Mini 743: Sanity Ensues - Over!

[Artem]

/confirm

[Artem]

Vote: Magus_Stragus

for playing the "newbie" card.

[Artem]

Ouch... he posted at the same time as me... he screwed my vote...

but that wasnt a newbie card!!!!

So I'll keep my vote for... being aggressively suspicious?

If you're claiming that you don't understand the title (and thus, sanities), then you're effectively stating that you're a newbie.

why? because he is one of the first people to confirm... Magus stragus already posted so I know he will be here. Hohum is in another game so I know he posts ussually... then Artem... He is the one that will probably post next...

FoS: alexhans

for having double standards. I've been posting in other games too. Are you trying to cover up your scumbuddy Hohum?

[Artem]

Wow, fast paced game. And I didn't play a newbie card!!! I just don't get the title of the game (English is not my native language). So, let's omgus.

I guess I should ask: do you not understand the idea of sanities or do you not understand the phrase "sanity ensues"?

[Artem]

I think Hohum lacks a sense of humor. (Hence the dice voting?)

@Magus: Apologies. I thought you were saying that you didn't understand sanities.

Unvote

@Alex: You're FoSing yourself because you already know you're scum and you're just letting us all know because you secretly wish you were a townie.

Vote: Alex

Tell us at what point it's not "so fast" to unvote and why you seem so concerned with it?

@Hohum: Will you kindly provide your definition of OMGUS, please?

[Artem]

There is a number of posts that all essentially ask the same things:

1) My bit about Alex FoSing himself.

I sure hope that at this point it's clear that it was a joke. If it's not clear, grow a sense of humor.

2) The "alex covering hohum-scumbuddy" argument.

It's not OMGUS-by-proximity. OMGUS means that you are voting/FoSing somebody for the sole reason of them voting/FoSing you back. I had a legitimate reason to FoS alex. Therefore, it's not OMGUS. Although his vote was a joke, his reason was a double standard:

why? because he is one of the first people to confirm... Magus stragus already posted so I know he will be here.

Hohum is in another game so I know he posts ussually...

then Artem... He is the one that will probably post next...

He was basically voting me over you because you were posting in another game. I pointed out that I'm posting in other games as well.

(Obviously, since his vote was a joke, my FoS was not completely serious, but it was getting the ball rolling.)

3) My "quick" unvote Magus/vote Alex.

Magus and Green are right. The best we can do is pressure others right now. My pressure question was this:

Tell us at what point it's not "so fast" to unvote and why you seem so concerned with it?

My unvote/vote was in part to show that there is no such thing as too quick of a change of vote. You must always look at the reasons behind both. Mine were misunderstanding of Magus (unvote) and a pressure question for Alex (vote).

I also think that scum (or at least a cautious townie) would be tempted to answer the question as "I didn't want to appear wishy-washy". Here's Alex's answer, however:

If I vote and then unvote too fast I dont get a reaction from the player...

While I don't completely agree with it, I find the response to be townie, because scum would be more interested in how their votes/unvotes perceived than fishing for reactions. I don't completely agree with it, because unvoting "too fast" generates reactions too. Just look at the reactions I got.

4) Gut feeling.

The best I can do with this is give you a cookie.

Also,

I was in one of your first games too, so I know that you know better.

If I'm not mistaken, you're referring to this game:

http://www.mafiascum.net/forum/viewtopic.php?t=8255

in which you (or dcobre, who has the same avatar as you) soft-claimed a power role and left me a mess to replace into.

I'm interested in hohum at the moment.

Unvote; Vote hohum

. Hohum, can you explain your use of the term "tunnel vision" as a reason to vote me?

2) Seriously? Tunnel vision?

Are you trying to cover up your scumbuddy Hohum?

[Artem]

mmm I still don't like your fast paced vote change Artem (especially after someone just voted for Hohum wich could be viewed as bandwaggoning). Although many of the things you say are reasonable.

My playstyle usually gets a few eyebrow raises and I tend to accumulate votes quite quickly during Day 1. However, there's always rhyme and reason behind my actions, so in the end there are usually plenty of nice reactions to analyze.

ZEEnon and seb456 need to post more.

Outside of calling out obvious lurkers, I'm generally not a big fan of such posts, because they fall under "posting for the sake of posting" category.

If the call to post more was part of a larger post, where Magus outlined some of her (his? your avatar is missing a gender icon) other thoughts, then it's one thing. When the call to post is the only thing in the post, one can argue that Magus wants to appear contributing to the game, without giving any actual content.

At this point I read the post as eagerness to hear from others, so I'm not calling it a scum-tell.

Myself, the only person who I'm getting a scummy vibe off is Artem, but I can't really say why. It's just a gut feeling at the moment, but it has nothing much to back it up.

How is your gut feeling since I made my last post?
@ZEE: Same question.

[Artem]

as i stated earlier,
i don't have enough to go by
in order to vote .
but if i DON'T vote,
people will view it as suspicious .
so my vote with remain with Artem,
until something comes along
to change my opinion .

