Mini 829 - Internal Struggle Mafia (Over)

[ryan2754]

OT: Alex, the flavor of this game so far is tremendous.

*I'm glad you liked it.

Vote: ryan2754

for being scum in the last game I played!

Well,

Vote: DRK

for being scum with me. With my random vote out of the way:

Unvote

.

Vote Dank

For being the first person to make a second vote for someone.

WTH?!

unvote, vote:Idiot King

for having a "real" vote.

Interesting. I kind of felt the same way when reading it.

You don't like Jeff Gordon, so you put the

third

random vote on Jason?

Indirectly trying to protect jason from quick bandwagon?


Then HipHop gets called out about his vote (DTM said he made idiotking L4) and then hiphop unvotes. Seems scummy.
Then Paradoxombie says this:

FOS:

Hiphop and Idiot King. I don't like the way they each unvoted immediately when their votes were called into question, and how they didn't put any other votes down in place of them.

Hiphop then later in Post 33 tries to reenter the RVS with his vote on RC, not to mention it came AFTER paradoxombie's post saying it's scummy that they didn't place another vote down. Although I don't particularly agree with the idea that each unvote needs to be followed by a vote, the fact that hiphop revoted a seemingly random vote after Paradoxombie's call-out after RVS had finished is extremely scummy.


I do find both unvotes to be slightly scummy, like paradoxombie says.

I'm confused. Normally you would unvote when you see a bandwagon forming if you were part of that bandwagon. You voted for danks first though not jason.

Wow, didn't realize this initially. Definitely makes IdiotKing look scummier.
1.) IK votes Dank for being FIRST PERSON to make a SECOND VOTE
2.) Jason wagon follows
3.) IK UNVOTES

Dank

, not Jason. If you aren't voting the bandwagon, why unvote and comment on the bandwagon?


Does anyone else have a weird vibe about the exchange between Hiphop's 22 and IK's 23? Who does everyone think is wrong, in that exchange? Hiphop for the logic of his IK vote, or IK for his explanation?

I believe they are just lurkers, and I despise lurkers. They make the game less fun for everybody else, and they hurt the side that they are with. Their posts no matter how small can give us more activity and more discussion. I am waiting for them to post, but that does not mean I won't be active in trying to locate the rest of the scum.

1.) Don't call me a lurker. We are on page 3. Oh, and I despise lurkers as well.
2.) I had a wedding this weekend. I also learned this past week that my Uncle and my GF's Uncle died. It's been a hectic few days, to say the least.

You [Hiphop] were also quick to unvote. And you didn't give any explanation either. You say you want to give him a chance to answer, but I don't think that makes sense when you were already voting him for something else altogether.

Good point. Hiphop is being fairly hypocritical.

As for why I am not voting for him, it is because he already has two votes on him, and I don't want scum to pounce on him without giving himself a chance to defend for himself. As I already explained I didn't know he had three votes on him.

Really? Worrying about L-4/L-3? It would be dumb for scum to jump on at that point, and get a quick lynch. We are sinking to a brand new low, people. Extremely scummy statement by hiphop trying to appear cautious.

And my wording in my original unvote post was exactly what I intended it to be. I saw a problem with a bandwagon forming, and so unvoted my random vote. My post makes sense in this context.

Who thought I was voting for jason instead of danks?

1.) You gave off the impression you were voting for jasont by mentioning the bandwagon. You make no transition/segway between your vote on danks and the bandwagon on jason, thus implying you are unvoting jason. Thus, we are confused why you would say the things about the bandwagon on unvote a random vote at the same post, with no transition between the two thoughts. Thus, what you intended the post to be is not clear, and thus it's weird you say it's exactly what you meant it to be.

What case could I possibly have? "A bandwagon was formed, and those 3 were part of it." That's all the information available; everything else that I can see could be explained away as being merely part of the RVS, as you say.

Umm, let's go back a few posts. You say:

...and was considering investigating the bandwagon [voters on Jason]...

So you say you were thinking about investigating the bandwagon, then later say the only information available is the bandwagon itself? So you admit that there is nothing to investigate, despite wanting to previously do it? Or is it that everything you could investigate is "part of the RVS?" and thus not readily able to be investigated? You seem to be contradicting yourself.


Shrine, in your post 46, where did you take DTM's quote from?

Hiphop continually trying to deflect.

Unvote
vote: ryan

@zach. It has only been a couple of days, not even half our required time. And that lurker is as suspicious as anyone else. I would of kept my vote on idiotking, but I dislike lurkers more.

So you would rather vote lurkers than "scum number 1?" Usually, when you admit that your vote on lurkers is a pressure vote to get them to post, it doesn't work. Pressure votes lose their luster when people know they are for pressure to post.

I'm considering on putting a vote on hiphop, but his lack of experience sort of is making me feel sympathetic and going against it. But you know what, after rereading his posts, I'm definitely not getting a real townly feeling from him, so...

Vote: hiphop

Anyone else getting a weird vibe by this post. Sort of like, "If he is revealed as town, I told you it could of been lack of experience." Seems like a sort of fencesitting.

I must be scums greatest dream. I would think that if I was scum, my buddies would of defended of me, before this got out of hand.

No. Good experienced scumbuddies would have harped you and pounced on you for your play in this game, not defended it, especially this early in the game. It would have been an extremely bad move for scumbuddies to do so.

By the way Ryan still hasn't posted yet, and there is a little more than 12 hours left, I believe.

Good God. You can count. Read above.

I could see both IK's and HipHops play as VI/newb/inexperience. IK, what is your level of experience?

DTM, you have read my meta? What games?

I will take my vote off of Ryan, because he is either going to be replaced, and I want to give the person who replaces him a chance, or he eventually will post anyways, and I will probably unvote then anyways.

You continually outdo yourself, hiphop. Someone applauds you for lurker hunting, and you vote me, but before I even post, you unvote me. Seems fairly weird to unvote a "lurker" before he posts, especially when you are trying to lurker hunt.

unvote

vote:Toro

just a hunch right now may come back with reasons later.

So let me get this straight. You have ahunch on toro. Yet, you say you will come back with reasons later.

1.) This early in a game, I have no problem with hunch votes, but hunches have reasons now? I thought hunches were gut feelings, without any reason?
2.) Voting someone and giving reasons later is scummy.


I would like my question to IK answered before I make my vote.

[ryan2754]

EBWOP: Fixed Quote/Formatting Tags for readability. I would like people to answer the questions posed in my post.
OT: Alex, the flavor of this game so far is tremendous.

*I'm glad you liked it.

Vote: ryan2754

for being scum in the last game I played!

Well,

Vote: DRK

for being scum with me. With my random vote out of the way:

Unvote

.

Vote Dank

For being the first person to make a second vote for someone.

WTH?!

unvote, vote:Idiot King

for having a "real" vote.

Interesting. I kind of felt the same way when reading it.

You don't like Jeff Gordon, so you put the

third

random vote on Jason?

Indirectly trying to protect jason from quick bandwagon?


Then HipHop gets called out about his vote (DTM said he made idiotking L4) and then hiphop unvotes. Seems scummy.
Then Paradoxombie says this:

FOS:

Hiphop and Idiot King. I don't like the way they each unvoted immediately when their votes were called into question, and how they didn't put any other votes down in place of them.

Hiphop then later in Post 33 tries to reenter the RVS with his vote on RC, not to mention it came AFTER paradoxombie's post saying it's scummy that they didn't place another vote down. Although I don't particularly agree with the idea that each unvote needs to be followed by a vote, the fact that hiphop revoted a seemingly random vote after Paradoxombie's call-out after RVS had finished is extremely scummy.


I do find both unvotes to be slightly scummy, like paradoxombie says.

I'm confused. Normally you would unvote when you see a bandwagon forming if you were part of that bandwagon. You voted for danks first though not jason.

Wow, didn't realize this initially. Definitely makes IdiotKing look scummier.
1.) IK votes Dank for being FIRST PERSON to make a SECOND VOTE
2.) Jason wagon follows
3.) IK UNVOTES

Dank

, not Jason. If you aren't voting the bandwagon, why unvote and comment on the bandwagon?

Does anyone else have a weird vibe about the exchange between Hiphop's 22 and IK's 23? Who does everyone think is wrong, in that exchange? Hiphop for the logic of his IK vote, or IK for his explanation? Or do people think this exchange is normal?

I believe they are just lurkers, and I despise lurkers. They make the game less fun for everybody else, and they hurt the side that they are with. Their posts no matter how small can give us more activity and more discussion. I am waiting for them to post, but that does not mean I won't be active in trying to locate the rest of the scum.

1.) Don't call me a lurker. We are on page 3. Oh, and I despise lurkers as well.
2.) I had a wedding this weekend. I also learned this past week that my Uncle and my GF's Uncle died. It's been a hectic few days, to say the least.

You [Hiphop] were also quick to unvote. And you didn't give any explanation either. You say you want to give him a chance to answer, but I don't think that makes sense when you were already voting him for something else altogether.

Good point. Hiphop is being fairly hypocritical.

As for why I am not voting for him, it is because he already has two votes on him, and I don't want scum to pounce on him without giving himself a chance to defend for himself. As I already explained I didn't know he had three votes on him.

Really? Worrying about L-4/L-3? It would be dumb for scum to jump on at that point, and get a quick lynch. We are sinking to a brand new low, people. Extremely scummy statement by hiphop trying to appear cautious.

And my wording in my original unvote post was exactly what I intended it to be. I saw a problem with a bandwagon forming, and so unvoted my random vote. My post makes sense in this context.

Who thought I was voting for jason instead of danks?

1.) You gave off the impression you were voting for jasont by mentioning the bandwagon. You make no transition/segway between your vote on danks and the bandwagon on jason, thus implying you are unvoting jason. Thus, we are confused why you would say the things about the bandwagon on unvote a random vote at the same post, with no transition between the two thoughts. Thus, what you intended the post to be is not clear, and thus it's weird you say it's exactly what you meant it to be.

What case could I possibly have? "A bandwagon was formed, and those 3 were part of it." That's all the information available; everything else that I can see could be explained away as being merely part of the RVS, as you say.

Umm, let's go back a few posts. You say:

...and was considering investigating the bandwagon [voters on Jason]...

So you say you were thinking about investigating the bandwagon, then later say the only information available is the bandwagon itself? So you admit that there is nothing to investigate, despite wanting to previously do it? Or is it that everything you could investigate is "part of the RVS?" and thus not readily able to be investigated? You seem to be contradicting yourself.

