Mini 775 - Hammersmouth Is Under Attack! (Game over)

[semioldguy]

semioldguy! Imagine someone has a gun to your head, and is telling you that you must choose one of kirroha or PsychoSniper to be lynched RIGHT NOW. Who do you choose, and why?

kirroha... use of the word fishy and that I am allergic to fish.

[semioldguy]

Uh, actually, it would not be too strange if he FOSed someone without voting anyone. Some people don't like early voting.

But that wouldn't really apply to percy here as he clearly is not against voting for someone early.

I'd say random vote for most people is not completely random. Something about someone's username, avatar, quote, etc. triggers that little bit extra to earn a vote.

[semioldguy]

I think getting started on them is getting us out of the random voting stage and will hopefully lead to some content. It's early and we don't have much to go on, getting started on them will start giving us more to look at. If you don't want to get started on them what would you propose we do instead? Which other direction do you think we should take?

[semioldguy]

I think getting started on them is getting us out of the random voting stage and will hopefully lead to some content. It's early and we don't have much to go on, getting started on them will start giving us more to look at. If you don't want to get started on them what would you propose we do instead? Which other direction do you think we should take?

Urgh, tunnelling on the two of us to start with, when all of this has exploded out of not much at all, is pretty dumb. There are people who still haven't really got to posting, and much more info can be gathered about the entire playerbase. Why do you want to end the random vote phase when it's what generated this information in the first place?

Why do you want to stay in the random voting stage for longer than need be? What is the purpose of the random voting stage as you see it? I personally dislike the random voting stage and I'll tell you why I want to move on from the it, which you say has generated this information... but then you answered your own question...

because it generated this information

and now we actually have something to discuss.

You claim that this "exploded out of not much at all" and I don't disagree with that, but what do you really expect to develop from the random voting? Would you suggest we jump over skyscrapers while we're still standing on the ground, or should we jump somewhere not as high first to get us in better position to jump the skyscrapers?

To clarify: Yes, getting started on us will generate content, but it won't be useful content unless one of Psycho, CJMiller or myself is scum.

How do we not generate any useful content unless one of you is scum? That makes no sense at all to me. You can get reads off of the other players and how they see the situation as well as use what people say to start going off in new directions. Just because we start somewhere doesn't mean we are going to stay with that same focus until the end of the day or that other things aren't going to be coming up for discussion.

If we're all town caught in a clusterfuck of vague reads, the scum will rub their hands and hasten this along until one of us gets lynched. I'd prefer to keep my focus wide at this point.

Why the jump to such a harsh conclusion? I didn't say anything about lynching one of you, just to get some ideas on what position other people would take about what's going on. If anything, what you are saying is something that could help us to find scum if you are all town, by seeing who is trying to convince and hasten the lynching of one of you without further support.

[semioldguy]

At this point in the game, my votes don't mean suspicion (and neither does anyone else's, for the most part).

Not only do I think the above quote is completely wrong, but comparing it to your following post…

I'm determined to keep things in the random vote stage, looking at everyone and yes, fishing for reactions before we go tunnelling in on any subset of players.

If the votes don’t mean suspicion, what exactly are you expecting to get out of the random voting stage by determining to keep the game from moving past that?

I know we have information now, and I think the way my wagon has progressed is good information. But I didn't want this to be what we're working with, and now we're stuck here.

We are by no means stuck here. As can now clearly be seen. This is way too premature to think we are stuck anywhere. It’s only the third page.

...but I think a lack of a good starting point (in the random voting stage) leads to unnecessary tunnelling,

as evidenced by my current state

.

I don’t see a bunch of tunneling going on right now. I see a variety of discussion for how early in the game it is with multiple people and things being discussed. Again, it is premature to make this claim as the game has hardly begun. Could you point out this tunneling to me?

Well, with the current state of affairs, who on my wagon do you think is scummy?

As of your post (Post 56), kabenon007
Since then, kirroha

Sure, I can gather similar information as the day progresses, but the random vote stage makes it easy for everyone to contribute without having to weigh in on this case or that case.

How is there actual contributing in the random voting stage? Especially considering your previous point that you don’t think votes mean much of anything during the random voting stage.

Seriously though, there hasn't been enough talk, and too much lurking.

The game has hardly been open, again I will reiterate that it is page three, and I also think this game is surprisingly active at this point and that not all that much lurking is going on yet. Who were you thinking of as lurking when you made this post?

I strongly disagree with your playstyle so far and the way you look at things. I would like some input as to why you think these things and in some places where you seem to jump to early conclusions and state contradictory opinions.

_ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _

Percy and Psycho could both be innocents making mistakes during the RVS, or could be scum slipping up. There is pretty much equal chance of both, so I do not think we should really get started on either of them right now. But I really want to listen to some sort of defense from Psycho.

