Mini 730 - Hard Nights in the City - OVER!

[Nameless]

/Confirm

[Nameless]

just a note to all. i don't really post at weekend

I really hope you're on the mafia's side.

[Nameless]

i was just asking if he realyl thought me not posting 2 days a week would be that bad?

12.) If you do not post for a full deadline game day you will be modkilled. Further, you will be blacklisted from any future games I run.

... So, yeah. Also, learn to type, both of you.

Vote: Danchaofan

who is clearly looking for an excuse to vote somebody rather than correct them. Or is he just HOPING for a townie to be modkilled?

Current Seriousness Level: 12%

[Nameless]

Calling "Random Voting" a stage is wrong. You may start with, but there is no distinct phase, seriousness and arguments just slowly build from there.

Don and Mega have started going at each other very quickly, perhaps suspiciously so? Penguin comments, but doesn't contribute to serious or non serious discussion, is that suspicious? Chaos says nothing but votes, suspicious?

Here's a question for whoever feels like answering it: If I now changed my vote to Megatheory, would that be suspicious and why?

Upon clarification, I find SpyreX's posting rules to be weak, and furthermore, lame.

PSH.

[Nameless]

Mega is pushing very hard for early, weak points. He's also placing vote/lynching under general discussion, and his idea of scum being more sensitive than town to votes is bad (I'd say a player's personality would have has much impact and townie power roles would be as sensitive anyway). Suspicious, and that's not a question this time.

[Nameless]

Discussion does not always benefit the town. If two townies get into an argument and one of them gets lynched over it, their discussion was ultimately bad for the town.

Why is placing voting/lynching under discussion as early as possible suspicious? Voting is a fundamental part of the game that gives a great deal of information.

If two townies get into an argument that still helps an attentive town as much for other people's reactions as the two arguing. If one of those arguing is lynched, then it's the voting that's causing a problem, not the discussion itself. More discussion means more analysis, if a townie can't cope with the quantity that's a personal time issue that could be overcome by eg. just analysing key exchanges. Given it's the primary source and basically the point of the game for the town, discussion = good. Portraying discussion as sometimes bad (or trying to keep discussion low) seems slightly dubious.

By the way, you are completely wrong about scum being more sensitive to votes. It's a fundamental factor in scum hunting. Usually, the best way to find scum is to vote for someone and gauge their reaction.

Yeah. They're reaction (to more than the vote, ie. the reasons or case attached to it) is more of a wide and general thing than their sensitivity, which is all you mentioned in your original quote. This might be heading towards a semantics argument though, let's not do that.

Starting to get the feeling now that Mega is just verbose rather than intentionally arguing strongly.

[Nameless]

Vote: Plum

For not posting since confirmations[/b]

Okay, hold a moment. I'm all for harassing lurkers, but let's put this into perspective here. At this time of this vote, the game had been started for all of ~30 hours. Jumping the gun much?

[Nameless]

I'm going to go ahead and agree with everything Chaos said in his last post. Also @ Mega, the alternative to you just being generally verbose is that you were being deliberately verbose and overly argumentative towards Don over comparatively minor issue; this appears scummy.

[Nameless]

Don't like Juls's vote on Penguin. Juls' contribution at that point still wasn't that much, yet that was why she Foss and votes Penguin. "Really bad vibe" isn't much of a reason. She uses phrases like "this post is long enough" when the majority of the post is just quotes, flattery, apologising for noncontribution before this point, or in one case just an agreement.

Vote: Juls

I'm not really seeing Geraintm "playing innocent" or anything, either, but that's up for interpretation. And FYI, I only made the comment about not posting on weekends = bad because I'd misunderstood the posting requirements.

i liked your post, though i would definitely request less "stream of consciousness" posting. i do it as well sometimes, but i find it easier to communicate when things are structured well.

This makes me laugh because you have trouble finding your Shift key. But seriously, you're exaggerating Mega's scumminess in your

game theory

exchange and saying one of you must be scum is

very wrong

. (Protip: Townies disagree often, and you are getting tunnel vision. There will be more than one scum, why not take a break from Mega and try to give opinions on who the others might be? You're allowed to have some initiative rather than wait for questions, you know. -_-)

@ Porkens #83: [Sarcasm]No, really?[/Sarcasm]

Fos: Porkens

just for that.

@ Penguin's #84: Large contribution, but quite a few questions rather than hard analysis and some points/assumptions are bad/wrong. Getting a nulltell overall. In response to the questions directed at me:
- See the second paragraph of this post.
- I hadn't felt the need to place a serious vote yet, but there hasn't been any pressing reason (such as a sudden bandwagon) to unvote either.
- I'm as yet undecided on who the most scummy is (kind of hard to tell between scummy/newbie yet in some cases ... Juls, Atronach and Mega anyway, although I'm not liking the actual bandwagon on Mega), and saying who the most townie is would generally benefit the scum's choice of nightkill.

[Nameless]

Please inform me how some of my points and assumptions are bad/wrong.

It's hard to actually answer this since nearly everything you say is worded as a question you can easily deny implications of later (how convenient for you) BUT:
eg. you misrepresent Atronach saying he thought "too much time is being spent discussing and not finding scum." when all he actually referred to was the one theory discussion between don and mega.
eg. you accuse Juls of hypocrisy by not voting after saying votes generate discussion, but you even quoted Juls explaining serious discussion had already started so there was no need.
eg. you imply Mega is scummy for asking why somebody is suspicious of him, which is stupid, because players kind of need to know why in order to defend themselves or know if the other player is BSing.

Why don't you like the wagon on mega?

Some of the votes have been poorly justified, and there has been little attention towards Don despite him being IMHO more at fault for the exchange. Also, it irks me.

[Nameless]

Sounds like scum sitting in the background waiting for a convenient wagon... =P

really?
juls post seemed pretty sane to me, i didn't think it was worth such a strong calling out over it

This is the second time somebody has taken that statement seriously (or am I just imagining the "=P"?) and

that

starts to worry me.

i actually deliberately put in such an obvious line into my post 15, the "you think it will hurt us that much? " just for shits and giggles really. i thought it was such an over the top attempt to appear clueless newbie town it was funny, it wasn't meant to generate a page of discussion about it.

This is a very poor retroactive excuse for something that IMHO shouldn't need one.

FoS: Geraintm

[Nameless]

Voting for somebody who isn't your must suspected player, but has a bandwagon and you believe to be nonetheless scummy ... I'm not seeing that

as

suspicious as some people are making penguin thus out to be. Townies do that too, it's called compromise. Also, a vote can be known to be for pressure and still serious if somebody is willing to lynch for unanswered questions. Depends how you define "pressure vote", eh.