Shrine, in your post 46, where did you take DTM's quote from?

Hiphop continually trying to deflect.

Unvote
vote: ryan

@zach. It has only been a couple of days, not even half our required time. And that lurker is as suspicious as anyone else. I would of kept my vote on idiotking, but I dislike lurkers more.

So you would rather vote lurkers than "scum number 1?" Usually, when you admit that your vote on lurkers is a pressure vote to get them to post, it doesn't work. Pressure votes lose their luster when people know they are for pressure to post.

I'm considering on putting a vote on hiphop, but his lack of experience sort of is making me feel sympathetic and going against it. But you know what, after rereading his posts, I'm definitely not getting a real townly feeling from him, so...

Vote: hiphop

Anyone else getting a weird vibe by this post. Sort of like, "If he is revealed as town, I told you it could of been lack of experience." Seems like a sort of fencesitting.

I must be scums greatest dream. I would think that if I was scum, my buddies would of defended of me, before this got out of hand.

No. Good experienced scumbuddies would have harped you and pounced on you for your play in this game, not defended it, especially this early in the game. It would have been an extremely bad move for scumbuddies to do so.

By the way Ryan still hasn't posted yet, and there is a little more than 12 hours left, I believe.

Good God. You can count. Read above.

I could see both IK's and HipHops play as VI/newb/inexperience.

IK, what is your level of experience?

DTM, you have read my meta? What games?

I will take my vote off of Ryan, because he is either going to be replaced, and I want to give the person who replaces him a chance, or he eventually will post anyways, and I will probably unvote then anyways.

You continually outdo yourself, hiphop. Someone applauds you for lurker hunting, and you vote me, but before I even post, you unvote me. Seems fairly weird to unvote a "lurker" before he posts, especially when you are trying to lurker hunt.

unvote

vote:Toro

just a hunch right now may come back with reasons later.

So let me get this straight. You have ahunch on toro. Yet, you say you will come back with reasons later.

1.) This early in a game, I have no problem with hunch votes, but hunches have reasons now? I thought hunches were gut feelings, without any reason?
2.) Voting someone and giving reasons later is scummy.

[ryan2754]

Can you explain your weird vibe here in more detail?

I can't quite put into words what I mean. It seems like hiphop attacking IK without really attacking him. Sort of a buddying proposition that later he can say: "look, I found him suspicious earlier" type thing. I had no trouble understanding IK's vote reasoning about him being the FIRST one to place a second vote, but it seems hiphop misses it, possibly on purpose, and then IK gives a fairly level-headed response, with a smiley. It just comes off as an early form of buddying. Nothing too intense, agains just a vibe.
My biggest issue with the exchange now, looking back on it, is that I can't tell if IK's vote on Dank is still a random vote with a seemingly real reason or a "Real" vote as Paradoxombie suggests - SOMETHING I THINK WE SHOULD DISCUSS, TO BE HONEST. And Something I would like IK to clear up ( Which I realize he did in 78)

Anyone else getting a weird vibe by this post. Sort of like, "If he is revealed as town, I told you it could of been lack of experience." Seems like a sort of fencesitting.

The newb card defense is weak in general, especially after hiphop mentions he has played 3 games.

I don't understand how your response here relates to my quoting of TORO. More explanation necessary.

Nope because I don't have too much time to do a meta read at the moment, which is why I asked DRK for her thoughts. While meta reads are useful at times, I rather base an arguement against/for you with what you posted in game.

So this quote below madeby you was in response to DRK's post? (Italicized Mine)

Ryan posting a few things at a time is part of his meta

. But how is the content of his posts? I am more interested in what he posts, rather then how much.

1. That was actually just a random vote, not a real reason. I use that reason in every RVS I get into simply because it's a good, reliable, repeatable reason (because someone inevitably makes a second vote).
2. Correct.
3. I don't understand what you mean 'voting the bandwagon'. Do you mean voting ON the bandwagon? As in being part of the bandwagon? In that case, I'd actually thought the RVS was over, and so unvoted Dank (unvoted my random vote) in preparation of an examination of the bandwagon. That didn't occur, however, because shortly thereafter I was pursued because of the unvote.

1.) Fair enough. Can you link to other games where you used this from this site?
3.) I guess that makes more sense, I guess. I find it extremely weird you think we are out of the RVS on page 1, and just because someone gained 3 votes. I just see no reason to unvote.

So you chose not to follow up on the examination of the bandwagon because you were being pursued? You can scumhunt and defend at the same time, I do it all the time.

-Town expects A to happen
-I make B happen instead
-Town is surprised that B happened instead of A

By this logic, B doesn't have to be scummy, just unexpected, or in this case, misunderstood (I'm a confusing person). A is also not necessarily pro-town, just what is expected. My question is, how is it actually scummy for me to have acted in this manner?

In light of your "thinking we were out of RVS" on Page 1, I guess it doesn't look nearly as scummy. It was just fairly unclear why you unvoted Dank (not being bandwagoned) and discuss the bandwagon on Jason in the same post, without transition. Just doesn't flow at all. Not necessarily scummy. Looking back now, I would have found it more scummy if you unvoted JasonT at that point (it would seem you would be afraid of a L-4 scenario, which has been discussed). Given your explanation, and the fact that your vote was on Dank, I guess it makes sense. The post (18) with no transitions just made it seem as though you were unvoting jason.

I can see how it'd be seen as contradictory. It would have been impossible for me to investigate at that exact point. Instead, I was hoping for something else to happen, some new development that I could see concerning the bandwagon. However, thing's didn't turn out as I'd expected.

It's even more contradictory given that you now say you didn't pursue because you were being pressure about your unvote. So now we have the following scenario:
1.) IK says he is going to pursue/examine the Jason RVS bandwagon.
2.) When asked later to do it, says there's nothing to look at.
3.) Later says he didn't look at it because he was being pursued for unvote (very scummy)
4.) Admits it may be contradictory, and then says it was impossible for him to look at something at that "exact point." Then why even mention looking at the bandwagon on page 3? Why not save it for later?
All this seems very contradictory.

Seems I find hiphop and IK fairly strong lynches at this point

Hiphop: Unvotes when called out; revotes a lurker right after Paradoxombie asks why he unvoted and subsequently didn't place another vote somewhere else; attempts to go back to RVS (a form of deflection); claims inexperience, which can only take you so far; worrying about L-3/L-4; Hypocritical on IK's unvote, where he did the same thing; deflecting onto lurkers on PAGE 3; would rather vote lurkers than scum number 1; after voting a "lurker", takes his vote off before allowing said lurker to post, which goes against his strategy to lurker hunt; votes toro without reasons, and says its a hunch.

IK: Somewhat experience, so such mistakes seem surprising; says he's going to examine RVS jason wagon, then says there is nothing to look at, then says he didn't pursue it because he was being pressured on his unvote (completely different reason), then says at that exact point couldn't look at RVS wagon.

And how long did it take ryan2754 to write that!?

About 35 minutes. Multiple open windows helps with quote tags and quick copy/pasting. Plus 3 pages isn't that bad to analyze.

Does seems like RC is slightly strawmanning in his argument on Dank. The voacbulary issue was a small portion of Dank's a rgument, where the jist of it is the bandwagon.

I tend to agree with Paradoxombie's ideas about Toro, but I would like him to respond before I think about voting him. You can tell alot from someone's defense.

I also think IK's defense as of yet is far from adequate and the same about Hiphop, with an AtE and constant WIFOM.

Suspects:
High: IK, HipHop
Medium: Toro
Slight: RC

@Paradoxombie: I like for people to generally have a chance to defend themselves before I throw a vote at them. As I have stated, I would like a response from Toro, IK, and Hiphop. Once they all respond fully to the allegations against them, I am sure a clearcut candidate for a vote will come up. I barely place pressure votes on people. The vote is the best thing for the town, and I don't use it lightly like some people.

[ryan2754]

Also, Alex, can we get an updated vote count?

*Sure.

[ryan2754]

Unfortunately, at this point there's so little actual logic and almost no fact, and as such, it's hard for me to do my job correctly...

@ryan Everything you said on me is the truth how can I defend against it.

Hiphop, yes they are facts, but they are facts that make you scummy, and thus, a good thing to build a case around.

Look at the above two quotes. One person says there is no actual logic, thus no fact. The other says everything is fact.

Interesting dilemma here.

What does everyone else think about the cases so far this game? Actual logic/fact or not?

In my opinion, I think we have a fairly large portion of good logic, contrary to what IK thinks.

Toro is currently self-voting?

Post 116 looks like an AtE about his scumhunting abilities. Not to mention a softclaim as town when it is completely unnecessary.

IK and Hiphop have both responded to the arguments against them. It was obvious who had a legitimate response.

Vote:hiphop

[ryan2754]

I'm really not liking the way toro unvoted after getting a couple of votes. Toro, I didn't vote you for voting, I voted you for having suspicions that did not strike me as genuine. You were wishywashy when you got on the wagon, but after you'd actually voted it seemed nothing could change your mind. When hiphop tries to reason with you, you essentially shrug him off, like you're not even interested in the possibility that he's town. It's quite different from a few posts before, when you weren't even sure whether to vote him. Then when a couple of people vote you, you hastily unvote. You're all over the place.

Agreed. Seems like the main argument against toro right now.

The first group is trickier. Up until recently, hiphop's been giving scum more than enough to use against him.

You seem to be implying that you know scum are going for the hiphop lynch, which can be followed with you knowing hiphop is town.

But when I place a vote (aside from RVS) I am 100% sure I feel that person is scum.

Really? Only 100%?!? Wow. That's interesting, because if you happen to be a vanilla townie, there is no way in hell, save investigations results/other PR such scenarios that you would know who his 100% scum.

Who are you voting for currently? IK...so you KNOW he is scum? Not to mention, has Jason voted anyone else today (outside of RVS)? If so, that means he has two scum nailed on day one. AMAZING!

IK-says hiphop's "exploded in scumminess" but never votes for him
Jason-already explained [Fencesitting]

Missed these earlier. +1 scumpoint to both.

(I do think this was a tad scummy yes, but I believe he acknowledged he was wrong on)

So just because hiphop acknowledged he was wrong, he's off the hook in your mind?

