Mini 836: Commie Mafia (Game Over)

[Raskol]

Hello all.

I've been following the game since mid day 1 and I'm already mostly familiar with what's been going on, so it shouldn't take me too long to do a quick reread to refresh my memory.

[Raskol]

Alright, first did an iso-read of Peabody looking for connections.

The strongest connection I found was the complete lack of connection between him and le Chat. He's the only player in the game whom Peabody neither attacked nor defended in any way (everyone else, living AND dead, was at least minorly defended or lightly attacked). In fact, aside from answering a few questions le Chat asks him, Peabody doesn't mention him at all.

On the other side, le Chat asked a few noncommittal questions of Peabody, but otherwise defended him (in his special half-hearted way).

The overall pattern of fence sitting and infrequent voting doesn't hurt the case, either.

I'd say as of right now, le chat (now DDD) is my choice for the lynch.

[Raskol]

I'm not really comfortable giving out a full list with town reads at this point, but if you have any specific questions I'll be happy to answer them.

[Raskol]

I'm sorry. Full player lists for the sake of full player lists don't really work for me. I prefer not to talk about my town reads unless there's some definite advantage to doing so (which will outweigh painting a nk bullseye on their backs). Right now I don't see how it would do anyone any good.

I prefer having people ask me questions about specific players, or better yet, specific actions and events. That way we can have an exchange of information---you get to find out what I think, and I get to find out what kind of things you most want to know. That way, if someone wants to fish for my opinion on a certain player, they have to ask for it right out in the open where everyone can see it.

[Raskol]

I'm sorry. Full player lists for the sake of full player lists don't really work for me. I prefer not to talk about my town reads unless there's some definite advantage to doing so (which will outweigh painting a nk bullseye on their backs). Right now I don't see how it would do anyone any good.

I prefer having people ask me questions about specific players, or better yet, specific actions and events. That way we can have an exchange of information---you get to find out what I think, and I get to find out what kind of things you most want to know. That way, if someone wants to fish for my opinion on a certain player, they have to ask for it right out in the open where everyone can see it.

I think the supposed downfall of players 'painting targets' on townies for NK's is a load of rubbish. Scum aren't brainless morons (usually), playing a different game to us. They can sense who has a town-presence amongst the group - don't you when you're scum?

Actually, I've found in my (limited) experience playing as scum that knowing what everyone thinks of everyone else is incredibly useful when deciding whom to attack and nk. 'Townie presence' isn't something that just exists 'out there' and can be sensed by anyone like checking to see what time it is---in actual play it's largely a matter of individual perception. True, people tend to see a lot of the same things as being townie, but there's more disagreement than you might expect, and it's invaluable to get it straight from the townies themselves---especially when it's given to you without anyone knowing you wanted to know it.

Overall, I'd say that yes, having players volunteer their neutral and townie reads is very helpful for a scum player. That doesn't mean I think it's a bad idea per se (after all, it helps town too)...it just means I think it should be done in certain ways and at certain times. All at once in a big summary post is not one of those ways, and right now is not one of those times.

Only talking about your scum reads gives you immense personal wriggle-room for later in the game, as you have no previous opinions you need to correct or restate. I'd rather the entire town declare the entirity of their thinking, than keeping tricks up their sleeve. Scum players like to have options.

I didn't say I wouldn't talk about town-reads at all. I just said that I won't hand out a summary of all my thoughts on the entire game without anyone having to put themselves out there for specific information. I'm fine giving out any and all info as long as the person who wants it is forced to let everyone know what they wanted to know and why. I feel like a conversational exchange between players about specific details of the game brings out more information about all of them and is better for town in pretty much every way than having someone give out a general summary of their 'thoughts about everyone'. Better yet, it forces scum to actually engage with me if they want info out of me (and if they're good, they want info out of everyone)...which lets me learn about them at the same time.

[Raskol]

No, you're wanting to lynch me because you're too lazy to ask your own questions and/or you're pissed that you didn't get your own way.

I will repeat myself, much as I hate doing it: I will give any info you want, but I do not do full player list summary posts. If you don't like that, and you want to ragevote me, then go ahead.

[Raskol]

Here's an example of the kind of post I respond well to: can anyone besides Cyberbob show me an example of a post they have made where they've given reasons to lynch CoCo other than the fact that he was a VI?

In other words, can anyone make an actual case, or is this a lynch of laziness/policy?

(Specific question, with a definite answer. Alignment relevant and game-furthering. Revealing of the questioner's thought processes and capable of being built upon for further discussion)

[Raskol]

I'm still at odds about what to do with CoCo. For those opposed to the 'easy lynch', do you think he would act any differently as scum? The facts are he defended Peabody on multiple occasions, especially early for the random vote thing (see here: 1, 2, 3, 4)

After this early foray of defenses, he decides to iso-read Peabody and conveniently does a 180 and jumps on with the L-1 vote. I know everyone is finding it difficult to read CoCo, but this is a signifigant enough piece of evidence - especially when he rarely, if ever defended any other player. It seems to me he was trying to deter suspicion on Peabody early, then as it became increasingly likely he was going to be lynched, he had to somehow change his views to jump on and gain some town credit.

This theory is also quantified by the way he acted toward my early bandwagon. You'll note he was on edge when my wagon reached 4 and 5 votes. I think a similar thing happened when Peabody reached the same mark, he genuinely felt his Peabody's lynch was inevitable, and had to change his views knowing what Peabody would flip.

This smorgasbord of evidence is enough for me to think he is probably scum. This does not even include points I posted throughout D1 (such as bringing up his own two-game meta to try and defend himself, and his late flip-flopping on Peabody).

So, my question to those who don't think CoCo is scum is; what would CoCo have to do, for you to consider lynching him? Despite being anti-town, people only oppose his lynch because it seems too obvious. This is a bad trap to fall into as it allows him to get away with anything that could be construed as lying or a scumtell. The lynches become more important each day, and we don't want to be in a situation where he is alive in Lylo.

I'd say the points about CoCo defending Peabody and jumping on and off his wagon are valid ones---but he was hardly the only one to do either of those things.

Of living players, both SC and le Chat also defended Peabody (maybe others that I don't remember), and charter jumped off the Peabody wagon when it had gotten to L-1---doing a complete 180 of his own and voting mathcam.

So yes, there are some connections between CoCo and Peabody that could be scummy---CoCo defending Peabody, and acting erratically on his bandwagon. I don't think those actions particularly stand out, though, because there were other players who did similarly. I might be biased on that, but that's my stance.

OTOH, Peabody went after CoCo pretty hard, but ignored le Chat altogether, neither attacking nor defending him, while le Chat made a halfhearted, non-confrontational defense of Peabody. That, to me, is something which I find a far more likely indicator of a scumpair than the kind of blatant defenses that CoCo and SC offered, especially since Peabody's actions towards le Chat were unique in that respect---he didn't ignore anyone else.

[Raskol]

This theory is also quantified by the way he acted toward my early bandwagon. You'll note he was on edge when my wagon reached 4 and 5 votes. I think a similar thing happened when Peabody reached the same mark, he genuinely felt his Peabody's lynch was inevitable, and had to change his views knowing what Peabody would flip.

Got more, actually.

This doesn't really make any sense. Why would the fact that he responded the same way to a (let's assume) townie wagon as what turned out to be a scum wagon

In other words, you seem to be saying that his thought process was similar both times---but why would he react the same way to a townie wagon as to his partner's wagon?

If he really thought you were going to be lynched, why would he worry about it if he were scum? If he were, he'd know you were town (assuming you are) and would be glad to see you lynched on page 2 or 3 or whatever it was. Why wouldn't he have just watched it from the sidelines and waited for the quicklynch he was sure was inevitable?

[Raskol]

bah, clipped off part of the second "paragraph"

Should be "Why would the fact that he responded the same way to a (let's assume) townie wagon as what turned out to be a scum wagon indicate that he was the scum's partner? If anything, I'd think it would indicate the opposite."

[Raskol]

Can anyone explain to me how my behavior has been scummy and not just a source of butthurt?

[Raskol]

bob, I'd love to see your theory on how that phrase furthers a scum wincon.

charter:

Alright! So...if you're so concerned that you don't know what I think about anyone else, why haven't you asked me any questions as I suggested?

It doesn't really sound like you're interested in finding anything out. Rather, it reeks of rage. You just want your summary post and are pissed you won't get it. Instead of actually being willing to cooperate with my playstyle, you throw a hissy and vote me.

Either that, or you're scum and see me as an easy lynch because I'm not playing the way people are used to. I don't think so, though.

By the way, I do apologize terribly for not blowing the lid off the game with mindblowing new insights. I'm talking about things that happened weeks ago, and some of the things I said might already have been mentioned before (although I don't think anyone pointed out that le chat was literally the only player whom peabody neither attacked nor defended in any way before I said it).

Also, for me, scumhunting and getting read son people is a process of interaction. I get stronger and better opinions of people after I've been able to poke them a bit and see how they jump. Reading other people's interactions and analyzing them after the fact isn't my strong point. I actually think of myself as being rather easy to read, but it comes out in the way I interact with people, not in summary posts. If at the end of the day you still have no idea what I think about anyone, you can go ahead and lynch me if it's really such a matter of concern for you. But whining that I won't have it all out for you by my second post isn't going to help you out, or anyone else.

[Raskol]

bob, I'd love to see your theory on how that phrase furthers a scum wincon.

I'm more interested in the fact that posts like that actively work against the town's "wincon" (this is a really stupid neologism), which indirectly works towards the scum's "wincon".

Pointing out irrational, emotional reactions doesn't hurt the town more than voting based on them does, no matter how much you dislike the phrasing.

[Raskol]

unvote, vote Raskol

I'm down with this.

[Raskol]

Ah, ok, I see what you're saying. Yes, hiding behind Coco doesn't seem possible without an obvious breadcrumb.

[Raskol]

Raskol, since you seem to need it explicitly asked for you to say it, who is second most likely to be scum to you after DDD?

Before I replaced in, it was CoCo, actually. I've changed my mind now, obviously.

At this point I'm really not sure. I would say SC, but I feel like it's a lazy read and I'm not comfortable with it. If I had to lynch someone now and coudln't choose le Chat, it would be him.

I'm still in the process of reading through the thread again (reading as a spectator and readig as a player are completely different, turns out :p) and looking through people in isolation, especially some of the ones who haven't been coming under suspicion much (cyberbob, hoopla, and mathcam). This game feels like there are a few people who have been singled out for stupid play, lurking, or what have you, with everyone else having gotten a free ride for a long time. One of the people who has been promoting this the most actively, I think, has been Hoopla, and that's why right now I'm looking at her.

[Raskol]

Ah, ok, I see what you're saying. Yes, hiding behind Coco doesn't seem possible without an obvious breadcrumb.

