korts]

2. being a possible alt

How does this even begin to be a scumtell, assuming you're right?

[Korts]

@Adel: I'm not aware that TSQ uses alts to avoid being accused of lurking contrary to his meta. I thought he played with alts mainly because he was tired of being "well-established". See SCAM, his activity in Gangland Mafia seems more than satisfactory to me. I don't know of any other TSQ alts, though, so you may have information that I don't.

Anyway, I see your point better now. Thanks for clarifying; although I still don't follow why you think tubby is an alt. Can you/do you want to elaborate?

I don't really like the implicit suggestion that tubby is now definitely today's lynch, especially in such a "sneaky" way as in a quote tag, however. Like you're trying to plant the thought in others' subconscious.

4. only voting for a townie on day 1

Would you elaborate on this, please?

Also, since everyone who's active and had your previous questions directed at them answered, please answer them yourself, now. I'll quote for your ease:

Who do you think has been vote hopping more: Korts or Darkdude?
Why do you or don't you count that as a scum tell against either of them?

[Korts]

read his posts from when he first joined mafiascum.net. I think of it as a "newbie check". His first posts really strike me as a person with a solid understanding of mafia pretending not to know the jargon. One of his first posts where he asked what it meant to be a lurker really raised a flag in my mind to make me think he is an alt.

Hmm. You have a point. The first game post of his includes a strong accusation of using the newbie card, although I'm not really sure that's such a difficult-to-notice tell. But I've seen him posting pictures of himself in the Put a Face with a Name Thread, and I'm not really convinced any alt would do that in any account other than their main one.

Bold letters are hardly subliminal, or sneaky.

Thus the quotation marks around "sneaky". I was trying to express that I usually read only the body of a quote properly and check the head only if I don't know who it is quoting. To express myself better, I meant that your push of the notion that tubby is to be lynched was put in a place where it is more likely to be skimmed over. Hmm. On second thought, though, this point isn't really worth anything in itself.

No. I am not happy with the answers I've gotten yet.
Also, I'm working my ass off and providing tons of information. That I am willing to lynch darkdude today, but I am not willing to lynch you today, should be enough. Am I really a priority suspect for you right now? I will probably get my alignment revealed soon enough by nk (WIFOM TRAP!) that trying to get me to answer questions is a waste of my time.

I admire what you're trying to achieve here, for which you will be NK-ed (WIFOM TRAP!), and I'm not really suspicious of you; but refusing to address questions because of your imminent NK isn't really going to prove that you're actually going to be NK-ed. I realize you put a lot more effort into this game already than some of us others, but does that really give you a right to refuse answering?

Also, you could've just said "I'm not satisfied with others' answers yet."

Don't think he is scum? I don't recall saying that.

There's just nothing to suggest him being more likely to be scum than other players.

Right now I'm most suspicious of Korts, but even that is mostly gut feeling and guess.

To me Ecto seems like a very tunnel vision stricken

town

. Scum would probably pursue one of the lurkers IMHO.

You may not have said that previously, but you just now contradicted your self. Emphases mine.

You really should claim, darkdude.

[Korts]

@Adel:

In another game I'm following (Xyl's Relative Chaos), tubby recently posted this (I made sure I'm not breaking the rules of either TDC or Xyl)

IRC?? is that like through a chat thing ,, no but i do play here,,http://mafialives.darkbb.com/forum.htm

This gives me a pretty fair notion that he isn't an alt. It pretty much justifies the prior knowledge of the newbie card; although I don't know how he didn't know what a lurker is, in that case.

[Korts]

@ Korts: You've almost convinced me that he isn't an alt. You've certainly raised reasonable doubts. I think my case against him is robust enough to still apply even if he isn't an alt.

Fair enough. I just thought it was a relevant point.

But darkdude is still a far better lynch; the points against him have been discussed far more extensively and thus his alignment will shed more information, in addition to the fact that lynches started ca. 1 week before the deadline reveal far less information simply due to the fact that they aren't discussed as thoroughly, especially not with the posting frequency this game has.

[Korts]

Why are your reasons so vague? Please quote any analyses of his actions you agree with.

[Korts]

Whoa Ecto. Slow down. Drawing the conclusion that since your own personal play is so and so thus everyone's play is so and so is a huge fallacy. In general, low activity is a slight scumtell. Only after that comes any personal meta. Either you're protecting an inactive or unresponsive player (tubby, any of the incarnations of penguin and Sweeneytodd, and maybe ThAdmiral to a lesser extent), or you yourself are trying to keep posting

something

, anything. The remaining 5 or so percent is you being town and not knowing what you're saying.

[Korts]

Hm. No posting after 2 AM is my new rule. I misread you as trying to suggest that inactivity is more of a towntell than a scumtell. It seemed like such a revelation, too.

Scratch my last post then.

[Korts]

Is that your serious response?

[Korts]

Alright, hammer away.

[Korts]

Short on time, quick post. Ecto makes a compelling case against Rage, but I can't shake the sudden feeling that there was some bussing going on between darkdude and Ecto yesterday.

Adel's post 495 gave me a bad feeling on first read, but now I've gone back for a second look, I can't really find it. Her speculation is fairly valid, though, especially the points about the likeliness of this being a coordinated gambit and the implications of darkdude giving up instantly after Rage shoots down his claim.

what do you guys make of this:

ThAdmiral mentioned darkdude 13 times, and tubby twice.
darkdude mentioned ThAdmiral 8 times, and tubby 4 times.
Tubby mentioned darkdude 14 times and ThAdmiral only once.

I don't find it especially good evidence, personally. Followers (tubby and ThAdmiral seem like followers considering their play so far) have a tendency to zoom in on the main point of discussion regardless of alignment; scum have motive to deflect suspicion.

By the way, thanks for the information on ThAdmiral's play, Adel. I support more insightful posting from ThAd today compared to his Day 2 play.

In the context of numbers alone, I don't think it means a whole lot. It really depends on why they mentioned each other. Obvious raw conclusion is that Tubby and ThAdmiral don't like mentioning each other.

The obvious conclusion is not taking into account their play so far in the game, though. They have been commenting mainly on already established points of discussion, and there hasn't been much pressure on either of tubby/ThAdmiral.

Also, hi, Kison and afatchic!

[Korts]

Short on time, quick post. Ecto makes a compelling case against Rage, but I can't shake the sudden feeling that there was some bussing going on between darkdude and Ecto yesterday.

I'll take that as a compliment.

Can you tell us why it is more likely that Ecto was bussing and not Korts? Or why it isn't possible that we both bussed Darkdude? Or neither?

Umm, stupid question. I know my own alignment, and it'd be pretty stupid for me to even consider having bussed regardless of it. Maybe you're forgetting that you quoted me.

Anyway, I'm in full knowledge of the fact that I don't have any case on you. It's just a sudden feeling that I had. I promise you that I'll go over it and make a case if I find it holds.