Logic requires fact, fact can't happen exist without concrete evidence of it, true concrete evidence doesn't exist until night actions have taken place, people are dead, and true roles of the departed are known. Then, using the logic from the next day, the logic of the previous day can be dissected and new facts emerge. At least that's how I see it, and helps explain why I do so poorly in RVS.

I understand that, but I was just pointing out the discrepancies between you and hiphop. He says he can't argue the facts against him (voting, unvoting, etc.), where you say facts are alignments. Thus, you think what hiphop regards as facts, aren't necessarily facts, and thus can't be used for logic. I understand your point of view, but I think it is possible to use logic outside of knowing alignments (aka cases are made not based on alignments). Just different theory on the use of logic.

Also can you elaborate more on IK and Hiphop's responses and how IK's demonstrate better logic then hiphop's? Also can you also elaborate more on "IK has a legitimate excuse" ?

Question 1: Don't understand what you are asking. Is it that you are asking me why I think IK's response to my accusations is better than hiphop's. If so, then the quick answer is that IK actually defended against the attacks whereas hiphop just said "I can't argue because they are facts."
But, according to what IK said about facts, those are necessarily facts. Thus, hiphop CAN defend against them. I am still waiting a defense.
Question 2: I never said "excuse," I said "response." Thus, when you initially read my post did you see/read/think I said 'excuse,' or did you accidently type it in wrong and think I read 'response?'

I would recommend you not be weary of using your vote a little more strategically. Be flexible. Your vote is a tool, not a promise. You definitely do not have to be 100% sure of anything before you use your vote.

Coaching? Just out of curiosity, and I am pretty sure it's been mentioned, what are the other pairs of coaching that have gone so far in this game? Granted, this one seems more geared towards future overall mafia play and not this game specifically, but still wanted to point it out.

I have tried explaining, but I can only go so far.

No, I don't think you really have. Against my accusations on you, you said you can't argue the "facts."

Don’t you believe that sometimes a town can act scummy?

1.) This answer is obvious, and thus makes this a dumb question. OF COURSE town looks scummy. During the course of a game, almost everyone has a scumtell or two. It's multiple instances of scum tells and looking at which scumtells are the worst given the context that reveals scum.
2.) This seems like a deflection away from my accusations and away from the course that the discussion is going. Seems like a game-theory question to change the current discussion. I'm not buying it.
3.) Again implying you are town when it is unecessary.

Your play style is potentially very dangerous to the town. You need to learn as you go and develop your play style into something that is more than just going with the flow.

Coaching? Again, seems more geared towards general mafia play than this game in particular. Again, pointing it out because it caught my eye, and well, because I agree with his assessment.

Oh, I have been trying to be cautious and be sure with my vote because I thought not being 100% sure on my vote would actually be hurtful and dangerous to the town.

AKA agree with DTM's 171.

Your cases against IK and Hiphop amount to simply that they unvoted when criticized and haven't done much scumhunting. They both did those things, but hiphop is the one who actually tried to scumhunt even at the cost of more suspicion, while IK has been laying low and on the defensive since RVS. Hiphop admitted that he made mistakes, while IK made a bunch of excuses. Now you vote hiphop who agrees with you and legitimize IK who basically still hasn't left RVS?

And as you pointed out IK is the one who we should have higher expectations for since he's played a game on this site before.


So Im pretty suspicious that you consider hiphop the obvious choice. I'm not saying that voting hiphop is unacceptable, but looking at your arguments and both of their play, picking hiphop without even explaining your logic looks like a slip, because now you're choice seems more based on majority support than the facts. Nothing about IK's response is more legitimate than hiphops. In fact it looks very defensive because it shows much more effort and insight than any of IK's scumhunting. So your whole interest in their responses seems pointless, because I don't think their responses played into your decision at all, they just made it easier to make the vote you already wanted to.

Your thoughts are misquided, or wrong, on a few accounts.
1.) No, that is not the reason for my vote. In my post for 100, I list, in summary mode, the scumtells/case against each. You will see that hiphops is much more involved and multiplied. Add to that that hiphop is being hypocritical with going after someone for not voting their "most scummy player" when he indeed did the same thing. The majority of the case on IK, however, was his contradictory statements on why he eventually DIDN'T LOOK at the bandwagon.
2.) We must be reading different threads then. IK's posts, in my opinion, have been much more helpful and coherent then hiphop. Thus, hiphop seems like struggling scum. Sure, it would make sense that IK is on the defense, given his situation. If you could give some posts/evidence where hiphop actually scumhunted and how IK has not and has been laying low, that would be fantastic.
3.) Just because hiphop admits his mistakes, doesn't mean it isn't still scummy (you are saying what jason said that I mentioned earlier in this post). Where was IK making excuses? I may have missed that.
4.) How has IK not left RVS? What is hiphop agreeing with me about?
5.) Yes, he does have higher expectations. But the amount of things hiphop has done wrong doubles that of IK. Thus my vote.
6.) If you read my post 100 and subsequent 149, you will see that it was a logical transition. I suspected both, and wanted a response from both. Clearly, one was inadequate, saying he has nothing to argue against (hiphop). Defeatist, and total bs. So no, I DO logically support my vote.
7.) Majority? There was one other vote on hiphop at the time. The bandwagon had fallen apart. There was no majority when I VOTED.

FOS: paradox

8.) A lot of IK's response was more legitimate than hiphops. Hiphop said I can't argue, and I made a mistake. Completely bogus response in the game of mafia, ever.
9.) This sentence from the above quote: "In fact it looks very defensive because it shows much more effort and insight than any of IK's scumhunting" doesn't make sense. I think you may have messed up the pronoun usage. Retry that sentence again because it doesn't make sense as is. Do you mean hiphop's response looks defensive because more more and insight compared to IK's scumhunting? Because again, I don't see it. Maybe I am just missing a post, but hiphop's RESPONSE TO ME was inadequate.
10.) No, my interest in their responses is not pointless. Who was more scummy before they responded, IMO? Hiphop. I wanted to await their responses/defense to then make a decision on my vote. Hiphop allayed no suspicions, thus my vote. Don't see what is so hard to understand about that.

Suspicions
High: Hiphop
Growing to High: Jason
Medium: Toro, IK

[ryan2754]

To everyone:
For the next five or six days, I will be working on getting moved up to Toledo for medical school.
Thus, my time for the next few days for mafia will be limited.
I am just posting to let everyone know that I WON'T be going absent, but will keep along with the thread. However, my responses will be limited as I will not have the time to make my long posts that I usually make. Just letting everyone know.

[ryan2754]

Just for everyone, because of the rate and depth of the psts involved since page 8 (my last significant post), I will not post until Thursday.

On Thursday, I will have a couple hours to dedicate to this game, and hopefully make a reasonable post.

[ryan2754]

Just got the internet working today in my new apartment. It's a little late now. Sorry for all of this it has been a stressful week.

A decent sized catch up post will come tomorrow, for sure (I mean it)...

[ryan2754]

In all the games I have played, I have found RC to be the most unreadable player I have ever played with. I have played 3 games with him, and have yet to have a reasonable idea on his alignment. One minute I think he is scummy, the next I don't. Suffice to say, I see nothing out of the ordinary with regards to his play.

...
@RC
Actually you pointed a potential OMGUS FOS on ryan with 177 right there.

Umm, no, it's not FOS. Re-read the post, and you will see it's not OMGUS.

If he said I and idk were doing it, than those three were definitely doing it more.

Definitely see what you are saying.

I also gave a reason for voting toro, which I didn’t have time to do that night.

Ok, sure, but that is still suspicious in my mind. Anytime someone makes a post with a vote without an explanation, it is suspicious and is perceived as either withholding information from the town or voting with cause. It seems it would be easier if people would just witheld their vote until they had the time to explain it.

Yay Bandwagon is me [...] But I am officailly the bandwagon in the RVS of the game lol

Does Jason seem

too

happy to be bandwagoned to anyone else? More to the point, does anyone else think Jason could be trying to seem happy about it so as not to draw any suspicion?

I can see what you are saying. Humor is often used by scum in early rounds to hide their alignment.

Yay Bandwagon is me [...] But I am officailly the bandwagon in the RVS of the game lol

Does Jason seem

too

happy to be bandwagoned to anyone else? More to the point, does anyone else think Jason could be trying to seem happy about it so as not to draw any suspicion?

I can see what you are saying. Humor is often used by scum in early rounds to hide their alignment.

DRK brings up some decent points against IK. However, his opinions on IK/RC situation seems like buddying with RC. I do tend to agree with DRK (as opposed to IK) that 3 votes/L-4 on page 3 is not that big of a deal and seems like IK is trying to appear too cautious.

DRK/IK's argument/extensive posts were getting a bit annoying, especially after they started talking about game theory.

Ryan, to put it simply the main reason I suspect IK more than Hiphop is that Hiphop has been trying to get things done and IK hasn't. Maybe he is fearful scum struggling, but to me it looks more like someone who wants something more out of a game than defend himself the whole time. Im much more suspicious of a player who jumps into their shell when poked, verses hiphop who continued to apply pressure and seek new leads.

The main reason I found your argument suspicious is how you deal with hiphops response. You call it BS and bogus that Hiphop says he can't defend against your arguments. Doesn't that imply that you know your arguments to be flawed or deserving of opposition?

Paragraph 1: See, the thing is, this is how I saw it. Hiphop gets accused, bypasses it, and continues on with his assessment of the game. IK gets accused, defends himself, while then later getting back into the scumhunting, although he may be tunneling on RC.

Paragraph 2: No, it's not implying my arguments are flawed. This game is about attack and defense, and conceding to not defend yourself is a defeat, which seems pointless as both scum and town, and is anti=town, as then we have no measure to gauge his response.

I really like DRK's 223, the last few paragraphs with IK's insistence on RC's alignment and unwillingness to change his opinion.



More opportunistic voting by hiphop. The same argument could be used against DRK about the quote war, but hiphop jumps on IK.

The whole DRK/RC thing could be a few things:
1.) DRK scum, backing town RC for when RC dies, gets town points
2.) DRK town, backing town RC from scum IK
3.) DRK scum, defending scum RC

I as well would like to see this better represented case by RC on IK.

I will say this little argument has gotten us tunnelled hard. Seems Toro has left the spotlight as well as some others. Hiphop chimes in and makes himself look even more scummy.

@Hiphop: Definitely don't like your vote on hiphop for a subpar reason.

Can someone reverberate the cases for Toro and Jason and why they are scummy?

Jason for fencesitting on Hiphop and Toro for?

