Mini 734 - GrimMafia - OVER

[Nuwen]

Vote: zwetschenwasser

, for possessing the least pronounceable name in the thread.

[Nuwen]

@Ecto: IF your vote wasn't random, then what was it?

Yes, what was it?

Vote: Ectomancer

[Nuwen]

"Yes what was it", is the cause for your vote? It doesn't appear random to me.

I was echoing Beyond_Birthday's question - if your vote wasn't random, then what was the reasoning behind it?

Random voting is always a good beginning; how else does an uninformed majority ease into finding an informed minority?

[Nuwen]

I was rephrasing my question, as you obviously didn't understand the first time around. Yes, the point is moot now because you answered, but I wanted to clarify my original inquiry.

[Nuwen]

And Nuwen, why would you further explain and clarify a question if your question is answered? Do you have a reason to pursue it further that you are not giving?

None, other than ensuring clarity of expression. The biggest roadblock in mafia is imprecise or ambiguous explanation. Leaving Ecto's counter-question unanswered benefits no one.

[Nuwen]

Nuwen, what do you think of the game?

I think that I requested to be replaced approximately a week ago after informing Grimmy that I wouldn't have time to play this game out fully until early/mid February.

[Nuwen]

Hi.

My request for a replacement in this game has been twice overlooked, so it appears that I'll be playing with you guys out of necessity. There are worse motivations, I suppose.

I'm going to touch on a few key points of this thread and interact with you lot prior to posting any comprehensive analysis. Asking for one equates a vapid gesture on your part, valuing rote participation over genuine contribution. Don't do it.

Ectomancer

• Ecto's assertive playstyle is belligerent and, early in the game, appeared to focus on a target with little provocation and even less lucid logic. Originally, his insistence on an arbitrary end to the random voting stage irked me; he appeared to be providing himself with herring ammunition to be used against any player questioning what he called 'logic.'
  
  I didn't like Ecto's cavalier willingness to "persue" players on self-dictated constraints shared by no one else in the thread. This behavior presented itself as active scum weeding, with the effect of following illogical or immaterial leads. See post 66, where at no time did PerAdua recommend retrograde motion back to the RVS. He, like I, was highlighting Ecto's tendency to seize a herring. The proof-positive to PerAdua's suspicions is, ironically, in Ecto's response in 70:
  

  PerAdua, your assessment of Ectomancer's play so far please.

  Seconded. I'm confounded by a player so determined to get their random voting phase. Random vote away. Please get it out of your system so that you can play the game with the rest of us.

  Rather than addressing Per's concerns about Ecto's jaunty pressure tactics, he continues with his accusatory style, dismissing the point via strawman. I don't believe his play is particularly scummy, but I do wonder if Ecto knows that blind pressure can flip the finger of suspicion back in his direction - as a town player, he lacks caution.

Zer0ph34r

• People want a reason for my vote? Okay, how about the mere fact that I don't like this guy for making people hate me.
  
  Everyone seems to find my scummy or at the very least suspicious. Every game I have been in so far, my fellow players have made the same mistake; lynching me; a Townie, on day 1. If you guys wanna be the third group of fools to do it, by all means, go right ahead. People may not LIKE my methods of playing, but too bad, I'm not changing it because I LOOK scummy, because so far, I never have been scum. Have any of you thought to yourselves, "Well, he's acting like he did in his other games, so maybe when he acts differently, he's scum?" If not, do so.

  This is a piss-poor defense for your play; it's a small wonder you're a repeated d1 lynch target. If you commit actions with scummy origins, even while playing town, then your peers have little choice but to believe that you're as scummy as your play suggests. Yes, you do need to change your play - playing to win as a town member involves
  finding scum
  , not witlessly drawing attention to yourself and
  away
  from potential scum. As a vanilla townie, there is only one certain axiom: "I am town." Behaving in any manner contrary to that is aiding scum and distracting the town.
  
  On this note, I really doubt that Zer0ph34r is scum. He's a flop-eared ninny, too stupid to set up the complex WIFOM situation that would certify him as scum. Idiotic, emotional, and unable to defend himself, yes. Obvious scum, no.
  
  Because of this...
  