[Korts]

Are you saying that I should be arguing that I am quite possibly scum? Because I don't see how that would fulfill any win condition other than a Jester's.

No offense, but if we are going to be using the word stupid, it should be applied to your statement, not my question. What purpose did it serve except to sling unsubstantiated dirt?

I believe in transparency of motives.

[Korts]

Really, stop dodging here. Can you demonstrate to the town without resorting to your PM, why exactly your idea that I was bussing DarkDude is more likely than any of the other scenarios surrounding his lynch? If not, you had no point at all except to make a placeholder for yourself to refer back to later should you find the need to build a case on me in the future.

No, I cannot demonstrate why you bussing was more likely than me bussing. But the implication that I should seriously consider myself as scum is bizarre.

Anyway, my purpose in stating this feeling was to have it written down lest I forget to look into it. And when I look into it, I will drop the issue if there's no proof, and push it if things point to it being likely.

That's exactly what I'm after here Korts, is transparency in your motives. I'm trying to understand your motive for singling out one possible scenario out of equally possible ones and stating it.

As I said, my motive is fairly clear; stating this basically forces me to go back and give reasons, which I will. Not stating it when I have such a feeling is against the whole concept of transparency.

I'd feel better about it if you put out what your thoughts now. If you don't have anything, say so.

I don't have anything at the moment, no.

I investigated Korts Night 1 because I was mildly suspicious of him at the time

I don't remember you pressuring me; can you point to the posts where you expressed this suspicion Day 1?

The breadcrumb is not the best of proof, but believable. It seems like a more general breadcrumb for investigative roles in general, not tracker in particular.

Besides, haven't I drawn too much attention to myself (the long posts made unsuccessfully trying to understand the case against darkdude) for your assumption to be valid, or for me to even appear the slightest bit pro-town now because of it? I ask you, what could I achieve by purposely misunderstanding the case against him, giving him ample opportunity to claim something he just doesn't have, and then claiming against his roleclaim?

I don't understand your logic. Simply because of the fact that you misinterpreted the case on him, basically passively defending him in a harsh interpretation, you say you couldn't later have decided that you should bus him?

One other thing. Why do you say "we didn't immediately accept darkdude's claim" even though you hadn't said a word? Sounds too much like trying to fit in with Town to me.

This seems like a potshot. Maybe because it's wedged in between your defenses, but it looks like you are desperately lashing out to deflect some of the suspicion.

I can understand why people are suspicious of me for not divulging much information late yesterday, but to assume that darkdude and I had planned something all along is stupid. There may be things that someone may think mean a certain thing, but they're only going to be found if that's precisely what you're looking for.

It's not necessarily something that you had to plan particularly for this game, considering your RL experience with each other. This may have been a plan to fall back on if circumstances demand it; with you or darkdude giving some kind of signal in-thread to start this, it's fairly plausible that this is a gambit with you being his scumbuddy.

Also, I like that you assume here that I'm a Tracker before I say so myself.

It was a fairly safe assumption considering your previosu softclaim, though.

And now I'd like to call Ectomancer and darkdude scum together, and hear Korts' (and others, but especially you because you expressed a gut feeling about this) thoughts about this.

Right now I don't have any solid thoughts about this. I only remember a very vague outline of the argument between Ecto and darkdude. As I say further up in this post, I will be sitting down for a thorough reread soon.

@Korts: What can you tell us from comparing Tubby's performance in Xyl's Relative Chaos where he just beat you as scum with this game?

It's hard to say. His posts were the same, pretty much: low-content and not very frequent. What content he had was opinions and not analyses. He basically flew nicely under the radar after managing to get out of a pseudo-serious early-game case. I'd say posting-wise he's pretty much playing the same way, but it's possible his playstyle just doesn't change with alignment all that much.

3. Rage did not investigate me or Bow

That's a good point indeed. Especially because he chose to track me instead of Wombat N1 even though him pushing the case on Wombat from the start of D2 suggests that he was more suspicious of him than me.

vote: Rage

No-one hammer yet.

[Korts]

That's just bullshit. Answer the points.

[Korts]

Why are you so afraid of L-1? I'm not willing to see him hammered yet, either, but it's a good enough test keeping him one vote from a lynch.

[Korts]

(note that he was lynched in both games, but I don't think he would've tried it either time if he didn't think he could get away with it.)

Exactly. Others' opportunism is partly what having someone at L-1 for a longer duration is a good test of.

[Korts]

The newbie card is invalid when I specifically ask for "no hammer yet" though. But okay, let him be at L-2.

[Korts]

tubby, it may give hints regarding your alignment if there are inherent patterns related to alignment. I believe that's the quite obvious purpose of the whole charade. Unfortunately, I think it gives relatively minor implications either way.

I really would like to hear the interpretations of Adel and Kison, though, of their own calculations.

Rage's promised post is still due; ThAdmiral's case on me as well; I'm wondering where we can go until they're back from (I presume) holidays.

[Korts]

I'm uneasy going into an argument about this and going entirely off-topic, but quantitative analyses don't allow for changes in posting frequency in pretty much the same way meta arguments don't allow for changes in playstyle; and thus any implication is minor.

Still, if this has been proven as an effective method of scumhunting, I respect your efforts at sifting through the information.

[Korts]

(EBWOP: post 584 is at Adel)

[Korts]

what do you make of his challenge for us to "read his meta" and see that when he has a role he is far more active?

On the one hand I don't like his uncalled-for softclaim (I'm right in remembering no reason for him to claim I think). On the other hand I don't like what amounts to a meta defense of his apparent softclaim when proving or disproving his defense would take more work than I have time to do.

Then again I'm surprisingly detached from this game.

[Korts]

then please wake up and invest yourself in this game Korts!

I'm doing my best, but at the moment I have far more urgent responsibilities at hand.

Meanwhile:

Which wagons were offered as alternatives to the darkdude wagon on day 2?

Who advocated those wagons?

I remember a BoW wagon lead by Rage and tubby; there was an IH wagon, but I don't think it was ever going to reach a lynch. The IH wagon was lead by you (Adel) and Rage hopped on it without much provocation or reason.

site wouldn't apply here

Why are you trying to dissuade us from researching you on the other site, when you were the one who brought your meta up in the first place? Strikes me as evasive and scummy.

3.

i never thought the case on dd was valid till he claimed

until he claimed "watcher" or until he claimed "scum"?

3) no idea but apparantly at one time i did think it was valid,, i guess this is what i get for half assing a game,
i really haven't paid to much attention until this holiday break where i had time.

This isn't an answer insofar as I can see. Are you saying that you didn't realize what he claimed at the time but the case on him turned valid regardless?

however i do not like admirals post #620 that wreaks of scumminess

This is very general. I do not like General Comments. Please elaborate, lest you want me to assume you're just trying to implicate ThAdmiral without committing yourself to anything.