This is called parking your vote.

Tunnel Vision: Concentrating on one person, ignoring everything else around you, as you seem to be doing to Alexhans right now.

So you quote me bringing you into the picture and call it tunnel-visioning on Alex? That doesn't make much sense to me.

Also, mind citing the game and the player that you confused me with?

[Artem]

You're not looking as scummy to me as you did now that I'm taking Alex's most recent posts into context.

Nice side-step of the argument against you. Also, the following struck me as odd at the time I read it:

Curious, why would you changed your vote instead of simply calling me out with a FoS, HoS or IGMEOY? And how could you be certain that you made the correct choice 3 pages in to day 1?

You have no problems flinging your vote around, yet somehow you feel that you deserve a special treatment. What's with the double standards?

i'd rather not draw attention to myself,
but who says that i'm a regular vanilla townie ?
i don't particularly care if you think of me
as potential scum. if i was scum,
i would definitely be concerned with my post
in order to stop you from thinking that, but i welcome it.
(although this also could be seen as a scumish plot
to make it seem that i'm not scum
because i don't care.. so whatever. lose-lose situation.)

At least you see the WIFOM.

You explained that giving a reason why you're not changing your vote until you see something else is called "parking your vote," Artem, but then you stopped talking. Is there something wrong with parking your vote?

If he parked a vote on me and I was at L-2 or L-1, then I would call it out for scumminess. However, with two votes on me, it's hardly a tell one way or another.

[Artem]

You have no problems flinging your vote around, yet somehow you feel that you deserve a special treatment. What's with the double standards?

It was a probing question, I ask it all the time.

And what do you generally get, besides the game preference debate we had happen here, which only distracted the town. Got any examples where it helped you catch scum?

Also, I was not answering the question. I was commenting on you asking it.

[Artem]

Well, since things have cooled down a little bit, I will pose a few questions for anyone who would like to answer and maybe spark some more discussion.

1. At this moment, are there any players that you believe are town? If so, why?
2. At this moment, are there any players that you suspect are mafia? If so, why?
3. How would you choose who to lynch today if you do not yet have any suspicions of who may be mafia?

1. Not going to answer, for obvious reasons.
2. I suspect hohum is mafia. His bending of the facts and incorrect use of terminology gives him an excuse to vote players for whom he has little to no reason to vote otherwise. I think he's wants to appear scumhunting.
3. I'm voting for hohum, who I believe is mafia.

[Artem]

HoS:hohum but id prefer not to vote until i can find my own reasons (which seems realy hard, coz all the good ones have been taken

2. ZEEnon & possibly hohum. ZEEnon plays a lot like Chuck Norris did in my first game (go look me up and META!!!) I dont have any of my own reasons for hohum but others seem to think he's realy scummie and when i find any scum behavior BAM one point for the town, but until then ima listen to his reasoning.

You seem overly concerned with having your own reasons for voting hohum? Why?
Also, what do you mean by "BAM one point for the town"?

God you're a raging faggot. The only thing good about this game is that I'm going to be lynched today.

Remember that this is a game. No need to make personal insults.

I realize this has already been pointed out but:

Your attempts haven't been obvious to me, sorry. Please quote them. (Quotes are king and god) I, myself, am quite happy to read your explanations. And I hate it when people say I twist things, because I try my best not to.

And no, I'm not convinced you're scum, you're just the person I consider to be scummiest so far.

If you provide me with decent why you aren't scum, I will most likely unvote, and go my merry way scumhunting elsewhere, and keep my eye on you. Until then, I'm gonna keep voting you.

You've already rejected most of what I've had to say outright. I know you'll probably dismiss this reply as evasive too. It's alright -- keep wagoning me -- lynch me. I don't mind taking one for the team. That way when I flip everyone will see you for what you really are: opportunistic and scummy.

7 pages into day 1?

And you're already convinced?

Who's twisting whose words?

[Artem]

Ill answer the last question first. BAM is like instant awesome that can be imagined with a loud noise and/or bright light.

Also, "One point for the town" is us soultaking a mafia, which i see as getting a point. We need 2 or 3 points to win this game.

I'm confused by the wording of this. Are you saying that when you find a reason to vote hohum, it's guaranteed that he's mafia and town "gets a point"? What makes you think that a townie cannot inadvertently drop a mafia-tell? You sound like you already know that hohum is mafia.

[Artem]

Also, the problem with hohum is that even if he

is

a townie, his playstyle is far from townie and we don't want to be stuck with something like that in the end-game. In my opinion, he's a good candidate for a lynch today, but Seb has been interesting lately.

[Artem]

OK, catch up time.

... If i spot a scumtell (a REAL one) then ill probably vote. Im not saying i will, but im definently not saying i wont.

How exactly do you quantify a "REAL" scumtells? Are you saying that the scumtells hohum has been dropping are not real?

