Mini 836: Commie Mafia (Game Over)

[Socrates]

Greetings.

I have read and hopefully will have a post up within the hour.

[Socrates]

My computer crashed as I was in the midst of posting and I have to start over. Gah. My apologies.

[Socrates]

Okay, starting over.

I am a bad lynch. Vaya had no real interactions other than with CoCo at the beginning, it is highly likely there are only 2 mafia, in which case it is impossible for me to be Peabody's scumbuddy, and I would likely have made the kill if I was the scumbuddy on a three man team.

So, not only would the town not really get anything from the lynch, but there is real evidence that decreases my likelyhood of being scum in any case.

Vaya is also a habitual lurker and does it regardless of alignment.

Now, with that out of the way:

I did not like SC's play day 1. He spends most of the day dismissing the case on Peabody as "the RVS vote" when there was more to it than that. Hell, at one point he even admits that Peabody committed a real scum tell, but continued to insist that it was a bad wagon. Also note that his first case was on CyberBob, an early proponent of peabody's wagon (the first?), and the wagon he spends the most time on is Talitha, another early detractor of Peabody.

Also, his interactions with Sens was pretty bad. He was trying his damned hardest to make Sens' extended absence look scummy when it was nothing of the sort.

On Harumafuji, it is worth thinking about what his intentions must have been entering this game. I can't think he would NOT do his translation party thing as town, because if he was inconsistent about it in games it would be pretty obvious, and it is pretty clear that he made the account with the sole intention of doing his thing, so I don't think it is indicative of his alignment.

Reading CoCo made me want to stab my own eyes out. I find myself waffling quite alot about him like some of the other people in the thread. I am gonna have to sit down and really try to sort through to some sort of read on him.

Le Chat was a frustrating player for me to read. His posts had a high word count, but they didn't feel like they had anything to them. It really hit me when I noticed that I hadn't seen anything in bold from him until page 10, and in fact made 3 votes the entire game. That is harcore fence sitting right there. Also, the way he got off of Col. Cathart's wagon was terribad.

This post in particular set off my scumdar:

As for the rest of your post, it feels quite wishy-washy. I'd rather you made definitive assessments on Vaya and Cathart.

Who is your prefered lynch out of Vaya and Cathart?
Would you hammer Cathart if I wasn't going to vote him?

i would like to see vaya kick his butt when he runs and start posting opinions and get back in the game. i would take the pact. i would also choose to lynch cathart over vaya.

if you told me right now you werent going to hammer him, i wouldnt hammer in your place. i fear his claim is for real and were getting rid of doctor-man. i dont mind more talking.

le chat, any coment on the night choice of cathart?

you mean that he says he chose to roleblock vaya instead of doc protecting someone? well the main problem is that he later said he didnt know roleblocks stopped kills. as a doctor-role youre doing a lot more by stopping a potential kill by roleblocking the killer or doctoring the target than you are doing by roleblocking a non-lethal mafia action, which is what he said his goal was, as he didnt know a roleblock would stop a kill. thats if there are 2 maf.

ugh. that is a dumb stance for him to take. doesnt make sense.

hoopla i dont know if i would hammer him or not. i fear losing a doc role and his claim sounds like it could be true. end of day 1 he was literally voting WITH peabody. that seems careless to do if you are maf partner with peabody, be the only two people voting a guy.

i wouldnt hammer if you didnt. i think we can still look at more people toDay.

He admits that Col. Cathart's Play makes absolutely no sense, not to mention he eggs on the wagon with more suspicion (which is pretty poor BTW) and yet he believes the claim anyway, and refuses to hammer on the basis that we might lost a doc.

Scummmmmmmmmy.

I need to think some more and I might have more to say, but I want to get this out in case my computer crashes again.

[Socrates]

Can you guys give opinions on more than just the scummiest players? All of your predecessors ranged from highly questionable to probable scum, and just chiming in just to pile on each other in order to save yourselves isn't really that helpful and probably won't help you out.

Meh, I think Mathcam has been generally protown, more specifically I found myself liking him as town a lot more after day 2. The way he approached the Vaya policy lynch seemed pretty genuine to me.