This line of attack is entirely dependent on there only being 2 scum in the game (including Peabody). How do you know there aren't 3?

Or maybe you

do

know?

Even if there's a 3 person scum team, it still lowers the odds.

And before I replaced in, charter (by his posts anyway) wasn't preferring a CoCo lynch.

So basically, between the time I replaced in and now, charter has admitted to evidence that suggests I'm not scum, and yet is still more willing to vote for me than he was before he had acknowledged that evidence. (if he were being rational, it would be the other way around).

That suggests to me that his vote on me is a product of his frustration that I didn't give him a full summary post when he asked me to.

[Raskol]

Why didn't you just say this earlier?

I was planning to say it at some point. Just not in a pbpa summary post.

I really think the reactions to this position of mine are way overblown. I've given out more info about my thoughts in the past few pages than just about anyone else, and for a smart player, a lot of things that should be very telling, and yet I'm still being treated as if I refuse to say anything simply because I won't make a certain

kind

of post.

[Raskol]

Look, basically mt position right now is this: I am going to be posting content, but it will take time. In the meantime, if you want something specific out of me, ask for it and I will look into it and tell you what I think. Until then, just wait and allw ill be revealed. If, at the end of the day, you feel like you're not satisfied with the reads I've given you, you're free to lynch me. Until then, stop the whining.

Of course, this doesn't apply to charter, who has stated that he's locked his vote and is unwilling to consider new information.

[Raskol]

Just finished my isoread on Hoopla. As of right now I'm not willing to vote for her after all, mostly because of the way she pushed the peabody lynch D1.

I had been suspicious of her because from my partial reread of day 1 yesterday she seemed to be playing metamafia rather than mafia, with an emphasis on discussing overarching theory more than discussing players' alignments, but I suppose since then she's done enough to make me doubt she's only trying to appear to contribute, and her voting history/attitude towards the various wagons seems solid.

I'm not comfortable clearing anyone else with a townie read until I've had a bit more time to feel things out, so you'll have to make do with just the one.

After looking more closely at the Peabody wagon, I'd say my next two favorite targets after le Chat would be SC and charter, in that order. That's subject to change on further reading, of course. (will try to look at each of them in iso in the next few days---I haven't really paid as much attention to day 2 as I'd like yet either)

[Raskol]

What a bunch of bullshit. My first post in the game was a case on my top suspect, and I've I haven't sat back for a second since. I did say that people who wanted info out of me beyond what I'm already volunteering independently would have to ask questions in order to get it, but I've in no way been "hanging back"

just waiting

for questions. True, I've had to spend a good amount of my time defending myself, but even in that I think a lot of information has come out, and not just about me.

In any case, such an accusation as "hanging back not actively seeking scum" is hilarious coming from a guy who was waiting on le Chat before he was willing to contribute

anything

, and has been in the game from near the start and says he doesn't have much of a read on anything. I'm finding your sudden change of heart extremely fishy, especially after your last few mentions of CoCo were things like this:

His (Peabody's) exchange with coco in this post and this post is indicative of him not being partners with coco, I think.

477 means Coco is likely to be town. He definitely looked to me like Peabody's scapegoat lynch.

So before now you thought CoCo was town.

But now, you come in and see me under attack, and you think to yourself: mislynch ahoy! So you conjure up a few sentences about me pretty much echoing charter's BS (which I think may be genuine, if wrong, unlike yours) and cast your vote, confident of being supported.

Well, fuck that. I may in fact get lynched today, but if I do, you're not going to come out of it clean. I've understood, if not agreed with, the other attacks on me, but as far as I'm concerned, your last post is the vote of an opportunistic mafioso.

Unvote
vote: SerialClergyman

[Raskol]

I don't think my vote is

based

on an emotional reaction, even if I may have displayed one. I feel like I have pretty good reasons behind it, in fact.

You might disagree. If so, I'd love to hear your thoughts. What do you think of SC's little change of heart, there?

[Raskol]

On the contrary, the le chat wagon was the easy path. I was on early, almost everyone feels that that playerslot is scummy in one way or another and it's maintaining the status quo. So charges of taking an easy option that will be obviously supported are not particularly reasonable - I doubt this will be particularly more supported and it will definitely be 'harder' on me than just sitting on le chat.

No, I really don't agree. The momentum in the last few days has been clearly shifted towards me. I may be partially at fault there, but the point remains.

And the coincidence between that and your "I just changed my mind" is a bit much for me to believe.

[Raskol]

Well, let's see. In the past few pages, 4 people besides yourself have expressed a willingness (or even a growing willingness) to lynch me. You make 5. That's a majority, and some people haven't even weighed in yet.

How can you not see how this is a perfect place for you to jump in with a vote if you're scum? The fact that you do so now, despite having been entirely pro-CoCo recently, on very flimsy evidence, makes it even scummier. Basically everything about that vote screams opportunistic scum.

[Raskol]

Yes, the misrep you put into your 'case', the parroted nature of it, and your "I don't really have a read on the game" talk.

Fishing for charter's read on you doesn't hurt either. There's also your treatment of Peabody D1, but I'm sure that's been talked to death already.

[Raskol]

0: I actually did mention all those things earlier (except for the charter thing), if not in the same words I just used.

1: Here's where I pointed out where I think you misrepresented me:

What a bunch of bullshit. My first post in the game was a case on my top suspect, and I've I haven't sat back for a second since. I did say that people who wanted info out of me beyond what I'm already volunteering independently would have to ask questions in order to get it, but I've in no way been "hanging back"

just waiting

for questions. True, I've had to spend a good amount of my time defending myself, but even in that I think a lot of information has come out, and not just about me.

2: What you said about

me

was pretty much a repeat of charter's complaint.

3: It would be less scummy if you weren't simultaneously parroting his read of me, but atm it feels like buddying.

4: I wouldn't vote for you based on that alone, but the fact remains that you defended Peabody (and he defended you).

5: I never said anything about emotional/irrational displays posting, just voting and decision making (and by the way, even if I had, using a few vehement expressions does not an irrational post make). This is more misrep.

6: I think I have a bit more of an excuse than you for not having as solid a read on things as I would like than you do, given the fact that I've only been in the game as a participant for a few days.

[Raskol]

He's refusing to do much and justifying it by saying, 'well, it will just help scum'. I'd argue that it helps town more than scum, but that's not really the point. I think it's scummy to use that excuse to avoid giving opinions on people. I really see no town reason for him to not talk about more than just le Chat. Plus, I'm pretty sure I've been caught as scum trying to pass off 'it helps scum' as a reason for not answering a question.

Why are you pretending as if I still haven't said anything about anyone but le Chat? Have you actually been reading the thread?

[Raskol]

I guess that would explain why you've missed all my posts where I give opinions on players other than le Chat.

I was starting to think you had a learning disability of some kind---glad that's not the case.

Now, if you would be so kind as to go back and read, I'm sure this will all be cleared up.

[Raskol]

Why haven't we lynched Raskol yet?

Because some people prefer to vote based on alignment-relevant behavior.

Or at least, I hope so.

[Raskol]

Your alignment is scum.

Other than butthurt, what reason do you have to think that? (One which isn't directly disproven by a casual glance at the posts I've made, that is?)

[Raskol]

How is that a personal insult, exactly? Would you have preferred that I use a longer phrase that means the same thing, like "a desire to spite me because of your emotional overreaction to my refusal to do your exact bidding"?

Personally, I prefer "butthurt". It doesn't take nearly as long to type.

[Raskol]

This has been made abundantly clear by myself, cyberbob, and anyone else voting you. Have you actually been reading the thread?

So you're going to maintain that you still have no idea what I think about anyone but le Chat?

I know you've already as much as said you would refuse to consider new information, but I didn't think you really

meant

it.

[Raskol]

O_o

At this point, I don't think there's anything I could possibly do to convince you. The sheer level of thickheaded irrationality you're displaying is just beyond my ability to cope with without getting genuinely personal, and at this point I feel like it will be more productive if I don't talk with you any further on this point. Instead, I'm going to quote all the posts I've made in the past few pages which give my opinions on the game, so that those players who are capable of rational thought can look at them and judge for themselves whether you're being fair.

Raskol, since you seem to need it explicitly asked for you to say it, who is second most likely to be scum to you after DDD?

Before I replaced in, it was CoCo, actually. I've changed my mind now, obviously.

At this point I'm really not sure. I would say SC, but I feel like it's a lazy read and I'm not comfortable with it. If I had to lynch someone now and coudln't choose le Chat, it would be him.

I'm still in the process of reading through the thread again (reading as a spectator and readig as a player are completely different, turns out :p) and looking through people in isolation, especially some of the ones who haven't been coming under suspicion much (cyberbob, hoopla, and mathcam). This game feels like there are a few people who have been singled out for stupid play, lurking, or what have you, with everyone else having gotten a free ride for a long time. One of the people who has been promoting this the most actively, I think, has been Hoopla, and that's why right now I'm looking at her.

Ah, ok, I see what you're saying. Yes, hiding behind Coco doesn't seem possible without an obvious breadcrumb.

This line of attack is entirely dependent on there only being 2 scum in the game (including Peabody). How do you know there aren't 3?

Or maybe you

do

know?

Even if there's a 3 person scum team, it still lowers the odds.

And before I replaced in, charter (by his posts anyway) wasn't preferring a CoCo lynch.

So basically, between the time I replaced in and now, charter has admitted to evidence that suggests I'm not scum, and yet is still more willing to vote for me than he was before he had acknowledged that evidence. (if he were being rational, it would be the other way around).

That suggests to me that his vote on me is a product of his frustration that I didn't give him a full summary post when he asked me to.

Just finished my isoread on Hoopla. As of right now I'm not willing to vote for her after all, mostly because of the way she pushed the peabody lynch D1.

I had been suspicious of her because from my partial reread of day 1 yesterday she seemed to be playing metamafia rather than mafia, with an emphasis on discussing overarching theory more than discussing players' alignments, but I suppose since then she's done enough to make me doubt she's only trying to appear to contribute, and her voting history/attitude towards the various wagons seems solid.

I'm not comfortable clearing anyone else with a townie read until I've had a bit more time to feel things out, so you'll have to make do with just the one.

After looking more closely at the Peabody wagon, I'd say my next two favorite targets after le Chat would be SC and charter, in that order. That's subject to change on further reading, of course. (will try to look at each of them in iso in the next few days---I haven't really paid as much attention to day 2 as I'd like yet either)

His (Peabody's) exchange with coco in this post and this post is indicative of him not being partners with coco, I think.

477 means Coco is likely to be town. He definitely looked to me like Peabody's scapegoat lynch.

So before now you thought CoCo was town.

But now, you come in and see me under attack, and you think to yourself: mislynch ahoy! So you conjure up a few sentences about me pretty much echoing charter's BS (which I think may be genuine, if wrong, unlike yours) and cast your vote, confident of being supported.