@ Atronach, I'd say Don overestimates the significance of his earlier exchange (edit: actually, he seems to do that with IP's vote too, not commenting much on other players or exchanges even though he has contributed reasonably. Hmm.) leading to the lylo comment. Planning lynches is bad, but planning your own lynch is stupid and really a nulltell. Your accusations of desperation seem to be reaching.

@ canadianbovine re: "Aren't scum usually on the first bandwagon?" Idiot scum might jump at the first bandwagon, yes, but you could also interpret your comment as slightly cleverer scum trying to show yourself as townie by not doing so. And asking questions is digging yourself into a hole now? Don't like that post. General statements possibly implying alignments without specifics or arguments. (Nb. I might be reading into one post too much here.)

@ insanepenguin02 re: #112, did you forget which game we're playing? Holding back analysis on who is scum (not to trust) because you don't trust people? WTF, I call BS. And re: #114 Lol, obvWIFOM and poor attempt at deflecting suspicion. What I said earlier defending you? Consider that retracted! (Currently undecided on whether to vote just on the basis of those two posts, will give you one post to explain these comments.)

@ Megatheory, re various parts of #120: when first reading the initial exchange between you and Don I got the feeling that you were being more aggressive in arguing, while Don was more responsive to everything you said. That, and a few specific things you said I disagreed with, was why I suspected you of deliberately exaggerating the argument. Since that point Don turned more aggressive towards you (and now IP) though.
Oh come on, my first three questions in #34 were obviously rhetorical.
I'd call Don more at fault for the initial exchange because Don was the one to self vote. So, yeah.

[Nameless]

Hey geraintm, how about you read the thread yourself instead of asking others to look back for you. Then you'll be able to make serious contributions instead of generic townie strategy that's been mentioned before and you're probably only saying to try and appear townie yourself!

[Nameless]

@ insanepenguin02 re: #112, did you forget which game we're playing? Holding back analysis on who is scum (not to trust) because you don't trust people? WTF, I call BS. And re: #114 Lol, obvWIFOM and poor attempt at deflecting suspicion. What I said earlier defending you? Consider that retracted! (Currently undecided on whether to vote just on the basis of those two posts, will give you one post to explain these comments.)

Unvote; Juls - Vote: insanepenguin02

Although, I'm not liking the way Chaos exaggerates the scuminess of what I'd consider the least significant point against IP. (And Chaos, the obvious difference between your first vote and IP's first vote is that IP's was clearly a joke vote whereas you implied you had reasons for yours that you didn't give.)

[Nameless]

vote: insanguin

I think it's time for a claim, pengy.

unvote

[Nameless]

And to elaborate on that now I'm not worried that someone will quickhammer while we still have like a week left of D1: Porkens has contributed very little thus far, except for maybe one post that was only answering questions directly posted by IP to him. At that point he even promised "moar later", but 48 hours later jumps out of nowhere to place someone at L-1 having personally said nothing against them thus far.

I do not like this.

Vote: Porkens

(And since somebody will probably ask me this, the reason I put IP at L-2 myself was that I had promised to vote IP if he didn't respond to my concerns, which he then ignored. However, right now I'm pretty suspicious of Chaos as well, for virtually the same reasons as Porkens - Aside from one post belatedly explaining a vote against Mega, he's done nothing but exaggerate the scuminess of specific actions by IP. I don't have much free time left now, I'll need to do a reread later today.)

[Nameless]

*sigh*, this always seems to happen day one.

Maybe if you tried contributing day one

that would help.

I note also how quickly you refer to your meta as a defence rather than, say, contribute. [Out Of Game] If you don't like D1s, why not just replace into games all the time. Or try them! Try them! And you may! Try them and you may I say! [/OOG]

Me being all the way to L-1 all of a sudden is quite interesting, especially for the lack of any good reason by most of you. If you guys don't want me to offer my thoughts on the game, that is absolutely fine.

Um,

NO.

One of the reasons I quoted for voting you was that you had already refused to offer further analysis!

And apparently we have all forgotten about a possible scum connection between don and mega? I would like to hear more on this as I still have a feeling that there is a connection there.

Awful attempt to redirect attention back towards an old, minor issue that's generally not beneficial for the town anyway (scum pairings D1).

Taking these, IP's refusal to answer other concerns, IP acting like an idiot in #155 and IP acting pointlessly desperate in #156 ... I will be willing to lynch IP once we reach the last few days of deadline.

[Nameless]

If anybody hammers within the next five real life days, my vote will not move from them D2, no exceptions.

[Nameless]

Afterthought: You know, I'm seriously not sure which I found more dubious: insanepenguin02, or his wagon. Even if IP is scum I wouldn't be surprised to find scum bussing right now.

[Nameless]

Yeah, IP's not even trying to be helpful now. Given that he did put the effort into his series of questions and answers earlier I'm not inclined to believe he's an angsty townie. He dies comes deadline if nothing else major comes up.

Don doesn't find Porkens anti-town? Even though Porkens hasn't contributed really at all? That's being (mildly) suspiciously overgenerous.

Megatheory states there are no cops in this game (from flavour NPC kills). He also states that scum must be on IP's wagon. I find both these statements overly sure and dubious. And Mega, yeah I'm serious about that promise. It's not about whether IP is town or scum, it's about dissuading scum (and overeager townies) from cutting off discussion time in a constantly deadlined game.

Okay, seriously, people who think D1 doesn't matter are wrong. Discussion now is just as important as any other day, skilled townies can pick up on scummy actions just like any other day etc. Saying that one townie dead isn't necessarily is a bad thing (compared to stopping, thinking, and lynching scum) is just scummy. I'm looking at you, bovine.

Megatheory, WTF is up with your reason for fosing bovine. No, you're right, it's clearly impossible a townie would point out a scum had screwed up an revealed themselves ... ?

Either bovine is not reading the thread, or bovine is BSing. Going to go with BSing here,

FoS: canadianbovine

. Also, believe it or not, "consistent posting" is not an excuse for you to look scummy. -_-

Atronach, stop and think about that plan for two seconds. Tracker not equal cop. If IP is a tracker and targeted scum, the scum will just claim a powerrole. Or IP could target a powerrole, and they'll be forced to claim, so we're not going to know which from IP alone. Or IP could target a vanilla townie. Or IP could be scum and claim to have targeted a vanilla townie. Do you see where I'm going with this?

Oh Porkens, not you to. Even if we assumed the game had no cop that's not reason to assume there must be tracker, or that if there were and IP weren't they would they'd need to claim now. And it's GREAT to know you have no reason to believe IP is scum after putting him at L-1 and saying other cases had convinced you.

[Sarcasm]Oh, Pengion is admitting he made mistakes! Well, that's okay then. No, no, don't bother trying to explain them or providing any analysis you were asked for. We'll just believe you because you claimed and you are sorry.[/Sarcasm]

[Nameless]

Megatheory states there are no cops in this game (from flavour NPC kills). He also states that scum must be on IP's wagon. I find both these statements overly sure and dubious.