How is a doc that doesn't know his sanity gonna be careful? I don't like your reasoning. You're saying that they shouldn't try to use their powers until they know FOR SURE who to protect? When is that? And the cop thing... We all know this... Isn't it just adding stuff to confuse us? I know it helps making our thoughts known but this is just making everybody uncertain.

I'll address the doc point, since the cop sanity is obvious. If you look at the wiki, there are several doc sanities: Insane, paranoid, naive, weak, CPR. That means that depending on who he/she and the mafia target, a potential doc can kill a townie or themselves.

Im saying that with a catch 22 im screwed no matter what, but a WIFOM has a chance that i wont be screwed (even though i probably would be).

Too concerned with personal safety. WIFOM is never, ever good for town.

FoS: Seb

2.Magus is a vanilla townie that finds me suspitious for my seemingly inconsistant play.

(it's actually called learning)

Newbie card played by a non-newbie.

So what you're saying is that, since alive people can say the same things as dead people could've when they were alive... Are you telling me that we shouldn't listen to alive people's suspitions because they are potential crazy dead people? I trust dead townie posts more because they are confirmed town. Please explain your logic here

Townies don't know other players' alignments. This remains a fact when they die. Yes, players will re-read the thread keeping in mind that player X is town, but the words said by player X will not be treated as gospel.

@Seb: Why are you so concerned with personal safety and not drawing attention?

Why what? I IGMEOYed him coz people (not all ppl) think he is scummie, and they might be right

Just going with the flow, are we?

I'm liking the pressure on Seb at the moment.

even more suspicions to go on. how are you SO SURE that the person that is going to be lynched/ killed is going to be town. assuming that you are scum, which i currently believe, we won't be listening to your accusations at all. we will however read all relations and voting patterns of yours. you may have voted your partner to confuse us, so we also have to be aware of that. also, if you turn up as town, i will allow myself to be lynched day two as compensation.

Bad post for two reasons:
1) Seb is very sure that

he

will flip town (not just some hypothetical random player), hence him saying that players can quote him later;
2) If you are town, you should

never

put yourself up on an altar. All it does is create WIFOM for town and a free point for the scum;



One more thing I wanted to note:

As for Artem, there is not one thing he has said so far that made me raise an eyebrow. He has been a perfect townie in my eyes. That does not mean I am 100% confident he is town, but he isn't a good candidate to be lynched on the first day, in my opinion.

Please don't give the mafia poll results about who we think is most townie. They can decide who to NK on their own.

[Artem]

2) If you are town, you should never put yourself up on an altar. All it does is create WIFOM for town and a free point for the scum;

if he flips town, people will point to me regardless. they won't take into account that townspeople do make mistakes .

I'm going to chalk this comment up to your inexperience.

[Artem]

But you know that

I know you're scum

, that makes me a risk to your people, which means that you could die if others thought like i did. Dont get cocky, you'll regret it.

Townies don't have the knowledge of who's mafia.

FoS: Seb

[Artem]

You can guess, and believe with all your heart that someone is scum, but you can't know for sure that a player is scum if you are town (unless you have some power role, which is not the case now).

QFT. Until somebody is cardflipped, you don't actually "know" their alignment, which is what you said, Seb.

[Artem]

...unless, of course, you're scum.

[Artem]

Woah. That post seems like that kid that tries to make friends so hard, but can't seem to get any. Then he ends up seeming desperate.Azhrei is hurting my brain. I can't stop thinking of him as scum now. I think I should

Unvote:Zee

because I'm not sure about a lot of things. Why {250} seems scummie: first part is just continuation of what everyone else is saying. Next part he says he wasn't defending me. He says this because I'm a ship that he knows is gonna sink. If Zee was the sinking ship he would agree with the post, no doubt about it. The rest of it is just sucking up to Zee. In short,

FoS:Azhrei

Whoa, whoa.... you're arguing that Azhrei is distancing from you because you're going down?

As far as I'm aware, a scum has no reason to distance from a townie that's about to get lynched. If anything, a scum is likely to keep the pressure up.

Can you explain why I should read your quote as anything other that you suggesting that the two of you are scum buddies?

[Artem]

Well, unless you think that the AzhreiZee relationship is scum, then no. I'm saying that he is hiding behind town to look town (or to make the townie look scum). I am going to leave it at that. Feel free to question me about anything, I'm not sure if I'll be able to answer them, but it's worth a shot.

No, you said that Azhrei is distancing from you because you're sinking. I'm saying that it implies that you're both scum.

Is that all the questions you got, because i enjoy answering them. It makes me feel important.

Im not sure if i answered the questions the way you liked. If you have any followup questions then just shoot (as in just ask them, not NK me)

@people that have questions towards me: ask them

others im not sure about. If you have any questions for me, please ask them.

Feel free to question me about anything...

I don't like this continuing call for questions. What makes you think that other players are withholding their questions? It seems that you're trying very hard to appear helpful and/or transparent. Meanwhile, you have been sidestepping some of the questions directed at you.