Also, tubby, what is your username on the other site? I'm planning on checking you out. Even though there are likely differences in site-wide meta on MS and there, tubby's internal motivations for frequent/infrequent motives should stay the same more or less. For this reason, tubby, please elaborate on what, other than being a power role, motivates you to post more frequently, and what causes you to be less frequent in your posting.

Also meanwhile, if anyone else has the investigation results and not ThAdmiral, I suggest an immediate counterclaim. ThAdmiral, did you follow darkdude's suggestion to breadcrumb?

[Korts]

To anyone who wishes to research tubby's games on the other site, I have registered.

http://mafialives.darkbb.com

Username: MafiaScum Research
Password: asdfasdf

[Korts]

tubby, is there some way to view a person in isolation?

[Korts]

Bah. I've drifted out of sync again. Will reread the last couple of pages, but these walls of text are stifling my brain...

[Korts]

Yep, Adel, I'm active in other games. Thing is, I have a solid grasp on those while here I'll need to reread the last one or two pages to find something I can pursue. I cannot promise anything right now, but believe me when I say I'm on it.

[Korts]

Kison being on both wagons is a very minor point.

insanepenguin's argument that he couldn't have voted darkdude if he was scum is either extremely thick-headed or scum being at a loss as to how to react to speculation (which makes him thick-headed to a lesser extent). IP, why did you consider the implied connection between you and darkdude something which you had to reply to, other than acknowledging the theory?

The lessening of pressure on tubby is a sad thing; unfortunately I haven't had the time to go through his games, so I have nothing new on him.

I also notice my vote is still on Rage, who I think answered the case on him pretty well. Let's correct that.

unvote, vote: tubby

The reasons: tubby's appeal to role-specific meta; his passive role in scumhunting; frequent bandwagon hopping on the most popular wagons and application of general pressure wherever the most people are turning.

[Korts]

Rather than refuting my points, why do you opt for practically ad hom?

[Korts]

ad hominem: attack on person

[Korts]

For one, you have been in this game from the first day so should have no reason not to follow the game play. But it seems that as time as gone by, you have been separating yourself more and more from the game, not being as analytical as you were before, etc. This makes me wonder why. I guess that I shouldn’t say that I think it is scummy it is just interesting. Interesting because with less analysis and activity, you start to lose that pro-town feel that you are looking out for the best of the town. I wish I could get more here but I’m having trouble reading into you much more than that…

I've said this multiple times. I have exams in January and studying takes up the majority of my time; and the overnight walls of text in this game make it a hard read. I'm sorry if my activity is lacking, and I will correct that once I'm through with the exams (if I don't have to go again, the last one's on jan. 7th)

[Korts]

Happy Scumday Korts!

Thanks

[qutoe="Ecto"]IP avoids the topic of bussing altogether, declining to discuss it during his breakdown in reference to myself, Korts, or ThAdmiral, all 3 of whom could arguably have bussed (though it gets a bit more complicated with ThAdmiral and myself)[/quote]

How does it get more complicated with you and ThAdmiral? If you're referring to the investigation ThAd claimed, it only semi-clears you, but not ThAd. ThAdscum can still claim correct results for brownie points, as well as incorrect to clear a scumbuddy.

The case on IP by Ecto is worth thought; tubby is still slightly better in my irrelevant opinion. I'd also like to see that case on me.

[Korts]

Damn quote tags. I hope it's still comprehensible.

[Korts]

Huh. I thought you did it to avoid the NK.

[Korts]

That is an awesome concept.

[Korts]

Adel- BoW may have been the scummiest play i have ever read through. he def. ranks up in the top 3 or 5. and reading through i was astounded he wasn't lynched a few pages into day 1. however if you look at it assuming he is town, i believe there is a very logical explanation, which i expect to hear from Adel later in the game. If i don't hear the explanation i am waiting for, i may be inclined to vote him based on how badly BoW played, but right now i think he is a townie.

This paragraph seems particularly wishy-washy, even for you, afatchic. You first state that Adel's predecessor is definitely scummy, then you assume he's town, then you demand an explanation from Adel; and finally you conclude that right now she's probably a townie. I sense a connection; such uncertainty makes me think of a partnership where you can't decide whether to bus, distance or defend.

[Korts]

Let me try and sum up the last page and a half.

afatchic starts throwing shit at the claimed tracker by trying to draw a line between the "no result" Rage claims he got every night and the certainty of a roleblock on him. I agree with Rage that this implies additional knowledge of night actions; but it also implies general craplogic.

I also don't feel comfortable with tubby's lack of posting. He hasn't posted elsewhere either since jan. 1., though, so I'm going to assume V/LA.

[Korts]

ThAdmiral, why do you draw the conclusion that since Rage's claim is believable, his alignment must be town also? Or is the conclusion of his alignment independent of his claim?

[Korts]

I believe he is town since his claim lead to the lynch of a mafiate.

So his claimed role in itself has nothing to do with your belief in his alignment?

Nevertheless, I think ThAd is town here. I'm fine with going for a tubby lynch now. If push comes to shove, I can support a Rage wagon, too, although I'm not nearly as convinced now that that's a good one.

Also, I agree with Kison's summary of ThAd and Ecto on the Sliding Scale of Confirmedness.

[Korts]

so ecto are you saying adel is scum??

cause i tried that on one of my re-reads and then dropped it cause all i found is WIFOM arguments that weren't pro town,

and if somone claims to have the gun would you then want rage to track that person to confirm that they indeed shot that person?

what if there are two guns out there??

i mean if we are playin what if letts throw it all out there right?

Note: tubby is defending Adel. If tubby flips scum, Adel has a slightly higher chance of being scum herself.

tubby, have you finished the case on me and Rage yet?

[Korts]

Who are your suspects, then?

[Korts]

who has actually done some research over there, and what were your conclusions?

Unfortunately I haven't had much time or patience for that. Nevertheless, tubby has more than enough on him for a lynch IMO.

Why vote IP when as far as I gathered your top suspect is tubby?

[Korts]

Just an idea, but since right now it seems that tubby will be lynched, can everyone give their second suspect if:
a)Tubby is scum
b)Tubby is not scum

1. In order:
   1. Rage
   2. Adel
2. Rage

[Korts]

Hmm. Adel makes a fair point. But after the implied connection between tubby and Adel, I'd really like to see tubby lynched; if he does flip scum, the connection is now slightly more strongly implied.

I'm confident enough of Adelscum's skills to presume she wouldn't outright defend tubby, and she did vote him to L-1 recently; but I also think Adelscum wouldn't turn down the opportunity to lynch someone else over an incriminated partner, if she thinks she can make a strong enough case. And IP is the perfect target in case of a tubby-Adel scumteam.

[Korts]

Before a lynch, I'd like to see tubby216's and Korts' analysis of everyone.

I don't know why you bring me up, I think I've been clear enough on everyone. But sure, I'll do it later today.

[Korts]

disclaimer: the numbers are simply quantified opinion, and aren't based on specific scum- and towntells' values like vollkan does it.