Looking back through the thread, this quote contradicts itself. You state that you don’t want to get started on either Percy or Psycho right now. Then in the very next sentence you say you want to hear a defense from Psycho. How is this not getting started on Psycho?

I am not rushing a lynch. I am merely trying to put more pressure on Percy to see if he would actually react differently. When people are pressured, they would tend to give out scummish signals or pro-town signals depending on their alignment. In another game I played (now over) I refrained from pressuring somebody and got accused because of that, since they started thinking that the person I refused to pressure because he's already at L-2 was my scumbuddy.

This seems to go against what you thought in Post 37. You already explained that when iamusername pointed it out, so I am not looking for an answer again. But to me this seems like you are acting in a way to avoid your own lynch. Now obviously no one wants to get lynched, but if you are town and act accordingly you shouldn’t have any fear of being lynched in my opinion because (1) You shouldn’t be a target; and (2) If you are a target the town is likely going to be gaining a decent amount of information if you were to be killed and your alignment then confirmed.

Your actions as town will speak for themselves and you pointing your previous game out in this way only seems to point out your worry of self-preservation. I don’t like that. This situation is different than your last one. No one here was thinking that Percy is your scumbuddy or getting on you to pressure him more. This looks to me like preempting a future possible concern. If you are town I think you’d be able to address it as it comes and act accordingly.

It is further emphasized when you quote part of this segment yourself “just for reference” in Post 68. To me this is something a scum player would be thinking about in order to avoid a previous unfavorable outcome. If you were town you could have just played the same way you did before and pointed to your previous game(s) as just being your playstyle.

Vote: kirroha

_ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _

After spending some time thinking about it, I think I'm going to claim, because otherwise I don't see how my role is useful.

I'm a

Self-Watcher

, which means that (unless blocked or jailed) I get a list of players night-targeting me at the beginning of each day.

From what I understand, this is a doubly-edged sword. On the one hand, other than a potential doctor protection, the mafia has no night ability that would not kill or block me. That means that anybody who appears on my list at the beginning of the day is either town or a mafia doctor.

On the other hand, if I reveal my "investigation" results, I would be outing the town's power roles.

I'm still trying to figure out the best play for town with this information, but the reason I claimed is that my role requires others to target me at night, and outside of me being purposefully scummy or a stellar scum-hunter, it's not likely to happen.

I’m still running this claim through my head. Right now I think it would have been better not to reveal yourself to the town. Yes, I understand that by revealing you are making a move that hinders Mafia who plan on fake role claiming, but it does not prevent them from doing so. It just limits what they are able to fake claim as. I’m not suggesting this is bad; it’s good as far as I can tell. It’s just not all inclusive.

However, I think you should have waited to claim until after the first claimed power role. This could have possibly caught a fake-claim in the act or helped prove someone innocent who claims a power role. A town power role isn’t going to fake claim, so this does not really affect their actions any aside from choosing you as a target during the nights; but if they do that because of your claim, then they could be wasting a night when they could have used their ability in a more beneficial way. Additionally, scum are now aware of a situation that they were not aware of before.

I don’t like most day one claims out of the blue. There are a few exceptions to that, but this isn't one of them. I’m willing to believe it for now, but I don’t think it was the best move.

I would like to hear what others think of this claim though.

[semioldguy]

One more thing...

@ CJMiller

Please add more content to your posts. Thank you.

[semioldguy]

I understand your reasoning, it's just different than my own. That doesn't necessarily make one of us wrong about how to play the Self-Watcher role, just different methods. The Self-Watcher is also a moderately testable role as another player can target you and if he claims later on, he can ask you what night he targeted you. If you answer correctly, then it can help toward confirm both of you. So your role claim can help in that regard in a way that I didn't think of during my previous post. For now I believe your role claim, it's just been handled differently than I might have.

Also I don't know that a counter-claim would necessarily mean anything as I don't see anywhere in the rules that states we can't have more than one of the same role.

[semioldguy]

So I'm scum just because I don't post a 15-page dissertation every 24 hours?

Unvote

Vote: Pablo Molinero

for discriminating against new players.

Discriminating against short posts is not the same as discriminating against new players.

[semioldguy]

This seems to go against what you thought in Post 37. You already explained that when iamusername pointed it out, so I am not looking for an answer again. But to me this seems like you are acting in a way to avoid your own lynch. Now obviously no one wants to get lynched, but if you are town and act accordingly you shouldn’t have any fear of being lynched in my opinion because (1) You shouldn’t be a target; and (2) If you are a target the town is likely going to be gaining a decent amount of information if you were to be killed and your alignment then confirmed.

Your actions as town will speak for themselves and you pointing your previous game out in this way only seems to point out your worry of self-preservation. I don’t like that. This situation is different than your last one. No one here was thinking that Percy is your scumbuddy or getting on you to pressure him more. This looks to me like preempting a future possible concern. If you are town I think you’d be able to address it as it comes and act accordingly.