Personally, right now, I think IK and RC are both slightly scummy, but not worth a lynch. As much as people think hiphop is VI, he gives off scumtells like a car gives exhaust.

I don't like DRK's 315 discussing lynch candidates further down the line, trying to order the days etc.

Reading through page 13 or so I am seeing a trend with hiphops posts: He often tends to give little information when people ask him questions, and the rest of his post is dedicating strictly to asking questions of other players. It is a VERY subtle form of IIoA.

Don't like DRK's 338 either.

Jason seems to be grasping for straws recently. Seems like he is trying to scumhunt anyway, albeit with very bad reasoning, and DRK tears it apart.

Is toro getting a replacement?
Right now, I think my vote should stay where it is. Hiphop seems definitely opportunistic on IK for game theory, then later says it was combined with gut. At this point in the game, a gut vote is stupid, and using it as the main logic for your vote (with the addition of game theory) is suspect.

Confirm Vote: Hiphop

[ryan2754]

You FoS: Paradox, but "your scum/suspicious list" reflects the current town feeling at that time.

One scumtell (my FOS) does not warrant someone being a member of my suspect list. It is an accumulation of scumtells that make me suspicious of someone.

You gave a detailed reason against Paradox but a lot of it clarified your case on how scummy hiphop is.

I don't exactly understand what you are addressing her. Of course it clarified my case on hiphop. My detailed post against paradox was me showing why I found hiphop more scummy, since he personally thought Ik was. It was reaffirming my position. I don't understand your issue with this.

@Ryan
I don't under stand the transition between your FoS, your list and your counter-post to Paradox to explain why hiphop is scummier then IK. You don't elaborate on why Paradox deserves the FoS in your 177.

Again, I don't seem to be following you.
I had my list, Paradox then calls into account why I think Hiphop is more suspicious, as he thinks IK is.
Personally, I think the FOS was fairly obvious.
My FOS came right after point 7. He called me suspicious for voting for hiphop when there was a majority consensus that he was scummy, and thought I was playing off that instead of facts. Thus, I considered that pretty suspicious to turn that situation around, since when I was placing my case on hiphop, the wagon had already died down to one person. Thus the FOS, for trying to blame me for something that is clearly a misrepresentation.

It looks like you are scum keeping the bandwagon opening, OMGUSing against the person who raised some flags against you, and didn't follow through that FoS in that list.

Keeping the bandwagon opening? Well, let's see, I find hiphop most suspicious, so that is where my vote is, which is what this game is about. How can that be considered "keeping the bandwagon open"? It seems by your logic people who vote against the norm are "keeping the bandwagon open," whereas if you vote with the crowd people call it "bandwagoning."
Also, I have explained why it's not an OMGUS. I have also already explained why the FOS is not on my list.

You also lied that "you didn't FoS" in 177.

I apologize, it was a typo. I meant to say I didn't OMGUS, not that I didn't FOS.

It'd be alright if you were just saying he may be avoiding a response or that his actions were suspicious without an explanation, but you seem to be framing it very differently. What I see you saying here that he is obliged as a town player to defend himself to the best of his abilities. That sounds more like an attorney than a townie.

Your argument against hiphop was just stating his actions and saying they're scummy. What were you expecting in response? A theory discussion with a new player? Did you want him to endlessly defend his mistakes or something?

Yes, I feel townies, if they are town, should defend themselves, at all costs, in order to avoid a mislynch. I was expecting him to defend himself adequately, and explain what happened, not just keel over and die. No no theory discussion. Yes, I think people should defend themselves, even when they make mistakes in this game. Sure, they can address the mistake they made (as hiphop did), but there should still be some level of defense to their actions, not just a keel over and die mentality, which is anti-town.

@Ryan

Um we don't have any confirmed alignment. How did you do that list?

For all we know it could be Town DRK defending Town RC from tunneling Town IK. (Which is my current interpretation right now unless new evidence comes up)

Fair enough. I was strictly explaining the instances in which one of them were scum. I think it's obvious to players of this game that a scenario is that they are all town. I was addressing how the scenarios would line up if there were scum involved.

I think it's premature to look at alignments like that without concrete evidence. It is much more revealing to do action and gauging reaction then question the setup right now. You assume too much when at least 1 of them has to be scum (and the whole team could be the other townies)

I concede this point. I agree with doing action and reaction right now. However, I felt it was a point that needed to be addressed given the current conversation at the time.

Also
Elaborate on: "@Hiphop: Definitely don't like your vote on hiphop for a subpar reason "

Hiphop didn't self vote so what is the corrected version of this line?

Obviously meant to say his vote on IK.

What are your thoughts on the Toro case (once you reread it since you asked for my view point which "might be a little biased" I recommend reading his stuff on your own to make your own opinion to avoid that issue)

BTW you disliked my 338. Elaborate? Or was it DRK's post? Clarify please.

I meant I didn't like DRK's 337. Again, damn typos.


With regards to the Toro case: I don't like that he is pretty much going with the flow. I hate whenever people say that because they are clearly acknowledging that they are active lurking.
He doesn't really seem to ever defend himself either. He just makes senseless posts when accused and sort of just let's it fly in the wind.

His 167 also seems like a bit of deflecting as the attention has been brought on him and he is trying to go back to hiphop. Also, don't like his softclaiming in 194.

@ryan I don't think gut votes are stupid at all. You can't prove anyone is scum on day one, no exceptions. What is your vote based on? My posts? Nobody here can say that the person they are voting for on day one is guaranteed scum. I see no proof at all; in fact, the odds of someone saying someone is scum and that person being scum is very slim. They have a better chance of saying someone is town.

You are saying that my posts are showing scum tells. That is only a matter of opinion, so basically your vote is based on gut. If this is so, I don’t know how you can say your vote isn’t stupid, since you said gut votes are stupid. Your opinion is your own. If you are stubborn, I can’t change that.

Your reasoning in the first paragraph is crap. Of course statistically we are not going to find guaranteed scum and have a slim chance of finding scum.

You are using basic statistics to prove that "gut votes" are OK and better than semi-informed lynches, which is asanine.

Yes, my vote is based on your scumtells. Scumtells are usually not opinions, they are commonly agreed upon instances that reveal scumminess. Some people find some to be nulltells, but more often than not there are things that people find as scummy. Thus, my votes are not based on gut. Sorry. Also, the fact that you are acknowledging that you aren't performing scumtells (in your own opinion) is noted.

AKA I agree with Zach's 384.

@RC: I have never laid off the hiphop case. So to say I am saying "Don't forget about hiphop" is a misrepresentation.

I don't like the idea that you are "confirming" your vote on a player with only one other vote aside from your own. You haven't heard hiphop's claim, and this seems more like you are trying to drum up the wagon with showmanship than you are with logical accusations and evidence.

This will only come back to hurt you later on in the game should this town decide not to lynch hiphop today.

If it comes back to bite me in the ass, then so be it. Please don't try to coach me (said without any hostility whatsoever).
Well, when I make two long posts, one on Page 8 and another on page 14 without much in between, I usually try to reaffirm/unvote-vote at the end of the post. You are reading too much into the confirm vote. And there is plenty of logical accusation and evidence in my case against hiphop. I have noted it over again and again, and noone seems to follow suit. So be it.

@@RC I have become a scrapegoat, not almost. There is nothing I can do or say that will get me out of that situation. People are going to suspect me until I die or a cop gets an innocent on me.

I have laid my case. No one has followed. Thus, it is fully obvious you are not the scapegoat as nobody seems to be blaming you.

[ryan2754]

You are wrong there, did you read what idk said in 385.

What does IK's 385 have to do with you being scapegoat and me laying my case. I am not seeing the connection.

Why should I try to defend myself to you? So that we can have another quotewar, basically saying that I made mistakes in the beginning, and should consent to the fact. I made it easy for you. I wasn’t going to argue my point to someone as stubborn as you. You wouldn’t change your mind anyways, especially concerning me.

Because you don't want to get lynched? No, you can easily defend yourself without spurring a quotewar. I am not actually that stubborn of a person. Yes, I would, but you seem to think defending yourself would be futile because you think I'm being stubborn.

No wonder you have a losing record as a townie. You always are waiting for scum to make a “scum tell”(which is a matter of opinion), when sometimes are not anymore scummy than the town.

1-2 is hardly a good measure or someone's ability. 3 games is not a good sample size. Trying to use my record for my play is a fairly bad argument, and sort of seems like bringing irrelevant information in to try and discredit my opinion and argument, aka sort of strawmanning. Many scumtells are not matters of opinion, they have been found to lead to scum more often than not. Granted, a single scumtell is fairly pointless, as even townies do scumtells. But an accumulation of scumtells is more indicative of scum, and voting patterns/analysis on top of that.

Since this might turn into an argument about interpretation of FoS, I want you to define how you use FoS and if you can meta link to show how you use FoS in the same way. It will clarify things here since I see FoS as more serious accusations (with more backing) then pointing out just one scum sign.

Yes, I obviously don't use the same definition for FOS as the wiki. I rarely use FOS, but mainly do it when I am in the middle of a lengthy post and find something suspicious, and want to show it to the rest of the game. Something in bold saying FOS is much easier to notice for others than just, that's suspicious, when in a lengthy post. I actually CAN show you a game where I played in and used FOS as that sort of thing, and actually voted someone completely different. I made my replace-in post, it was lengthy, and FOS'd 3 people, and caught flak for it.
Mini781:http://www.mafiascum.net/forum/viewtopic.php?t=11339 Post 122

2. The reasoning behind why I stated that was: you did not pursue more on paradox. Reading the original post was reading your case on hiphop, more then your reasoning behind your FoS on paradox. (Like I said earlier, it wasn't clear since you combined so many ideas into one post). If you really felt that the FoS had some merit to it, you would point it out like your 404 and do some side scum hunting. To me this either reads as the following: tunneling on hiphop, ineffective scum hunting, or someone who doesn't want to push the paradox envelope because she is considered as non-suspicious.

Yes, I concede the point that may be tunnelling on hiphop in that post and not looking more at paradox. But, save that little FOS, I have found paradox to be town.

3. What don't you like about DRK's 337?

It's an extremely hypothetical situation that leads to a lot of WIFOM and doesn't really give any relevant information, IMO. It seems like a subtle form of lining up lynches.

5. Um I disagree that townies should always be defensive to prevent a mislynch. When faced with a mistake or error, it is much better to admit to it then to try and defend that action. It just fuels the "defensiveness argument", which might lead into a "white lie", "overreactions" and "over analyzing situation".