Ectomancer- Right now, I think he is the most pro-town. He is also the closest to being confirmed, with the claimed investigation result on him. on a scale of 0 to 100 vollkan-style (where 50 is null), I'd say --

75

tubby- he's been acting fairly anti-town all through the game. He's active lurked his way through, with no serious content; what content he does is weak opinions and practically no analysis. He's always on the major bandwagons, and has followed multiple people, most notably Adel. On the vollkan scale, I'd say he's

20

IP- he's more pro-town than tubby, and he's made pretty good analyses. The main problem with him is the (now retracted) fallacy that him having hammered darkdude equals him being confirmed town; after that, there's the inconsistency where he attacks Rage, acknowledging that his claim led to darkdude's lynch, while still holding on to the previous fallacy. I seem to remember slight misreps also, but other than these two points, there's nothing in my mind that incriminates him. He's

35

Kison- I have no real beef with him. His analyses all seemed to have been written with the implicit intent to help town; I didn't notice anything particular about him that is scummy.

60

afatchic- his analyses have also been helpful, but I didn't always get the same feeling as with Kison's posting. Especially nearing a lynch, he seems to be getting frantic and wishy-washy. His earlier lurking bugged me, but his defense of having a method of not posting until he's fully caught up is plausible. I don't have any solid read on him.

50

Adel- She's definitely spent a vast amount of time and effort with this game; her analyses are all comprehensive and thorough. However, her "traps" didn't always seem pro-town, leaning more to being self-serving. The switch from tubby to IP at the finish line, along with tubby's uncertain defense of her implicates her pretty hard in the case of tubby turning scum.

30/60

depending on tubby's alignment (latter is if tubby is town--unlikely)

Rage- Rage is scummy for his strong push on the BoW wagon over anything else, especially Day 2, when the rival wagon was darkdudescum, and for his switch to darkdude only at the final moment, giving him the last push with his claim. However, he has regained some town cred with his recent posting; his opinions are fairly pro-town; this is mitigated by the circumstance that most of his points and questions are at IP, making him slightly more likely to be scum if tubby flips scum.

40

ThAdmiral- He hasn't been among the top contributors, but then again, his town meta is similar to his play here. What he's said made sense so far, and I haven't seen him commit any scumtells. I don't have a particular read on him.

50

[Korts]

afatchic, you are pretending that we have the timeframe to punish any opportunism at this moment. In reality, questioning any would-be quickhammerer today instead of tomorrow doesn't really make any difference in deciding who to lynch of tubby and IP, one of whom is irrevocably the lynch now.

[Korts]

I'm going to take a look at Adel when it's not nearly midnight.

[Korts]

Im a bit confused as to why Rage would have been killed there...

This comment is scummy, and the answer obvious.

[Korts]

First off, I support massclaiming tomorrow rather than today. It's pretty clear we're not in lylo yet.

Second, Adel is suspicious for suggesting two godfathers. Such a setup would render any cop practically useless, and since we know there was one cop at least, I'm more than prepared to rule out such a thing. I get the feeling you're just trying to avoid narrowing the field of suspicion down; Ecto is near-confirmed at this point.

I dont think we should mass claim. They still have to kill me, because regardless of what my power is, Im confirmed town.

You're nearly confirmed, but I wouldn't call you 100% confirmed yet. There's some chance of a 4-player scumgroup, with you and ThAdmiral as scum, however unlikely.

I dont think we should mass claim. They still have to kill me, because regardless of what my power is, Im confirmed town.

or a godfather.

Pushing this theory is not constructive. It is more than unlikely that there would be two godfathers.

Vig kill of Rage, but no scum kill would indicate another town role of roleblocker or protector. Would it really be best to mass claim in that situation?

Yes, we would have PR + who he protected as confirmed innocents.

Unless enough of their confirmed innocents are dead to make claiming unprofitable. If they haven't claimed yet, they shouldn't now.

As for Adel and tubby's previous interactions; if the connection that was implied by tubby's defense of Adel was one-sided, I would doubt my read and have to consider that tubby may have been tying himself to town, but Adel's voting pattern late into yesterday very much implies half-hearted support of the tubby-wagon (i.e. distancing/bussing). She also started pressuring IP when tubby came alarmingly close to the lynch threshold; there's no real doubt in my mind about her.

vote: Adel

[Korts]

y'all think I replaced in and got both of my scumbuddys lynched? seriously?

First off: it's possible; seeing pressure on your buddies is a good motive to add some yourself. You were also very inconsistent with the pressure on tubby.

@Korts: Why on earth do you think that lylo is the optimal time to massclaim?

I believe so because by then the claimed power roles will have had enough results to claim without having outed themselves eariler on, and a much more extensive puzzle's pieces can be fit together; and the mafia won't get the chance to make a NK-choice in the full knowledge of the town's power roles early on. LYLO is the optimal time to massclaim simply because any earlier is too early.

[Korts]

the day before lylo the town can test a claim without relying upon a coin flip.

Ah, but it is not the day before LYLO.

you are setting yourself up to fakeclaim in lylo for the win.

I'll be happy to disprove you with my claim when the time comes.

[Korts]

I think Kison is about as cleared as Ecto

Is this based on your read on him, or on something else?

[Korts]

voting patterns mostly. Since I was scum with Kison in SMM2, and nominated him for a scummy for his performance in that game, I am aware of his ability to pull a full game bus, and he did no such thing in this game.

Then I don't really agree with you. Ecto is near-confirmed through game mechanics, while Kison is more likely town due to a comparison between his voting patterns here and in a previous game.

Rereading, note how Adel attacks me the moment she sees an opening, however weak a point it is she can make.

Ecto, do you mean to say you suspect IP over Adel?

[Korts]

I don't see the discussion moving in anything but circles right now.

[Korts]

IMO we should massclaim tomorrow.

[Korts]

I don't see what I can or should say at this point. I still think Adel is scum; her questioning of IP seemed to me like scum angling for a slip.

[Korts]

FWIW I think Adel is probably pushing this line of discussion more because of her role getting replaced than because of afatchic. And FWIW I think getting replaced is not indicative of alignment overall. If town get replaced more often it's only because there are more town than scum.

[Korts]

I'm "pushing it"?

That's the impression I got.

[Korts]

Giving up, good. Now town, please take Adel's advice. This day has drawn on long enough.

so why don't I have a few votes yet?

You can always count on me

[Korts]

remember, before he linked me to tubby, Korts linked me to someone else:

What is your conclusion from this, Adel?

Rememebr that Korts stayed on the Rage wagon longer than others, and voted for tubby only after Kison, Ecto, IP and I did, and then only once Ecto and IP and I had unvoted. tubby only had one vote when Korts placed a second vote on him at 681.

And from this? I don't see the purpose in bringing these up, especially since you simply state facts and not your conclusions drawn from them. Almost like you're suggesting to the town what to look at, without having to commit to an opinion.

is this the post of a scumbuddy letting his partner know that "I'm bussing you, and I'm going to be lurking, so please don't freak out that my vote is on you"?