How/why is the first overly sure and dubious?

Flavour text hardly guarantees the lack of role ingame, and I can't think of a townie reason to want to ensure everybody believed it did.

Saying that one townie dead isn't necessarily is a bad thing (compared to stopping, thinking, and lynching scum) is just scummy.

i wouldn't say scummy. it is wifomic. its poor play.

That's not what WIFOM is. Also, gah, with posts like the one you just made it is really hard to not to start mentioning connections between players. (Not that it stopped you suggesting I look for connections from IP.)

Yes, IP is right. He can't prove himself in one night. Therefore, we must leave him alive until the endgame. *Nod, nod* Also, did he seriously just blame his lack of analysis on the weather?

Screw it. I'm saying this much in case I die N1, but don't expect me to elaborate further unless one of them flips scum: Possible insanepenguin02 - canadianbovine - don_johnson scumteam. That is all.

[Nameless]

wifomic in the sense of whether or not complacency is a scumtell.

You don't know what WIFOM is, do you.

you are insinuating that the person(me) probably most responsible for pointing out ip's initial flawed post and then actively campaigning for his lynch is in league with said character.

... or bussing!

NOONE suggested leaving him alone until endgame. your alternative is to lynch an uncounterclaimed town power role on day 1? had you actually read my suggestion.

Ignoring for a moment the sarcasm in what you quoted before this, I still consider IP the best lynch at deadline since he has IMHO acted significantly scummier than other players and there is not yet much consensus on who else should be lynched instead. If we could agree on that I wouldn't mind leaving IP alone for a day or two, but there are so many ways scum could BS the role that you're not going to be able to even pseudo confirm it. Best case scenario is, what, IP dying a few days from now and town being lucky enough to have some useful, confirmed information from it. I think IP is scum, whereas I'm not as confident is any one other player right now, so ... yeah.

To clarify slightly, there are several things from each of the three players I listed that makes me somewhat suspect they are connected. I'm not seriously accusing them or suggesting they be lynched (well, IP independently aside), merely noting the possibility might warrant looking into by others later. Independently, there are others I consider scummier. I say these now, because I noticed another that I considered plausible enough to warrant brief mention for somebody else to look into later if I'm NKed (as anyone could be, I don't expect to be or not to be for any particular reason), but obviously not serious enough to warrant the distraction from other discussion D1. Quick note for the future and moving on not equal encouraging others to start seriously discussing this now (such as IP #153).

So, you're kind of exaggerating my intent there.

Oh, and the sarcastic leaving him alone until endgame comment was actually in reply to IP emphasising how hard it would be prove himself in only one night. (#193). The weather comment was due to having IP, after I noticed that he had made no even quick attempts to answer any questions or provide analysis (despite clearly having some time because he WAS posting and ignoring them), blame ... the weather.

[Nameless]

Yeesh. I make one sidenote and suddenly it's FLAME ON.

and your last post, 203, where you admit that you think there are people scummier than your 3 man scum team, i am so confused now what you are trying to achieve?

What I'm saying is that I'm seeing some connections between those three, which during a later day might be worth examining. I'm trying to achieve that if one of the flips scum later in the game the town might use those possible connections to spur discussion/investigation. I didn't actually intend for people to start suddenly debating over it. Really.

[Nameless]

by my count, you sound like you have about half the town pegged as scum by now...

This is quite wrong and that accusation is one of my pet peeves so I'm going to go ahead and ignore it rather than spend half an hour compiling a town strategy rant. Okay?

@ Don, I "assumed" a three player scumteam because I noticed interactions between ... three players. I find it interesting that you ask the question to geraintm, rather than myself, though. Why was that?

#212, notice bovine assuming part of the setup based on flavour text (I still think that's a bad idea) ... and pretty much exaggerating what I said and ignoring my explanations.

Notice also that both Don and bovine are making it

extremely

clear they don't know how many scum there are.

#215, Mega's plan to deal with IP is a bad one because it relies on chance, but a probably good one because it ends with a dead IP and IP bussing a scumbuddy D2 if we're really lucky. But bad again because if we were actually stupid enough to plan lynches like that all the powerroles would just No Action and laugh as IP was lynched for free. But seriously, we can't reliably test IP's claim, I doubt IP's getting lynched now so we'll get back to that if he's alive D2 or 3, and I'll be suggesting one or two alternative lynches for D1 when I have more free time tomorrow. (Sneak Preview! If all else fails we policy lynch Porkens for lurking.)

Atronach, leading the doctor is a bad idea because it gives the scum a greater chance of getting their NK through (as they know who the doc is protecting). If there is a doc, ignore Atronach when making your decision. In fact, ignore me too, just on principle. (Psst, actually protect me, I'm on your side. )

Nice observations, guys. "Uncounterclaimed townie power role". Really, we get it. SPYREX'S eyes must hurt by now, nevermind those of us who actually have to carefully read every post.

Megatheory just encouraged a player not to post analysis. This is a bad suggestion for many reasons, at least several of which are obvious. And suggesting that IP would screw up explaining the power role he has or claimed is ... actually kind of insulting towards him.

An analysis from Juls! Well, it's much better than IP's effort. Let's see what she has to say about me.

[Nameless] does seem to throw a lot of things out there that could become confusing to town. If you read Nameless’s posts end-to-end he throws out a lot of allegations.

Yes. That and the judging reactions is how the town finds scum, and it is how I roll. Next.

Oh wait, that and some examples is it. Yeah, my suspicions of Mega were fairly mild, the way the wagon went worried me moreso (the comparative attention levels of don and mega being part of why). Greater suspicions on IP -> Wagon even more suspicious -> IP's reactions putting him ahead of the wagon again; that his flipping would help analysis the suspicious wagon is a lesser part of why I still think he needs to die sometime. (I do not play Mafia for it's simplicity, no.)

So as for the rest of it, I see you've been nice and technical with votes listed and everything, but generally the analysis is still rather ... general/light. Directionless, neutral perhaps. You only mention one or two things for each player, often older points and not what I'd consider the most notable. This is probably due to the style of analysis (rather than by events or a serious case against one player). Overall, still feeling slightly better about you for it, though, we'll see how you go from now. I'm interested in hearing what other players think about it.

You vote Dan, saying he hasn't scumhunted (pretty much true), though I think your flavour fishing accusation thing is stretching. But you know who else hasn't scumhunted? Porkens. You even say elsewhere that Plum is being to forgiving of him. What makes you think Porkens is more likely to be town than Dan? (I would call Dan a reasonable alternate lynch for today, anyway, if only for his unhelpfulness.)