I would be surprised to find out CyberBob is scum, based on day 1 and the only thing that has given me pause since is the way he reacted to Col. Catharts claim.

Hoopla hasn't given me strong feelings one way or the other, the way she called out Harumafuji struck me as protown (or at least, indication that she wouldn't be on a three man team with SC), but the way she approached Sens' extended absence, not so much.

You... Ehhhhh... I'm not sure. My gut says town, but I don't really have any logic to back it up much. I did not like the wagon that formed on you day 1.

--

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?

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.

Why didn't you say this when Sens said the same thing when questioned day 1?

@Charter: What do you think of my analysis of SC in relation to Peabody?

I still think Le Chat was the scummiest player, and I would prefer a DDD lynch today, followed by SC and then Raskol.

vote: Debonair Danny DiPietro

[Socrates]

All I found that you said was that SC defended Peabody some, which I agree with and mentioned myself earlier today. Cathart did this as well, so did le Chat, and I believe coco did. I kind of did by jumping ship and attacking others day one. I dunno, I'm not as sold on it as I was before.

For me, the stronger point was that he built cases on the biggest proponents of the Peabody lynch, which struck me as an attempt to derail his wagon. I guess I must admit it isn't video evidence or anything but it really stood out to me when I was reading.

[Socrates]

Can you please explain in a bit more detail how can possibly find SC to be more scummy than CoCo's replacement?

Meh, I guess I was still thinking in only terms of CoCo and not his replacement.

I don't really have a strong stance one way or another about the whole full player list thing, and I just find it odd that Hoopla jumps on him for that when nobody said word 1 to Sensfan when he said the same thing.

That said...

Raskol, while Im not asking for a full player list, you have only talked about Le Chat and nobody else. Do you have any other suspicions, like, at all?

[Socrates]

Meh, I guess I was still thinking in only terms of CoCo and not his replacement.

So was I, at least for the most part. SC is scummy but he's nowhere

near

CoCo or even le Chat.

As I said, I am having a hard time evaluating CoCo. I agree the way he acted towards peabody at most points during the day is bad but most of everything else is plausible VI behavior to me, but perhaps your right and I am overvaluing my read on SC.

I agree about Le Chat, thats why I'm voting him.

[Socrates]

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?

[Socrates]

most of everything else is plausible VI behavior to me

Two things.

- I'm not going to let you get away with making a wishy-washy catchall dismissal of the majority of the play from one of the scummiest players in the game. I want you to rebut each of the dot points in this post with as much detail as you can.
- VI?

Village Idiot. I'm pretty sure Ive seen it used elsewhere on the site.

1) Why would scum claim here? It's a stupid play all around.
2) This is Peabody stuff, which I said I agree with
3) More Peabody stuff.
4) This is just you rehashing that you think CoCo is scum?
5) Meh, I'm willing to bet most people become more active when people are loudly professing suspicion of them, and CoCo is obviously more easily agitated than most. Look at Talitha in this very game.

I never said I would resist a Raskol lynch, and I admitted that I am probably overvaluing my SC read. I still am more confidant about Le Chat though, and would rather DDD be lynched.

And Raskol STILL absolutely refuses to speak about any suspicion about anyone other than DDD.... I am about ready to change my mind about which lynch I would prefer.

[Socrates]

Simulpost.

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.

Why didn't you just say this earlier?

[Socrates]

Scum are more likely to be overly quick on the draw with their claims.

Maybe for a power role, but eager to claim vanilla? That doesn't sound right to me.

[Socrates]

Why would scum be hasty is claiming Vanilla? It does nothing to make the town think they are more valuable and it is well known that doing so is antitown as it helps the scum find the actualy powerroles. Not to mention it needlessly draws attention to them.

[Socrates]

Why would scum be hasty is claiming Vanilla? It does nothing to make the town think they are more valuable and it is well known that doing so is antitown as it helps the scum find the actualy powerroles. Not to mention it needlessly draws attention to them.