Or the post of a mechanical engineer student facing three exams in a row? I wasn't making excuses for my vote, I was making excuses for not being 100% up to date.

I think that any theory that has be as scum needs to explain:
1. why I am so active (both in posting and in voting), and drawing so much attention to myself

Activity isn't a tell of anything, in particular. I'm not aware of your scum play involving lurking on a regular basis, therefore I don't see how your general activeness should be a towntell. Scum may be just as active in posting and voting. You should know better than to ask this.

2. why I built the wagon on tubby

Possible bussing. The pressure on tubby was big enough even without you. Kison, in particular, started questioning tubby pretty much at the same time you did. tubby's play had been lurkish and non-committal throughout the game, it would've been noticed sooner or later anyway, and the Godfather didn't have any utility any more; I don't see why you couldn't have opted for a pre-emptive bus as scum.

3. why I hammered tubby.

Again, quite possible a scenario is bussing. After spotting the implied connection between you and tubby, you could expect Kison and me to push tubby's lynch the next day as well, so why not comply and maybe get the chance to semi-confirm yourself?

I'm fairly sure you realize how these questions fail to prove the case against you wrong.

The case on afatchic is based on his relative inactivity in this game when compared to elsewhere on site; while I agree that it is suspicious, I would think that he would be lurking for tactical reasons only if he were under pressure, which I don't see.

Giving up, good. Now town, please take Adel's advice.

This day has drawn on long enough.

I really beg to differ. In fact, I'd really like to hear lots more from ThAdmiral and afatchic. Why are you in such a hurry?

I was in a "hurry" because my conviction in Adel hasn't been made any less certain by recent arguments, and the discussion prior to my post you're referencing looked to me like it was fading into irrelevance to the game itself. Naturally the best thing to do in cases like that is to lynch.

Right now my LOS looks something like this...
Korts
Adel
ThAd.
IP
Kison

I would say Korts seems somewhat scummy, while Adel and ThAd. are both in the neutral zone still, and i believe IP and Kison are most likely town.

Cases, or at least a brief summary, please. Otherwise, this is just arbitrary (i.e. worthless when it comes to following up with scumhunting).

[Korts]

that you found me suspicious and tried to link me to someone before you tried to link me to tubby.

Actually, if you look at it in context, it's clear that I found afatchic suspicious primarily, and you only secondarily, since connections between two players are usually implied from one side, and the player whose interactions are implicating of that connection is far more suspicious.

Are you accusing me of offering evidence rather than suspicions and not cramming my theory down the throats of others? guilty.

I am pointing out things that I think are important to look at in order for a townie to make an informed decision.

I'm not suggesting that cramming your theories down the town's throat would be the pro-town thing to do, I'm saying that if you provide evidence, it helps the scumhunting process to elaborate on

how

the presented evidence implicates the suspect. I think what you did in the post I referenced could be classified as a version of Information Instead of Analysis.

ok. Have you ever been in a game where a scum player offered a bogus excuse for his voting or activity?

I don't recall, no. But I get your point. Do you admit there's a difference between making excuses for voting and making excuses for activity?

I don't "know better" because I know how I play differently when I am scum.

lol @ "I'm not aware of your scum play involving lurking on a regular basis"
have you even bothered to look at any of my games as scum, or is it something that you haven't gotten around to yet, like when you said you were going to look at tubby's posts on that other site.

I admit, I haven't. But you referenced Meta-Breaking and Mature Mafia; in one, you kinda lurked, according to yourself (Mature); in the other you were more active. So activity isn't a constant with alignment, we can assess that. And purely theoretically, I think we can safely assume that optimal scum play for every player would be as similar to personal town play as possible, since one of the objectives is not to get caught. Therefore, if you set a meta where you are active as town, it serves your interests as scum to be similarly active.

I watched you in crackers. I know you are lazy with your "scumhunting" when you are scum.

Let me turn your question on you. Have you looked at any of my games as town to see whether that same laziness is present in my town play?

bullshit. I led, others followed. tubby felt pressure mostly from me. I kept the pressure up until there was a case against him, and there was very little evidence against him that I didn't generate.

Alright, I concede that you were the main propagator of the tubby wagon.

I've come to the reluctant conclusion, setting aside my conviction for a minute, that your motive for competing wagons somewhat justifies the wagon-hop between the tubby and IP cases; however the timing (jumping off tubby and beginning the push on the IP-wagon when tubby was put at L-1) is still suspicious.

like ThAdmiral and afatchic have been noticed? It is one thing to notice, and it is another to actually do something about it.

ThAdmiral's been producing constant opinions and some analysis; an afatchic-wagon I can support.

unvote, vote: afatchic

You have failed to productively contribute to hte efforts of the town in this game, and you accuse me of being scum for being responsible for a "pre-emptive bus".
lol. you silly.

hehheh. I'm fairly satisfied with my contribution to the scumhunting efforts, although I probably should've done a lot more research into tubby's meta. I think my pressuring of you has fulfilled its purpose quite well. By the way, I think you're perfectly capable of judging whether a scumpartner would be too much weight to carry on your back to endgame, therefore a "pre-emptive bus" is en entirely possible theory.

it would be a very sub-optimal play.

Which may be the exact reason to do it. I don't know why I'm still arguing this, though.

fail. please reread again.

Pardon. I didn't mean case. I meant point.

you have "conviction" that I am scum? why? what is your case against me? that I "bussed and hammered tubby"?

Actually, it was that you "drove tubby to L-1 and hopped off" coupled with the fact that tubby defended you.

I'm very much on the fence about you right, Adel; some moments, I have a solid town read on you, but when I consider your Day 3 voting, the thought always occurs that the tubby case may have initially started out as a simple distancing act and you panicked at L-1.

[Korts]

I have not looked at any games where you were town.

Fair enough. I'll give some examples.

In Sci-fi/Fantasy Mafia (Spock, Vanilla Townie) I played a fairly pro-town game (outside random voting, I was only ever voted in the endgame, by the last remaining scum). Nevertheless, you can see my inherent lazyness here, too; I was reluctant to go back for re-reads and mostly tried to generate discussion from recent reactions.

In Facedown and Thirsty Mafia (Bulletproof), I replaced in Day 3 and procrastinated on my read up a fairly long while--I actually didn't finish it 100% because discussion picked up. If I'd have done a more in-depth read, I could've maybe caught one scum at least.

In The New C9 (Doctor), I was under pressure fairly early on and survived to endgame with a doctor claim and the scum trying to WIFOM the town into lynching me; I did quite a lot of reading in endgame, but until then I pretty much coasted; I particularly phased out around the time of The Fonz and ting's wall o' text wars.

How many times did I unvote tubby when he was at L-1? Which of those times (post numbers, please) do you find suspicious?