[Artem]

Hmm.... the last few posts from hohum actually give off a townie vibe. However, I don't like the "staying low to avoid drawing flak" argument. If you're town, all you're doing is stalling the discussion, which is not helpful in the slightest.

I think it would be good if those of us who are voting hohum, re-state the questions we feel he didn't answer, instead of going around in circles with the "I've already answered everything" and "You never answered anything" arguments.

Here's one from me where I felt you left me hanging, hohum (keeping the nested quotes to give context):

Curious, why would you changed your vote instead of simply calling me out with a FoS, HoS or IGMEOY? And how could you be certain that you made the correct choice 3 pages in to day 1?

You have no problems flinging your vote around, yet somehow you feel that you deserve a special treatment. What's with the double standards?

It was a probing question, I ask it all the time.

And what do you generally get, besides the game preference debate we had happen here, which only distracted the town. Got any examples where it helped you catch scum?

Also, I was not answering the question. I was commenting on you asking it.

[Artem]

EDWOP: I would actually like you to provide me several examples where you ask that question. Since you "ask it all the time", it shouldn't be a problem, right?

[Artem]

@Green Canyons: In my experience, the scum will keep the pressure up on a sinking townie to ensure a mislynch. After the said player is lynched and flips town, the scum will likely attempt to distance themselves from the lynch.

So, to clarify my statement: the mafia will likely attempt to distance themselves from their partners

before

the lynch (and from townie wagons

after

the lynch).

[Artem]

Also, distancing for a sinking scum-buddy and distancing from a townie wagon are two different things.

Next part he says he wasn't defending me. He says this because I'm a ship that he knows is gonna sink.

Going back on defending somebody (not that that's what Azhrei was doing, but it's what Seb is accusing him of) does not really make sense as a distancing from a townie wagon method. I read it as accusation of distancing from a scum buddy.

[Artem]

[quote="Green Crayons"
unvote, vote: seb.

First and foremost, a no lynch is a bad thing.
[/quote]

11. If a majority of votes hasn't been reached at deadline, the person with the highest votecount is lynched. In case of draw the person having reached the highest number of votes first is lynched.

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

Also, I don't like that some of the players seem to have fallen off the edge of the world. Take Charrat, for example. Parked his vote on the biggest wagon and hasn't posted in a while, even though there have definitely been things for him to comment on. Worth looking at more closely, if Seb flips town.

Nevertheless, I do agree with the Seb lynch. I didn't move my vote because I wanted to maintain pressure on hohum, but, as is the case for several other players, Seb has been my second suspect for a while.

[Artem]

I think now that Alex has flipped, artem should be watched a little more carefully. I no longer think his screwing up alex's quote tags or FoSing him for a stupid reason early on in the game was a simple mistake or sarcasm as someone indicated. IGMEOY.

I don't follow the logic. Are you saying that I purposely tried to get alex lynched and when that didn't work, I shot him last night and that makes me mafia?

Also, mind answering the question I re-stated at the end of Day 1.

The night actions didn't change my view of hohum, so I'm putting my vote where it was the previous day.

Vote: hohum

I also don't understand the sudden spur in activity. Is there a reason you were laying low at the end of the previous day and taking a spotlight now, hohum?

Agree with Magus that Seb's lynch was mostly due to Seb's play. I, too, was considering voting him.

[Artem]

@hohum: Can you define "pretty hard"? If I'm not mistaken, you too voted for Alex at some point, outside of the RVS and for a pretty poor reason. What makes my joking reasons during the RVS more suspicious?

Here's the question you didn't answer (again, quotes are included for context):

Curious, why would you changed your vote instead of simply calling me out with a FoS, HoS or IGMEOY? And how could you be certain that you made the correct choice 3 pages in to day 1?

You have no problems flinging your vote around, yet somehow you feel that you deserve a special treatment. What's with the double standards?

It was a probing question, I ask it all the time.

And what do you generally get, besides the game preference debate we had happen here, which only distracted the town. Got any examples where it helped you catch scum?

Also, I was not answering the question. I was commenting on you asking it.

I would actually like you to provide several examples where you ask that question. Since you "ask it all the time", it shouldn't be a problem, right?

[Artem]

I don't buy "joke voting." I think you should be watched very carefully for even attempting to call that early FoS a joke. Most people don't even bother to attempt to attach justification to random votes. The fact that you FoSed him instead of Voting him only further reenforces my point because in the multitude of games I've played in so far you're the first person I've ever seen do a joke FoS.

So I'm scum because I've done something nobody else has ever done before? Because everybody you've played with before has been a townie and I'm the first mafia role ever... O.o

C'mon hohum, enough with twisting null-tells into your agenda?

It didn't help me catch scum, because you took the pressure off of it immediately by questioning me. You didn't give anyone a chance to respond.

I don't think you understand what I'm getting at. I called you out on the double-standards. You said that it's not double-standards because you ask that question "all the time". I'm claiming that you're lying to cover up your hind and avoid taking responsibility for the double-standards. My proof is the fact that you can't quote any other games where you've asked that question, meaning that you DON'T ask it all the time, meaning that you're making it up to cover up. Get it now?