If they feel they are getting pressured - or are about to be pressured - they think it will draw some heat off of them without them having to actually supply a detailed defence of the case being made against them.

I'm not saying that they're

right

, and I'm not saying that town can't do it either (obviously they can). I'm saying that - at least in my experience - scum tend to be

more likely

to be the ones jumping the gun a bit. I would be more likely to call CoCo's particular case as nervy town were it not for all the other scummy things that he's done.

Mmm... You see, I would expect scum to claim some form of unconfirmable power role in that situation on the hopes that people will think "well, gee, I don't want to accidently lynch a power role, I'll cut him a little slack." Look at the way you backed off of Col. Cathart when he claimed.

That is pretty poor logic as well, but I expect it more than the logic for claiming vanilla.

You do have more experience than me in these matters though, so I won't push this much further.

[Socrates]

I will be V/LA for most of this weekend. I'll post if I can, but I probably won't be able to. My apologies.

[Socrates]

I don't have time to make a signifigant post, but I will just say that this:

le Chat wasn't useless or anti-town, he was scummy. Big difference. He consistently gave weak opinions on players and waffled on them, which is scummy. It lets you figure out what most of the town is thinking and then you can agree and step on as few toes as possible. There was also virtually no scumhunting in his posts. Hardly any votes either.

Is why DDD is a better lynch than Raskol. That is all.

[Socrates]

Okay, I'm back. Catching up right now.

I don't see why Raskol thinks DDD defending him makes him obvtown. scumDDD has very strong motivations to avoid being on the Raskol wagon (especially if he thinks the wagon will go to a lynch without his help). I mean, come on, right now DDD is most or second to most scummy player in the game for pretty much everyone right now, and going and pushing a mislynch would look REALLY bad for him. In other words, if I was scum, and I was DDD, I wouldn't push a TownRaskol lynch either.

Thinking about the arguments from a different perspective:

Both scum: If they are both scum, then Raskol's arguments for the last few pages have been nothing but a load of hot air, and he knows they would become moot the second one of them flips. As such, the only reason for him to make this argument right now is in the hopes of somehow getting some 3rd person lynched, but he didn't do that, instead voting for someone he would know would come up scum and he would know that wouldn't look good for him.

DDD's actions make sense under a both scum scenario because he doesn't want his buddy lynched.

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. But if the town buys it, it works out REALLY well for him, as it means he gets a mislynch and comes out of it with the town inclined to look elsewhere for the next lynch. In this situation I could see Raskol putting his vote on someone he thinks would flip town purely in the interest of "clearing" himself.

ScumDDD and townie Raskol isn't as unreasonable as Raskol makes it out to be as I said at the beginning of my post.

2 town: TownRaskol is really in a no-win situation. Right now he sees himself being mislynched and then a player he thinks is town about to be mislynched, which (assuming 3 scum) is game over. As such, he has every incentive to try to ensure that at least 1 of them doesn't get lynched just to give the town a chance.

TownDDD wouldn't be strictly out of the question as he would just be trying to stop a wagon that he thinks is bad. but, I do think he has been too dismissive of the case as "anti-town play" which ignores the interactions Raskol had with Peabody day 1 which are, on the whole, scummy.

I'm having a real hard time buying any scenario that has both Raskol and DDD as town, as that leaves me with SC and I guess... Charter or something as the only scumgroup that is really reasonable to me, and that goes against my town read on Charter.

Um.

I come out of this line of thinking less inclined to expect a Raskol/DDD scumgroup, but only mildly as it could be a WIFOM maneuver on Raskol's part.

I am starting come around to wanting to lynch Raskol, mostly because of just how much incentive a scum Raskol would have to make these arguments and then try to lynch a town DDD.

I would also like a votecount.

[Socrates]

Sigh, again with the dumb nolynching. Kublai knows what I'm talking about.

You people are crazy, a no-lynch is a terrible idea. The scum will just NK a person who everyone is reasonably sure is town (I can think of a few), and the town loses out on a vote we could reasonably trust. Having an even number of people at this point is good for the town as it means that the scum need one more person to make a bad judgement in order to push through a mislynch and also means more people will have to come to some form of agreement to move forward.