I see your side of the argument, and had not ever really seen it like that.

Besides one of the best defenses as a townie when faced with a strong case against them is to scumhunt and outline an offensive case as the defense (ie make a good case on someone else). Playing too defensively in that situation can be easily turned into scum's favour.

And I have always felt that someone under attack can mount a defense, AND scumhunt.


Don't like DJ's town PR softclaim. The transpiring events are rather interesting. I think that what was blown out of proportion, to be honest. I think Don's vote making sense, considering everyone knew what was going on in RVS with IK. I just think people blew it out of proportion. Granted his defense of the situation on his vote/reasoning, saying "Not much time, I'm a PR, let's stop this discussion," is a copout.

I would be supportive of an IK, Toro, or hiphop lynch.

[ryan2754]

I said you were wrong with me not being a scrapegoat, not about you laying your case.
Post 388 is where the scrapegoat term started from. You and zach keep it going over the same arguments, and now idk is going back. Even DRk is going back now.

I see what you are saying.

First of all your first accusations were answered before you even commented on them, thus you are stubborn. So I didn’t bother answering them. If you read what other people has asked me you would have seen that they were answered. Thus you are that stubborn for bringing up old questions.

Oh I got what you are saying. I am stubborn because I am going back to things that already have been addressed?

Why the Toro lynch, I thought you said you didn’t understand the case?

It's not that I didn't understand it, it's that I didn't remember what it was. Then when I read over it, and read Toro in iso, it made complete sense.

I agree with DRK's 473.
I would also like to know the reason for RC's unvote.
Don, I think that makes perfect sense, as I too get a fake feel from Jason.

Vote: Toro

, as I don't want to hammer IK but think Toro's vote was extremely opportunistic.

[ryan2754]

My opinion hasn't changed since my last post.
Toro's response to DTM was extremely subpar.

I feel IK's lynch would give information and what not, and has sparked debate, but I am less suspicious of him than I was before. I agree that his second go around with trying to get the wagon on him again is a move scum WOULDN'T make.

As for Jason, his 500 seemed more like an attempt to fit in and act as though he was scumhunting. Doesn't seem genuine.

I as well have a weird feeling about DRK's most recent post.

[ryan2754]

My opinion hasn't changed since my last post.

Toro's response to DTM was extremely subpar.

I feel IK's lynch would give information and what not, and has sparked debate, but I am less suspicious of him than I was before. I agree that his second go around with trying to get the wagon on him again is a move scum WOULDN'T make.

As for Jason, his 500 seemed more like an attempt to fit in and act as though he was scumhunting. Doesn't seem genuine.

I as well have a weird feeling about DRK's most recent post.

Well did you want me to spend my time writing paragraphs to try and defend myself?

Good Lord....

[ryan2754]

48 hours would be fantastic.

A vote count would be nice, Alex.

* I'm on it... Got distracted by the phone.

Currently have my vote on Toro, but depending on if we get an extension or not, I would be willing to put my vote back on IK, because I do understand the concept of someone not getting to claim at this point before deadline.

[ryan2754]

@Ryan
1. They wouldn't make a move on IK's BW? Can you elaborate this more?

I don't understand what you are completely asking. Could you make a reference to what you are confused about?

2. Can you also expand on your gut feeling with DRK?

It's mainly based off our previous game together. Granted, I have only played one game with him, but in it, he was scum with me, and although being fairly new to the boards (IIRC), he was a very meticulous player. Granted, I usually not try to bring too much meta information on, and in this instance as well, since all I have seen him play as is scum. However, I think what it was was I was misinterpreting a little of what he said in it with the whole "less blatantly" thing, which he discussed two posts after my post.

His last post just seemed to come off forced as if there was a motive.

I do as well agree that right now, although I absolutely hate softclaims or what not or implying you have a PR when you are in no danger of a lynch, I too agree that those should be addressed D2.

Also, DRK... whats with the vote hoping as of late?

Just to point out, I've used my vote conservatively this game as compared to last game, where I voted 9 times for 6 different people on Day 1.

Just because you vote hopped less this game so far doesn't mean you aren't necessarily NOT doing it this game.

[

Town

]---Paradox-----DRK--don--Ik--Toro-hiphop[

∙

]-Shrine---DTM---ryan----Zach-jason---[

Scum

]

I am actually intrigued as to why I am third on your scumlist. I feel you haven't really addressed me that much, but that's just me. Why is it that you waited until deadline to provide a case against me?

I'm not happy with ryan's "confirm vote", which, surprise surprise, turned out to be a load of nonsense.

May I ask why you consider it nonsense?

Maybe because ryan hasn't felt any real pressure this game is the reason why he is, in my opinion, having sort of a non-factoring, not-seeing-the-forest-for-the-trees kind of play.

I don't know what you mean. You think I am being a non-factor? I condier Toro a non-factor, not myself.
What do you mean by not-seeing-the-forest-for-the-trees?

Check out post 550. ryan sounds like a bird the way he fencesits so badly there. "Toro is poor, jason is scummy, DRK seems odd too!" I don't know, I don't even know what happened to hiphop.

No, you are misinterpreting my words.
Let's take a look at the post:

My opinion hasn't changed since my last post.
Toro's response to DTM was extremely subpar.

I feel IK's lynch would give information and what not, and has sparked debate, but I am less suspicious of him than I was before. I agree that his second go around with trying to get the wagon on him again is a move scum WOULDN'T make.

As for Jason, his 500 seemed more like an attempt to fit in and act as though he was scumhunting. Doesn't seem genuine.

I as well have a weird feeling about DRK's most recent post.

I mention my opinion hasn't changed. I still think Toro's response was subpar, then asks if I want him to defend himself, which I responded with "Good Lord."
I mention my opinion on IK as finding him less suspicious, which by definition means I am not fencesitting on him. Everyone has been over the whole Ik situation, and general consensus seems to think that information wise he is a good deadline lynch. Calling me somewhat suspicious for that is interesting considering I think at least have the game feels the same way.
I never say Jason is scummy - you are putting words in my mouth. Based on in his 500, I find him very suspicious. I don't understand how that is fencesitting.
With regards to DRK, I say his play strikes an odd feeling from me, a sort of gut. I expanded on that earlier in this post. I never say he is scummy or not for it, since it's just a gut feeling. It was something I wanted to say. If I had to put DRK on the ladder right now, I'd be thinking town.
What do you mean, "I don't know what happened to hiphop?"
So, having 3 suspects (toro, Jason, hiphop) is considered scummy/fencesitting if I do it, yet you have your scum list above which pretty much equates to three people? I mean, in 611, Zach calls 4 people suspicious. Is he fencesitting?

...
but I think he needs to get a grip on his play if he is town (which, as you can see, is not what I would bet on at the moment).

What the hell is this supposed to mean?

Not gonna lie, but Hiphop's accusation in 614 on DRK seems to turn into buddying/coaching. Anybody else think so?

Jason seems to be deflecting in 613.

Unvote, Vote: Jason

[ryan2754]

[ryan2754]

I'm not really "providing" a case against you per se. Paradox asked what my pulse on the game was, and I consented. Incidentally, I have no qualms with ever explaining what I thinkt he makeup of the town is and think it can always be a spark to conversations to get people to give concrete town/scum predictions.

Fair enough.

Because it didn't make logical sense. You said you were locked on hiphop, and a few days later you took your vote off. I don't blame you for unvoting hiphop of course, I blame you for erroneously "confiming" your vote before a claim and, if I recall correctly, before a deadline had even been set. There were only two votes, including your own, at that time on hiphop. I know I had expressed much disinterest in lynching him, I think DRK and DTM both felt the same way, but I don't want to put words in their mouths.

To be honest, it is the first time I think I have ever used a Confirm vote. Suffice to say, it seems we have a different opinion on how it's used, which you address later. So I am scummy for confirming a vote after discussing hiphop's scumminess with paradox before a deadline was set?

The point is, it was a showy tactic to try and win support. Your "confirm votes" will forever be slightly tainted because, well, they're not really confirmed at all.

Again, first time I have ever done it, and don't intend on doing it again. I agree, it

was

a showy tactic to win support. That's part of this game, to change people's opinions to who you think is scum.

Even Toro has, for better or worse, fended off pressure and showed us some defense and offense. I don't know, you and Shrine almost seem completely in the background of this game. Zach was guilty of this for a time, but I think he's brought himself out.

I guess I tend to disagree. I have been defending myself against others. I have talked with you since your post about me, and me and DTM have interacted a lot, as well as IK and hiphop. I obviously haven't had to do much defending, but I do when I need to. I feel I have gone on the offensive a decent portion in this game, far more than I usually do on D1. I guess we'll agree to disagree.

Not seeing the forest for the trees is an idiom. I mean like you are not seeing the bigger picture because you are stuck on relatively minor details. Your confirm vote is a perfect example of this. You've got this strong intent to lynch hiphop, and that's fine, but you're only looking at one dimension of the game. When you "confirm" your vote especially, that's like saying you are done listening to anything else and you are ready for the day to end. That's just not the message I think a town player would want to convey at that time.

Again, I have never considered a confirm vote to be that sort of thing. It was merely a reminder to the town that I find hiphop completely worthy of a lynch at that time. So it seems your argument is based on your definition of a confirm vote. I obviously have been open to other lynches today and have been looking at multiple leads and dimensions, and also asked for a deadline extension. Totally wanting the day to end.
However, I will concede the point I often do get hung up on minor details.

Apples to oranges. I'm providing more context than just, you know, "Zach's post seems a little sketchy. I'm suspicious". Additionally I am giving my players who I think sound good; I am showing my evolution throughout the game. Some of your earlier posts were more complete in this sense, but this post (550) is basically following the crowd. I appreciate you telling us that you agree with the greater town sentiment that Toro/jason should probably be given more scrutiny, but you can't lynch two people. What about Toro's breadcrumb? Does jason seem connected to anything? Expand, explain, and get deeper.

My 550 was simply a quick response to DRK's post. Nothing more nothing less. Would you like me to do a scumlist like you do? I understand the concept of not being able to lynch two people. However, given the deadline scenario, either one was viable before Toro's softclaim. I think since his softclaim, albeit having very bad timing, is something to look into D2. Non-CC'd PRs should not be killed D1. Jason seems connected to some people. I'd have to look back but I distinctly remember a few people laying some possible interactions out there with Jason.