Well, fuck that. I may in fact get lynched today, but if I do, you're not going to come out of it clean. I've understood, if not agreed with, the other attacks on me, but as far as I'm concerned, your last post is the vote of an opportunistic mafioso.

But of course, I never give out any information. Just ask charter.

[Raskol]

And plus, if YOU even thought CoCo was scummy before you got in, how do you blame anyone else for finding him suspicious? Kind of a no brainer.

I don't blame people who already thought CoCo was the best lynch choice before I came in (that would be, off the top of my head, hoopla nad cyberbob).

It's the people who changed their minds in favor of voting for me for halfbaked reasons I'm concerned with.

By the way, if your summary of my posts was really all you got out of them, then I really would suggest you find a physician who specializes in diagnosing learning disabilities. I'm pretty sure every post I made said at the least more than 'nothing'. Of course, if you're simply misrepresenting me in order to avoid having to back down on one of your points, then you can forget about that suggestion---but in that case I'd suggest you rethink your stance.

[Raskol]

By nothing I mean you don't give your opinion on other players' alignments. All that I know about what you think of other players' alignments is DDD is scum and HOopla is town. But there's no vote or anything to actually show this, so who knows.


Why am I still arguing this?

I have, so far, given my top three targets, a confident town-read, and a case on two of my top three targets. If I haven't said anything about the remaining three players in the game, it's because I'm not sure about them.

To put it pretty briefly, your assertion that you can't tell anything about my stance except with regard to le chat is completely baseless and yes, continuing to argue it is making you look stupid. (I agree with you that you should stop)

[Raskol]

The correct response to a request for you to stop being insulting is not to question why you are being seen as insulting. I do not care about your preferences with regards to the amount of time it takes to write something; if you make another insult during the duration of game I will be going to the mod.

Go to the mod then, but quit wasting my time. I care as little for your preferences in my choice of words as you care for mine.

[Raskol]

quit wasting my time

I am less interested in wasting your time than I am in ending it.

If anything I've done so far is grounds for my time being ended, I'd be more than happy to have it end. I wouldn't want to play in a game that catered to players' silly aversions to particular words, so long as they're not racial slurs or the like.

[Raskol]

I may have gone a bit over the line yesterday. I wasn't feeling well (nasal infection). I stand by what I said, though, if not the way I said it.

Also, I'm afraid I have no meta to point to that shows how I defend myself, as this is the first time I've ever been bandwagoned.

Anyway, Danny, although I appreciate your defense of me, I would agree in liking to see more from you than just that.

[Raskol]

Bob: I think you're way over-reacing to butthurt. Are you interpreting it as a gay slur? I took it as a synonym for "pain in the ass," which is a fairly mild epithet.

I'm not picking on the word (it is a gay slur btw) so much as I am picking on the fact that he seems to think that making any kind of personal attack is acceptable behaviour if it's done in the name of "saving effort".

I'd rather not spend any more time focusing on this issue, so I will leave it at that. My threat regarding Kublai does still stand though.

http://www.urbandictionary.com/define.php?term=ButtHurt

Throwing around the "VI" word so liberally is showing a complete ignorance of the game. Sorry.

http://www.sarcasmsociety.com/irony/dramatic

[Raskol]

The fact that Raskol is trying to defend his insulting behavior instead of just dropping it makes me EVEN HAPPIER lynching him. Seems like he's willing to fight anyone about anything.

Translation: "I have no interest in finding scum and prefer to lynch people based on my own personal likes and dislikes."

[Raskol]

Glad to hear you finally admit it.

[Raskol]

You two think you're scoring points with these pithy one-liners, but you're really just making yourselves out to be asses more interested in one-upping one another than advancing the game.

Let's lynch DDD.

Cam

I consider getting charter to admit that his vote on me is based on policy and emotion rather than my probable alignment is an advance, as it allows people who might not be interested in letting his feelings dictate the outcome of the game make a better decision about whether they should hop on my wagon. Avoiding mislynches is helpful, don't you think?

[Raskol]

People I'm willing to lynch:

SC, Danny, Charter.

I'm also kinda considering hammering myself in case I get another vote. I've never been lynched before and I've been kinda curious to experience it---besides, I'd enjoy seeing the look on certain people's faces (figuratively speaking) when they see my flip. At this point it seems highly doubtful that the town is going to win anyway, so it would probably be worth it for that alone. Besides, this game seems to be slowing down, and to be honest, I'm losing interest.

In the interests of contributing, though, here's some advice: if I do get lynched, you guys should consider trying a no lynch tomorrow.

Anyway, it doesn't seem like the SC wagon is going anywhere, so I'll go for Danny now.

unvote

vote: Debonair Danny DiPietro

[Raskol]

List of living players who were against the Peabody wagon, but on the Cathart wagon: charter, SerialClergyman

[Raskol]

[Raskol]

Oh give it a rest, Raskol. You're not being persecuted here -- you got in a mildly heated (lukewarm at worst) disagreement with another player. It's going to happen from time to time, so get used to it. And you're self-hammer comment isn't helping your cause any.

Cam

I didn't say I was being persecuted. I'm just making fun of them a bit (mafia is supposed to be fun, don't you think?). Cyberbob's comment about calling CoCo a VI showing "ignorance of the game" was especially funny.

Of course, if they're scum (and I think charter at least might be), they're doing a wonderful job.

No lynch is because a 5-person LyLo is better than a 6-person MyLo.

[Raskol]

Also, I only said I was considering it.

[Raskol]

Well, the way I see it is we need two of Hoopla, mathcam and Socrates to vote Raskol, if that's not going to happen, my vote is going elsewhere.

Just out of curiosity...where else would you be willing to put your vote at this point?

Will probably be useful info later.

[Raskol]

Well, the way I see it is we need two of Hoopla, mathcam and Socrates to vote Raskol, if that's not going to happen, my vote is going elsewhere.

Just out of curiosity...where else would you be willing to put your vote at this point?

Will probably be useful info later.

Yeah, I'm not saying this until others say if they're willing to vote you. It can definitely influence others' opinion on whether or not they would vote you. Scummy, but good try though.

Interesting answer, especially given the things you've been attacking me for today.

If DDD flips town, I'm pretty sure charter and SC are our scumbuddies.

[Raskol]

And you're basing this on the fact that both me and SC are voting for you and not DDD??

Why on earth would you think that's my basis? Did I say anything like that?

[Raskol]

If DDD flips town, I'm pretty sure charter and SC are our scumbuddies.

I'd also like to point out that this kind of setting up lynches is abhorrently antitown and I'm betting that he knows that a DDD lynch followed by a charter/SC lynch would be game.

Actually, it's called process of elimination.

If the rest of the town thinks charter's made a good point, consider this: at this point, I would be only slightly less happy with a lynch of myself than a lynch of Danny.

Danny would have little reason to defend me if he is scum and I am town, so afaic a town flip from me would be as useful in clearing Danny as his town flip would be. In fact, it might even be better, since it would clear me completely (removing a major source of doubt), and go a good way towards clearing Danny.

So if you think charter has a point here, and are afraid that I might be scum setting up lynches, then lynch me first instead.

(ofc, a Danny lynch has the obvious upside that I think he really might be scum, so that would make me more at ease---but lynching me might help the rest of the town get their minds clear, and if that's the case then go for it)

This raises an interesting point though, this would mean that one of mathcam, Cyberbob, Hoopla, Socrates is Raskol's partner, which is a difficult swallow right now.

A difficult swallow indeed.

Why on earth would you think that's my basis? Did I say anything like that?

Well, since you refuse to be helpful, I have to fill in the blanks myself

I think someone who is good at reading (iow, not you) could come up with some other very plausible explanations why I'd be suspecting you and SC together, just by reading the posts on this page.

I think a better explanation is that you saw me out you, panicked, and then made a hasty and poorly thought out post trying to discredit me by attributing some terrible reasoning to my theory.

Neither of us are voting DDD, so it seems bizarre (to say the least) that you try and chain lynch one of us.

Yes, definitely very bizarre. So tell me again, why do you expect people to believe it?

[Raskol]

How is it an AtE if there's a good reason behind it? Telling people to lynch you isn't always done out of frustration or self-pity, you know.

I honestly think my flip might be more valuable to the town than my continued existence.

Of course, I'd prefer seeing you or charter lynched today, but I don't think I'll be able to convince anyone to do so without having cleared myself as town first.

That's why I'm doing what I'm doing. If people are willing to believe me that I'm town, then we should lynch DDD. If they're not, we should lynch me. If we lynch me, then I'm cleared and people will know that I have no ulterior motives. If we lynch Danny and he's scum, then great---we lynched scum. If we lynch Danny and he flips town, then that helps clear me too---because at that point my only possible partners would be people who are more townie than average.

Either way, we lynch one of me or Danny and then if it's a town flip, we no lynch the next day. After that, we lynch either you or charter, and we have a good chance of winning.

[Raskol]

Arg, simulpost city.

The lining up lynches thing isn't as bad near the end of the game as it is near the start, but it's still a pretty shoddy principle. In this specific case, it makes zero sense because if charter and I were on a team together, presumably we'd have been perfectly happy to go with a le chat/DDD lynch if he's town rather than stir up trouble by voting for Raskol.

So the logic to me is worse than the principle in that suggestion.

Just wanted to point out that this is pure WIFOM.

There are an endless number of reasons you would have wanted to switch over to me (in fact, we've been over this already).

[Raskol]

The difference between DDD and I being cleared by the other's town flip and your "but why would I do that" defense is that there are clear reasons I can give why Danny would be better off attacking than defending me if he's scum, and why I'm less likely to be scum if Danny's not my partner.

On the other hand, in the case of you and charter attacking me, there's absolutely no reason why you

wouldn't

do it, beyond your "well, why would we need to?" remark.

This is why your point is WIFOM and mine is not.

(related point: I'd like all the people who are highly suspicious of me at this point to list the people they think could possibly be my partners in crime)

And to answer your question about DDD: I'm beginning to think that DDD is town, but I'm willing to lynch him because firstly, I'm not absolutely

sure

he's town and will be more comfortable lynching you once I know his alignment for sure, and second, I take much the same attitude towards his flip at this point as I do my own: if he's town, his lynch will clear two townies (one completely and one partially), leaving us with two credible suspects that have a very good chance of being partners.

If I had to give my proposed strategy in three words at this point, it would be

process of elimination

.

[Raskol]

Oh, and I'd also like both you and charter to tell everyone why you're still voting me.

Especially pertinent---have your reasons changed at all since you first voted me?

[Raskol]

Process of elimination is a really horrible strategy unless the game is something like a Smalltown, where you have a lot of roles and you know where all the roles are. You can't just lock the town into a set course of action based on current knowledge, and you can't plan for every eventuality (as much as you might try with your "contingencies").