No lynching is only helpful when there isn't anybody who isn't under any suspicion at all, because that person isn't under any danger of being a mislynch anyway.

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

[Socrates]

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.

doesn't matter if the person is never going to be lynched anyway.

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.

it doesn't need to be 100% sure. What is important here is

possible

lynch target. I cant give you any confirmeds, but I will go out on a limb and say that hell will freeze over before we lynch MathCam today, so if we go to night and he is town and NKed, then we are no better off than we were yesterday.

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

if by less useful you mean not useful at all, you have it right.

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.

[Socrates]

Bah. The point is that you guys are putting the direction of the town in the scum's hands. The fact of the matter is that whatever possible benefit you see to a No lynch can easily be thwarted by the scum.

The questions that we have today will not get answered by a no-lynch, we would lose a pro-town vote, and whoever is killed would probably give the absolute minimum amount of information to the town.

I absolutely will not support a no-lynch in any way.

If you guys are suspicious of MathCam, why don't you put some pressure on him?

By the way, SC why can't Le Chat and CoCo be scum together? That seems to come out of left field.

[Socrates]

Over the last few pages SC and Raskol have jumped up above DDD in terms of scumminess to me. Raskol's last argument has serious pro-scum implications as I said earlier and for all of the talk SC does about confirming alignment, I find it telling that he absolutely refuses to lynch the by far most controversial player in the game.

I would probably consider giving SC's theory more credit if Raskol flips town.

Right now my favorite scum groups are Raskol/SC followed by Raskol/DDD

unvote, vote: Raskol

This is the L-1 vote I believe.

[Socrates]

Socrates, can you explain which of Raskol/SC or Raskol/DDD you find more likely? I think both of these are definitely possible, but I am currently finding myself wanting to vote SC even though Raskol is the common element there, because of SC's unvote. SC's unvote put some doubt in my head about Raskol being scum, and between DDD and Serial, I find Serial scummier.

Right now I find Raskol/SC more likely. What it looks like to me is that SC came in after all of the replacements had started posting, saw that it wasn't going well for his scum buddy and decided to bus. Once it started to look like the Raskol wagon was going to be derailed and you, the primary pusher of said wagon, had professed that you were about the move your vote he jumped off his buddy's wagon at the first opportunity.

Who is your alternative partner for SC if not Raskol?

[Socrates]

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

Lolz.

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.

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?

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.

Way to go Raskol, way to go.

[Socrates]

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.

Ugh, The point is that you were arguing that you could not be scum if DDD was town, and your reasoning for this was terribad. DDD might have been your most likely scum partner at the time, but off the top of my head I can say that SC, Hoopla, and MathCam are all possible scum buddies for you.

The reason this argument is scummy is because that, combined with your argumentation about DDD's play (which I also have shown to disagree with) you have set up a nice little pairing of you and DDD such that you both MUST have the same alignment. If you are scum and DDD is town, this is a win-win for you because if he gets lynched it "clears" you and if you get lynched it will lead to a mislynch the next day.

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

Scum.

I am about ready to end the day too, lets lynch Raskol.

[Socrates]

Wow, don't take it personally. It's just a game.

[Socrates]

How many is that?

I would be willing to hammer at this point.

[Socrates]

Woo, cheap one liners!

umm... I got nuthin.

[Socrates]

Cyberbob, you said not to hammer just yet, what more are you expecting to get out of today? Do you just want Hoopla to check in or what?

[Socrates]

Cyberbob, you said not to hammer just yet, what more are you expecting to get out of today? Do you just want Hoopla to check in or what?

Still pretty sure you can't hammer yet since SC is only at L-2.

I know. Thats not the point.

[Socrates]

unvote, vote:SerialClergyman

[Socrates]

My god Raskol, who's lynch WOULD you support at this point?

[Socrates]

I am fine with that.