[Nameless]

@ Juls, you say posting filler is a scumtell specifically in the early game because in the endgame there is less to go on ... ? [/Sceptical] Being honest about being scummy (noncontribution, putting someone you suspected was townie at L-1 and lying that you were swayed by arguments ... can we double policy lynch Porkens now?) should not get you a free pass. (Also, see, I'd have thought suspecting and considering everything would be a good thing, but I'm so glad to know that my efforts are being handwaved as "noise".)

@ IP, I

like

sarcasm. *Double thumbs up!* Also, I had to focus on your "very small sidenote" because it was the ONLY (non)explanation for your lack of scumhunting. And if you're going to say my arguments are unclear or WIFOM, give reasoned examples.

@ Don, first you say I'm "feeding mafia strategy" by daring to mention something for later, but then accuse me of refusing to elaborate ... which is what you've been calling scummy in the first place. Do you WANT me to

actually

feed mafia strategy? One last time guys, noting possible connections for future consideration not equal seriously claiming I've found a three man scum team. Everybody else seeing Don's strawman here? Good. (Also, I work under the basic assumption the town aren't as retarded as you make them out to be, and will not mindlessly lynch a player because one townie noted some connections earlier.) The fliers are a nice touch, though.

I hope everybody else is noticing IP now saying he shouldn't have asked questions earlier and still not scumhunting whatsoever.

... loner vibe? SK? I am actually (Out Of Game) impressed by the epic level stretching Don is doing here. Keep up the good work, and OM

G

US.

Mega's determination to focus on IP is ... weird. Particular the part where he is quick to insist IP wouldn't be lynched in LyLo. Here's a reasonable suggestion: We lynch IP when we run out of other scummy players to lynch or we reach possible LyLo and IP is still looking scummy.

You did not address my point that waiting until Twilight or at least until L-1 of a serious bandwagon might have been the right time to do this if you were doing it mostly out of fear that you might be NK'd Night 1. You've scumteam-speculated Day 1 as scum before (I checked!) and you knew well how distracting and detrimental it could be to the town.

I made the (basically spur of the moment) comment at the time that the level of connections reached the point where I felt it deserved a quick note. And for what it's worth, I think the apparent meta of not doing so is overrated (but let's not go into that) and I've made serious attempts to actually call the scumteam D1 as the uninformed majority before, with less comment than what I've suddenly had in this game. (Mini 672)

And I say Porkens because Porkens self admittedly hasn't tried to contribute much (this irritates me regardless of alignment) and because of the instant L-1 when Porkens now even admits he suspected IP was town.

Can't help but notice that right after Plum is accused of going easy on two players, she claims to be tossing up between voting those two players. But doesn't vote either of them. Right.

[Nameless]

So anyway, I propose we lynch one of the following players:

Porkens

, for lurking and the dubious L-1.

Danchaofan

, for saying VERY little but filler (see Juls's #224), especially after comments like "if I don't see scum hunting, eventually, I'll be serious.".

don_johnson

, for the self vote, following overly long/pointless discussion, following mega vote and the awful "wifomic? yes. but only until my death." self pairing THING, still disagree with the way he jumped on the IP bandwagon with what I see as the (then exagerated) smallest reason, seriously arguing semantics (eg. #172), frequently using "wifomic" to cast false suspicion on arbitrary players/posts, for a second time exagerating and pushing a single minor point as the only reason to lynch somebody (that's me!), make it overly clear that he doesn't know the scum setup, trying to partially direct the doc (#220), aaaaaand epic stretching by taking a cassual comment ("Yeesh ...") as serious evidence that someone (me again) is SK.

Or maybe

ChaosOmega

as a fallback, unless he appears with a good excuse for vanishing and a better analysis of everything that has happened since then.

[Nameless]

EBWOP: Eh, you know what, let's give Chaos the benefit of the doubt until D2, since he hasn't posted anywhere else on the site and could have RL issues. I think most of us would agree Danchaofan is a good deadline lynch if there's no other consensus before then.

[Nameless]

The L-1 vote was to get pressure and to keep the day moving.

I hope someone does quckhammer.

Ending the day counts as keeping it moving now?

[Nameless]

[Filler Post]

With 12 of you alive, it takes 7 to not fail.

[/Filler Post]

[Nameless]

is lynching a player who has little interaction with the group going to be all that beneficial for town?

Comparatively. It's not going to be detrimental the town (by mislynching a useful townie) and lurking is a common way for scum to hide SO ...

its nice how you detail my actions but don't really explain how they are scummy.

Half of them I'd consider self evident and most of them I've explained earlier, but I don't honestly expect to convince the town to lynch you today give my position. Megacasing will ensue D2 or if interest in your lynch picks up.

also, i believe you were speculating as to whether or not cb was scum due to their "accidental" hammer vote on ip. that is what i was referring to as wifom.

I'm not sure WHY you're using the term "hammer vote" (or accidental for that matter) here when there has been no mention from cb or myself about him trying to hammer. Care to explain?
(As for the speculation, you see, I have this optimistic outlook on people that I honestly don't believe any player would be stupid enough to make a vote without actually reading any new posts first.)

Incidentally: You were the third on the wagon (I still think your point was the weakest against him/exaggerated), depends how you define pressure, that's a rather loose and meaningless usage of wifom then, and you did say that what I was doing specifically pointed to an sk.

why are you no longer pushing for ip's lynch? your new "best lynch" list is two players you are labeling as "lurkers" and an omgus. you do realize that, don't you?

I'm no longer pushing for IP's lynch because there is some benefit to leaving him alive for a day or two, and more to the point I know I'm not going to convince enough people to lynch him today. Dan is undeniably lurking, Porkens WAS lurking (less so now, but the L-1 and misleading the town is obviously a problem too) and yes, you

do

suck for voting me in the same flawed fashion as you did IP as well as the various other reasons most of which I noted even before you attacked me.

And hey, this attack on me only came after I noticed a few dubious actions of yours and noted you in the connections, so we can ignore it as an overreacting OMGUS too, right?

you leave the players in question with no possible way of defending themselves from what may eventually turn into an angry mob

This? This is the part where you seriously consider the town would play

that badly

. I'm going to go ahead and keep playing as if the town weren't idiots, if that's okay with you.

@ Juls: If IP is actually a tracker and doesn't claim results, then we'll probably end up gaining no information when he's NKed a night or two on.

Also, suggesting a strategy for the doctor is the same thing as directing the doctor, no questions. And Don is doing just that (#260, OMG), after it having been explained several times why this is a bad idea. Don is also strawwomaning Juls in #262, no questions there either.

And, given the retrospective quantities of posting recently ...

Unvote: Porkens
Vote: Danchaofan

(In case it wasn't obvious, I will also vote Don if a wagon forms.)