I will be more than happy to lynch you today, but I'm not going to be railroaded into only looking at a specific few as viable lynches tomorrow.

I can't force anyone to do anything. I'm just making suggestions---it's your job to evaluate them and make up your own mind.

Answer these questions for me, though:

1. Assume, for the sake of argument, that you had a town flip from either Danny or myself, and good new reason to believe that the remaining player is also town. In this hypothetical situation where Danny and I are both cleared, who besides charter and SC would you think is a viable contender for being our remaining scum (ie, better than random chance, as opposed to worse than random)?

2. Besides Danny, who would you be willing to believe is my scumpartner?

[Raskol]

No lynch is because a 5-person LyLo is better than a 6-person MyLo.

MyLo? And that statement's only valid in vanilla games...or at least it's only sure-fire in vanilla games. Otherwise we'd be no-lynching every day from the start.

Last couple of pages have been very interesting. Gonna take a bit to parse.

Cam

MyLo=mislynch and lose

Assuming we lynch town today, there will be 4 townies and (probably) 2 scum alive tomorrow.

Lynching another townie tomorrow will result in a loss (lynch +nk=2town2scum=endgame'd). Base chance of hitting scum tomorrow with 6 people alive is 33%.

OTOH, no lynch gives scum the opportunity to kill off another townie, increasing base chances of hitting scum to 40%. Worst case scenario is the scum don't NK and you're back to where you started, except having gained more time for discussion.

If you're concerned that the NK might be a PR, then do a massclaim before deciding whether to no lynch or not.

[Raskol]

Damn this game is frustrating.

I cannot get a damn handle on it at all.

I just want to point out that comments like this are a major scumtell.

Forming reads as scum is always more difficult than doing it as town, as scum already know everyone's alignment and have to spend a lot of mental energy creatively coming up with false reads, while making sure those reads don't interfere with their goal of staying concealed and getting mislynches.

I'd also like to call attention to the sharp rise in SC's activity levels around the times when I've expressed suspicion of him. Make of that what you will

[Raskol]

So basically you want to know I think is most likely to be scum out of Hoopla, Socrates and mathcam?

In a situation like that I would be looking hardest at Socrates and Hoopla. Socrates replaced Vaya, who had a fair amount of baggage hanging over his head before the thing with the roleblock setting him as more likely to be town in many people's eyes. Hoopla hasn't been as active as I would prefer, though what posts she does make are generally on the mark.

Okay. Now, for the kicker: do you think there's anything to what I've said about Danny and I being less likely to be scum if the other isn't?

IOW, how much stock are you willing to put into the idea that Danny wouldn't defend me if he's scum and I'm town? Are you willing to consider him less scummy if you get a town flip from me?

To be clear, I don't think it's absolutely certain myself---which is why I'd personally be happier lynching him first (ofc, the fact that you think there are other people likely to be my partner besides Danny makes this probably a non-factor for you)

Actually, how about this: in your opinion, would my town flip clear Danny more than Danny's town flip would clear me, or vice versa?

le Chat did both of these things - the former one in particular - and CoCo was a big fan of the activity levels thing. Just saying.

Fair enough---things like this are part of why a flip from one of us today will be so valuable.

[Raskol]

I don't think it will/does make him 100% confirmed, though, just a lot more likely to be town than he would be if he hadn't been defending me.

Even if I did think he was 100% confirmed town, his lynch would have the same advantages as my lynch does (and you'll note I'm willing to be lynched, despite being 100% confirmed to myself)---so I'm willing to lynch him for the same reasons, which you'll find I've explained pretty thoroughly over the past few pages.

Of course, none of this is optimal---I'd really prefer, in an ideal world, to lynch you right now. But I have to consider not only catching the sccum, but

convincing the town that I'm right

.

I think that getting a town flip today from one of us is the only realistic way for me to do that, since I'm under such a high degree of suspicion. And since a mislynch today won't lose us the game, I'm willing to make a sacrifice in order to secure the eventual win.

Cyberbob---that's completely reasonable. I'm not in any way suggesting that any of this is certain. Things rarely are in this game. What I'm trying to do is set things up so we can play the odds to our benefit in the best way possible.

[Raskol]

Cyberbob---the first part is for SC.

SC---I don't like that you're making me repeat myself, but here goes again: I think DDD is more likely to be town than I did before because he's defended me consistently and openly, even when doing so has made people more suspicious of him and despite the fact that it would be in his interests as scum to push my lynch as an alternative to his own, rather than going on you when no one else seems willing to vote you.

It's possible that he's being tricksy, but it would be a major risk.

Also, I really would like you to answer the question I posed in #1205.

Hoopla---I agree that balanced levels of participation are ideal, but in this case I've felt that I have a lot I need to say and I really have tried to be as succinct as possible (while still conveying everything I need to), at least today. I'll try to do better, but I can't promise a whole lot beyond avoiding any more convos that aren't clearly game-related.

[Raskol]

I love how Raskol goes from wanting to lynch DDD (when he first replaced in) though never votes DDD. Then he changes to Serial and votes him. Then goes back to DDD and votes him. Then says that a Raskol lynch would clear DDD as town. SERIOUSLY, HOW DOES THAT MAKE ANY SENSE? He's practically arguing that he (Raskol) is scum.

You are continuing to reach hard.

Plus, he keeps saying a DDD townflip will clear him while condemning me and Serial. Seriously? Sounds to me like he knows DDD is town, sees he is going down, and is planting seeds in everyone's head for his coast to victory.

I really really strongly suggest that anyone who finds this even the slightest bit credible should vote for me today. I am absolutely 100% serious.

[Raskol]

I already knew you did, Cyberbob :p

If there's anyone besides you who feels the same way, then I probably need to be the lynch today, as the plan doesn't work if the person not lynched isn't cleared at least partially by the flip.

If people are not willing to soft-clear me on a DDD townflip, then I need to be lynched today.

OTOH, if any of those people aren't willing to soft-clear Danny on my town flip either, then I guess it's a null point and in that case I'd probably want to still go after Danny today.

So, for Hoopla, mathcam, Socrates:

1. How much would you be willing to trust me tomorrow if Danny flips town today?

2. How much would you be willing to trust Danny tomorrow if I flip town today?

If you think my flip would narrow your scum pool down than Danny's flip, then by all means, lynch me today. The worst thing that could possibly happen imo would be to lynch one of us without getting a soft-confirm on the other one.

[Raskol]

Also (and I really am sorry for being so post-heavy but I think there's a lot that needs to get out before the day ends), but the town needs to know this from Sc and charter:

If you lynched me today, and you were forced to lynch again right away tomorrow with no additional discussion, who would be tomorrow's vote?

[Raskol]

By the way, that's assuming I flip town (obviously).

[Raskol]

Charter, answer my question from post 1205, and the new one. Now.

[Raskol]

I am voting Raskol because of le chat's play and his inconsistent thinking.

You know what, I think I'll take your advice.

unvote

Vote: SerialClergyman

100% sure now.

[Raskol]

Btw, about the 'inconsistency': I already admitted before that it wasn't ideal. I really did think it was the only way to convince anyone, though.

I think you've given me enough to get you lynched now though, so thank you.

[Raskol]

True, but when you see no chance of getting scum lynched, lynching for information that will lead to a later scumlynch is the second-best deal.

[Raskol]

Oh, and keeping information away from mafia isn't necessary when the mafia are the ones you're asking for information.

[Raskol]

Nice job ignoring the quoted section, SC.

But as to my "inconsistency"--even if it was a mistake (and I'm not convinced that it is, considering how at the time I saw a lynch of either myself to be almost inevitable anyway and was trying to make the best of it) how on earth could pushing my own lynch be scummy? Don't you think it would be an even worse play for scum?

IOW, what on earth is it about that 'mistake' (if it is one) that could possibly make you think I'm

more

likely to be scum?

[Raskol]

Oh, and I'd also like both you and charter to tell everyone why you're still voting me.

Especially pertinent---have your reasons changed at all since you first voted me?

Oh boy, where to begin. I'll try and go in rough chronological order.

• Refuses to talk about anyone but le Chat when he replaces in (scummy)---
  completely irrelevant at this point, as all my stances are absolutely crystal clear now
  
  
• Barely says anything about le Chat, and brings nothing new to the table (scummy)---
  also completely irrelevant at this point, for the same reason
  
  
• Demanding that everyone else quiz him (anti town)---
  blatant misrep
  
  
• Claims he scumhunts by interacting with others, yet refuses to do so unless others ask him questions (scummy)---
  actually, I've been interacting with everyone quite a bit, without being asked any questions at all. In fact, if you'll notice, I've asked more questions than I've been asked. The only thing I haven't done is post a player by player analysis
  
  
• Defending himself by saying he can't be scum since Sens wouldn't have hid behind Coco (anti town)---
  this is a point you agreed with yourself when mathcam brought it up (super scummy on your part to bring it up now as a point against me)
  
  
• OMGUS voted Serial (scummy)---
  a vote is only OMGUS if you have no reason to vote for them other than the sheer fact that they voted for you
  
  
• Constantly throwing tantrums and insulting others (anti town)---
  whine more---it got you to slip up, didn't it?
  
  
• Identical strawman to another game he was scum in (scummy)---
  you should find out what the word strawman means before you use it. Also, having the same opinions across games is, remarkably enough, not a scumtell. Also, "PBPA" in that game stood for post-by-post analysis, while in this game I've been using it to mean player by player analysis. Look it up.
  
  
• Says he thought Coco was scum before he replaced in (scummy)---
  actually a valid point (one out of 15 isn't bad)
  
  
• Is overeager to fight anyone over anything, example where Cyberbob tells him to stop being insulting (scummy)---
  not terribly alignment relevant, even if you think it isn't helpful
  
  
• All his self vote threatening (scummy)---
  explained, and certainly not something that would help a scum player out anyway---unless you can think of some reason why mafia benefits from being lynched
  
  
• Logic like if DDD flips town, he thinks those not voting him are confirmed scum (not sure how to classify this)---
  this is a story you made up, which has no basis in any of my posts, as I said the first time you attributed it to me (misrep, scummy)
  
  
• Setting up lynches (anti town)---
  explained, and explanation ignored by you
  
  
• Saying that his townflip will clear DDD, but he is voting DDD (scummy)---
  explained, and explanation ignored by you
  
  
• Coco's play (scummy)---
  but not scummy enough for you to vote him before I came in. A valid point, but inconsistent with your previous position on CoCo

[Raskol]

That's okay, I'm not trying to convince you either---that post is for the town's benefit.

Anyway, on a related note: do you guys think that posting cases full of 10+ weak, null, and even completely made-up reasons is a move more likely to be made by scum or town?