Now that I went back and checked, it was twice. I remembered only one; the more suspicious one was probably the first, in post 705, where you unvote for unstated reasons, baiting a question. In post 798, you unvote due to Ecto asking the town not to lynch yet, and I can understand that. What's particularly strange is what you do

after

the second unvote: you vote IP in post 823 without any particular reasoning or any discussion of IP in your posts prior to the vote, and with the former willingness to lynch tubby apparently disappearing.

In short, I believe that I have had two games as scum on this site where it could be said that I "panicked". ABR was in both games, and went out of his way to lynch me in both games, as he did in every game we were in together since our first. ABR's grudge against me was an "outside of game" complication that still really pisses me off. We lost every game we were in together where we shared an alignment (except for one assassins in the palace game) and it made mafia very much not fun for me.

Thanks for that. I'm now slightly more convinced you are town. However I get the thought that I'm easily fooled by selective evidence due to my inherent laziness.

Sorry, but I don't have the time to research the answers to your pop quiz. Off the top of my head, Kison and I accused you of bussing tubby, and IP, and Ecto as far as I remember accused Rage of bussing darkdude.

-----------------

I'm trying to figure out why you pulled this 180:
<quote>
Adel has been bringing this up since yesterday(game days), I think. Why does this suddenly become convincing enough to turn you away from your previous conviction that she is scum?

Because I realized I was basically ignoring her reasoning.

You mentioned just yesterday(real life) that you were convinced that Adel was scum and ready for the day to end(and in fact, I think you've been calling her scum the entire game day), but here you claim you have moments of 'solid town reads' on her. When was the last time you had a solid town read on her?

While reading posts I frequently got the feeling that she was pro-actively scumhunting, and her actions make sense. But my posts were always centered on her interactions with tubby, which strongly implied her as tubby's partner, and thinking about that reinforced my conviction. During my recent replies to Adel I decided to consider things more thoroughly from her angle and I second guessed myself.

Meanwhile, looking into Adel's voting pattern I found this post.

umm not sure i guess if i had to say

ip and thAdmiral

i think most pro town are adel and ecto

korts, rage and kison are pretty much middle of the road could go either way

Tubby would probably put his partner on the pro-town list or in the middle of the road. The latter is slightly more possible, since it gives room for distancing moves; however, having played with tubby before I'm fairly sure he would go for the simplest solution, so that implies Adel or Ecto. Ecto can only be scum if ThAdmiral is, too, so I'm second guessing myself again.

unvote, vote: Adel

[Korts]

Hmm.

unvote

I noticed after hitting the submit button that tubby omits afatchic from his list. This was after he had replaced in, and after his catching up posts, so there would've been enough material to decide.

Also note this:

I would first like to say that Im pretty sure one of the scum is in tubby/ IP, however I don’t think they are both scum, as I will explain later.

This is right before tubby's list of suspicions, and after saying this, afatchic goes on to make a big case against IP. This implies that afatchic wanted to distance, and also wanted IP to be lynched. The sentence "however I don't think they are both scum" would make more sense if all of afatchic, tubby and IP were scum, but this is still heavy implication.

vote: afatchic

[Korts]

That's a convincing case for massclaim, Adel. And if we decide to do it, how do you propose we go with it? Popcorn starting with most suspected, random, or other?

[Korts]

ok, that sounds good to me. no gun here.

[Korts]

IP, please claim gun or no gun.

[Korts]

It's possible that the kill was used already; N3 may be the night. Doc/blocker had protected/blocked correctly N0 and more importantly N2, so I doubt N2 was the night unless the scum also have a blocker/doc and they scored a hit.

Hum. I think a massclaim is in order after all.

[Korts]

It's possible that the kill was used already; N3 may be the night. Doc/blocker had protected/blocked correctly N0 and more importantly N2, so I doubt N2 was the night unless the scum also have a blocker/doc and they scored a hit.

You do realize that what you're suggesting is impossible unless Rage committed suicide, right? Everyone here claimed not to have a gun, and unless some dumdum townie lied, Rage is the only other town aligned player who was alive during Night Three to have been able to use the gun to... well... kill himself. So it pretty much has to be a scum kill as far as I can tell. Look at it this way:

~~Night Three(assuming one scum, but it doesn't really matter for what I'm showing)~~
1)

Townie(still living)

->No gun, no reason to lie. Result: Not the murderer of Rage.
2)

Townie(still living)

->No gun, no reason to lie. Result: Not the murderer of Rage.
3)

Townie(still living)

->No gun, no reason to lie. Result: Not the murderer of Rage.
4)

Townie(still living)

->No gun, no reason to lie. Result: Not the murderer of Rage.
5)

Townie(still living)

->No gun, no reason to lie. Result: Not the murderer of Rage.
6)

Townie(still living)

->No gun, no reason to lie. Result: Not the murderer of Rage.
7)

Scum(still living)

->Possibly has a gun.
8)

Rage(dead)

->If he had a gun, it was not used successfully unless he decided to blow himself away. Result:

Prooooobably

not the murderer of Rage.

Anyone know if Rage was on anti-depressants?

Hahaha. Why are you excluding the possibility that a town player with the gun was blocked when they tried to shoot?

just to be clear, when I claimed "no gun" I meant that I do not have one now, and I never did have one.

Is the same true for everyone else?

This is correct.

On the IP lynch: I don't follow why he's the optimal play. I'd rather lynch afatchic.

[Korts]

So then why would a town player have lied about the shot? everyone claimed "no gun" when that would have been some nice info to share during that "mass claim".

True. Rage or scum having the gun is the likeliest possibility, and if the former is the case scum could've blocked Rage in anticipation of a protect.

Care to give a reason why?

Because I think you're scum, obv.

[Korts]

@Kison, sorry. I realize on second thought you're right. I forgot to take into consideration the all-round no gun claims. So either Rage had a gun or one of the scum did or does is the conclusion we can draw here.

[Korts]

Adel, can you give me a quick rundown of why IP is the optimal lynch now?

[Korts]

Fair enough, I'll bite.

unvote, vote: insanepenguin

[Korts]

I could live with being lynched, but if that happens I'll want to make a full list of suspicions.

[Korts]

Ok, I'll start writing up the suspicion list now. I'd expect it to be done in ca. an hour or so.

[Korts]

Ecto--my opinion is still pretty much the same as in my last list:

Ectomancer- Right now, I think he is the most pro-town. He is also the closest to being confirmed, with the claimed investigation result on him. on a scale of 0 to 100 vollkan-style (where 50 is null), I'd say --

75

IP--

IP- he's more pro-town than tubby, and he's made pretty good analyses. The main problem with him is the (now retracted) fallacy that him having hammered darkdude equals him being confirmed town; after that, there's the inconsistency where he attacks Rage, acknowledging that his claim led to darkdude's lynch, while still holding on to the previous fallacy. I seem to remember slight misreps also, but other than these two points, there's nothing in my mind that incriminates him. He's

35

In addition to this there's the vanilla claim which is anti-town when it comes to the pool of possible power roles; I'm not convinced of his guilt but I agree that he's a very good lynch at this point. I'm gonna make that 35 a

30

now.