[Nameless]

Alright, I'm not going to be directly replying to most of what Don has said in his last few posts and probably won't for the rest of the day because as much as I enjoy repeating myself in a slightly more sarcastic tone of voice, it's really not helping the town at this point and I'd rather spend my time looking into some other players than pointing out yet another exageration or meaningless and unexplained "wifomic" from Don*. (It also helps that Plum beat me to the punch with a few things in #270.) The sad part is, at the moment I'm not even completely sure he's scum rather a well intentioned but overly dramatic townie.

* (I'm serious, how Don defines it in #272 applies to literally the entire town game of scumhunting. WTF. Also, try calming down before you post and see if that helps.)

would you find it suspicious if i wrote [nameless and juls are the scummiest two players i see. vote: danchaofan.]

Only depending on the context.

this is a complete 180.

Given I still consider IP highly likely to be scum and the larger part of the reason I'm moving on from that is out of my control (what others have decided), it's really not. But go ahead and try to justify that statement. For bonus points, mathematically!

my reasons for voting you are sound. i have not implied that you have done anything i cannot prove.

You can prove a loner vibe that equals SK now? (At least, that hilarious and cutting retort still holds if I've actually managed to wrap my mind around that confusing statement right.)

please explain this strawman. 262 is a list of questions determined to help me understand what juls is talking about.

Uh, "veiled threats" for one. Adding a question mark to the end of your misconstrued recap of Juls' plan doesn't make it a question and okay. "so we lynch them(even if they are a town pr) on ip's word?" is pretty obviously not what Juls said in #224.

also, no one has explained why using the doctor to towns advantage is bad. in fact, you and juls just keep reiterating the fact that it is bad, but have not come up with a plausible scenario where it is bad.

Well, I did in #226, and it's not exactly a subtle problem. But since you in #272 you admit it's meaningless to the doctor it would raise the question why you keep doing so.

Okay, that was more direct replying than I intended to do. Enough of that. I do like and agree with Atronach's analysis of Gera. To be honest I pegged Gera as Another Bad Player early on and haven't paid as much attention to him yet as I should have. (Let's ... just say he wasn't the only one in this category and it's something I need to start avoiding to improve my town play.) After rereading, I would support a geraintm lynch.

@ Plum, I

may

have forgotten the V/LA. Or I might have made the statement as a trap in hope of tripping up an inatentive scum and more the point

you can't conclusively prove either.

Seriously, though, the quality of Porkens' posts has gone up a bit and as much as I hate myself for letting an issue slide even temporarily due to meta ... (But that's really not saying much given what it was at.)

Um. I hope #275 is only the start of the reread, or that's just sad and really reinforcing why you're a good lynch.

[Nameless]

What gives you a town vibe from Porkens, and why are you defending him in #277?

Right now I'm willing to lynch: geraintm, Danchaofan, don_johnson, Porkens. In that order, even. Not that it really needs saying, but if anybody posts their own list but doesn't adhere to it come Thursday, consider it suspicious. I presume Danchaofan will post one himself as soon as he's finished rereading.

(Yes, I still think IP is probably scum, but upon consideration of recent discussion, I've decided it might prove telling to watch the actions of certain players if IP is alive D2.)

[Nameless]

You know, there really is a difference between suggesting a scumpairing and multiple FoSs. The first implies connections as well, whereas the second is just independant scumminess.

I notice Juls gives the same Lynch List as I do, which is either coincidental, or indicitive that we are both awesome scumhunters (probably not the later). Don has us both on his, and doesn't mention this fact (only that he's on both). Juls already responded to this, but it bears repeating ... there has been nothing "stealthy" about my arguments with Don and ongoing suspicion thereof. I'd say he was strawmanning, but Don is throwing that word around almost as much as wifom. Nevertheless, take note that Don ignores the majority of the reasons I'd lynch him (for a summary, please see #246.)

Another thing that I find suspicious, is that despite nearing deadline and still listing me as his #1 lynch candidate, Don unvotes me. He says "it is obvious noone sees what i am seeing." even when several posts

have

indicated similar suspicion of me (I've even made Plum's scummy mashup!). He apparently admits tunnel vission, but continues making misleading statements about myself. Basically, without any obvious trigger or change of position, Don has unvoted as we near deadline.

This is a bad thing, and I'd love to hear an explanation for it.

the actual words and phrases [Nameless] has chosen to get his points across are what i am suspicious of.

I've been suspected from semantics, from someone who can't even use the term WIFOM sensibly. Well that's just great. Sigh.

I find Gera's a DCFs latest posts rather weak and unhelpful. Mafia, please NK them. Think how much more fun LyLo would be with only the most active players left! And you know any docs wouldn't bother protecting them. Come on, do it. What are you, afraid? [/Does not think this helping. ]

Anyway, players need to get their butts in here and start lynching now.

Sorry, I hit submit instead of preview to make sure I had all the quotes right before I typed analysis.

Whee, sneak preview!

[Nameless]

Unvote: Danchaofan
Vote: Gerantim

I am really getting tired of Don repeating himself, and sorry Mega, but I do not have the effort to repeat myself again as well. Some players need to learn to agree to disagree or at least agree to stop typing the same friggin' thing once they've said their point and resume scumhunting. (Protip: This is not setup discussion or planning D2.) Plum's caps lock = justified. Not liking Mega lately, don't think he's being as helpful as he's pretending to be. And yes, I am only changing my vote now to bandwagon a different player I decided would be a good lynch, we are pretty much reaching that time of D1.

That's all for now, not really in the mood. Plenty of free time between now and deadline, expect something more helpful later, hopefully.

[Nameless]

FAST FACTS

FoS: Porkens

for stating suggesting a random lynch is not scummy.

Gera is exagerating and appealing to emotion with statements like "so many time over so many weeks". He also an epic level hypocrit by calling someone lazy after posting so little of ANYTHING before now and being unable to use capital letters.

Gera's roleclaim is unlikely, but plausible, even if IP were telling the truth. Why SHOULDN'T we have two trackers since everyone is sure we have no cops. (I doubt two vigs though, since too many NKs in a small game would be excessively swingy.) Best plan: We don't lynch Gera, and Gera vigs Chaos*. Even if Gera is scum let him waste a kill and we can lynch him later. Unlike doc, directing vig is only a problem if the mafia have a doc, but don't know that so eh. Bovine wants to prove him with tracker?

FoS: canadianbovine

for trying to give the Gera too easily fakable and less useful way out.

* Chaos = A player Gera wants to lynch, unlikely (wasted) NK for the mafia, stopped playing anyway.

Don thinks Atronach's case is weak, echoes Gera's (incomplete) rebutal, yet considers scum BUT withholds vote. (

This close to deadline?

) Don also accuses someone ELSE of "squeezing him in" their lynch list.