That I'm missing your unique interpretation of the game.

This response didn't help me, Ha. I guess I just am not grasping what you mean. Is this sarcastic?


Anyone else skeptical of the fact that he claimed Town RB? Anytime I have ever seen someone do that, they have come up as scum. However, I just realized this game is not necessarily normal and is a mini, but still.

634 is an obvious deflection from Jason, again.


I agree with DRK that we need to look at all three claimed PRs, especially since all have claimed on D1. Very unlikely, but again, not something to deal with today.

With regards to Jason's claim, I find it a crazy role, and given this isn't normal, I would be hard pressed for him to make this up. I do agree with DRK that it IS verifiable, and thus can be used on D2. I also think D2 Toro should tell us who he RBed.


I agree with don: Although I don't like to tell PRs what to do, I do think if Jason investigates Toro then we have an interesting situation with regards to both their PRs.

I am town-aligned.

How much longer until deadline?

[ryan2754]

i like this beginning. this most likely signals the existence of a second faction, be it mafia number two or an sk. unless we have a successful vig shot? i am going to look back at drk because he was one i had not pegged as anywhere near scum. sufficed to say this is a good start no matter how we slice it.

Personally, I highly doubt in a mini there is a second mafia faction, especially since there was only one NK, and outside of "Mafia Goon," there is no other designation to DRK's alignment, indicating only one mafia faction.

"Eliminated" doesn't really give us much with regards to flavor.

Suffice to say, as much as I don't like trying to outguess the mod, listing out the possibilities on what happened may be in order, as it can help us debate what happened last night.

1.) No lynch by mafia, vig/SK kill.
2.) RBed(Toro possible)/Doc protected mafia kill, vig/SK kill.
3.) 2 Mafia factions, with each a kill every other night (highly unlikely, Don, especially since there is no designation of DRK's alignment outside of Mafia Goon, which insists only one mafia).
4.) Other shenanigans I can't think about right now. Redirector of some sort? Isn't there a role that does that? Sorry, outside of normal roles, I do not know much. Possible bus driver? Isn't there a role where if a mafia targets a certain person, that mafioso dies?

Anyways, all this speculation is making my head hurt, and I personally think it is one of the first two options, as they seem most viable (Occam's razor).


BTW alex, nice flavor.


Anyways, I am going to go look back through DRK's posts. Granted, it's hard sifting through what DRK says, because since he was scum, he knew who was town and scum (knew alignments), and thus could adjust his opinion accordingly. Given this, however, I still find rooting back through his posts advantageous.

Vote: JasonT1981

Because I hate Jeff Gordon.

You don't like Jeff Gordon, so you put the

third

random vote on Jason?

Unvote, Vote: Zachrulez

Interesting. Don't know what to make of this, but I am including it to see what other people might think of it. Seems like trying to indirectly buddy jason (I've said this before).

I guess you've probably noticed this by now, but you won't have a problem with the amount of content in ryan's posts (unless you despise long posts).

As I said above, dank appears to be attempting to corner a newer player by twisting their rhetoric beyond its meaning.

...and you didn't think to give that reason with your vote?

I do see some sense in this, although as DTM just pointed out, you used that argument on the wrong person. If you combine this argument with the fact that hiphop was an easy target, I think this will be useful (later in the game if not now).

Attempt to buddy with me.

Don't know what to make of his last statement, but might provide useful.

Also your thoughts on hiphop because he also put someone at L-4 with his second vote in the RVS.

He had a real reason, as opposed to not liking someone's avatar (nice avatar btw DTM). Then again, as I look back I'm pretty sure hiphop was wrong in saying that Idiotking voted twice. For now, I'll just be happy with the explanation that he miscounted votes.

Casting aside hiphop's errors is what this seems like to me.

unvote, vote: hiphop

for the following reasons:
1) He unvoted when DTM brought up that he put Idiotking at L-4, even though he still thought he only cast the second vote.
2) He tried to (at least temporarily) divert our attention to the lurkers instead of following a valid line of questioning.
3) Posts 39-41. They pretty much speak for themselves.

Trying for honest scumhunting.

@deathrowkitty what do you think would of happened to me if I hadn't even posted yet? I wouldn't have any suspicious drawn on to me. Which is why I don't like lurkers. They think they can float under the radar.

True. I agree it's pretty bad not to have posted yet, but since you have posted and you're suspicious, of course you're going to be voted. (and from my last game, I know ryan tends not to post as often)

@everyone. FYI there are more than one scum in the game, so keep looking. At least I am staying active.

We shouldn't vote you because you have less active scumbuddies we could be voting instead? That's how that sentence reads to me.

Hmmm...

Unvote: hiphop

I'm starting to get the feeling he's not a good lynch for today, especially three pages in. I'm getting more newb tells from him than I am scum tells and I'm pretty sure there's nothing more he can do to defend himself besides claim, which I don't think is warranted as of yet.

Willing to let hiphop off hook again.


DRK132: Thinks Toro is actually attempting to scumhunt, and thinks Jason's waivering on hiphop/fencesitting is suspicious.
DRK142: Analyzes hiphop wagon, finds Jason, IK, Paradox, and RC suspicious.
DRK146: Continues attack on Jason.
DRK180: Leans VI over scum for hiphop.
DRK190: Can see IKscum, but thinks hiphop town, votes IK.
DRK201: Calls RC suspicious, but not scummy.
DRK203: Calls IK's attack on RC suspicious.
DRK216: Inclusive list of IK argument.
IK/DRK quote war insues, about buddying of RC by DRK. Interesting take, as DRK thinks RC more likely town over IK.
DRK270: Scumlist-> IK, jason, hiphop
DRK296: more RC buddying.
DRK324: Mentions he could see RC being scum.
DRK372: Attacks Jason, votes Jason in following post.
DRK375: Doesn't find Zach scummy.
DRK423: Weird feelings about don's PR claim.
DRK446: FOS DTM.
DRK473: FOS Toro for voting after Zach
DRK502: Agrees with Don that Jason's 500 is awful.
DRK525: Approves of Jason, IK, toro, or hiphop lynch (Biggest suspects from D1)
DRK547: Votes Jason, says he's less blatantly scum than IK.
DRK579: Addresses Zach, just to say his own vote hopping can be seen as suspicious, but explains why it isn't in this situation.
DRK615: Defends against hiphops claim that DRK would have hammered if [hiphop] kept his vote on.
DRK623: Calls out Toro for claiming now...
DRK650: Doesn't believe Jason's claim.

Word of note: DRK rarely has any interaction with DTM, paradox, Shrine/Iceman, Zach, and Dank/don (moreso than the others).

Given this information, and IK's revealed alignment, I can see where the Vig/SK (most likely scenario in my opinion, see above) killed DRK. Their argument didn't seem staged at all, and definitely comes off as a town vs. scum argument.

Oh and Jason, results from last night?

Toro, who did you RB?

Not to mention, this could be a setup, by which we beleive Toro RBed the mafia, when in actuality they no lynched, but my head is starting to hurt thinking about it.

In final, what were the exact interactions that people had with IK? A compiled list would be good, but right now I do not have the time to go look.

Mod, what is the order of actions for the night?

[ryan2754]

Personally, either Toro, Don, or Jason is lying, if not maybe two of them.
Given the current set up, there is no way all three of them are power roles, given the issue with the NK.

Right now, Toro seems most likely lying, as I could see him and DRK making this a mafia RB "block the night kill" ploy, in an attempt to clear Toro while sacrificing DRK.

It's slightly convenient that Jason got that result. However, his claim to me makes sense given the possible flavor. But that is an issue I will be able to better address later in the game.
Jason, why do you think you got an inconclusive result, save a RB?

Personally, I think Toro is lying.

Vote: Toro

, as I feel he is a Mafia RBer

[ryan2754]

Given the current set up, there is no way all three of them are power roles, given the issue with the NK.

please explain this. how is there "no way"? we have no other claimed prs. three prs does not sound farfetched. if toro blocked a mafia goon that could certainly explain the night results of only one nk.

We clearly have a Vig (or SK) as well. Thus, given previously claims, that would make 4. Thus most likely that one of the three that have claimed as lying. If there is an SK, I find it highly unlikely that there are 3 town PRs, and if there are, I doubt they are the ones that have been explicitly expressed by Toro and Jason (personally, I think one of them is lying indefinitely).

Right now, Toro seems most likely lying, as I could see him and DRK making this a mafia RB "block the night kill" ploy, in an attempt to clear Toro while sacrificing DRK.

are you implying that mafia killed one of their own? this was mentioned before, but i find it extremely wifomic(if not completely assanine) to suggest such a thing. escpecially considering drk had little suspicion on him day 1. let's stick to the facts, and mafia killing one of their own is quite a bit outside of the realm of "most likely" scenarios here.

No, I am not implying that. You are missing my point.
WHat I am saying is this: Toro claims Town RB, knowing we are going to be skeptical, and ask him for his N1 choice. He then discusses with his scumbuddy, to decide on NO NK. Thus, the next day, when Toro says, I RBed DRK, and no NK, so DRK must be scum. We lynch DRK, and he shows as scum, and Toro would gain a TON of ground with the rest of populace, as opposed to having to continually deal with explaining himself everyday, and eventually outting himself as mafia RB. However, seems to have possibly backfired with vig/SK kill of DRK.

I've seen stranger things, and from the few games I've played with DRK on this site (and the few he's played in general), he's pretty damn good,a nd could totally see him trying this. Not to mention, DRK never fully pushed at Toro, whereas he was hardcore on Jason, which makes me think Jason is town, personally.

[ryan2754]

If there is a bus driver/redirector, that individual should claim now to shore up any of these possible scenarios.

[ryan2754]

Agreed. I would like for an explanation from paradox.

So both Zach and Paradox changed their opinions about the vig claiming?
Who thinks the vig should claim and who thinks the vig shouldn't claim and why?

I must be missing everyone's logic...

[ryan2754]

Personally, I think it was a vig kill over an SK kill, given my analysis of DRK's interaction with IK.

[ryan2754]

Personally, I think it was a vig kill over an SK kill, given my analysis of DRK's interaction with IK.

please detail this. it is a very suspicious statement. i thought drk was obvtown for the better part of the day yesterday. to me it looks way more like an sk picking a town target.

FoS Ryan

just an odd thing to say here. if you can back this up with evidence i will retract my statement.