[Raskol]

Erm, I really don't think it's as simple as that. Both of these scenarios are far from soft-confirming either of you. I might be missing a piece of logic crucial to your reasoning (I'm still not completely up-to-date). Can you explain this to me?

Well, that's good to know. You not seeing how either of us would be cleared a good reason to abandon that plan.

But FWIW, I would be less likely to be scum if Danny is town because that woudl leave my only credible partners as you, mathcam, socrates, and cyberbob, all of whom are either somewhat or much more likely than random to be town (imo).

And Danny would be less likely to be scum if I'm town because of how bad for him defending town-Raskol would be if he's scum.

[Raskol]

Actually, I knew you meant CoCo (though I wouldn't call it a 'typo'---more like a 'mindo'---which would be telling on its own, btw)

You know, the guy you thought was town pretty much the entire game---until it became convenient to do otherwise.

[Raskol]

I'm honestly confused by the town reads on charter.

Posting style can be faked, and is subjective and unreliable as evidence for alignment anyway---votes and cases can't be faked. He makes bad cases and has bad votes (was off the scum wagon, on the town wagon). And when I say bad cases, I don't just mean bad. I mean fucking scummy shit, completely making things up out of thin air and attributing them to me when I never did them, saying I'm scummy for bringing up points he himself agreed with, misrepresenting me, and bringing up points that don't even apply anymore. He's been on the same wagon as SC every Day this game, including today (they even made the same initial "argument" for their vote). They show other signs of being linked (look at their interactions with each other). SC has the same bad cases and bad votes.

We are looking for two scum. We have two people who have the same entirely scummy voting record, who make terrible, irrational cases, who change their mind at terribly scum-convenient times for bad or no reasons, and who have been ignoring or town-reading each other for most of the game.

I understand that this sounds fishy coming from me, as I replaced into a bad slot. But it's completely genuine, which I suppose you'll only be able to find out for yourselves after you lynch me, or when the game is over. Part of me thinks this game was lost before I even replaced in---this town has mostly foregone vote analysis and partner interactions and gone for lynching based on post quality and style reads---which is fine, if you want to lynch bad players instead of scum (after all, you might get lucky once in a while and lynch bad scum). But I'm hoping I can still bring people back to their senses.

[Raskol]

You mean like destroying almost every point you made against me in your case? Which counter you then ignored, saying you "didn't want to argue"??

I think the only reason that more people don't think you're imagining your case, honestly, is that people haven't bothered to read it.

[Raskol]

I'm absolutely serious, by the way. I've only finished 6 or 7 games before this, but your case on me is honestly (and I say this with some but not a lot of bias) the worst case I have ever seen past D1.

[Raskol]

So you knew it was a mistake - I'm not following the 'aha! eureka, lets go find a giant pic of a T-shirt' moment.

It's actually more scummy when you put the word CoCo in there. Did you honestly think I would be that sure you were scum based on a typo?

By the way, changing your mind about something before doesn't excuse doing it again. And changing your mind is okay, EXCEPT when you do it for little reason and with scummy motives.

You changed your mind not based on new evidence, but on "another look" at OLD posts, just when it was convenient for you to hop on a townie wagon. You'd had that information already, and it hadn't swayed you before. It only swayed you when you needed to hop on my wagon. You can keep saying you "just changed your mind" if you like. you can even say you've done it before. That doesn't change anything, though.

[Raskol]

Because there's very little chance that you could be

sincerely

voting me for Coco's behavior, when you thought that CoCo was town.

Also, the theory is relevant. Please do tell how changing your mind without any new evidence can be anything but scummy, especially when done in the way you did it.

changing your mind because of new evidence---town
changing your mind because it's convenient---scum

[Raskol]

Don't talk to me about generalities. "Changing your mind in general" is not something I'm interested in here, and neither should anyone else be. The way you changed your mind was scummy, and no amount of evasion will change that.

As to my acting scummy, you still haven't made a case against me that does anything more than echo charter's complaint (which was terrible in the first place and doesn't apply any more even if it ever did).

You claim that I was scummy for trying to get myself lynched (which would be the stupidest thing I've ever heard, if not for charter's case).

And when asked why you were still voting me, you mentioned NOTHING that had to do with my behavior before the point at which you first voted me.

SC is scum, 100%.

[Raskol]

Lynch me then, so long as you lynch SC next. This WIFOM bullshit is really starting to get boring.

unvote

Vote: Raskol

I just put myself in hammer range. Anyone who thinks I'm WIFOMing better call my "bluff" or else shut the fuck up about it.

[Raskol]

So you do believe me, eh? Know I'm town, and worried that people might start listening when they see my flip?

You weren't saying it was stupid, you were saying it was scummy.

If you're so sure that I'm scum that you have your vote on me and were pushing a case on me, why unvote? Wouldn't you be happy to see me lynched?

Or are you being insincere?

[Raskol]

There was nothing antitown about what I just did. If there is anyone who thinks I'm playing tricks on them, then me being alive tomorrow is going to be a liability to the town. I'm going to force people to come up with a decision on me today, so that we don't have to deal with this tomorrow. Either believe me or lynch me, but either way the suspicion of me needs to stop dominating the conversation if town is going to win.

Day 3 is not the time for policy lynches, and charter's comments on this page should be screaming scum at anyone who has any sense at all.

SC---no lynch is only appropriate tomorrow if we lynch town today. No lynching today is not appropriate at all.

[Raskol]

By the way, I would also be comfortable with a charter lynch. I've been looking over Sens in iso for a while, and I think he would have been more comfortable hiding behind charter than Sens.

He had nothing bad to say about charter, and neither did charter look likely to be a NK choice.

SC would be good too, with Danny as a last resort.

Of course, this is all assuming people are willing to believe me that I'm town. If they're not---well, you know what to do.

[Raskol]

Should read "hiding behind charter than SC"

[Raskol]

Maybe, but I think it's better to try for our lynch first and see if a no lynch will be necessary, rather than doing it the other way around. After all, if we hit scum today, then it's not necessary to do it ever.

Lynching today will give us a LOT of information for tomorrow, no matter which person gets chosen eventually. At that point we will be in a better position to decide whether we need or want a no lynch.

Besides, doing a massclaim tomorrow will be better by far than doing one today, and that will be one of the things which will decide whether it's a good idea to do a no lynch at all.

[Raskol]

Well, I'm not totally against it---I guess I'll defer to the consensus on that.

[Raskol]

Think about it this way, does a dead (person you find most townie) really help you narrow down your suspects?

Absolutely it does.

1---it gives us another 100% confirmed alignment to work with, to analyze interactions from.

2---it removes doubt and a possible lynch target---no one in this game is 100% confirmed, which means no one is above suspicion. If you can point out a single player in this game that everyone in the game is 100% sure is town, then I'll take this back. Otherwise, it stands.

3---it can give us information about scum's motivations (less useful since this is so easily WIFOM'ed away)

If you don't want to do it, fine. But don't pretend as if there are no potential advantages, ESPECIALLY in a game with no confirmed townies.

[Raskol]

1---Actually, it does. Being able to completely eliminate the possibility that a certain player is scum eliminates a lot of possibilities with regard to possible partnerships, and allows us to analyze everyone's interactions with that player.

2---See above. I don't think mathcam is going to be lynched either today or tomorrow, but knowing for a fact that he is town eliminates a lot of possibilities. You'll notice, for example, that in Hoopla's last player list, she listed mathcam among her "possible scum". Are you going to claim that mathcam's flip wouldn't affect her thinking any? That's just one example. The same thing could be said about any player in the game.

Basically, the more info you have and the fewer unknowns you have, the better. That's completely undeniable.

There might be downsides as well, but that doesn't make the upsides go away. You don't need to say that no lynch is completely useless in order to say you don't want to do it., and trying to is unreasonable. You're taking it too far.

[Raskol]

I'm not suspicious of mathcam, I was just saying that we'd get info from even his flip. As I said before, I don't feel terribly strongly either way about no lynching today, and I'm willing to defer that decision to everyone else.

Tomorrow will be another day, but I can't imagine myself pushing too hard for it even then, if most people don't want to do it.

[Raskol]

I know, that's what makes Raskol's play so maddening for me. If he is town he seemingly doesn't realize that he doesn't need to pull these outrageous gambits when his wagon was slowly falling apart. But his play only really makes sense to me as scum partnered with SC himself and I think that's beyond the unlikely.

That was after I did it, though.

Anyway, like I said, I scumhunt like this. It's not just about getting my wagon to fall apart. But it's probably better to save talk about that for after the game has ended.

mathcam---I haven't dismissed DDD, but I do take the defense as a towntell. I've been wrong before and I'll be wrong again, but I'm much less happy with his lynch than I was when I got in. If I can't get SC or charter on the gallows, I'll vote for him, but he's no longer my first choice.

[Raskol]

1 scum, 1 town: ScumRaskol would in this situation be trying to argue that a townie defending him makes him more likely to be town, which is pretty bad logic.

Just wanted to point out that I never said anything like this. Was gonna let it go, but apparently he was serious.

[Raskol]

I still hold that every flip is crucial and a no lynch with just about anyone dead, including myself, would help confirm or deny the theory or otheris narrow down the possibilities with only minor detriment.

Just something else to add that I don't think I talked about. No lynch is absolutely stupid. Despite your theory having little to no town support, even if we no lynched on this basis, do you think scum would be stupid enough to kill someone that contradicted your theory if the scumteam wasn't Hoopla, charter or Cyberbob?

This wouldn't improve your theory's credibility at all, with the only thing happening is losing another town member. We might as well do that by lynching, with the added bonus of possibily hitting scum (yay).

Not pushing no lynch, but I wanted to point out that at this point, anyone that could be killed by scum would contradict

someone's

scum theory.

Anyway,

unvote

. It probably is time for me to do that.

Just as a general comment, though---I find it funny how strongly people react to things that the Wiki tells them are bad (sometimes without even thinking what the actual effects of the action have been). Given that I wasn't hammered, and in fact got quite a bit of info out of my little sin, can anyone tell me how self-voting, in this case, worked out to be actually and not just theoretically antitown?

Maybe that discussion can wait until after the game. But anyway, just something to think about.

Socrates, I'd really like you to let me know what you think my scum motivations would be, given that the argument you attributed to me in your "I'd like to lynch Raskol" post was one I never actually made.

[Raskol]

Your self vote makes you look really scummy

I understand that's your reaction. The point is: why?

Plus, I've seen scum put themselves at L-1 and escape lynch AND WIN THE GAME. So, when someone says selfvoting is scummy, they are 100% correct.

Non sequitur ftw!

Here's a sentence that follows the exact same logical form as yours:

"Plus, I've seen town lynch scum and LOSE THE GAME! So, when someone says lynching scum is antitown, they are 100% correct."