Note that Megatheory attempts to handwave the different cases against three players under the same category of "bad D1 play". This is stupid because bad play is an incredibly general term that pretty much every scummy action falls under, and because Mega tries to use this as a reason to attack several players for, god forbid, pushing a single player for lynching. Mega then states that one of Don or I must be scum (BAD, townies get into arguments too, you know). Mega also obviously defends Gera.

HoS: Megatheory

and this man needs to be examined closely D2.

Oh, and after a quick reread and since it was so wildly popular last time, Gera - Mega - Bovine connections

NOTED WELL.

Argh, unsure whether / where to move vote for the greatest chance of scum or a useless townie or ANYONE being lynched today. >_<

I can't help but notice DCF suggested the idea but has not yet himself listed lynch preferences.

[Nameless]

Don thinks Atronach's case is weak, echoes Gera's (incomplete) rebutal, yet considers scum BUT withholds vote.

don_johnson NEVER stated that Atronach was scum.

Uh, I meant that you considered Gera scum.

I noticed you can't argue that ger's actions are truly suspicious as opposed to bad play

Yeah, see, you could say that about anything. Plenty of Gera's actions obviously benefit the scum (leaving a player at L-1, not contributing to discussion for quite a while, agreeing with Porkens' random lynch comment etc.), so why assume they come from a townie playing badly?

He is trying to prevent his own lynch and prevent don from being lynched because it may expose him.

... At the time I made my last post, exactly zero players were voting for me, and I was tossing up whether to swap my vote to the other possible bandwagon of Don. Where the heck did you get THAT from?

[Nameless]

Alright, I'd rather not be the primary bandwagon and Don appears to the other popular acceptable lynch, so.

Unvote: Gerantim
Vote: Don_johnson

At this point, I'd suggest all players shift their votes to myself or Don as the only lynches likely to go through. (I will self hammer rather than have a no lynch, if it comes to that.)

I

don't have a particularly powerful role, so you don't need to worry about that, but DO NOT judge Don by my allignment. Megatheory is talking out of arse in that regard, and if I am lynched I would suggest seriously examining his play over the last few RL days. Canadianbovine also deserves more attention D2 than he's getting now. Force IP to scumhunt, and do the same constantly with Gera. I don't trust either of them, but they need to try harder and interact more to fully judge them. If Porkens doesn't start playing well D2, I would lynch him for it. Do everyone a favour and prepare some anaylsis during the night, there's a lot happening right now to consider, and town needs that extra effeciency D2+.

Alright. Now that's said, let's try to not die.

#359. I've already clarified Don's misinterpretation of strawmanning. Don is obviously defending Mega in this post rather than let Mega answer for himself, but doesn't actually correct my suspicions or do much else than accuse me of strawmanning, again. (First it was wifomic, I take it this is Don's new pet word to throw around.) Asking a townie to self vig is not, under any circumstances, a good idea. It loses the town a member for exactly no benefit, and Don giving Mega "townie brownies" for this (what I had assumed not to be serious) seems either a mindless agreement, or WORSE if Don had actually thought about it first. As for "muddying the waters", my "wildly popular" remark might have tipped you off that the comment was at least partially sarcastic. Otherwise, apply my entire previous explanation.

(The only real concern here is the

previous

times Megatheory has defended or assumed to be town Gera, even from joke comments. Even when Mega claims to suspect Gera, he includes clarifiers such as just the latest post, or that it's too early to make real judgements. Next thing you know he's claiming to have known Gera was a bad lynch, defends Gera's posts, believes his roleclaim without any explanation why or as to how it supposedly fits his playstyle, and generalises other players actions to cover up Gera's lack of contribution. Given possible motives and gut on Mega's playstyle, I would say this is more indicitive of Mega's alignment than Gera's. YMMV regardless, Mega has gone much further for Gera than a townie would have reason to.)

#360. Megatheory says I can't argue Gera's actions are suspicious compared to bad play, but Mega has at no point argued why Gera's actions are bad play rather than suspicious, making this a nulltell at best and hypocritical at worst. (See also my reply in #366.) Mega accuses me of not addressing his arguments and just heaping suspicion on him, but even after quoting my points does not respond to them. Also hypocritical. Mega then states either Don or I must be scum. These kind of absolutes are bad for the town in any case, but he specifically points out I would need evidence to argue against this, after proving none himself. Again, hypocritical.

Also, in #363 Megatheory states I was trying to prevent my own lynch (this is a nulltell because it is no player's best interest to be lynched (Jesters aside, but let's not go there), and notably I had no votes or obviously high level of suspicion at the time) or Don's (despite having listed Don has an acceptable lynch, and my only mention of Don in the last post at the time raising another suspicion against him). I've mentioned this before, but am repeating now as a reminder that Megatheory has made no attempt to justify this statement when questioned.

#368. IP joins my bandwagon with no further explanation than I'm "starting to read scummy". Right. IP's claimed previous suspicions of me make for light reading: There was one FoS soley for not giving specific examples of flaws in his Question Time Analysis. I did then give examples, and recieved no response to them. Some time later he gives a few reasons in #228, none elaborated, which in my next post I answered as much as I could without particular examples to refute. Later, IP agrees with Don's "vibes" argument, but gives no explanation or examples. Basically, IP has made no case to answer.

#369. canadianbovine Joins The Brawl! The only reasons he gives for voting me are that I do not provide quotes for my arguments. In first case (my FoS regarding his suggestion to confirm Gera), it was obvious which post I was referring to, and Bovine quotes it himself in his defence. (As for the confirmation itself: Scum might be able to fake a vig kill, but since that would give control of scum NK to the town, it's a good thing. Relying on tracking is bad for all the reasons noone could actually agree on a plan for IP.) In the second case, it was regarding my noting connections. I've elaborated somewhat on that earlier in this post now that I'm apparently a lynch candidate but the reasons I didn't quote everything then are the same that I didn't quote everything last time I mentioned possible connections. (See: #203) Note also that (lampshade hanging aside) the way I posted connections then was no different to what I did the first time, but the first time Bovine made no comment other than he didn't quite understand it. As a whole, bovine is similar to IP in giving very little explanation for voting me.

#370, and Megatheory is back for another attempt. (I'm going to need to paragraph this ...)

Suspicion number one, I used rhetorical questions. About the only reason I had for using them was that I felt like using that particular arguing method at the time, but the fact Mega is arguing against a method still clearly conveying my point amounts to meaningless semantics.

Number two, I accused Mega of considering voting/lynching part of discussion. Mega even admits that I answered this, but to repeat it again: it is entirely possible to discus something, even strongly scumhunt, without voting. The reason I found Mega's statement suspicious was that by implying voting of one party was inevitable from discussion, Mega was implicitly discouraging generating discussion. (Yes, this was a weak suspicion, but it was very early in the game.) Mega even directly responded with a clarification of his intent in #63. This isn't an unanswered question, this was a concluded exchange in the early game that Mega only brings up now in an attempt to justify his vote.