It is further emphasized when you quote part of this segment yourself “just for reference” in Post 68. To me this is something a scum player would be thinking about in order to avoid a previous unfavorable outcome. If you were town you could have just played the same way you did before and pointed to your previous game(s) as just being your playstyle.

The "Just for Reference" bit was one of my previous posts that I think you all might have missed, not a quote from another game. And sorry, I didn't really get what you meant about why you suspected me. Can you explain?

First, the quote should be from me, not Pablo. Second, I specifically mention the fact the quote was of yourself from a previous game... in fact I quoted the first time you did this to point this out. I suspect you didn't read my post very well if these two things slipped by you and that may be the culprit for why you don't really get what I mean about why I suspect you. I am suspecting you because there are contradictions in your posts, both textual and personality contradictions. You also seem to be too worried about appearing town. If you are town, there shouldn't be a need to emphasize it as much as you are. You seem to be forcing it. The excuses you have used so far for some of your actions don't apply to the questions asked of you, they have been deflections that don't actually resolve the question asked.

One more thing... How come you didn't address the other part of my post about you and ignored the one question I did ask?

[semioldguy]

And I didn't know the quote was from a previous game. If so, can you give me the URL to the post that I had made? Sorry, since I play quite a few games at a time, I do mess things up a bit.

However, I'm kinda sure that I've posted that post in this game. Somewhere on Page 2, I think.

EBWOP, I meant to say wasn't from a previous game. Post 76 should be able to confirm this as a typo from me in post 84. As I quoted it from you and mentioned the post where you quote yourself later, both on page 3 (post 57 and 68 from you, respectively). Sorry for that typo there though in post 84, I've understood the whole time that you were quoting from a post in this game.

[semioldguy]

My question still stands:

Percy and Psycho could both be innocents making mistakes during the RVS, or could be scum slipping up. There is pretty much equal chance of both, so I do not think we should really get started on either of them right now. But I really want to listen to some sort of defense from Psycho.

You state that you don’t want to get started on either Percy or Psycho right now. Then in the very next sentence you say you want to hear a defense from Psycho. How is this not getting started on Psycho?

It's one thing to change opinions on things between posts with new points being brought up and things happening, that can be perfectly understandable depending on the situation, but this still post confuses me.

[semioldguy]

I can wholeheartedly contend that everyone who thought you were a scumbuddy for not wanting to put more pressure at L-2 is a complete and total idiot. I will personally go up them, hike my leg and pee on them.

Please help me out here. Who, exactly, thought she was a scumbuddy of Percy's for not wanting to put him at L-2. Who accused her of that? I think I missed that. (Not being sarcastic - if it's there, please point it out)

I thought it was pretty clear he was referring to this:

In another game I played (now over) I refrained from pressuring somebody and got accused because of that, since they started thinking that the person I refused to pressure because he's already at L-2 was my scumbuddy.

and was not referring to this game's events.

[semioldguy]

@ kirroha

The reason I find it suspicious is not because you are defending yourself and not because you are doing things pro-town, but it is suspicious because you are unnecessarily describing and/or implying that what you are doing in this game as being pro-town actions, when doing so it not necessary. If what you are doing is pro-town, it will speak for itself. You don't have to and shouldn't preempt it by saying or explaining that you are doing something because that's what town would do or because someone else might think that if you didn't do something you would be perceived as scummy. This shouldn't be confused with not explaining things, just to avoid certain kinds of explanation in certain ways.


@ CJMiller

The last vote count was only twelve posts ago. Only one vote has even changed since then. Have some patience.

[semioldguy]

Like for example, you said, "Why are you being so defensive? If you're Town you shouldn't care much" (it's not the exact quote, I am too lazy to find the original, but he asked something along those lines) and of course, I have to answer that what I was doing (aka defending myself) is considered pro-town.

I have not questioned why you were being defensive, nor have I ever thought you guilty for that. In fact, I specifically say in Post 113 that it is not why I find you suspicious. Next time spend the few extra moments looking for a quote before completely misrepresenting someone else (that would be in the best interest of the town). Artem posted a good example of what I've been referring to:

Okay, purely defending myself isn't going to let the Town go anywhere. I've read through all the posts, so I should post a bit on what I think about the players here so far.

This is not a response to somebody "picking up things that you have been doing and throwing them back at you". This is an explanation that what you're about to do is what a good townie should do. I'm with the semioldguy: a townie should let their actions speak for themselves.

That quote by you could have been left out of your post. Adding it in makes it look like you are trying to appear pro-town rather than just being pro-town.

I'd comment more on kirroha's responses to me, but it seems others have pretty much pointed out the same things I would have.

[semioldguy]

This is why I *hate* people defending me, but putting that aside.