  {JereIC, Zwet, Beyond B, Zach, Sipylus, WolfBlitzer}
  
  There is scum on this wagon. Zero is an easy target, as new players usually are. His erratic play and inability to grasp advanced Mafia theory makes him an ideal d1 herring, a perfect opportunity to force a claim from him (and potentially other town power-roles, in an attempt to validate or disprove Zero's original claim) and put themselves in a wet dream on night 1.

Speedlynching

• A big scrub-scum mistake is double-teaming someone to start a speedy bandwagon or jumping on the l-1/hammer votes to secure an ineffectual lynch. Because of this, a quicklynch can provide
  more
  incriminating information than a dozen pages of mutable discussion. Voting patterns are quotable, brief, and far more tangible than semantic-drive suspicion six pages into day 1.
  
  A short day is bad for town because it limits
  quality
  and
  quantity
  of information gathered that day. However, if the day is shorted
  because
  quality information was presented - two scum buddies foolishly jumping on a quicklynch - then the trepidations behind a short day are moot.
  Think about the logic behind wiki axioms before applying them
  .

[Nuwen]

Three games is not a sample size I'm going to trust in meta decisions about a new player with 121 game posts. The only cogent conclusion I see is that Zero is new.

[Nuwen]

How can you possibly know for a fact that scum is on this wagon? It's possible that all the votes against Zero are town. In fact if you look at things from a hypothetical standpoint, it's also possible that you are making this point as his scum buddy, in order to make a case to get the bandwagon off of him. If he's town, maybe you just want the bandwagon somewhere else in hopes of lynching a power role (Since he's claimed townie.)

Because the wagon is well-built and opportunistic. It's certainly possible that

six

town out of eleven other players simply think that Zero is dumb scum, but I think it's far more likely that the wagon is scum-propelled. Newer players are easy targets for scum, especially on day 1 before claims and power-roles can affect the game's direction.

Your last option sounds like terrible scum play. Ideally, scum want to leave as few footprints as possible when erecting wagons. Trying to shift suspicion away from a on-town wagon to another would involve either scum buddy acquitting the first wagon in order to make the next more gravitous. If either partner attempts to target the first player again (Zero, in this game) on a later day, it'll be easier for observant townies to poke holes in the wagon.

[Insert long and intelligent analysis here]

Brilliant. If Zero is scum, you are the obvious scum partner. Therefore, Zero is not scum, and you are scum. (This is tongue in cheek, do not take seriously. But seriously, bravo, and I agree with your logic.)

This is precisely why I think he's just an inexperienced townie - prior to my post, there was no attempt by Zero's hypothetical scumbuddy to redirect the wagon. While I realize that my post could be interpreted as the aforementioned redirect,

I

know that it isn't, and that constant allows me to poke and prod for reactions.

Remember

: The only thing a townie knows for certain on day 1 is that he or she is a townie.

I need to reread the thread again and closeread Sping/Jere's exchanges before commenting.

[Nuwen]

Zachrulez, explain why you think JereIC points are good.

1. Try asking me nicely this time.

2. Explain why you think his points are scummy.

3. Tell me where you saw the word good in my post about his points.

1. Explain what 'nice' has to do with anything.

2. I already explained why his points are scummy.

3. You said that you didn't believe JereIC's point were scummy, as per 2, I expect you to explain why you don't find my arguments convincing.

Jesus Christ, Mary, and the other guy. Stop this type of question-counterquestion play. It's not productive, cute, or clever. One doesn't always need to be on the questioning side to have a one-up in conversation. One doesn't always

need

a one-up in conversation.

If someone asks a question that you already answered, provide links and quotes. He or she is obviously having a hard time finding the answer, which requires clarity from the respondent. Neither of you are extracting or contributing useful information by repeatedly head-butting the other with senseless semantic quibbles.

[Nuwen]

2. I said very clearly why I thought Zero was crapshoot, I think he has an equal chance of being awkward scum and awkward town. I also think the best argument against him right now is to get rid of the distraction.