[Raskol]

But like I said, that's for after the game! I don't want to get too caught up in this, as apparently some people don't want to have to read it

[Raskol]

1st: uniform replacements don't lie. Your logic is weak, grasshopper.

2nd: That would be fine, except I

already had

explained why voting for me was bad. In fact, I'd pretty much destroyed any argument thrown at me which doesn't have to do with what coco did.

At this moment, any objective look at the evidence which includes the fact that Sens wouldn't have hidden behind me, and excludes knee-jerk reactions to irrelevant wikitells, would indicate that I'm more likely than average to be town. The trouble with this, I guess, is that people actually have to think a little bit instead of letting me play them with my posting style.

[Raskol]

Given that I was at L-1 for all of about 3 minutes, how strong do you think that point really is?

[Raskol]

Reading comprehension is a key part of every youngster's schooling, Socrates. You should go back and get some.

The reason I was actually arguing that DDD's townflip would mean I'm more likely town is this: he was/is one of my only credible scumpartners. And if he's town, he can't very well be my scumpartner, can he? So who would be my partner at that point? (Read: how could I be scum?)

Of course, the fact that you think SC might be my partner limits that point's strength for you, but unfortunately it doesn't give you your strawman.

[Raskol]

I'm at L-1.

If this happens, fine. I had fun for the most part. Anyway, I left behind 10ish pages of good info, so even if I'm not able to prevent the lynch today, I think I'm satisfied. I'll probably make sure I don't replace a player like CoCo ever again, so I even learned a valuable lesson (/end afterschool special).

But yeah---my targets are the same as they were before. Sc, charter, danny. I'm no longer quite as confident that SC and charter are the team, due to their recent interaction, but I would pick my targets out of those three tomorrow. If mathcam and/or hoopla are scum, they probably deserve to win---they've outplayed you all. If they're town, well---shame on them. One interesting point about Cyberbob, though---he's been tunneled on me completely for over two weeks now. Since October 14, he's posted almost nothing that hasn't either been an attempt to refuse some of my points or get me lynched (or otherwise killed *cough*). Don't know if that's a scumtell as it's consistent with his earlier play, but it's something to look at---if you're town, you need to learn to broaden your scope a bit. Vaya/Socrates is a bit of an unknown to me, and I wouldn't lynch him---but if you're willing to lynch me because you don't think Sens' action means anything, then you're probably willing to lynch him too---unless you buy the WIFOM thing from Peabody. I'm not sure what to make of the fictional case he made against me, but his response seems to indicate he was genuinely confused.

[Raskol]

I don't understand why my flipping scum would make SC look scummier, so I would like that explained as well, especially since I don't want my town flip to make him look townier.

[Raskol]

I don't know if I would strictly say SC's theory, or his pushing of it is scummy. I do think there are a lot of assumptions in it, obviously, which may or may not be true---but in this game, you really have to make all sorts of those kinds of assumptions to figure anything out, and hope you're right. We're all making them tacitly with every post we make, and every time we form an opinion---SC's get criticized because he puts them out in the open, but that doesn't necessarily make them any worse than the ones everyone else is making. The fact that his assumptions lead to a situation where he won't get lynched isn't necessarily scummy either---neither town nor scums want to get lynched (although it's worse for scum than town).

The fact that I'm not implicated in his theory might in fact be biasing me here as has been suggested---after all, I'm sure about me and I'm not sure about any of you, so I'm going to like a theory that says at least one thing I know to be true for certain. All that said, for me, it sounds genuine, but I don't think it changes my opinion of him much. I'm still up for an SC lynch.

However!

I still think it makes sense to look at Sens' night action, though...and reading him in ISO I came across something that gives me pause. I remember reading it before, but something just came to me that I didn't realize before.

le chat needs to grow a pair.

I might be stretching, but this looks like a breadcrumb to me. It was his last post of the day. Sensfan's role was called coward. Cowards are known for their lack of "balls". I think Sens was trying to link his role name to le chat, hoping we would make the connection if he died. It looks at first glance like nothing, because le chat was hesitating on Cathart, and so for all you could tell beforehand (without knowing his role name) Sens might just have been berating him for not dropping the hammer, but the more I think about it the more I'm convinced that this was Sens' breadcrumb. Towntells or not, I think this is a big turning point for me on Danny. He's a good player, and so he might not necessarily look scummy today. I'd rather trust what I see from Sens, and so I think unless I can be convinced that I'm absolutely full of crap (in which case I'll go for SC), my vote's going to Danny today.

Vote: Debonair Danny DiPietro

[Raskol]

Well, it's not entirely based on that. Everything I said about le Chat in my first posts still applies, and besides, I've also been getting a queasy feeling that you're buddying me in both the games we've been in together. I really hate those queasy feelings, you know?

Seriously though, I get that he said something similar to Cyberbob, and that's a valid point, but I don't think I'm going to abandon the idea just for that. Besides, I've never seen you react this way to an accusation against you before; it has me kind of interested.

[Raskol]

When I say in both games, I mean in this game and that game, but only in that game after we were both in this game.

[Raskol]

Wow, don't take it personally. It's just a game: if anything you should be flattered that I don't think I can trust my read on you.

[Raskol]

Okay, look:

---I appreciate you defending me (though I don't think it's fair to give yourself all the credit for my having avoided a lynch thus far)

---This isn't personal. I'm interested in finding scum and winning the game, and so I'm going to treat everyone as just another player: if that bit about you buddying me offended you, understand that it was in the context of the game and half a joke anyway (hence "seriously though").

---If anyone else thinks similarly to you, I'll drop the point. You have to understand that I can't let you be the only one to convince me I'm wrong, because if you're scum then I can't trust you on this. Again, not personal, just mafia.

[Raskol]

Fair enough---I already said I was open to being convinced otherwise. And I should have made it more clear that the buddying comment wasn't entirely serious, but to be honest I don't think anyone would have paid it much attention anyway. Even if I had been entirely serious it would have been a weak point (which was the joke---talking about voting based on queasy feelings when you're saying I'm imagining things. Not funny, maybe, but they can't all be gold).

Anyway, I'm serious. I just need one person who isn't you to tell me I'm being crazy and I'll drop it completely. I thought it was plausible enough to warrant mention and a vote, but it's not a humongous deal. You're not in any immediate danger of being lynched, and so I don't feel like it was something that was going to OMGRUINTHEGAME before there was a chance to discuss it. It was just something I felt should be said, and the vote at least helped me get a reaction from you, which (I'll admit) feels town. If the breadcrumb thing is shot down, then it will at least have been useful in making me more confident in my read.

[Raskol]

EBWOP: Saw mathcam's post, finally someone else actually mentioned it.

Okay, I thought maybe I was stretching. But it's the kind of thing that has to be brought up, you know? If I don't say it it will sit in my head and fester.

unvote

I need to do some serious rethinking, because I'm actually getting positive vibes from SC for the last page or so. Want to make sure it's not just gas.

[Raskol]

I just want to point out, in favor of Socrates, that he was not only roleblocked but not hidden behind.

That's not just one but two completely certain facts that lower his chances of being scum. I would expect clearing Vaya/Socrates to be the least controversial assumption SC made.

Again, nothing is certain. But we are always playing the odds here. The odds say that Vaya is town, in a way that no amount of activity or helpfulness could match.

[Raskol]

I could have phrased that better---I might have said "It's a certain fact that the unlikelihood that Sens hid behind Vaya makes him more likely to be town."

Which I do think is true, whether or not it has already been 'decided'. If you'd like to argue the point, fine...

[Raskol]

I also said "nothing is certain" and "likely to be town", if we're going to play at semantics.

In any case, I hardly see what hinges on this. The effect of the post is the same either way: I consider Vaya to be likely town, and I have good reason to do so. Whether you think I made it sound exaggerated or not really doesn't change a whole lot. Your response should be the same either way---either disagree and say you think Socrates should be a priority suspect, or let it pass.

[Raskol]

First: when I say cleared, I mean cleared in the sense that the scum-odds are lower than most other players'. So although it's possible that in both cases Vaya was the 'other scum', it cuts Vaya's scum chances by 75% (assuming that Sens did hide, and not behind Vaya--if you regard those as being uncertain then cut the cut by however much you think is justified by the uncertainty). That is a

lot

of town points right there---even if you cut it to, say, 65% because you think Sens might not have hidden anywhere.

Also, Vaya would have to be Peabody's only partner on his wagon, not necessarily his only partner period.

But I agree it could be considered another point which raises his town-odds, although I'm less likely to put trust in things like that.

[Raskol]

Well, if people feel like they don't want to hear any more, then fine. I was hoping to hear more from some people rather than less from the rest, but that's just my preference.

However, I do think we should at least get a prod on Socrates before lynching anyone.

[Raskol]

Hmm. I agree that I'm a liability in the sense that I'm going to be a fairly easy mislynch target, but if you think I'm going to play anything like the way I've played today in a LyLo situation then you're not giving me much credit. I admit I've been off my game---I tried out a new way of doing things and maybe did a few things that weren't optimal in order to make a point. At some points I even did things that were done just for fun! The fact that I came into the game expecting to be lynched anyway probably influenced me there---I'm not usually like this. But I am taking this game seriously enough that I'm not going to do anything wild in LyLo.

Points in favor of lynching me today:

1. cyberbob and charter are utterly tunneled on me and will never change their minds. If even one of them is town we will lose the game in LyLo if I am alive in it. If both of them are, we are fucked.

2. I'm a top suspect for most other people, and so there probably wouldn't be much opposition.

Points against lynching me today:

1. I'm town, for all the reasons I've given. This obviously isn't going to convince anyone if they aren't already convinced, though, so...

[Raskol]

There's no "chance". I may have played strangely today, but I'm not an idiot. I absolutely will not self-vote tomorrow or encourage my own lynch in any way. I felt I could afford to do it today, but that's because we're not in LyLo and I thought at certain points that I might even be able to get something positive out of my lynch by removing myself as a target and maybe even someone else in the process (that's what that whole thing with flips was about). Maybe I could have done better---I don't know. But mostly I was acting under the assumption that I'd be lynched anyway and was trying to make the best of it for the town and for myself, by generating content (which I apparently did a bit TOO well) and having fun. If I had thought that there was more of a chance that people on my wagon could be persuaded logically to get off it then I'd probably have played differently, but neither of you (and cyberbob) showed any sign of being capable of being swayed much by that route, and for the other players I would never have been able to erase the huge red mark CoCo left on my slot.

Anyway, I think you have a significant bias as to what can and can't be justified as town. The arguments you've given that many of the things I've done have been scummy or antitown were beyond poor and although you're entitled to your opinion, well....(never mind).