Read my lengthy post at the beginning of D2. It explains how I could see it as a vig kill.

[ryan2754]

i understand. i am just wondering why your interpretation has gone from vig/sk to vig. drk presented more town in my opinion than he did scum. a vig would aim for scum, an sk would most likely target town on night one. just because he flipped scum does not mean it was a vig shot as opposed to sk. the fact that he presented as townie makes me lean more towards and sk target. also, i am a strong believer that if vig exists they need to claim, so by not claiming today i have to operate on the basis that vig does not exist. a vig claim later in the game would have to be interpreted as an sk fakeclaim thereby leading to a potential mislynch if vig actually exists.

ryan: you said-

Personally, I think it was a vig kill over an SK kill,

given my analysis of DRK's interaction with IK

.

i asked you to explain this and you have not. the post you directed me too does not explain this statement at all. please detail what interactions you are referring to and why, after ik flipped town, that a vig would target drk.

Since we have some people unable to read between the lines of my posts this round, and since there is a contingent that wants a claim, I AM the TOWN VIGILANTE.

I shot DRK last night.

Now I know everyone is going to say, "You never showed must interest/suspicion in DRK."

Comparatively to my attacks on Hiphop and my opinions on IK, Toro, and Jason, this is true.
However, Toro and Jason both claimed PRs, and I do not like Vigging OR lynching claimed PRs on D1/N1.

On Day 1, I

did

make a mention of DRK as playing very similar to his scum play he played in my last game, when I was scum with him. Granted, I said that only gives me his scum meta, but it was enough to make me want to vig him.

In the early rounds, I play vig like I play as the cop: Investigate/Vig someone I have either no read on/trouble reading, or a hunch.

DRK was a hunch, and it was correct.

Actually, given my role, you will notice that alot more of my D2 posts make sense (not believing DJ/Toro/Jason all as town PRs, because well, I am one) and my insistence that the NK was from a Vig.

[ryan2754]

EBWOP:
Not to mention, looking back at DRK's/IK's interaction after IK's reveal, it definitely make it seem like their argument was NOT staged, and DRK's insistence on proving IK wrong and multiple vote changing/open suspicion list made him slightly scummier in my mind.
Again, that along with my scum meta with him, made it worth a vig shot N1.

[ryan2754]

now you're making sense, and thank you for the claim. i still think we should follow through with the toro lynch.

ryan:

1) are you comfortable with letting us help direct your kills from here on out?

2) do you agree that as a safety precaution we need to be rid of you before a lylo or similar situation?

3) in regards to (2), would you be willing to self vig if necessary?

we now have:

town

roleblocker
dj(unknown)
lie detector
vig

scum

goon

may be premature to call town overpowered, but i find toro's claim the most suspicious. i think alot of what we do is going to depend on his flip. if he flips town i suggest protective role(s) randomize their selection(s).

with a town flip, perhaps the vig should hold their fire this evening?(thinking out loud here)

thoughts?

1.) I tend to be under the group of "Let the PRs do what they want, and let them play their own game." However, I understand the "swingy-ness" of how a vigilante works. He has the most potential as a town player to make or break the game, and it usually ends up being the latter.
2.) No, I think that is completely unnecessary, and I will show why in a minute. Not to mention, a vig is a TOWN-ORIENTED person, and lynching them in a lylo is a bad option, since it a town-confirmed individual and at that point I feel many other options would be available given the small number of players.
3.) Self-vig? I don't know of any situation where it would come down to that, but if it helps ensure a town win, then sure.

Now, about your last question.

Actually, you are preaching to the choir.

I am under the understanding that if a Vig goes goes 1-1 or 1-2 (baseball meaning, not record), that is a successful vig. Given this, I actually intended, ever since DRK was revealed as a goon, to NOT vig this round, or most likely in subsequent rounds, unless there are certain situations where it is necessary (for example, if D3, cop reveals 2 guilty's, or someone is proven to be fake-claiming at the end of the day). Thus, unnecessary to deal with me in a lylo/similar situation.

I think Vig's that lynch near/around LYLO and have had no success previously in the game are a liability to the game, and can definitely drastically change the game dynamics, even to a town loss.

Also, given that we have a fair amount of PRs (4 claimed, most likely only 3 or less) I have a feeling that we may have a Godfather. I only bring this up because it was huge in my last game I played in, and it something that should naturally be considered.

[ryan2754]

I am extremely disheartened by this quicklynch...

[ryan2754]

Damn, I'm good. I vigged Jason, clearly for the reasoning that Toro showed up at Town.

What is a ninja?

[ryan2754]

This makes me think we have a watcher/tracker (ha, good reasoning).
Either way, it actually surprises me they killed RC. Again, maybe that's me, considering I never get a good read on RC in any of my games.

[ryan2754]

What do you mean, "How"?


I already explained my N1 Choice.

N2 seems pretty obvious. I foreshadowed it by saying that I doubt that myself, Toro, Don, and Jason are all town PRs. When Toro was revealed as town, I vigged Jason. I even remember saying "The both of them in particular aren't two town PRs."

I guarantee NOONE (scum included) would CC me at all right now. I also guarantee noone is going to CC my kill of Jason. Because well, it would be the death of them, in both cases.

Vote: hiphop

I would not as all be surprised if he was final scum. Not to mention your asking of "how" seems pretty weird.

[ryan2754]

EBWOP: Also, "how" is a stupid question. I claimed the N1 kill, and noone CC'd. It seems I am the only non mafia player with the ability of a NK (based on two night actions). Thus, the how seems pretty evident. If there are two kills, then I most likely killed the "non-town" player.

[ryan2754]

The how did not mean how did you do it. I believed you did the NK. My question is how did you manage to pick two scum out of all the players here, especially in the first two nights? And you answered that in your above post.

Interesting how if Toro was scum, the town would of attacked me, but because Toro is not scum, Ryan attacks me.

@Ryan-What about Don, do you believe he is a PR?

Given what has occurred, with Toro being a town RB, and Jason being a Ninja, I think we DO have a third PR, and seeing as Don is the only one that claimed it, I think he may be it. I think save myself and toro, there is only one mroe town PR, since we got a mafia goon.

To be honest, if we have a ninja, we most likely have a town watcher/tracker. Which means, if someone is able to CC Don's generic PR claim saying they are town watcher/tracker, I feel it would be safe to say that Don is lying.

[ryan2754]

So because I nailed another scum, Don, you now think I am NOT town now?

[ryan2754]

I think I have done my job with regards to the vigilante. Having an extra round of voting instead of possibly going into lylo next round is a lot better.

I fully intend on withholding my kill, as much as it pains me to want to get 3of3 in one game.

I think a massclaim should be in hand as well.

[ryan2754]

a) how would we know if he disobeys? he could be sk.

Good God.

b) no need to massclaim, but i won't oppose it. we are ahead of the curve right now. mass claim is better reserved for times when town has nothing to go on.

Personally, I think it would do us some good.

ryan: i want to believe you are town. in fact, you were the only one i felt sure was town going into night phase, but i cannot ignore the possibility that you are a clever sk, and i wouldn't be doing my job if i did ignore it.

I understand you, but you seem to further implicate that I am an SK more and more with every post, subtely trying to get the town to think that way. Very clever.

a. It's called a gamble at this point. Since Zach didn't watch Ryan we cannot confirm him through watcher powers. Since he's been able to snipe scum, I'm willing to trust him. If he disobeys we'll be in lylo tomorrow and we can lynch him then for being SK. If there is scum left then we will need his vote.

Or we could have me kill someone and have Zach watch me tonight to confirm. Or to confirm that I don't kill anyone. However, then if mafia NK, it opens a whole big bag of WIFOM.
Personally, I am surprised either myself or Don was not killed last night. We indeed were the at least softclaimed PRs. Makes no sense they offed RC, unless he was hot on someone's trail.

b. Your setups break the 3 scum rule for setups 2,4,5. Usually its 3 scum in this setup and if there was 4 with a vig/sk in the mix we would need to literally kill scum everyday to win and lynch on the final day or we lose. If there is 3 kills a day and 2 of them are townies. It's too much for a max of 12 people.

True.

we won't have his vote if we lynch him. how do you know zach didn't watch ryan? why does town need to "gamble" at this point? seems to me we could win easily if we play our cards right?

We could. Looking at me is barking up the wrong tree.

we have two nightkills per night indicating two killing factions. simplest explanation is two scum factions. most likely set-up with two scum factions is 2man scum team and 1sk imo.

We have not had 2 NKs every night. Toro RBed one night, remember?

a vig with multiple shots is a possibility, but then why wasn't vig targeted by mafia? if they were a two man team they would have suspected him to be sk and would need to get rid of him. if they were three man team then they would suspect him to be vig. again it makes sense to target him. in fact it makes more sense to target him if they believe he is vig than if they believe him to be sk. since they did not target him, then they must think he is sk. if they think he is sk then their is most likely only two scum. sk's are often unk and that would explain why they wouldn't target him. protective roles don't

usually

target vig's due to the wifom surrounding their alignment, so i don't see any reason for scum to fear killing the "vig". anyways...

I feel SK would be more important to kill for mafia than SK. When I have played as mafia, and seen a Vig, I have usually let them go, because their track record is usually not that good. I assume the mafia assumed I wouldn't kill (like I said I might) and at tops wouldn't get another mafia either. Either way, whether or not I am SK or Vig, they should have killed a confirmed power killing role.

if sk exists then it is most likely ryan. it is beyond reasonable to think he is scum gambiting for the sk to expose themself.

What do you mean by the last sentence?
You think I am scum gambiting (3rd scum) trying to get the SK (2nd killing faction) to out himself? Good God.
I thought you said 3 scum 1 Sk was extrmeely unlikely?

Let's just end this discussion now.
I am a vigilante, town aligned.
There is 3 scum, most likely the last having some powerful role (since all we have killed is a goon and a ninja).


We need a mass claim. I have a feeling it would put this game to rest.


Anybody do an ISO read of RC or Jason?

[ryan2754]

And what did your results reveal?

[ryan2754]

Don, for the sake of argument, I am going to wait on expressing my opinion before others chime in that haven't said anything this round.

[ryan2754]

So, seeing as though you claimed doc, Don, why were you going into all that trouble discussing why I wasn't killed last night? You clearly protected me last night, and well, I'm intrigued how that fit into your whole thought process about me not being targeted. Just seems odd you would go into detail on why I may not have been targeted when it was null and void anyway, especially when you discussed an SK being unnightkillable.