Anti-town argument, if not scummy. No one appreciates being caught in LILO with an erratic, inexperienced townie -

but it's better than losing

. Cannibalizing "distracting" players who are little more than a "crapshoot" at being scum does nothing for town. This sounds like a thinly-veiled attempt to get Zero's (or any hapless townie's) wagon started up in earnest. A desire to lynch someone for

being town, albeit bad town

, is suspect.

(This would mean the posts that have come below and AFTER the posts you quoted.)

You there, patience. I did say that I needed to do a full rethrough of Jere & Spring's interaction. This involves revisiting posts that seems long-dead or immaterial.

I pointed out their directionless bickering because, currently, it provides an illusion of investigation and counter-investigation without actually bearing new information. Example:

1. What was your reasoning behing x statement?
2. I already posted it, why are you continuing to pursue the point?
1. Why won't you simply answer my question, and why are periphrasing the subject at hand?
2. I'm not dodging the subject at hand, I'm answering and have already answered your question. Why do you want to know an answered question?

• Compare to

  Oooooo... a demand.
  
  So now... you can...
  
  1. Try asking me nicely this time.
  
  2. Explain why you think his points are scummy.
  
  3. Tell me where you saw the word good in my post about his points.

  1. Explain what 'nice' has to do with anything.
  
  2. I already explained why his points are scummy.
  
  3. You said that you didn't believe JereIC's point were scummy, as per 2, I expect you to explain why you don't find my arguments convincing.

  1. Has to do with asking me politely in a way that's more likely to make me want to respond. Some people would call it manners.
  
  2. Well that's great. Would you care to point out the exact posts or quotes, or do you want me to struggle to look through and find these explanations, so that when I fumble with trying to find them, you can find me scummy too?
  
  3. Am I supposed to find your arguments convincing? I must have missed the rule that said that was a requirement to play this game.

  1. If you have a problem with my 'manners' or lack thereof, do take your complaints to the mod and I will respect arbitrage if any. As far I'm concerned, I do not believe I have been excessive in any way toward you. If you do not wish to take your complaints to the mod, I expect this line of discussion to be dropped, and am willing to pretend it wasn't raised in the first place.
  
  2. Yes, I expect you to struggle and find them, it's your job. I will tell you if I think you to be scummy when you have done so.
  
  3. I do not require of you to find my argument convincing, however I asked you to demonstrate why you think they are not and am expecting an answer.

And so on. This is a common scum-buddy technique used to disassociate each other without actually giving the town any workable data. I pointed this out with the hope that either poster would snap back into progressive posting, but that isn't happening. Usually the tactic is better choreographed.

Nuwen, I've reread your posts about Zero at least three times now, and all I get out of #190 is a long and colorfully-written version of the newbie defense. In #206 you add the argument that no one tried to redirect the bandwagon, but it's just as likely that his scum buddies stayed clear or tried to bus him. Are there other reasons you think he's not scum?

Play to win - why would anyone bus his or her scum buddy this early in the game? There's no reason to toss up a sacrifice just to avoid an intervening defense. Between third party strawmans and strings of chainsaws, a quality scum player can rescue his or her partner while barely touching the subject. Bussing should be reserved for cop investigations and little else. As a preemptive gambit, it's overambitious and unnecessary.

[Nuwen]

It seems that since everyone is assuming that scum will bus their scum buddies to death, you can fly under the radar by supporting him instead.

Painful WIFOM and some bad reading, effectively useless as a tell or point of reference.

1. Hopping on Zero was highlighted as a bus possibility

so,

2. Jumping off Zero relieves culpability from town players most concerned with remaining alive (arguably a bad town mentality).

thus,

3. According to you, a vote off Zero and suspicion in the direction of his strongest accusers is equivalent is 'flying under the radar.' Motivation-wise, this action is in opposition to tunneling members of Zero's wagon because it appeared scum-propelled, but will present almost identically.

[Nuwen]

Lovely. Zero's wagon is virtually worthless, as his actions were scummy enough to warrant genuine pro-town scathe. Splicing pro-town intent versus convenient scum propulsion will be difficult.

Vote: springlullaby

- Far too much emphasis on wagoning Jere after Zero's clean lynch was spoiled by multiplayer support of the "noob" rationale, which proved to be correct. The ensuing argument between her and Zach is fluff; I'm inclined to believe that if spring flips scum, Zach will as well after diverting attention away from her mismatched voting on Zero/Jere.