WRT my expectation---I may not have had a lot of votes on me at that moment, but I'd been reading the game and knew how willing everyone was to lynch CoCo. That expectation rose sharply when I began to be attacked for nearly everything I did. You'll notice I didn't really start to do any of the things that might be

legitimately

criticized as antitown until after that.

[Raskol]

Then what do you do after claiming that DDD is probably town through this logic? You vote for him!

Scum.

That was during a time of day when it seemed as if the town had decided beforehand that one of us would be the lynch (basically everyone was talking as if it was a choice between Danny and myself). I was trying to make the best of the situation based on my read of the game (which was that a flip for one of us would help clear the other, reducing our chances of two mislynches in a row---at that point (and right now again, in fact) it looked as if you guys were setting up to do a one-two on Danny and me. I was willing to have one of us die if it would help save the other, even though I didn't think he was scum, and knew I wasn't. I was trying to build a ladder out of the shithole that town had dug itself into.

Whether you agree with that or not, at least get it right. I made it very clear and explained it several times. Read the fucking thread.

[Raskol]

Not taking it personally, just saying you should read the thread. You'd be surprised how much knowing what's going on improves your reads on people and your play generally.

Sometimes I wonder whether cursing as much as I do makes me seem more emotional than I really am. I'm actually quite a casual user of words like that.

Anyway, would any of you guys mind if I self hammer now? This day needs to be over and it's probably going to happen anyway.

[Raskol]

I dunno man, I just might....seriously, my hammer hand is starting to get itchy.

Here goes...

Vo

oooookaaaay: never mind, I'll wait for someone else to do it. Seriously though, I'm getting a bit bored with this game. I'd defend myself some more, but I'm pretty sure I'd just have to end up spending twice the time correcting people who didn't understand a word I was saying. :p

[Raskol]

By the way, I'm not going to do it not because I think it will make a difference, but just to avoid giving charter an aneurysm.

Although, come to think of it..........

No. Still not gonna do it.

[Raskol]

Yeah, I'm a bit conflicted. On the one hand, it would piss everyone off, and on the other hand, it would be kinda funny.

I'm thinking no on it, though.

[Raskol]

Damn, Danny. It was a simulpost. I was talking about the selfhammer, obv.

[Raskol]

Well, I was hoping I could be the one to drop the hammer, since I was cheated out of it just earlier.

[Raskol]

Besides, I'm not sure how comfortable I am with an SC lynch. If he's town, he'll be under less suspicion than I will tomorrow, so I'd rather have him alive than me if he is. And I'm starting to think he is. His recent stuff seems genuine and he's got the same thing Vaya and I have going for us (being an unlikely hider target).

I could still go for charter, though. He's got the voting record and the potential to be the Sens target, plus his cases have been absolutely terrible (but I think that's a nulltell for him, having more to do with ability than alignment ).

If that doesn't happen today, my official recommendation is that he die tomorrow.

[Raskol]

Holy simulpost batman. That was supposed to come right after 1469, but I got up to do some other stuff before I came back and finished it.

[Raskol]

This just in: charter thinks SC is scum and I am scum and we are likely to be partners, but he also thinks SC is trying to get me mislynched.

Explain?

[Raskol]

Meh. I was just messing with charter with that Vo...thing. A more liberal use of smilies might have better conveyed the tone. If someone had asked me to self-vote at that point, I would have. In fact, I was considering doing it without waiting for an answer (I know, no reason to believe this).

But two people asked me not to do it, so I didn't.

I have tried giving the evidence in favor of my not being scum---since Sens by all reasonable estimation did not hide behind me, my chances of being town are increased by at least 25%, and that's being generous--assuming there's a 1/2 chance that Sens didn't hide for some reason-if he had to hide, then my town-chances are doubled. That's assuming there are three scum. If there are only two, then my chances of being scum are very minimal. My innocence is backed up by some of the only hard evidence we have. Any gambler would tell you that I am a bad choice for the lynch today. That is the same reason why I won't support a Socrates lynch at any point and why I now don't think I can support an SC lynch either---at least not unless we hit another scum and find compelling reason to think SC is their partner. If you want someone else to hammer him, I'm sure Hoopla will be pleased to do it when she comes in. But I won't.

Anyway, mathcam got one thing right---part of the purpose of some of my play today has been purely psychological and even appealing to emotion.

I've been pushed to that, though, as I've been through the evidence over and over again and although I find it hard to believe, people trust their reads so strongly that they will discount the information legacy our PRs left with us in favor of subjective tells and playstyle policies. So yes, seeing that people have been voting based on playstyle, I decided to adopt one that would be absolutely suicidal if I were scum, knowing that only something really shocking would be able to make people forget about CoCo's abysmal play. I've already literallly put my life in the hands of the other players, and knowing that I don't see how you can think I'm not at least being genuine. Could it still be some sort of weird scum WIFOM game? As far as you know at least it could. But I think I've already proven my genuine willingness to put myself on the line.

[Raskol]

Confirmation bias is interesting---how on earth could anyone who wasn't already certain I'm scum interpret that as an attempt to hide something?

[Raskol]

Who would I want to lynch? Charter, mostly. Danny is still a decent bet, and Cyberbob's moving up as well. I think people are giving him way too much credit for helping the game when it was inactive---scum sacrifice basically nothing to do that. In the meantime, he's either been really stupid or intentionally reaching hard for suspicion on whatever looks like an easy lynch at the moment.

[Raskol]

To clarify my stance on Danny---my gut says he's town, the evidence I have says he's scum.

I'm not feeling good about my gut at the moment. I'd still rather go with charter, as there my gut and the evidence agree. But there it is.

[Raskol]

Actually, I think we should massclaim, and then discuss whether or not to no lynch, now that I think about it.

Yes.

[Raskol]

Although, I think we should wait for everyone to weigh in on the massclaim before we have anyone claim.

[Raskol]

That should be okay, since after Hoopla, everyone already had claimed.

Can you explain your thought process in choosing to track Socrates?

[Raskol]

Well, it was definitely an interesting choice.

I have to ask, though: why aren't you voting for him?

[Raskol]

I'm waiting to see what he claims first.

It shouldn't matter to you

what

he claims, since Vaya already claimed vanilla. The fact that Socrates went anywhere at all meant that Vaya's claim was a lie and that you have found scum with a ridiculously high probability. At least, that's what it means if your claim is real.

But since everyone seems to want a claim out of me, I'm just a vanilla townie. You guys can go ahead and lynch me now, I think it might be a good idea to get me out of the way.

[Raskol]

I agree that one of Cyberbob/Socrates is scum, but I'm not so sure about DDD/Hoopla. As much as I'd like to be cleared, there are a lot of very likely scenarios in which they could be town together.

I'll post more thoughts on that, but I want to hear DDD's extra info first.

[Raskol]

meh, simulpost.

Night three, Socrates. Was a toss up between mathcam and Socrates. Went with Socrates because I thought he was the obvious nightkill choice as NO ONE was considering him a suspect. I have more on this, but I'll wait until after claim.

While you're on, would you mind going ahead with this?

[Raskol]

Well since I am vanilla, I know for a fact that cyberbob is lying, so he must be scum to me.

How does the (supposed) fact that you're vanilla have anything to do with how

you

know that Cyberbob is lying? I mean, do you think people often think to themselves in their heads---"Wait, I'm vanilla! Cyberbob must be lying!" Or did you think: Cyberbob said I was at Hoopla's last night? Bullshit! He's lying scum!"

Also, the way you phrased this---"so he must be scum to me" is a little strange.

Overall, it sounds like you're trying to reason through what you would be thinking if you

were

a vanilla townie---not like you're reacting spontaneously

as

a vanilla townie.

IOW, you're approaching your vanilla-townie self as an outsider would. You posted something that I can see myself thinking

about

you---you know, from the outside. This is the kind of thought process people have when they're thinking about things they're unsure of, or that they know are fictional. It's probably my favorite "stylistic scumtell".

Interesting that he claims he tracked me to Hoopla, as this would mean he is implying that I am a scum roleblocker, or something.

I don't remember cyberbob saying anything like that, or even hinting at it. It may be implied by his posts, but he gave no sign that he recognized that.

The reason this is relevant is that of the two of you, you were the first to bring up the idea of a mafia roleblocker. You did it defensively, too. Not the greatest thing for you imo, though I don't find it as telling as the above quote.

[Raskol]

Okay, just throwing this out there:

I believe Hoopla's claim 100%---my town read on her is backed up by her breadcrumbs. Setting up a claim of a combination doc/cop isn't exactly a great move as scum, so the fact that she breadcrumbed both an investigation and a doc save, both on different days, is a towntell---unless she had simply breadcrumbed lots and lots of different roles so she'd be able to fakeclaim anything she needed to. But there are two reasons I find that unlikely: first, why would she claim JOAT when she could just have claimed a single-ability role, if she has set up breadcrumbs for many different abilities? It doesn't give us any incentive not to lynch her, since she's already used up all her good abilities. More than that, it doesn't incriminate anyone. It implies that there's a roleblocker if it's true (or else a mafia doctor), but says nothing about who that is. So her claim neither makes her less lynchable nor puts anyone else in the noose. Neither of those are characteristic of scum claims. Second, I just looked at her posts again in iso looking for breadcrumbs that follow vaguely the same sort of format as the ones she listed and couldn't find anything. Maybe there were some and I missed them, but overall I'm very confident she's telling the truth.

Okay, so let's assume there's either a roleblocker or a mafia doc (or both), because Hoopla's claim is true and for it to be true there has to be at leastone of those. This gives us some useful information. If there's a mafia doc, it means Danny is scum. So if we hit the scum out of Cyberbob and Socrates, and they flip mafia doc, we know who they protected and we've got our team.

[Raskol]

Reasons why I'm leaning towards believing Cyberbob atm:

---Cyberbob's slipup about the Vaya claim was a nulltell as far as I'm concerned. It seems like the kind of mistake that could only have been made in carelessness. Neither scum nor town would want to forget that kind of thing: no matter what Cyberbob's win condition is, it's more likely to be hurt by that kind of slipup than helped---since no matter what his goals are, he wants to get Socrates lynched today if he gets/fakes that result. This kind of thing is especially WIFOM-proof as no one would ever try to fake that kind of mistake.

---Given Cyberbob's slipup, Socrates' claim that Cyberbob is trying maliciously to paint him as the roleblocker makes no sense at all. If Cyberbob were trying to frame Socrates, he would have come out of the gate swinging. He didn't, though---he had to be

reminded

that his results incriminated Socrates. Even after that, he didn't even mention the word roleblocker. So Socrates' insistence that Cyberbob is trying to pin not just an alignment on him but a particular role makes me think more that Socrates has a "guilty conscience"---ie, that he

knows

he's a mafia roleblocker, and so he interprets the attack in himself in that light.

[Raskol]

Hmm---just saw that from Danny. Gonna take some time to think.