[Artem]

Oh, I meant to say Charat, not hohum.

Why to both names?

[Artem]

Ok, I went back and re-read the first few pages. My FoS was not even a joke as my joking vote was on Magus at the time. Alex really did have double-standards by saying that you're posting in other games and then voting me (who was also posting in other games).

When I

did

vote Alex I gave a joke reason:

@Alex: You're FoSing yourself because you already know you're scum and you're just letting us all know because you secretly wish you were a townie.

...and a pressure question...

Tell us at what point it's not "so fast" to unvote and why you seem so concerned with it?

So, yes, there was reason to be suspicious of Alex to give him an FoS (well, as much as it can be on Page 1). My RVS votes generally have a joke attached to them, but also have some pressure that encourages some information content. This was the case both with Magus and with Alex.

Care to explain your lying about asking a question "all the time" to cover up your hind, or are you just going to lay low again claiming to have answered all the questions?

[Artem]

Why are you so focused on 3 words? Is that really the only thing you can get to stick on me? I'm really frustrated by you. You're reaching, again, on D2 because you don't have any real justification for your vote. You're trying to do everything you can do to find something that will stick to me so that you can walk the town into another mislynch on D2.

Because it's not about those 3 words as much as your reaction to them. You're consistently misusing terminology, dropping blanket statements and twisting the truth to fit your agenda. When somebody calls you out on something, you simply brush it off with "I've answered all the questions". You were laying low at the end of Day 1 because you didn't want to draw extra flak and surpass Seb in votes.

All those things combined make you a pretty good D2 lynch candidate in my book.

How is that re-read coming along, by the way?

Scum generally post things like "Re-reading, comments coming" or "There's more to follow" and then never post the promised content. It makes them appear busy and contributing when in actuality they're not. I've actually nailed scum in an endgame scenario based on this before.

[Artem]

I said I meant CHARAT, mixed up names.

So tell us why you should have voted Charrat during Day 1.

[Artem]

@hohum: Maybe you shouldn't be conjuring up page-1-based arguments against other players if you haven't had the chance to re-read it yet.

[Artem]

Considering that we have 10 players and this is a sanity game, we can probably assume there are going to be 3 or 4 cops. I

know

that there are 3 at this point, unless spring was really cruel and chose not to include a regular cop. Lynching both of us is a bad idea if we both turn out to be townies because that would be game over N3, I think.

Oh really?

Explain away.

[Artem]

Uhm, isn't it obvious? I know I am town, Zero says I am guilty, that means he must be a cop who is not sane (or he is lying). I should have said that I know there are at least 3 at this point, although I did basically say that I suspect 3 or 4 in the sentence earlier.

No, not obvious. You seem pretty confident that there are 3 cops, even though only one has been cardflipped. We don't know if Zero is fake claiming, we don't know his sanity if he is a cop, and we're not guaranteed to have a sane cop in this game.

For all we know, there could be only 1 cop (who is now dead). We suspect there may be more, but we don't know for certain. Thus, you using phrases like "I

know

there are at least 3 cops..." is suspicious to me.

Question for the mod: Are the cops allowed to investigate themselves?

My thought is that if Zero really is cop, he could try investigating himself. If he gets an innocent, then we know he's sane. Unfortunately, a guilty on himself wouldn't tell us much.

[Artem]

A guilty on himself would tell us that Zero is either insane or paranoid, which tells us nothing about Charrat's alignment.

[Artem]

Not a paranoid or insane cop, just my strategy,...

How do you know what your sanity is?

[Artem]

I'd rather just ignore his claim for now, and let him investigate a few more people. We can always lynch him later, and we'll get a bit more out of it than we would now.

^This^

I think Zero did the right thing by revealing his investigation. You can't subtly push a case on somebody you have a guilty on if you don't know your sanity. The right thing to do is to put the information out on the table for the town to analyze after your lynch/NK.

I don't think we should be wasting a lynch on Zero. Let the mafia NK him and reveal his sanity. We can then look back at all his results and draw proper conclusions. And if the mafia lets him live, Zero can just continue investigating players.

I'm still happy with a hohum lynch, however.

[Artem]

Azhrei basically explained it. If mafia don't NK Zero, we get more investigation results (which may or may not be useful). All this assuming Zero's claim is legit, and at this point I believe it is.

Looking forward to Green Crayons finding more time to comment on the earlier happenings in the day.

[Artem]

My views haven't changed. Still happy with hohum lynch. Still voting for him.

[Artem]

Btw, can someone please explain me why are the pressure on hohum? I'm not defending him, I just want to know why Artem, Azhrei and GC (and possibly others) say he's scummy, in order to see if I missed something. Hohum acted weird, but not enough for me to cast a vote. So, I want to know if I missed something or what.