[Nuwen]

I'm not certain that you have taken into account the whole situation with your theory. If JereIC flipping town is such an indicator of Spring's alignment, why would Spring have NK'd JereIC instead of someone else? I understand the old "He was creating WIFOM" argument, but with the attention it would garner, I think that hitting someone else, then going after JereIC as a lynch target today would have gained him one more day (and night) without this type of pressure. What reason do you think that Spring would have had for killing him last night? JereIC too much for him to handle during daytime discussion? Something Jere said rang too close to home for scum? He thinks Jere breadcrumbed a role?

I thought the WIFOM situation it created would be reason enough. I'm sure either scum predicted that this conversation would take place; it's equally possible that Jere did nothing remarkable at all, except act as a target for spring, and his kill is supposed to flag the unremarkable. Those two pieces of WIFOM alone make the kill worthwhile.

[Nuwen]

In case you didn't notice, my first post was "spring is scum", before Nuwen.

Yeah, that's why Ecto and I don't like it. We realize that you've been pursuing spring since yesterday, but you didn't point out how Jere and Zero's alignment confirmed spring's alignment to you. I have the reasons I stated, but they're less definitive - care to share yours?

When playing mafia, it's a good idea to assume others players cannot read minds.

[Nuwen]

Based on the grandiose misdirects I theorized in 224, Zach is the likely buddy. However, I wouldn't place a ton of weight on that exchange - it wasn't choreographed excessively, and it's more common for scum buddies to avoid

any

interaction on Day 1, barring extreme bus gambits. Spring's partner is an independent entity right now.

[Nuwen]

*is probably an independent entity.

[Nuwen]

Did everyone forget BB's reluctance to hop on the Zero wagon? Sounds like scum not wanting to be on a town mislynch wagon.

BB was one of the earliest votes on Zero (L-4/5) and stayed there until he sided with my noob-town theory about Zero for a brief period, then hopped back on again in post 282. I'm not reading a distance attempt in the slightest, and would really like to know where your read is coming from. I'd also like to know why you're intentionally ignoring Zach and Ecto's accusations in 359/363, which are quite weighty, in favor of highlighting a false point about BB.

[Nuwen]

What accusations? All he said is that Zach didn't vote. BB is reluctant because of that noob town switch. It was too hasty and seemed contrived.

Reading comprehension is a life skill. I believe Ecto's post is aimed at

you

, quoting Zach only to reiterate his theory that

you're

the scum who pushed for Jere's NK with the hope of dumping culpability on Spring.

I don't see how you're making a point - because BB was on the wagon, removed himself from it to pursue Spring, and then

got back on vehemently with apologies to his middle suspect

, he's trying allay responsibility?

[Nuwen]

Yes. I don't get how Ecto's post is aimed at me. Is he asking me something?

Yes. All of the following statements in the second person are addressing you.

I did miss the last post of page 14

Zwet

, the chronology of events weighs better in your favor,

but I do still have concerns about your lack of expressed reasoning.

I thought it was clear from yesterday's spring/jere debate that jere's alignment would point towards spring's scum/towniness.

Why does that make me think YOU killed JereIC?

I think this also deserves an answer. I find it likely that lesser experienced scum would be be tempted to put forth the theory they setup with the previous nightkill, especially when they provide very little in the way of reasoning.

Also of note is your lack of a vote. I know some people depend upon previous vote counts to see who was pushing what, but in this case you are definitely trying some momentum building and are apparently waiting for it to get some legs before actually jumping on yourself.

Condensed:

1. Can you comment on the following theory: rather than a direct Spring -> Jere kill, Zach thinks that

you

pushed for the NK on Jere with the intention of dumping blame for the kill on Spring. I don't support this theory, but I would like to hear you respond to it.

2. Ecto and I want to know why your vote isn't on Spring, even though you immediately called her out as scum. He believes that you're biding your time, waiting until other players have bolstered her wagon before adding your vote.