Kison--

Kison- I have no real beef with him. His analyses all seemed to have been written with the implicit intent to help town; I didn't notice anything particular about him that is scummy.

60

My opinion hasn't really changed; Adel makes a fair point, but it boils down to Kison being "too townie" and I'm not prepared to lynch on something based on that.

afatchic--

afatchic- his analyses have also been helpful, but I didn't always get the same feeling as with Kison's posting. Especially nearing a lynch, he seems to be getting frantic and wishy-washy. His earlier lurking bugged me, but his defense of having a method of not posting until he's fully caught up is plausible. I don't have any solid read on him.

50

The point I made a couple posts ago is incriminating enough to make the 50 a

40

.

Adel--

Adel- She's definitely spent a vast amount of time and effort with this game; her analyses are all comprehensive and thorough. However, her "traps" didn't always seem pro-town, leaning more to being self-serving. The switch from tubby to IP at the finish line, along with tubby's uncertain defense of her implicates her pretty hard in the case of tubby turning scum.

30/60

depending on tubby's alignment (latter is if tubby is town--unlikely)

I'm leaning more towards Adel being

50

. I'm definitely the most uncertain about her, since her actions imply pro-town intentions most of the time, yet I did see a definite connection with tubby implied from both sides.

ThAdmiral--

ThAdmiral- He hasn't been among the top contributors, but then again, his town meta is similar to his play here. What he's said made sense so far, and I haven't seen him commit any scumtells. I don't have a particular read on him. 50

My opinion's pretty much the same; although contrary to Adel's previous supposition that ThAdmiral would be more active closer to endgame, I don't see his level of contribution growing. If anything, he's become less informative in his recent posts, degenerating into one- or two-liners. I'm giving him

40

.

So the list is

IP
afatchic=ThAdmiral
Adel
Kison
Ecto

In the order of preferance for a lynch.

[Korts]

Adel, why don't

you

hammer?

[Korts]

I support a massclaim at this point.

[Korts]

Hmm. I'm wondering why scum killed ThAdmiral and not Ectomancer. Ectomancer is confirmed this way, but if he had been killed, ThAdmiral wouldn't have been. The obvious answer to this is that Ecto is a second godfather, but that would very nearly defeat the whole purpose of an amnesiac cop.

I agree that Ecto should choose the order, but I think he should claim, too, after everyone else has.

[Korts]

Ok, I claim vanilla. Adel, go.

[Korts]

Ecto: if you think a rapid double bus is farfetched in the case of Adel, why don't you take into account that I was another propagator of both scum lynches? If I was scum, I could easily have chosen IP over tubby at the brink of deadline with the reasoning that any lynch is better than no lynch.

Out of the possibilities afatchic is most likely to be scum, with Kison and Adel far behind. Ecto is either confirmed or the setup fucked the amnesiac cop in the bum.

[Korts]

If there are pro-town protective or blocking roles alive, please claim now. There is no reason any more to hide, since you have information useful to the town.

Otherwise, I'm happy to lynch afatchic. Everyone else is more likely to have been around to submit a choice.

[Korts]

Everyone else was also around, and I can't see Adel, Ecto or Kison missing a deadline.

Also, how is that a scumtell, going by process of elimination?

[Korts]

Oh, nice.

vote: afatchic.

I don't see anything to discuss at this point.

[Korts]

So what is your case on me?

[Korts]

Go make a case and then we can talk.

[Korts]

I can't figure out how pissed I will be when Ecto is revealed to be a godfather.

The tracker, the gun inventor, and the amnesiac cop could all potentially confirm innocents or find scum. I think this would be a tough setup to balance. I don't see a dead scum-aligned roleblocker. If there is one it is Korts. If there isn't one I almost think we have a scum godfather instead.

unvote, vote:Korts

afatchic needs to find his own reasons. These are mine.

Anything to back this seemingly absolute sureness? What leads you to believe that I'm scum, and why would I be roleblocker in particular?

Also, looking from a balance viewpoint, a godfather seems enough to balance the amnesiac cop's power, and the tracker and gun inventor are more complex and thus weaker information roles. I'd say a mafia doctor is more likely.

[Korts]

Where did I say I know there is one? I said this:

If

there are pro-town protective or blocking roles alive, please claim now

Note bolded.

[Korts]

would it be a possibility that the mafia can only kill every other night. like n1, n3, n5; and can't kill n0, n2, n4. and maybe the scum got the gun n0/1 and used that last night instead of their scum kill.

This theory is invalid because there was a kill n4.

I'm pushing for any possible protective/blocking roles' claims because we are down to five people and any confirmations or implications would be worth outing power roles.

But on the other hand I hadn't considered that perhaps they wouldn't want to claim if their confirmed/implicated targets are dead already.

I'd like everyone to say which scenario you think the more likely -
1: inventor gun being used in lieu of scum nk and failing
2: Doc/Roleblocker prevented a kill n2 and doesnt want to be forced to claim today
3: Scum was inattentive and didn't send in a kill

my list would go 2->3->1. I just don't really see TDC putting random choices into the roles (or if he did, the role PMs would include them). Plus flavorwise it doesn't really make sense for gun inventor guns to be any different from mafia guns.

[Korts]

oh. missed that, sorry.

[Korts]

It is the most likely explanation for the lack of kills, Ecto. Your theory depends on the mod not including information which I strongly believe should be included in the role PM, as well as the mod employing a random chance-based element, something which is frowned upon by the majority of mods on-site. As for explanation no. 3, everyone here was accounted for during at least one of the no-kill nights. I don't think any more that power roles should absolutely claim now, only if they have an innocent or a guilty on someone still alive. WHICH WOULD MAKE SENSE.

[Korts]

would it be a possibility that the mafia can only kill every other night. like n1, n3, n5; and can't kill n0, n2, n4. and

maybe the scum got the gun n0/1 and used that last night instead of their scum kill.

This theory is invalid because there was a kill n4.

he kinda just went over that. idiot

So would that be allowed, and something we could look at for a bit? i have seen it where scum could only kill on odd/even nights but it was always in open games. however, that may have been what the mod did to offset a mass slaughter with the gun inventor. i need to reread some stuff before i do anything else though...

Again, I don't think this theory is particularly credible, because the scum's inability to kill on alternating nights would probably be included in the role PMs as well.

However, going back to check the role PMs, there is no specific mention of a seperate scumkill group ability; only

possible

town aligned/mafia aligned/group mafia abilities are listed. Which draws the question: do we know scum have a night kill, or is it possible that the kills were another role/ability's fault?

[Korts]

I definitely think they should, if there's one.

[Korts]

Also, hi ABR and thanks for helping out.

[Korts]

I'm still vanilla.