Because it's not about those 3 words as much as your reaction to them. You're consistently misusing terminology, dropping blanket statements and twisting the truth to fit your agenda. When somebody calls you out on something, you simply brush it off with "I've answered all the questions". You were laying low at the end of Day 1 because you didn't want to draw extra flak and surpass Seb in votes.

All those things combined make you a pretty good D2 lynch candidate in my book.

[Artem]

Mod: The votecount is wrong. There are players voting hohum (myself included).

It's very likely that hohum is laying low "waiting to be lynched", like he did during Day 1. I doubt we'll get any more information out of him, because he's likely waiting to see if anybody else will draw attention and surpass him in votes.

[Artem]

EBWOP: Azhrei, me and Zee are all voting hohum.

[True and fixed, thanks. - Spring]

[Artem]

The miller gets a special role PM in the vast majority of games on MS where the roll exists, so if you are miller, then you would and should indeed know it.

The miller role is useful in situations where the cop needs to be confirmed. It works because the miller has to counterclaim the cop when the miller shows up dirty on an investigation. The miller gets lynched, the cop gets confirmed, and the cop's previous investigation results can then be trusted.

Unfortunately things didn't work out to the point where I got a chance to use my role effectively this game. I apologize for that.

The reason it didn't work out how you said it should is because you didn't claim D1 and let the cop(s) investigate you during Night 1. Just sitting there, betting on a chance that some cop will investigate you, gets a guilty and lets us confirm his alignment/sanity by lynching you is not good play. A miller should always claim as early as possible, so the town can decide whether the cop(s) should investigate you or not. In a non-sanity game, it saves the cop a wasted investigation. In a sanity game like this one, investigating a miller may give information about own sanity.

Now I'm not sure if you're just a poor player or a scum trying to hide behind a miller claim on D2. With Zer0 claimed, I'm not even sure if your millerhood is useful anymore. I think the best play may be to lynch you still. In the best case, we hit a scum. In the worst case, we confirm alignment of a very scummy townie.

As a side note, I don't understand why you keep saying that I zeroed in on Alex, whom I haven't touched since the RVS.

[Artem]

EBWOP:

Just sitting there, betting on a chance that some cop will investigate you, gets a guilty and lets us confirm his alignment/sanity by lynching you is not good play.

Moreover, you were betting on a chance that some cop

who may not be sane

would investigate you, thereby may not even getting a guilty in the first place.

If your plan was to confirm a cop, you really should have claimed early in D1.

[Artem]

*grumble* *grumble*

Unvote

I'm thinking.

When's the deadline?

[Artem]

Ok, here's the thing.

First, hohum is either scum or a miller. In either case, he's a guaranteed guilty for a sane cop, and a guaranteed innocent for an insane cop.

Since hohum so graciously f***ed up on D1, one thing we can do is keep him alive today for Zer0 (and any other cops who haven't claimed) to investigate. Knowing a result on a certain guilty and their N1 target, they could make a good guess at their sanities. We then lynch hohum first thing on D3 and hope that Zer0 and any other cops have any worthy results.

The problem is that even in the best case (where hohum really is a miller and we don't mislynch today) before we get any useful investigation results, and even those results are not 100% guaranteed.

Screw it.

Vote: hohum

I say we go with the first plan of having Zer0 continue investigating players and/or getting NKd, confirming his sanity.

[Artem]

EBWOP:

The problem is that even in the best case (where hohum really is a miller and we don't mislynch today)

we'd be down 3 more townies

before we get any useful investigation results,

[Artem]

Ok, the fact that we're still playing this game with 6 people means that there're only 2 mafia. (Otherwise, there would be no way of reaching majority and scum wins.)

It also means that we're in a lylo situation now. What do you guys think about a mass-claim?

[Artem]

I'm sorry, there's also a choice of no-lynch to bring the game to 3 town, 2 mafia. So, not quite lylo.

[Artem]

GC, name the next person you'd like to claim? Then that person claims and names the next one and so on. That way we don't leave the mafia waiting until the end to claim.

[Artem]

Shinn, who's next?

[Artem]

Zero: guity on hohum (sane or paranoid)
GC: innocent on magus, guilty on charrat (sane or insane)
Shinnen: guilty on hohum, guilty on GC (sane or paranoid)

So, first things first:
-Magus and charrat have the opposite alignment
-If we assume that there's one cop of each sanity, all three "cops" can't be telling the
truth.

Charrat, you should claim next.

[Artem]

Zero investigated Charrat and received a guilty, not hohum. This was, in part, why I investigated him myself on Night Two. This doesn't change your (accurate) speculation as to what his sanity may be.

Ack. You're right. Zero has a guilty on Charrat. But that makes him (Zero) one of {sane, insane, paranoid}.

Still, either we have double of some sanity or one of the "cops" is lying.

I am a doctor. I protected Charrat both nights.