[Nuwen]

I just backread and realized that I voted for Spring based on inaccurate time recollection. I thought Spring's shift from supporting a policy lynch on Zero to preferring a Jere lynch was instantaneous, but she had expressed that view for a few pages, with no single trigger pushing her in one direction or the other. I'm not sure why the opposite was firmly ingrained in my memory.

unvote

"Fluff" refers to information exchange or discussion that gives the impression of grilling or stance reading, but actually goes nowhere. You pointed out that Jere said something to the effect of "we should lynch scum because it's good to lynch scum." Your exchange with Zach went along the lines of:

1. Why do you think anything Jere said is not scummy?
2. omg ask nicer. Explain why you think he IS scummy.
1. wtfnice. I already did. So why don't you?
2. omgurnotnice. So why is he scummy?
1. gtfomanners. Find why he's scummy.

[Nuwen]

I can see where the bussing theory is derived from, but it depends on three assumptions that need to be proven independently:

1. Zwet is scum
2. Nuwen is scum
3. Nuwen is currently pushing for Zwet's lynch

If 2 is assumed because 1 is assumed because 3 is predicted, the theory deteriorates.

"Zero's wagon was virtually useless" stinks of scum gloating to me.

Or someone trying to nip mislynch finger-pointing in the bud. A classic scum tactic is to set up a mislynch and then cycle through every member of the wagon and lay blame on thick, especially if the lynchee was overtly scummy. I usually open each day with an analysis of 1) Final wagon members 2) On & off votes 3) Density of support from each wagon member, but Zero's poor town play makes that senseless to do.

I don't deal with WIFOM directly either; instead I try to identify and reason out the source for it. It's one thing to fall into a WIFOM trap and another altogether to

point out

where its being employed and attempt to deduce why.

I am VERY confused by this post, because I haven't seen any posts prior to post 357, back to the beginning of the day where Nuwen states any concern for Zwet's suspicion of Spring.

Nothing screams scum/irrational town play to me like an unjustified vote. I don't have to actively pursue a player to read one of his or her posts, recognize a fault, and point it out or ask for clarification. Are you suggesting that someone needs to be tunneling another player in order for his or her suspicions not to be suspicious themselves? I think you read this post in retrograde,

after

deciding that I'm bussing Zwet, and then tried to make it fit the scenario.

D'OH! Re-read indicates that Spring doesn't look suspicious to Nuwen after all. The transformation is complete, now the entirety of the suspicion can be focused on Zwet. One thing here... what stopped you from doing a re-read BEFORE voting for Spring? Just curious.

I was working from a combination of notes and memory which are usually reliable, save me from ten-tabbed browsing, and give me an easy way to compare evolving voting patterns. You can take a peek. I'll probably have my voting matrix reordered and converted to a more readable chart soon.. A lot of my early day 1 notes are condensed though; I expected to be replaced.

[Nuwen]

See? Spring is trying to get people to say this. And are you saying tha specific cases are bad?

Spring hasn't "tried" a thing. You're the one pushing faulty presumptions here:

1) Spring had an argument with Jere and thought him scum yesterday
2) Spring probably thought that if Jere died and flipped town he would be incriminated

I've already dismissed this as WIFOM, in addition to being a poor argument. Why would Spring pursue a case if she feared the town flip would point directly in her direction (more WIFOM, sorry)? If an informed minority pushes for a lynch, he

knows the target will inevitably flip town and should prepare for it

. This is scum 101. Backing off a lynch with a predictable outcome is a bad action to present as a scumtell.

3) If a cop investigated Jere and got an innocent Spring would be in a big pit

Why would this be any more or less incriminating than a town flip? If a mislynch occurs, do all former attacks on that player instantly become scummy, logical or not?

I hate to behave exactly as BB predicted and I don't want to bolster his shaky bus theory, but I'm putting a big, fat

FOS on Zwet

.

[Nuwen]

Oh, and

prods on Wolfblitzer, madam.fobs.hero., and Sipylus

please.

[Nuwen]

Herro there.