[Socrates]

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

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

If DDD and Charter are telling the truth, that would explain why Mathcam died and I lived BTW, though I don't think the NK choices was a clear cut as Charter says it is. I had already claimed vanilla town and I didn't exactly show myself to be a paragon of scumhunting yesterday. Better for the scum to go after someone much scarier than me.

This could be a calculated scum gambit by charter and Cyberbob to get me killed.

I need to go to class, so I will post later tonight.

I am going to go ahead and vote Cyberbob though, as I know he is scum.

vote: Cyberbob

[Socrates]

Hmmmm... Tracking me to hoopla would Oh so conviently explaim why Hoopla's vig didn't go through. This makes me think it is Cyberbob and Hoopla.

[Socrates]

WAIT! That doesn't necessarily incriminate Hoopla as since both DDD and Hoopla have claimed blocked actions, so even if one is lying there is still probably a scum roleblocker.

Scum probably DO have a roleblocker, and Cyberbob is trying to make me out to be him. Was anyone blocked night 1? That would shoot that theory down right now, as I was roleblocked myself then.

[Socrates]

Okay, so Cyberbob is scum and in order for Raskol to be scum then {Charter, Hoopla, DDD} would all be town, which would mean 5 pro-town power roles, which seems like too many. This means that Raskol is probably town.

So one of {Charter, Hoopla, DDD} is the other scum from this perspective.

I need to think more, but based upon people's reactions to the mass claim, I am more inclined to think that DDD is town because he would have to be pulling some kind of gambit and bussing Cyberbob to be scum at this point.

I need to look at the claimed night actions again.

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.

Eh? My thought process was "I didn't target ANYONE last night, because I am vanilla. He is lying scum!" I didn't even read who he said I targeted at first because the mere fact that he claimed I could target is a lie. The fact that I am vanilla is proof that Cyberbob was lying.

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".

Dude, I need to prove it to you guys. I don't need to prove it to myself, so of course I am going to argue it from an outsider's perspective.

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.

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.

[Socrates]

Socrates, I protected you since you were the ONLY person no one was considering scum. You seemed like the obvious NK, and you might have been if DDD is town.

I know, I understand the logic, but remember that I had already claimed vanilla, and going into lylo they only need one suspicious person the get mislynched. It wouldn't be unreasonable for scum to attempt to kill a power role instead of me.

WAIT! That doesn't necessarily incriminate Hoopla as since both DDD and Hoopla have claimed blocked actions, so even if one is lying there is still probably a scum roleblocker.

Scum probably DO have a roleblocker, and Cyberbob is trying to make me out to be him. Was anyone blocked night 1? That would shoot that theory down right now, as I was roleblocked myself then.

Half the town is dead. Anyone could have been roleblocked on night 1 and taken it to the grave. Or a vanilla could have been blocked.

I know, I was just hoping that someone could say that, as it would be a big help to proving that Cyberbob is lying.

[Socrates]

I need to think more, but based upon people's reactions to the mass claim, I am more inclined to think that DDD is town because he would have to be pulling some kind of gambit and bussing Cyberbob to be scum at this point.

Note that this also applies to charter.

[Socrates]

Mmm... I wasn't exactly the paragon of pro-town play when I came in, with all of my scum reads on townies. I guess I still need to get better at reading people.

One thing I don't get is why Cyberbob and Hoopla picked me as their mislynch target instead of Raskol. There was heavy evidence in favor of me being prob-town and there were multiple players who would have jumped on a Raskol lynch in a heartbeat. Was I acting scummy at the end of day 3 or something?

I also find it funny that scum would probably have won if they had just claimed Vanilla, or gone 1/1 on power roles, as people would probably have a harder time buying DDD's role if there wasn't other, more out of place roles like JOAT, and if they were going to try to pick a scum out of vanilla claims once again Raskol looked likely.

[Socrates]

Looking at the scum QuickTopic, Cyberbob, was your ignorance of popcorn style and me having already claimed faked? They were both mentioned in there.

[Socrates]

No (why would I fake that?) and sort of.

I don't know, I just thought it was weird how Hoopla had mentioned Popcorn in the QuickTopic but when it came up in thread you didn't know what it was.