My first priority was to get an idea of my sanity. So, night 1 I chose to protect somebody who I didn't have a clear read on. If I was insane or a CPR doc, we would get a cardflip. I also left a breadcrumb in case I was a weak doc and Charrat was mafia:

Also, I don't like that some of the players seem to have fallen off the edge of the world. Take Charrat, for example. Parked his vote on the biggest wagon and hasn't posted in a while, even though there have definitely been things for him to comment on. Worth looking at more closely, if Seb flips town.

I hoped that if I flipped weak doctor, somebody would be able to pick up on it. The fact that both Charrat and I are still alive means that I'm not insane or CPR, and either Charrat is town or I'm not weak (or both). The fact that ZEE had no sanity qualifier makes me lean towards docs being sane in this game.

I chose Charrat during night 2 for two reasons. 1) I still wasn't 100% certain I wasn't weak and protecting him the first night didn't kill me, so I decided not to risk it. 2) If Zero is insane, we would have a confirmed townie as soon as Zero cardflipped. Since the mafia have a better guess at his sanity than us, I thought they might try to shoot Charrat to prevent us from getting a confirmed townie in the end-game.

[Artem]

hohum was a miller, so doesn't that mean he will appear guilty when investigated, presumably regardless of the sanity of the cop investigating him? That would leave open the possibility of Shin being insane.

Insane means the result is flipped. So, a miller should show up innocent.

And why did you claim after your post 418?

1) Because I didn't think a doc claim was going to affect scum's decision to fake-claim something. If I was a cop, it would be a different story, because you want to let the scum fake-claim their investigation results and then claim yours.
2) Because you said you wanted all the claims on the table. (Granted you didn't say now). But the less time we wait for everybody to claim, the more time we can spend analyzing the info.

After Azhrei claims, I have something to say about our cop situation.

I am a doctor. I was somewhat reluctant to claim honestly because I feared revealing myself to be a doctor would make me a big target N3.

Poor excuse. If we mislynch today, it won't matter what the scum does on N3. We lose.

[Artem]

Shinnen, four cops, one of each sanity is not possible with the given claims.

Charrat, you're right. I overlooked the possibility of a successful protection.

[Artem]

Alex: dead (naive)
Zero: guity on charrat (sane, insane or paranoid)
GC: innocent on magus, guilty on charrat (sane or insane)
Shinnen: guilty on hohum, guilty on GC (sane or paranoid)

Assumption: there's one cop of each sanity.

Shinn can't be sane, because she has a guilty on GC (which breaks the assumption). Therefore, Shinn is paranoid. GC and Zero both have a guilty on Charrat, which means that either both are sane or both are insane (which also breaks the assumption).

Since Azhrei didn't claim a cop, we now know for sure that:
-Either there are two cops that share a sanity;
-Or one of the "cops" is lying;

If I was to speculate about the setup, it seems silly to me to put four cops in and not make it one of each sanity. (Of course, there also appears to be three docs, so who really knows?). I'm leaning more towards one of the cops lying and my bet is on Shinn. Of course that means that Charrat is a townie and telling the truth, which makes my claim less likely to be true (from your perspective). :-/

(I'm also wondering if Shinn is right about Charrat being a role-blocking doc. That's one way to explain the lack of an investigation.)

Another thing we're not accounting for is the possibility of a godfather, who would show up innocent to sane cop and guilty to an insane cop. So, potentially, both Shinn and Charrat could be a scum-pair.

Here's why I think Shinn is lying:

Mafia has been zetta lucky lately... First a cop, and now a doc? Hmm.....

Ok, so, something tells me that everybody has a power role. So, should we mass claim?

These quotes makes it look like Shinn just discovered the possibility of there being a lot of power roles. However, if you

are

a cop, shouldn't you expect that to be the case from a while ago?

I also don't like the following:

Btw, can someone please explain me why are the pressure on hohum? I'm not defending him, I just want to know why Artem, Azhrei and GC (and possibly others) say he's scummy, in order to see if I missed something. Hohum acted weird, but not enough for me to cast a vote. So, I want to know if I missed something or what.

Hmmm... After reading GC's and Artem's post (and also reading a few pages back), I think I have to agree that hohum is scummy. However, what it strikes me the most is that attitude of him of trying to lay low because he's about to get lynched. And, it's the second time he does that. Not good enough for me, so:

Vote: hohum

Very little initiative from Shinn and appears like an opportunistic bandwagon hop.

[Artem]

@Shinn: What happened between posts 400 and 407 that made you go from thinking that the mafia got very lucky to thinking that everybody has a power role?

[Artem]

How can you say "Mafia has been zetta lucky lately... First a cop, and now a doc? Hmm..... " while believing there to be 3 cops and no docs. O.o

[Artem]

I'm not sure if no-lynch is a good play now that we've mass claimed. You have to remember that the mafia has a pretty good idea of our sanities, and potentially has a role-blocker and a godfather to boot. Somehow, I doubt we'll get anything useful out of the next night now that all cards are out on the table.

Although, one thing we get for sure is another cardflip, which will help narrow down the possibilities. So it may be worth it if we want to play safe.