I was really hoping Zero would get day vig'd before being lynched; his play made his wagon meaningless, and our first day's lynch could have been spent developing a more striated bandwagon to pick apart today. I'm a strong advocate of Lynch All Liars - I can't think of a single claim gambit that is more beneficial than detrimental to the town. He and his multiple claims would have been a liability for the rest of the game. But I wanted to make a case for this scrubby obvtown play so scum couldn't hide on his wagon as easily. Scum love scummy town.

Behold how Nuwen ignored Zach's case again. If Jere had been investigated it would look like scum pressing for a mislynch.

What the bugger are you going on about?

If a cop wants to use an innocent result as ammunition against someone, two things need to happen:

1. He needs to breadcrumb an innocent result,

and then question anyone still pursuing the case AFTER obvtown is laid out

. Are you really going to call pursuit on a non-obvtown target scummy?

Really

?

2. The target needed to be obvtown prior to the investigation, which Jere was not.

I think you should take another look at your list of scum tells. Most of them appear to be equally indicative of pro-town play.

[Nuwen]

Would Grimmy be cruel enough to put a Jester in this game?

[Nuwen]

I care, because Zwet is pining for a lynch right now.

http://www.mafiascum.net/forum/viewtopi ... 26#1506626

I have a pre-in for Suzumiya, but I'm not dead in one of my four minis, but I want to be in Suzumiya. What do I do?

Trying to suicide out of our game?

[Nuwen]

I just don't like that each of Zwet's posts makes less and less sense, scum OR town perspective. My policy on jesters is the same as millers: inevitably lynch (or dayvig, if available).

A jester claim is an oxymoron, assuming every player is trying to win. Claiming jester will make an actual jester's win condition impossible to satisfy, making it a stupid claim for scum to hide behind. No real jester would ever claim, thus every jester claim is either false or made by someone not playing to win.

[Nuwen]

I thought I addressed everything. Quote what you think I missed?

[Nuwen]

I am VERY confused by this post, because I haven't seen any posts prior to post 357, back to the beginning of the day where Nuwen states any concern for Zwet's suspicion of Spring.

Nothing screams scum/irrational town play to me like an unjustified vote. I don't have to actively pursue a player to read one of his or her posts, recognize a fault, and point it out or ask for clarification. Are you suggesting that someone needs to be tunneling another player in order for his or her suspicions not to be suspicious themselves? I think you read this post in retrograde,

after

deciding that I'm bussing Zwet, and then tried to make it fit the scenario.

I'm not really satisfied with this answer.

Zwet's day 2 posts prior to 357, the post troubling Zach:

Aha! Springlullaby is scum!

It's clear that Jere's flip as town puts a lot of incrimination on spring, and I completely agree with Nuwen.

In case you didn't notice, my first post was "spring is scum", before Nuwen.

These three sentences struck me as inadequate explanation for Zwet's certainty about Spring's alignment, especially because he was parroting my reasoning, which I later decided was faulty and based on misinformation. The "read minds" comment was a snarky way of asking Zwet to expand his case against Spring.

But I think it's the timing of this post, rather than the content, that you have a problem with?

361, 362: Backtracks on me being Spring's most likely scum buddy.

This? There isn't much to lean on.

My scum buddy theory pivoted around my case against Spring. Yes, I still find the exchange between Spring and Zach contrived, but I can't accuse Zach of being Spring's scum buddy if I'm no longer positive that Spring is scum.

That's

what you've been referencing for two posts? A piece of sequential logic that you could have worked out yourself?

[Nuwen]

I don't see how I "parroted" your reasoning.

and I completely agree with Nuwen.

Yesterday, your posts mentioning - MENTIONING, not even building a case against - Spring:

Springlullaby: What don't you like? I was joking about not knowing what's going on, and Ecto thought I meant it, so I set him straight.

Spring: Stop contradicting yourself, and what does Skillit have to do with anything?

Spring, you were almost nonexistent at the beginning of the game, and now you're trying to distance yourself from a Zero lynch.

The ones in question, from towniest to scummiest:

BB
Nuwen
Spring
Zach

Spring 2. WHAA??

You weren't answering Spring's questions by talking about manners and other randomness. I don't know what that has to do with anything, now that I'm one hundred percent sure that Zero is scum for fakeclaiming a Night 0 investigation.