Three, I distorted Don's case against Mega. I didn't actually comment on any point in the case TO distort, to start with. My only comments were that I believed Don's case to be exaggerated given it came from a discussion on game theory (I stand by that), and that it's bad to state one of two players must be scum (I admit I misread Don's post at the time, and kind of quietly moved on when I was corrected). Note also that Mega says Don had good points against Mega, which makes you wonder why Mega then

never responded to it himself

rather than expecting me to have done so at the time.

Four, I implied there are probably scum on IP's wagon but was dubious of Mega when he agreed with me. This is a gimme; I said there were

probably

scum on the wagon, whereas Mega said there

were

scum on the wagon, and in case it wasn't obvious already, using absolutes is suspicious. (This wasn't a case of mistaken semantics either, Mega's followup to Don indicated he did mean it.)

Five, I accuse Don of jumping on the IP wagon when Don was the first to vote IP after the Question Time Analysis. There still was a small bandwagon on IP at the time though, so the statement is literally justified if a poor choice of words, but my accusation wasn't THAT Don joined the wagon, it was WHY Don joined the wagon that I disagreed with (Mega just didn't bold that part). And this was among a list of other suspicions. Oh, and Mega blatantly argues semantics by suspecting me for the word "disagree" rather than summarising with a harsher word. I'm sorry, I'll swear next time. (Mega also says I'm using a "distancing tactic", but since he doesn't explain this I can't defend against it.)

Okay, I'm done, enjoy the wall of text.

[Nameless]

@ Juls - I, for one, consider Gera's and IP's claims at about the same level of likeliness. "Overanalysis"? No such thing. If you think I'm reading too far much into one particular post or such, sure, but otherwise I'll take it as compliment ...

Guys, let's nobody waste time voting Chaos at this point. He's probably a dick who abandoned the game, but since he's going to get modkilled D2 anyway we're just wasting time.

Even if Porkens missed reading a page, he sounded pretty sure in not moving his vote for a moment then. This, and his determination Gera is the SK, would seem at odds with his previous statements regarding lynching whoever and taking little from D1. (Tell you what, if I had to pick one player for a 3rd party role it would be Bovine, he seems to be keeping a low profile and mostly following other players along.)

You know, my gut is telling me that Gera is actually paying more attention than I thought he was, which isn't neccesarily a good thing given his actions. I didn't mention this last time because I was busy defending myself, but his summary of Don is, in fact, very misleading. (Compare what Gera has said VS reading Don post by post yourself, and it's pretty obviously wrong.) Things like trying to start up scum pairing discussion several times while saying it's bad (#126, #130, #159), posting agreements with Mega once he's (mildly) suspected, generalising habits to justify questioned voting, careful to mention he doesn't know the scumteam, being able to post a lot more content once under suspicion, claiming a more complex role (after asking IP for general flavour!), quick to point out his own bad play in his defence, answering questions with questions ... Getting sidetracked now, but I'm getting the feeling Gera is actually pretty sly.

Responses to #388:
(Ugh, can't be bothered typing these all out in detail. Here are the notes I made while reading.)
- "Townie" because if Gera is scum, he won't. Semantics.
- Same reasons as last time, half I find it amusing.
- See first rebutal, leaping to the defence of someone you think townie still = bad.
- It's implied, right here: "Either he is scum and dropped a case that he saw wasn't working, or he is town and caught a scum, but became discouraged too soon." RIGHT HERE. (Don -> Mega connection noted.)
- Daww, wordplay, isn't that cute. Deliberately distracting? Done_johnson?
- Bovine didn't care the first time, now following popular argument for bandwagon? I suggest you self vote D2, both suggestion and scummy. Point was !quote (!=evidence) != scum, [Note: That's not quoting is not scummy, and quoting isn't the same as giving evidence, BTW.]
- It is my opinion that I felt like using rhetorical questions? WTF Don actually mean here.
- Different points. General consideration VS specific scenario. [We're at "but you are suspicious of me for not voting geraintm?", in case you're lost.]
- Numbers ARE right. Mega responds and clarifies, quote post.

If two townies get into an argument that still helps an attentive town as much for other people's reactions as the two arguing. If one of those arguing is lynched, then it's the voting that's causing a problem, not the discussion itself. More discussion means more analysis, if a townie can't cope with the quantity that's a personal time issue that could be overcome by eg. just analysing key exchanges. Given it's the primary source and basically the point of the game for the town, discussion = good. Portraying discussion as sometimes bad (or trying to keep discussion low) seems slightly dubious.

I'm suggesting that discussing things that really don't benefit the town and can't be used to determine someone's alignment are bad.

- Quote mining doesn't work when you leave in the admission to a mistake. Don applying OLD quote to recent Mega claim, what?
- Okay fair point, selfvig could help in rare circumstances. Doesn't justify other absolutes.
- All the other scummy things you did made you stand out. Obv.

Heh, you know you arguments are bad when even Danchaofan, half asleep, can point out flaws. (No offence! )

I like how Don, in #397, tries to defend and distract the town from Mega's obvious implications by bringing up an older, unrelated issue (directing the doc). Have I mentioned the obvious Don -> Mega connection yet? Yes? Good.

don't tell me what i need.

No tells to mention in this sentence, I just can't help but imagine Don saying this all dramatically. It makes me kind of sad that Don probably wouldn't be utterly shocked or appalled if I died, but I hope he pretends for me, please?

By the way, the reason I often don't use quote tags is because copying and pasting a bunch of quotes is annoying compared to just referring to events or post number if required (if you don't believe me you can check for yourself anyway), and it makes the walls of text even ... wallyer.

There is INSUFFICIENT VOTING happening here! Vote vote vote vote vote etc.

[Nameless]

[Filler Post]

The I've covered everyone and still have votecounts today votecount:

Why not have something like "The if I Spy was Played in the Cretaceous Period Votecount"?
[/Filler Post]

[Nameless]

[Actual Post]
Don is at L-2. Gera listed Don as an acceptable lynch, and Atronach agreed to lynch one of us to avoid a no lynch. I shouldn't need to say that it would be rather scummy for them to now go back on their word and allow a no lynch. (Or to a lesser extent, Gera to now vote me instead.)

Don, would YOU self hammer to avoid a deadline nolynch?

Alright, #406, this isn't going anywhere new, although Don seems to be moving away from the original arguments against me into whatever else can distract the town from the fact I refuted them all. (Eg. saying I didn't prove anything with my rhetorical questions from AGES ago, or asking me for more examples of why I think he is scummy NOW in response to the issue of why he stood out to me on the IP bandwagon EARLIER, or going off into another repeated tangent about the doctor directing accusations.) In any case, I'm going to not post another wall of text repeating myself to give Don an excuse to repeat himself some more and so on. Okay, Don claims vanilla, that's new, but unnotable.