Just to clarify I wasn't so much defending you as making a correction to what I saw as a mistake by another player, he clearly just missed something. I figure that by trying to set him straight sooner he would get his focus off of something meaningless and back to more important things. I can't know how long it would be for you to come and correct him and I feel that correcting people in cases where it is almost certain where something went wrong it is better to do it sooner rather than later.

[semioldguy]

I don't think it very likely for CJMiller to flip as scum. I'm willing to bet on his innocence. That being said, his style of play works against the progress of the town and I am fairly sure some opportunistic scum are getting in on his wagon to blend in with the frustrated townies.

Personally, I wouldn't be very comfortable with CJMiller still being around in a lynch or lose situation. Having him around obfusctes reads on everyone else and game progress in general as can clearly be seen by what has unfolded today, regardless of his allegience. His play is frustrating and distracting from other aspects of this game that could use more attention.

* * *

I have a hypothetical question for everyone (minus CJMiller who probably doesn't really answer questions anyway):

If we knew that CJMiller was a 100% confirmed townie, which he is not but let's say he is for the purpose of this question, what do you think would be the best course of action for the town to take under the assumption that his style of posting and voting does not change?

[semioldguy]

What is with the unprovoked day one claiming?! Why do people feel the need to make themselves known like that? We don't want to help scum figure out who have roles.

@ kirroha

Your soft claim is bad for the town. Don't claim any further and you shouldn't have said as much as you did.

[semioldguy]

Unvote; Vote: iamausername

My scum list now has two people.

Iaaun and kabe?

What do you think about kirr and CJ?

Iaaun-Actually, not on my scum list.

Kabe-On my probably scum list

Kirr-If I view her with the same eyes I'd give zwetchenwasser stupidity, she looks like dumb townie...

CJ-Looks like an idiot. Not particularly either alignment, just an idiot.

Then who is the second person on your scumlist?

Why are you voting for a player who is not on your scum list? Especially since your previous vote was on someone who is on your scum list.

[semioldguy]

As of right now, I'm not going to explain who is on #2 on my scum list because, to be completely honest, it is a HUGE reach. So, I'm just leaving the person there until I get a chance to better review it (with a little hindsight day 2, hopefully.)

I don't like this. You are hiding information that could be helpful to the town based off the hope that you make it to day two. A town aligned player shouldn't withhold opinions at the end of the day because he thinks he will make it through the night, because we don't have control over whether or not we will make it to the next day. I'm not saying that I think you should reveal it now if you don't think it advantageous, but to say you are waiting until day two is just bad in my opinion.

[semioldguy]

As of right now, I'm not going to explain who is on #2 on my scum list because, to be completely honest, it is a HUGE reach. So, I'm just leaving the person there until I get a chance to better review it (with a little hindsight day 2, hopefully.)

I don't like this. You are hiding information that could be helpful to the town based off the hope that you make it to day two. A town aligned player shouldn't withhold opinions at the end of the day because he thinks he will make it through the night, because we don't have control over whether or not we will make it to the next day. I'm not saying that I think you should reveal it now if you don't think it advantageous, but to say you are waiting until day two is just bad in my opinion.

Actually, telling you would just make me look stupid. And I'm not going to wait till day 2. In fact, I probably won't mention it as it gets dumber and dumber as the player posts. It isn't anti town to hold back useless information, and mostly irrelevant since its turned out to be complete garbage anyway.

Well, revealing who it is and then your explanation as for why you don't think that player seems guilty any more could be very helpful for the town. Otherwise I'm just inclined to disbelieve you that there was even a second suspect to begin with.

[semioldguy]

My opinions haven't changed much since my vote post and kirroha still didn't full claimed by the way, with there being possible vigilantes with a varying number of bullets (from 0 to 2). At the very least I think she should have either claimed having some bullets or no bullets as that would go a long way to both proving herself and being useful to the town. I am going to wait to hear from her replacement before making further judgment about her claim.

[semioldguy]

I don't think kirroha (or her replacement) should shoot herself.

[semioldguy]

kirroha has asked for replacement due to vacation/parents/time issues saying that she won't be able to post. She is in at least two other games currently with no mention of her vacation and no replacement requests there. She has even posted in one of those games within the last six hours and at multiple different times of day over the past three days and it appears that she intends on being active there.

I am going to go with "Lynch all Liars" and say we should get rid of her today.

[semioldguy]

I PM'ed the mod to ask if it was okay to post that in the thread. He said it was okay.

[semioldguy]

Percy's vote wasn't on kirroha anyway.

[semioldguy]

"Bah!" Go Town!!!

[semioldguy]

On night three iamausername should have jailed Sotty7 and Xtoxm should have tracked Pablo Molinero.

Since you knew there was a roleblocker it would have been a reasonable assumption to think that both mafia would be having night actions and having more accountability or prevention for what people are doing at night seems like the better plan to me.