That's quite the ironclad case, Zwet. You have a post asking for clarification on a Spring -> Zwet attack, half a post vaguely accusing Spring of contradicting herself with no example material, half a post listing Spring as the second scummiest player, a joke post, and a post directed at Zero referencing Spring's case against him.

I had thought that yesterday.

The only indication that you suspected Spring yesterday was in 225's list, but you didn't bother to explain why each player was rated more townish or scummy. If that's your strongest piece of material against Spring, why aren't you pursuing Zach more actively? You rated him more scummy than Spring - do you think he's more townish now, or are you choosing to ignore your previous ranking system in lieu of lynching Spring?

I fail to see how you arrived at "Springlullaby is scum!" from the above.

Vote: zwetschenwasser

- we'll have that bussing discussion again later, I suppose. I see and understand why Zach proposed the bus possibility, but I'm not going to let a suspicious appearance prevent me from stringing up scum.

[Nuwen]

Laying it out for you, one more time.

371

I never showed much interest in Spring yesterday, and I don't think I implied yesterday that I was going after the spring case today.

411

Eh??? I don't see how I "parroted" your reasoning. I had thought that yesterday.

Great. You "thought" Spring was scum yesterday, but made no motion to share your suspicions or lay out a case. You lynched Zero instead.

You're justifying this silence by saying the NK incriminates Spring - presumably, if you had shared your suspicions yesterday, it would have spoiled your read on the NK. Yesterday, you somehow predicted that keeping your case against Spring a secret would provide you with a large, tangible piece of evidence overnight. Essentially, you predicted that the kill would point in her direction.

So, here we are today, and your biggest piece of information gained from the NK is that Jere's alignment points directly at Spring. This is what you're making your case around. What happened to yesterday's secret case, the one you chose to keep in your "thoughts?" Are you going to share it with us? Thus far, your entire case has been built in retrograde - after the kill flipped, you decided it incriminated Spring based on a conversation YESTERDAY that you didn't name as suspect.

The rest of your case is "I agree with Nuwen." Nuwen already deconstructed her case against Spring; it was bad, for reasons outlined earlier. This is parroting, and bad parroting at that. Scum usually take valid cases made by town players and reiterate them to jump on a wagon without having to fabricate fallable reasons.

Even if we assume you had material to build a case with yesterday, why haven't you shared it now? Your only attack on Spring has been for the night kill.

[Nuwen]

im here.

vote: beyond_birthday

not gonna lie, pretty pissed that despite a few smarter people going hes town you morons you guys still lynched z3r0ph34r.

lets get the scum this time, hmm?

I'd like to make sure this post doesn't get overlooked. You wanted a Zwet lynch yesterday, with a BB followup today. Why did Zwet lose your attention, and what made BB take the spotlight?

[Nuwen]

He didn't make an attempt to defend himself.

This is not a scumtell.

This is not a scumtell.

Dear god, this is not a scumtell. And even if you believe it is, what does that say about your repeated neglect of questions/accusations tossed in your direction? Either your scum tells are wrong, or you just inadvertently claimed scum using your own set of axioms. Kudos.

[Nuwen]

Did those prods go out to Wolfblitzer and Sipylus, Grimmy?

I'd hate to have to policy lynch lurkers on day 2 over an overtly scummy player.

[Nuwen]

Thanks. Happy Fat Tuesday~

[Nuwen]

Case.

That's everyone's point. What case?

The very fact that scum wouldn't have killed JereIC might have made Spring kill him out of necessity,

Except scum DID kill Jere. You're trying to assert that killing Jere was an unlikely move for Spring, therefore it's also the most likely move for Spring. The heart of your "case" is pure WIFOM.

Confirm vote: zwetschenwasser

[Nuwen]

/facepalm

[Nuwen]

Best of luck Ecto.

[Nuwen]

you mean about how spring's dodginess is scummy?

Or on how your insistence that null tells are scum tells appears desperate and scummy?

[Nuwen]

Can we lynch him yet?

[Nuwen]

You know that self-hammering is only the correct play if you're really dumb or really scum?

[Nuwen]

Bah!

(I'd also like to see a game ended by a string of modkills. In the epic contention between scum and town, Grimmy. Always. Wins.)