[Korts]

Well I'm stumped. Going by my previous reads alone, Adel would be the play for me, but I'm going to do a thorough reread of the game and both of you in isolation soon--possibly this weekend. No promises though, semester's tough on me.

[Korts]

Don't worry, I will. I just drunk too much and I'm tired as well. Give me the weekend to reread.

[Korts]

Badly Didn't really get anything done...

[Korts]

congrats btw for the scummies.

[Korts]

I'm posting what I have so far, so you have something to respond to.

Why did Adel bus both scumpartners if she was scum? The wagon on tubby was started by Adel, and the wagon on darkdude was taken to the finish line by her. This is my main concern.

This post, for instance:

tubby: do you mind answering some questions about the case against darkdude?

1. What do you think the legitimate reasons (i.e. non-bullshit reasons) to be voting for darkdude are?
2. Do you think that all three people voting for darkdude are scum?
3. If you think at least one of the people voting for darkdude are not scum, why do you think that a townie is voting for darkdude?

She's forcing one scum to elaborate on the case against the other. I have a hard time wrapping my head around the thought that the third scum would do this.

Then there's this post:

thanks for asking that question Rage. it forced me to take a second look at everything, and I don't think that darkdude is the right lynch for today.

unvote, vote:tubby

for:

• 1. lurking through the game without getting replaced
  2. being a possible alt
  3. following my vote onto IH
  4. only voting for a townie on day 1

I don't see the purpose in jumping off a scumbuddy's wagon just to start another one on the other scumbuddy. Granted, the tubby-wagon didn't seem to gain momentum any time soon, but the game had been stalling for quite a while then. This whole tubby/darkdude thing fits into the profile of supporting competing wagons. If Adel is scum and purposefully did this kind of double bussing I'm nomming her for a scummy.

That's it for now; it's 1:07 AM here and I'm getting up at six so I'll continue this later.

[Korts]

2)do you think you should full claim since Bow kinda soft claimed?

I don't think tubby would ask his scumpartner to fullclaim regardless of whether they "kinda" softclaimed or not. Considering this in conjunction with the fact that Adel pushed tubby until he was at L-1, I'm more and more convinced that Adel isn't scum. The parallel wagons theory seems much more plausible in retrospect.

I'm more or less satisfied with my read on Adel. I'm starting on Kison tomorrow.

[Korts]

@Adel, because it makes less sense for being something that Adelscum engineered.

I'm sorry, I still haven't gotten round to looking at Kison. Semester's hard on me. I'll do it on the weekend.

[Korts]

I don't agree with the lurking and stalling. I've kept up a constant flow of posting with relevant information/opinions, even if I explicitly stated on multiple occasions that my schedule prevents me from immediate thorough research; and I'm fairly sure that every time I made a promise to make a case or dig for specific comments/posts I did just that, even if it took me a couple days.

My Kison read is starting now; I intend to have something soon (either today in ca. two hours before I have to catch a train or tomorrow).

[Korts]

Unfortunately Kison replaced in Night 2/Day 3, so he has only directly interacted with one of the two known scum.

His focus was on tubby from pretty much the beginning of the day, with a secondary line of questioning at Rage. The pressure on tubby before Day 3 had been almost non-existent, with only Adel calling him out, if I recall correctly, multiple times on the low contribution.

I can't speak for others, but your defense of darkdude was what stood out most for me as I read the game.

Vote: Darkdude

(instead of Rage; corrected in next post)

This slip might be indicative of something; however I can't really figure out whether it's relevant at all. I can't really imagine scum confusing a scumpartner with an intended mislynch, but then again the only similarity between Rage and darkdude is the fact that they are both mentioned in the sentence before the vote. So nulltell or very vague towntell.

Kison points out that Adel unvotes tubby and votes IP ca. a hundred posts later, as an indication of Adel being connected to tubby; he tries casting suspicion in these two posts:

vote: insanepenguin02

the way you vote without reasoning is quite interesting. Setting up traps, continuing wagons, I don't know the reason behind this one, as I'm sure nobody else does either.

This is typical. See this and this.

Just an idea, but since right now it seems that tubby will be lynched, can everyone give their second suspect if:
a)Tubby is scum
b)Tubby is not scum

(A) Adel -> The second game I linked to above has Adel running her scumbuddy up to the verge of being lynched. When he (Surye) suddenly comes close to being lynched, she quickly jumps off and begins campaigning against someone else. (A) is the assumption that Tubby216 is scum, which would make :

unvote

for unstated reasons.

a very familiar scene.

I would also go with Rage, because nothing about Tubby216 flipping scum really distinguishes my suspicion of him, but rather puts more on the table.

(B) Rage -> Tubby216 flipping town would land me back here.

She voted Tubby216 in post 687 and unvoted in post 705

The fact that Kison starts drawing the connection between tubby and Adel

after

I'd drawn attention to the possible pairing (I stated my theory in post 834, and Kison started making similar accusations in 836) implies slight opportunism at a chance to link a scumpartner to a townie--although the time zone difference may be the single reason for this. Going back through Kison's posts, on that day that both the mentioned posts were made (Jan 11, 2009) Kison's first post after my 834 is an hour later (my post: 9:17 PM GMT+1; Kison's post: 10:07 PM GMT+1) and the last one before that is seventeen hours before so there is nothing to imply that he'd been reading the forum before I had made that point--which doesn't mean that his accusation wasn't caused by my similar action. He also pushes the tubby-Adel theory with much more conviction after the tubby lynch than the day before.

--------------

This is tubby's final suspicion list:

umm not sure i guess if i had to say

ip and thAdmiral

i think most pro town are adel and ecto

korts, rage and kison are pretty much middle of the road could go either way

Naturally his scumpartner isn't in the IP/ThAdmiral group of "suspected" scum; I would think tubby would put his remaining scupartner in the middle of the road more likely than as most pro-town after he'd consistently called darkdude a "confused townie" right up to darkdude's lynch. This, to me, implicates Kison slightly.

To be completely honest, there is very little to imply Kison as the last scum; his behaviour has been consistently pro-town and his interactions with tubby easily interpreted both ways. On the other hand, Adel's actions make me seriously doubt that she could be scum, therefore my choice is clear.

vote: Kison

[Korts]

Meh, it's up to Adel either way now.

[Korts]

well I'm town, and judging from the long wait you are too.

Yaytown?

[Korts]

This is awesome

Thanks, ABR and TDC for the modding. Nice setup, too.

And I agree, Adel is the MVP.

How responsible was Korts in the lynching of darkdude? I never really got found a good answer for that question.

Well, I was more or less following in Ecto's wake, but I would've lynched Rage and not darkdude.

[Korts]

Me too.

Adel, why did you hammer Kison instead of me? I thought he had a more convincing case than I did.

[Korts]

Depending on whether RL clears up by then there's a chance I'll want to join that game, so sorry

[Korts]

I'm under the impression that such a game would not be "Normal" anymore.

Ah, but it would go into sign-ups that much faster for this reason.