[Raskol]

In the meantime, please unvote temporarily, for my peace of mind's sake if for nothing else.

[Raskol]

K, thought it through.

Vote: no lynch

This absolutely needs to happen. I will explain tomorrow.

[Raskol]

Less talking, more voting for no lynch.

Seriously. More information today will not help town---quite the opposite.

[Raskol]

srsly, everyone doit nao

[Raskol]

Well, I will say at least this: it has a much better chance of helping our position if I don't explain how it helps our position.

[Raskol]

Actually, let me say one more thing: the only scenario in which no lynch doesn't turn into a town auto-win leaves us off no worse than we are now.

And that's seriously going to be it.

[Raskol]

Well, you're right, Danny. It doesn't help us at all if it goes like that. Which is exactly why it would have been best not to let anyone know how to make it not help.

I don't think that scenario would hurt terribly if it did happen---after all, from my POV it would be exactly the way it is now, except I don't have to convince charter to go my way if it comes down to the hard choice. And after all, there's always the chance scum wouldn't have thought it through thoroughly and handed me the win.

There's not much point in doing it now, though. Scratch it.

[Raskol]

So anyway, Charter and I really are cleared now. It's now pretty obvious that the scumteam is either Cyberbob/Hoopla or Danny/Socrates.

On the bright side, this means we only have to make the right choice once. After that, no need to worry overmuch about who the scumpartner is.

[Raskol]

I wouldn't mind hearing that either.

And from Danny, why he found mathcam so suspicious.

Need to hear Socrates' response to all this as well.

[Raskol]

What other role could I possibly have in the situation that cyberbob is claiming? He is saying I targeted Hoopla who's kill did not go through. Try thinking before you post.

Trust me, I did think before I posted. A bit more than you did, apparently (yet again).

You could have been a mafia doc targeting Hoopla, your scumpartner, who actually targeted mathcam and was lying about the DDD vig.

Of course, that's off the table now, with the new info that's come since then. But at the time it was a definite possibility.

I'm satisfied with your explanation as to your wording; it fits with what I expected if I was wrong.

[Raskol]

Well, I see we have another terrible case from charter. There was nothing wrong with Hoopla's play D2 to suggest she didn't think Sens was innocent, and while your point that Hoopla could have made false breadcrumbs or made some up afterwards is decent, it wouldn't be enough to convince me if you were the only one who was trying to.

However...

Yeah okay,

my role fits the flavor of the game better

, fits neatly with the rather obscure role of Hot Nurse,

doesn't overpower the town

like combination JOAT/tracker would, and my one night action that was my own fits quite clearly with what I expressed my feelings were on D3.

The bolded are pretty decent points. Let's look at what the setup would be like under the truth of both possible teams' claims.

If Danny/Socrates are truthful:

Coward
Hot Nurse
Combat Medic
Doctor
5x VT
1x goon, 1x Mafia Roleblocker
1 unspecified mafia

If Cyberbob/Hoopla are truthful:

Coward
Hot Nurse
JOAT
Tracker
Doctor
4x VT
1x goon, 1x mafia roleblocker
1 unspecified mafia

We have a pretty powerful town and quite a swingy setup either way, but the H/C setup is a bit much for me. 5x power roles is a lot, especially since there's so little potential danger in the roles we would have. Having a vig in the setup adds the potential for townkills which can really hurt town a lot. If I'm looking at a setup with plenty of townie PRs, I think one with double-edged roles like vig is what I'm looking for. True, the JOAT brings a vig to the table, but only one, which limits how much a bad player can hurt the town with it and also makes them more likely to be careful than an unlimited vig.

Additionally, tracker and a JOAT with an investigation in a game with a pseudo-investigator (hider) adds way too much information power to a town with so many protects. I don't think anyone would call such a setup balanced.

Cyberbob/Hoopla---what do you think could be in the third mafia slot to balance your setup?

The final nail in the coffin, I claimed extra information in regards to both nights two and three before you claimed to be blocked on night two and Hoopla claimed to be blocked on night three. Besides being blocked what other information could I possibly had to share about those night actions? I left the truth out in plain sight and you and Hoopla tried to get around it, but you got caught.

This is close to damning. The one thing that was holding me back wrt Danny was that he may have made his mood-pm evidence up on the spot to save Socrates after I was questioning him in a way that looked like I would vote him. Now that he's pointed this out, I don't think that can be the case. The fact that he wrote "attempted" especially makes it pretty clear that he had this in mind the whole time.

As I said yesterday, I don't think I can support a Socrates lynch. I had to test his reactions today by making him sweat a bit just because I had to make sure, but I don't think I have enough of to go on to counter my overwhelming evidence that Socrates is innocent. He would have had to truly slip up badly today for me to consider lynching him. But he didn't.

[Raskol]

Actually, I've seen quite a few cops before. Guess what---they don't act the same. Different people play it differently, and good players will never play it the same way twice. There's no such thing as "a cop's play", except at the vaguest possible level. There are things no cop would ever do on an investigation target, but Hoopla didn't do any of them.

As for advising people to ignore the setup---well, that's not something I'm likely to listen to.

That's all moot, though. Your points don't need to be any good for this to be a good lynch.

unvote

Vote: Cyberbob

[Raskol]

Fuck Yeah!

Hoopla played a great game---if it hadn't been for the mod pm thing I probably never would have figured her for Cyberbob's partner. Getting caught out on something like that has to suck.

Both our surviving scum did a great job of keeping the discussion off themselves that day, and it really made things difficult. They were both basically untouchable until the massclaim. That kind of situation is never any good for town, and I tried to open things up a bit but I was only able to get charter and SC to bite.

Looking back, I'm really kicking myself for not trying harder to drag the others more into the discussion. By the end of the day I was feeling a bit uneasy about cyb/hoopla/mathcam simply because they were hanging back and I couldn't get a solid read on them (except for the town read I had on Hoopla from her play before I replaced in, and those reads are never good for me), but I knew if I brought it up it would be painted as a scum ploy and get me lynched, so I couldn't do anything. I also wish I had tried harder to save SC after my last minute turnaround on him, but maybe it was better I didn't as that probably would have meant a Danny lynch, which would have been bad in hindsight.

I don't think I played terribly well, but I don't think I played as badly as a few people have said either. In the end my goals for the day were accomplished (surviving, generating content, turning some attention on some players besides the easy lynches, and helping at least one person I thought was town to not get lynched), so I'm not too disappointed with myself.

Anyway, I think congratulations go to Danny on this one for the town side.

[Raskol]

I find it hilarious that charter is still giving the kind of advice that would have hurt our chances of winning, just to avoid admitting he was wrong. The fact that he told SC to change his play because he, charter, had a stubborn-stupid reaction to it is just mind-boggling.

[Raskol]

Wrt the self-vote: I'm glad I did it, even if it's not the kind of thing I'd ever do again. It's not the kind of thing I expect to be able to get away with in 95% of games, but it was a good thing for this one.

In the situation we were in at that point, I still think it was a good play. I was in a position where my flip would be worth something, and with the players online already voting for me, I was pretty sure I wouldn't get hammered. I checked the people not voting for me who were willing to, and none of them had a habit of being online at that time of day. None of them seemed to be aggressive or reckless enough to do a quick hammer on me without some further discussion either, so I considered it a pretty safe call, in fact.

Of course I couldn't let on that I didn't think I'd get hammered as that would have lowered the impact it had.

I can understand the point about policy, but part of me thinks the most important part about knowing the rules is knowing when they can be broken. I get the feeling that some people pay too much attention to the letter of the law without thinking about why those laws exist.

One thing I will chance, though---in future games, I will be giving my preliminary immediate town reads when I replace in, though. Not because I think it's a good idea, but because my reason for not doing it really isn't worth all the stink that some people are apparently willing to raise over it.

[Raskol]

So anyway, my point is that it's stupid to simply say that one should always react the same way to a particular action regardless of the circumstances.

[Raskol]

If I remember, we had this discussion in MD already, Sens, and you didn't have much to say there.

[Raskol]

And yes, the code was a great idea, and I'll probably be using something similar in my future scum games.

[Raskol]

with the information at hand he was being unbelievably scummy.

Bah. I remember people saying so, but I also remember challenging people at the time on multiple occasions to explain why, and no one was able to bring a case against me that couldn't be dismantled in 5 minutes by a 5th grader.

I really do think it was simply a case where people really did just let an unthinking kneejerk reaction govern their play. In a sense, I expected that, but I also expected people to be more swayed by the fact that they'd be completely unable to justify their reactions.

[Raskol]

to prevent the MD thread from getting sidetracked, response to SC's post goes here:

Well, that's actually what I started out doing, if you'll remember. My first couple of posts were pure case on my top suspect. Then I got attacked hard for not doing a full PBPA and it escalated from there. I probably got a little overheated, but I did plenty of scumhunting---as much or more than anyone else in the thread at the time, in fact (whether or not I was right about my targets is another story).

I don't think it's fair to call my votes OMGUS, anyway. It's true that some of the people I attacked were attacking me, but I didn't attack anyone just for being on my wagon, nor did I attack everyone on my wagon. What I did was point out incredibly scummy votes and people who were pushing me based on terrible cases and personal grudges. I had other evidence on my targets as well, from voting records to scum connections---many of which hadn't been brought up before.

[Raskol]

I didn't say everyone voting me was irrational. Just some of them.

But yes, I actually did mention you before I vote you. You were my second favorite lynch after le chat from the beginning. Your vote (which did display all the trademarks of a jump-in scum vote, even if you weren't scum) was just what set it off. You and charter both had the same voting record (off peabody, on cathart) and you both defended Peabody. That was the main thing I was looking at early on, and you both fit.

I never thought cyberbob was scum even when he was trying to get me modkilled (I didn't start suspecting him at all until he started attacking *you*, actually). I never thought Socrates was scum even when he was voting me based on fictions. I didn't suspect mathcam when he voted me, and I gave my first town read on Hoopla when I was still one of her top two lynch suspects. The one place where you might have a point is where I cleared Danny too easily, but I've played with him twice before this as town and his actions were consistent with my experience of him there.

[Raskol]

Anyway---as for defending myself legitimately---I quickly ended any legitimacy that the claim that I wasn't contributing may have had. All the other points against me I answered, well enough that I never got any response to my arguments. I explained the lynch-me-or-Danny plan several times, explaining my reasoning, and abandoned it once I found that people didn't agree (even though some of the points I made in it were ones you later adopted in your theory of the game). The one thing I couldn't defend was CoCo's actions, and I couldn't force people like charter and Socrates to abandon their vote on me once their reasons for doing so were shown to be faulty.

[Raskol]

So anyway, I'm not attacking your play either. I didn't like your case on me from the start, but you were open to new evidence and stuck to the facts and I can't complain about that, nor have I been, even if I disagreed with you.