Don, accusing someone of using "fear of no lynch" tactics is pretty meaningless since we're almost at deadline, no lynch is bad for the town, and we should be trying to avoid it.

Don is projecting a level of certainty that is so high, he is probably right.

Ahahahahaha, oh god no.

You are protecting Nameless because you are his partner.
Also, notice that Namless and Plum are working together to get that point across.

Uh oh! Megatheory is posting connections D1! Don, bus this man.

Hey Megatheory, wanting to not kill yourself, particularly if you have a powerrole, is not anti-town. Wanting a vig to waste their kill on a (for them) confirmed townie without any particularly dire context IS.

You wanted to lynch ger, therefore the burden of proof in on you. You have admitted that ger's actions are blatantly anti-town (which is just another way of saying they are bad play), but you cannot demonstrate in any way why they must come from scum. Again, if you want to throw dirt on ger, it is up to you to show that his actions can only come from scum. You still haven't. Why?

Megatheory is clever, but fails to take into account the fact that he was actively supporting Gera and therefore shared the burden of proof. The answer for why I haven't shown that Gera's actions can only come from scum is something I'm pretty sure I've already mentioned: You can't. Town players are known to perform actions which accidentally benefit the scum. Scum perform the same actions deliberately to benefit the scum. The more of these actions a player performs the greater chance they are scum, but there is no way to literally prove it because there are no actions which could only have come from scum. That's where the whole game comes from, and why you lumping three different players under "bad play" is scummy. (You did not address this issue.)

not to argue, but nameless promised to self hammer. if he doesn't then he is scum.

Absolutes ... It's not like a townie couldn't get cold feet. You could have just said Lynch All Liars anyway.

so in a way it makes sense to place nameless at L-1 and request the self hammer.

Only if you assume I'm scum, in which case there's no reason for someone else not to hammer. Except I'm town, so all you'd prove was that I was honourable!
[/Actual Post]

[Nameless]

I think Juls jumped ship a little too easily there. She's seemed kind of slippery with her votes and suspicions before too. It might be worth looking into if she's still alive near the endgame, but there are greater concerns to deal with first.

Unvote: Don_johnson
Vote: Nameless

So like I said, do NOT assume Don is scum. The reason I wasn't actually pushing him that hard in the last few days is that my suspicions of him have lessened to a certain extent. Like I mentioned in #276, I still think there's a reasonable chance he's a well intentioned extremist, if sometimes mislead. Comparatively, Megatheory is more subtle but some of his actions I find it

very

difficult to imagine a townie doing. He should be your primary concern D2.

I know I mentioned connections a few times, but what's probably important to look into is the instigator of these. If a player begins agreeing with or defending you, even as townie it can be hard not to instinctively react back. Mega, I think, has been doing some of this and it has been noticed by other players before (Gera, in #101, accused Mega of "buttering up".)

Otherwise, I'll stick with what I've mentioned before: IP and Gera need to be monitored for contribution, rather than attempting to prove their claimed roles or lynching them because of them. If the quality of Porkens' play doesn't improve dramatically D2, DO lynch him for it. Finally, I think the town needs to pay more attention to canadianbovine and Atronach in general, they're following along too easily. (Look how much they contributed to my case when joining this bandwagon, for example. Yeah, nothing.)

Please consider preparing an analysis post during N1, so that the town can squeeze a little extra value into D2. We had nearly two weeks this time, and we still managed to end up with IMHO a fairly poor choice of lynches.

Oh, and I was a nurse. The role implied the existence of a singular doctor, but didn't guarantee it. Spot the breadcrumb if you've got nothing better to do.

[Nameless]

that it then, twilight now? really thought nameless would have given me a chance to place my vote to avoid the need for him to self vote.

Even with your vote, one player currently voting me would have needed to vote Don instead, and especially after Juls swapped her vote TO me, I doubt that would have happened. (Although I wouldn't be surprised if somebody

now

claims they would have in an attempt to score townie points.)

Chaos will be modkilled at the end of D2. Unless he rejoins you, forget him.

[Nameless]

i might have voted you, and that would have given the town mor einfo than you voting yourself

Hmm, fair point, waiting to see who would have hammered first might have been interesting ... but given the deadline some town player would need to, so it would have been a nulltell unless they said something particularly stupid as they did so.

[Nameless]

Juls, I never claimed vanilla. I stated quite carefully that I didn't have a particularly powerful role, implying that I did have a weak power role. Discarding the game as a "big screw up" from one mislynch isn't helping, either.

[Nameless]

Yeah, um, town did not deserve to win this game

at all

. (Mind you, the scum

claimed

on D3, so I guess it's a case of the lesser of two fools winning. )

Anyway, now we've all stopped trying to absolve ourselves of blame from my lynch, can we please stop exaggerating the unhelpfulness of my play? The only two things I would say that I really did wrong (uh, not finding scum aside) in D1 was: a) Not taking the time to more clearly word a few things when I first said them, to avoid things being blown out of proportion and b) Although I stand by selfhammering at what might (due to RL) have been my last chance to post rather than risk a no lynch (which would have given the scum a free kill and put the bandwagon right back up D2 anyway),

announcing

what I thought to be fairly inconsequential townie intent proved more detrimental than I had evisioned as it allowed my wagon to be pushed to a lynch easier than that of Don's. Claiming I don't think would have helped either way, since I'd already implied I had a weak power role, and there wasn't time for the town to properly consider another unreliable (and easy to make, were I scum) claim. Also, nobody asked.

Not even slightly surprised that Plum was town, and killed N1. Now if our doctor hadn't been a jerk and flaked ...

Since when is Nurse a gamebreaking role? I can't remember who said that, but I'd love to hear somebody justify that statement over any other role.

Words cannot describe how much I was screaming "WIFOM!" at the screen when a player or two considered Gera more believable after changing his claim. He was telling the truth and I was pretty convinced he was a town PR at that point, but still, it's just an example of how many players were allowed to get away with scummy or antitown actions (and usually the same ones that had been pointed out D1). I do like how long it took Gera (of course) to remember Chaos's modkill when wasting time with D3 scenarios. I'd love to say I told you so with my hunch Don was town, but honestly given the way he played towards the end of D3 I can't blame anyone on his wagon for it.

Was honestly surprised Megatheory was town, I still think some of his suggestions and suggestions were far more antitown than anything I did this game. Was honestly pissed IP was town, for not really playing at all after claiming. Porkens wasn't my first pick as scum, but he was up there. The other scum just kind of stayed under my radar what with how bad we town played. >_> And this was my first win as town, too. Oh well.