Why protect someone you think might be an SK?

[ryan2754]

No problem shooting Hiphop and lynching Iceman tonight. Seems like a decent plan.

Granted, the more I think about it, the more I think Don saved paradox. Because well, if I were mafia, I would have no doubt had my ninja send the kill in, not the goon. just seems logical, so I feel Jason was the one sending in the kills since he couldn't be tracked.

Either way, I think the plan works.

I would love to go 3for3, especially because I think hiphop is final scum.

[ryan2754]

Who is Zach watching again?

[ryan2754]

Zach, did Don visit you?

[ryan2754]

Zach, did Don visit you?

^^ odd question.

only one kill. ryan is more likely serial killer today than he was yesterday, and perhaps our best lynch.

paradox: please claim. post your thoughts.

dtm: being next in line according to the original plan, who would you prefer we lynch and what are your thoughts on the developments here?

Sorry, I keep getting confused about what Watcher/Tracker differences are and what not. I thought since Zach watched you, it would show who you visited during the night, to confirm you visited Zach, like you said.
Why exactly did Zach watch Don last night? I am getting a little confused on this.

The remaining mafia member keeps trying to add WIFOM with regards to night actions.

The mafioso knew the plan was for me to vig kill IcemanK/DTM, and thus, didn't NK. Don't give me this "more likely to be serial killer bullshit."

Mafia knows people are thinking about it, and is playing right into it. You all were the one's that wanted me to kill Iceman or DTM last night, anyway.

[ryan2754]

@Don
We might need to discuss the possibility of no lynching with ryan withholding his kill to determine if this is scum gambit or SK play.

Speculating on the night actions it might be suspect to either: a protect on Zach from scum, a no-kill from scum and if there is a 3rd member or the possibility that scum wasn't around to submit night actions. T

I'm thinking that Para isn't cleared townie based on your protect on day 1 and needs to be looked at again. If ryan is the last scum/SK player lynch him tomorrow in the lylo situation since there was only 1 NK.

I suggest we focus on this order:

Para
Ryan
DTM

in terms of ISO reading and discussion. You may adjust this to your liking as:

DTM / Ryan
Para

in terms of the orginal plan.

@Ryan
Withhold your kills from now on if you are town vig.

I'm in for witholding my vig kill. I just have a feeling if we don't lynch scum today, they will no kill again during night to get you all to lynch me.

we have 5 people left.
4 after lynch.
1.) I withhold kill, mafia NKs, 3 people left, lylo
2.) I withhold kill, mafia DOES NOT NK, 4 people left, still lylo, because he will then kill at night.

Mod, if there are 4 people during the day, and we lynch to 3, does the game end there, or does night continue to carry out (possible doc protect)? If so, technically I could then use my kill when we lynch to 3 and possibly get rid of final mafia member.

[ryan2754]

if we no-lynch, ryan has to kill dtm or paradox. preferably dtm because of the night one protect. i would prefer to lynch. i think we can win today.

ryan: what is your major issue with being lynched today? given that scum would have only one choice to nk tonight, leaving zach and i a clear lynch in lylo, why does town still need a "vig"? (fyi: zach watching me lets him see who targets me, thereby reducing the chances of my being nk'd.) do you think either zach or i are scum?

I never said the town still needs a vig. But I know that I am town, so lynching a town person at this stage in the game (not because I am a vig, but because I am town) is poor play.

ebwop: if ryan is sk then he kills and blames mafia, so asking him to "withold" his kill is pointless.

On the same line, one NK also adds WIFOM in the other direction, about them trying to play the "Ryan as sk" game.

Vote: DTM

[ryan2754]

Lynch me then. I win if town wins (should have hit DTM instead Iceman so I could get the last mafia by myself)

Don, although your intentions are correct (since I believe your town), you end result is incorrect. You are using a lot of WIFOM with regards to only one NK from last night. Of course the final mafia member knows I was going to shoot last night. Why would he then kill someone at night, and out me as SK, revealing that there is infact a final mafia? Any competent mafia member would have no killed last night strictly to keep the WIFOM with regards to me and my alignment.

I am town, and I beleive DTM to be the final mafioso, however I don't like Paradox' slipup.

If paradox is tracker, he should track DTM tonight, see if he finds anything.

ryan targeted a claimed town powerrole night two. a player who claimed "investigative" powers. granted, jason was scum, but it is a seriously risky vig shot and seems more likely a shot taken by an sk who is posing as vig. also, ryan should be dead. scum calling in a no kill would only delay their downfall and thinking scum targeted zach is a bit silly, so yeah, the fact that ryan is still alive is enough for me to be convinced that we should lynch him today. zach and i can look after each other tonight and lynch the remaining player in the morning if the game doesn't end. we could do it the other way around, but i am more convinced of ryan's guilt at this point that i would rather lynch him over paradox or dtm.

Ugh.
1.) I already explained my Jason kill. It was fairly obvious.
2.) Already explained this. When everyone agreed I should kill Iceman, I did. Why would the final mafia member kill then? It would out me as vig, as opposed to SK. Again, any competent mafioso would not kill, and leave the WIFOM situation with me as SK. And it's working.

[ryan2754]

Noooo. Well I would have voted Paradox because of the whole:

1. Late claim which reads as too convienient.
2. The whole did not chose on night 3 when scum withheld their NK.
3. You didn't announced who you tracked.

I agree with all of this.

Also, ryan

Yeah, well, you gave off the same vibes as when I was scum with you.

<3 Ryan and his vig play here. <3

Didn't produce a win though. I'll get to my thoughts on this a little later.

^^ yeah. i still feel bad though. i pretty much organized the town into a slaughterhouse. unfortunately i do feel bad about ruining ryan's game. best vig performance i ever saw.

Why thank you.

When you started directing, I thought your intentions were in fact true.
However, you then suggested the night the I died that I kill paradox. Damn good thing I didn't, and here is why:
1a.) I didn't want the game to end at night, with me being a reason why.
1b.) 2 out of 3 for a vig is really really good, especially in a mini. Didn't want to stretch my luck.
2.) I actually went back over the night and at one point thought all of you to be mafia.
3.) I felt don even may be mafia. But then Zach would have been lying. Zach's results definitely came off as town, and it wasn't until after I died did I really think Zach may be remaining mafia.
4.) Paradox really screwed up, and could have tracked zach.
5.) Don's insistence on the fact that Zach and him were cleared deflected my own judgement. His plan seemed good to go, but it wasn't.
6.) Had I been alive, I don't know who I would have voted for. Paradox's play most game was pro-town, but then his results were messed up.
7.) Looking back on the game, I am surprised that Don didn't think "Hey, I protected paradox, there was no kill, therefore, maybe paradox is town." However, from Don's point of view, I can see why he thought Zach was cleared.
8.) To be honest, seeing what a ninja's role was, mad eme never think of the possibility of a mafia watcher.


This game makes me want to be Vig more, a lot more. I played it a lot like I play the doc: Get results on people you don't have necessarily a read on early on, or someone you have a hunch on (DRK). Continuing scumhunting on people you think are scum (to get them lynched), and then later, if need be, vig/investigate them (Jason).

A lot of people use investigations to enhance their scumhunting - aka, people attack people and then, when they find out their result, they either let off if they are town, or keep pushing if mafia. Personally, I find that extremely telling. It'd be like if I was pushing for a DRK lynch at deadline and he showed up dead in the night. Thus, practically giving me away as Vig/SK. In the same way, cops would be obvious to spot if they received a town result on a lynch they were pushing, and then stopped pressing. Also, if I vig/investigate a person I don't have a particular good read on/hunch, the result will help with relationships. For example, if I receive an investigate result that I am not pushing defending yet, I can see how people interact with that person, and see bussing/defending. If I vig said type of person, I can see how the information piles up and what not with regards to people's relationships with that person.

I would rather let my own scumhunting run its cource while also using my PR as a bonus - sort of like 'student athlete', the two words enhance each other as I am a 'town (responsible for scumhunting) vig (NK ability)'. I find myself to be an OK scumhunter, and would rather use my investigation/vig on people I don't have a strong scum read on, because I feel I can get a lynch of said scummy individual during the day than wasting a night action to confirm. Obviously, I killed two individuals, so my inner scumdar went off pretty good this game.


Thus, the reason as to why I investigate/vig people I may not have expressed concerns about. Let's me keep a few cards back in my hand, just in case (and works well as mafia too). I was getting scum vibes from DRK, but not enough to amount to an entire case. Thus, I vigged him, or would have investigated him given I was a cop. If I receive a guilty, I attack the next day, and spin the evidence in my favor.

Don, normally I am against people directing kills, but your plan seemed flawless at the time. Granted, it wasn't, but it was one of the few ways I felt that I could get you (and others) to not keeping SK thoughts in your head (why I killed Iceman). Good job to Zach for keeping those thoughts going by not killing in the night when I did. Touche.

As for Jason, it was a good claim, but given at the time of Toro's death, no way we had another power role, as much as Don didn't like my kill.

It took way too long for Ryan to meet his end.

My plan was for him to be lynched after the no kill, but after that didn't work out I decided not to push my luck plus I was a bit concerned about a tie going to the SK (Which is what I thought Ryan was likely to be.)

Really, you thought I was SK? Why is that?

To that end I'm not sure why I wasn't lynched on day 3. I thought my efforts to try to save Talbot on day 1 were pretty transparent, but maybe that's just because I knew who the scum were.

I am extremely upset I didn't notice that. It seems as though NOONE did rereads later that day.

Noone can deny that the Ryan, from now on known as "bullseye", acomplished an amazing feat. Nightkilling 2 mafia roles on the first 2 nights. He deserves to win.

I agree. I feel I deserve an honorary win. This is being marked with an asterisk in my record as a loss.
Also, the above quote is siggable, and almost makes me want to create an alternate account with that as my nickname.

Flavor was great as well.

Well the town was screwed by not having any lynch bandwagons on scum, which is very helpful in separating both town and scum out of the neutral zone in my read. At the end I was struggling to work with just claims and process of elimination.

Agree completely. Really wish we would have gotten one lynch on scum. But I guess I had to do the work all by myself. Definitely wish I could have went 3for3.

ryan: please don't hate me.

Bah, no hard feelings, but I am still slightly upset we lost.

At least I didn't have to deal with RC myself, as I never get a read off of him.

[ryan2754]

Link for the Nominations? Yeah, I'd like one as well.