I have been trying to figure out the best assignment of cop investigations and doc protections for the next night, but I can't come up with anything foolproof since there's always a possibility that the player you're relying on for information is lying.

I'm also wondering if Charrat and I protecting each other is going to fly, considering that the mafia knows whether or not Charrat is a blocking doc; plus, Charrat could be the godfather.

I'm more or less convinced that Shinnen is mafia. And yes, I realize that all the evidence seems to be pointing at me being her partner.

[Artem]

Note: I believe we have a roleblocker on the scum team.

Well, there's still a chance of Charrat being a blocking doc.

[Artem]

I'm V/LA this week. Should have some time to read the game tonight.

[Artem]

Now, something is making me feel that either GC or Artem are scum. They're trying to much to make a lynch, out-ruling the possibility of a no-lynch when it leads us to a situation similar to what we are now. Both of them are taking the worst case scenario, while ignoring the good possibilities.

If one of us is scum, the other is town, and we're both pushing for a lynch then how can you argue that pushing for a lynch is a scummy thing to do? By your own logic, it's a null-tell.

Besides, what I said specifically is that no-lynch is bad option because we've already mass claimed. If we hadn't, no-lynch would have looked better.

Tell me what benefit we would gain from no-lynching. Please. A 100%, guaranteed, benefit. I'd really like to see it.

One thing you are guaranteed 100% (ok, assuming no successful doc blocks) is another cardflip. This means that townies have to consider one less person. That's it. That's the only town advantage.

Any pro-no-lynch argument that is based on power roles is dumb, as already pointed out. Moreover, no-lynch only makes sense if the difference between the number of townies and the number of scum is even. For example, a no-lynch makes sense in a 1 scum + 3 townies scenario, but not in a 1 scum + 4 townies.

I originally said that we have at most two mafia because we're still playing the game with 6 people. However, Charrat brought up a good point: the mafia is not guaranteed a win until all the docs are dead. That means that we may be potentially dealing with 3 mafia. If that's the case, we have to lynch correctly AND protect correctly to win.

(Of course, the mafia may be declared victorious if they make up 50% or more of the population. It all depends on what their PM says.)

In either case, no lynch is bad for us right now. Besides, I don't think I'm having that much trouble deciding who to lynch.

I don't think the mafia needs advice, Azhrei. Do you think it's good idea to give advice like that to your enemies? Hmmm... Suspicious... Oh, if anyone who said that I was congratulation the mafia with post 400, then Azhrei's words should look really scummy. Don't they?

If Azhrei is sharing information with his enemies, the mafia, doesn't that make him town?

[Artem]

For today, I think our lynch should definitely be GC or Shinn. At the moment, I consider Shinn to be the more likely to be scum.

Why is Charrat not an option?

Question: should I state who I'm going to protect tonight, in case I'm a weak doc?

Votecount

Shinnen_no_me

(2):

Zerophear, Azhrei

Artem (0):
Azhrei (0):
Charrat (0):
Green Crayons (0):
Zerophear (0):

Not votingb (4):

Shinnen_no_me, Green crayons, Artem, Charrat

With 6 alive, it's 4 to lynch.

[Artem]

I say no for Charrat for a couple of reasons. One, because I'm really not sure which one of you two docs is the scum, and two, because if we lynch a cop, we still have a slim chance to make it through the night (with doc protecting right) whereas if we lynch the doc, we're all screwed. Also, I'd say don't tell us who you are protecting, as if you really are doc, then the mafia know who not to target. If you're mafia, then the whole exercise is pointless anyway.

Here's my thinking. If we're still playing this game after the cardflip, I will protect Azhrei. If I flip a weak doc and there's another death, it means Azhrei is mafia. Since Azhrei claimed a vanilla, I don't run the risk of blocking a power role if I'm a blocking doc. The mafia will be forced to kill one of the cops, thereby revealing their sanity, or me or Charrat, which is good also since we're both suspicious and the town gets a free cardflip.

Vote: Shinn

What do you think of the plan?

[Artem]

Good game, all.

I'm not a big fan of the setup, because from a town's point of view, you can't derive any information reliably. Not only a player claiming cop could be lying, but their investigation results could be wrong/misleading, or the person they investigated may always give innocent/guilty. It's like not having the roles at all, so why put them in the game?

I think one way to make the roles more useful is to make the setup semi-open by stating what kind of sanity/roles there are or aren't. For example, knowing that there was no GF would have helped quite a bit.

[Artem]

I was debating whether or not to include myself in the "people we should lynch" opinion. I figured if I would throw myself in there and explain it was because the other townspeople should consider if they think I'm lying it might come across as seeing neutral/objective. ...Which it probably does, but neutral isn't protown, eh?

I go back and forth on this. Yes, it's assumed that everybody's point of view is a townie, when they talk. But it just irks me the wrong way when people say things like "Since I know I'm town, ....", mostly because I always want to retort with "And we're supposed to know this how?". In that sense, seeing objectivity was refreshing and bought you some townie points in my eyes.