Mini 934 - Troubles at Smiths&Catharts (Game Over!)

[Thor665]

Vote:Ythan because he seems to be a fan of spamming up the thread and I am a fan of that not happening.

You, dear sir, are about to not be a fan of Ythan in any way shape or form imaginable. I'm almost tempted to just vote Ythan, because he's always suspicious looking in my eyes, but at the moment I think i shall...

Vote: SFG

She is totally scum and I have it on good authority she always cracks under pressure depending on her current meta of choice.

[Thor665]

I'm torn between agreeing and wanting to say so and not wanting to make another post.

Ah, Ythan, either a very clever and sarcastic wit - or a wonderful punching bag of obtuseness. Take your pick.

[Thor665]

She is totally scum and I have it on good authority she always cracks under pressure depending on her current meta of choice.

Would you care to indulge us and just expand on this idea a little bit? It seems as if you have more that you can add here, and I'm curious as to what it is.

Primarily the idea is simply a joke and references the last game I was in with SFG. She used to have a list of her major meta points in her sig line, one of which was that she 'always cracks under pressure'. During the game we played she declared a change in her meta, including this point, and changed her sig while declaring we could pressure her but she wouldn't crack. Then later she cracked under pressure anyway.

Hence the joke.

If you want to defend your post oversaturation, that's fine, but be upfront about it.

What makes you feel Ythan is not being upfront about his attitude on his posting habits?

[Thor665]

Lol this is gonna be a long game

Personally I've got money on SFG/Ythan being the most interesting personality clash of the game.

What are your thoughts on a large number of posts and its effect on the town be it positive or negative?

[Thor665]

@Nobody Special - you just unvoted RayFrost and didn't re-vote anyone. I can understand if you feel your RVS was answered in such a way as to remove whatever guilt you seriously or jokingly thought had been detected but...what do you see as your reason for removing your vote altogether? Is no one else looking suspicious to you in any way shape or form?

Ythan is a moutermouth.
SFG just voted a lurker
I am too handsome for my own good
and Scrambles just voted Ythan whislt claiming a slight mix of OMGUS and policy lynch

Nothing worth having a vote out there for you?

Oh, that reminds me;

Unvote: SFG
Vote: ScramblesTheDeathDealer

[Thor665]

I added numbers for clarity.

1.

Claim?

2.

OMGUS?

3.

Ythan voted me?

4.

When did I claim?

5.

I never said "hey I'm town."

6.

I said it prevents town from finding scum, resulting in a loss.

1. Actually I said 'claiming' it's in the Oxford English and has meanings outside of the game of Mafia.

2. Perhaps a slight misuse of the term, I'll concede - I meant it to showcase your vote for him because he had annoyed you; i.e. a personal attack reasoning which alluded to OMGUS in my mind.

3. No, he did not. Please refer to #2.

4. Oxford English dictionary.

5. ...while you're at it, look up redundancy and repetition (besides, I'm pretty sure all of us are implying we're town - are you not?).

6. Ythan's actions might do that very thing (though I personally disagree). However no part of my vote had any bearing on how much I believe his actions do or do not affect town. I do believe your vote was done from a sense of personal annoyance and with an intention of setting up some vague policy that you were voting for Ythan because he spams the thread.

So, to my mind, either your vote is illogical and not worth supporting, or you are scum hoping to ride the wave of annoyance and a policy vote to a mislynch. I'm currently betting that the latter is more likely the truth and am voting with that concept in mind.

[Thor665]

TBH, I'm waiting for the Ythan furor to die down and for someone to start looking scummy. And I won't vote for someone who has neither confirmed nor posted.

Why did you random vote then? Do you feel putting out a random vote helps find scummy behavior?

If yes, why not put out a second vote?
If no, why put out the first vote?

[Thor665]

But I think it makes sense to keep in the back of the mind that Scrambles is only 13. (The weird thing about me saying that is that I'm 14

Is it a bad time to mention that I support policy lynches on all players under the age of eighteen?

What specifically about Scrambles' play is making you FOS him?

[Thor665]

Also, thor, personal attacks as a method of argument is ad hom, not OMGUS.

Personal attacks != ad hominem and what Scrambles did was not ad hominem nor do I intend to imply as such. If anything I think he is using a non-cause for cause fallacy, but I'm not sure I'd even go so far as to claim he's using a fallacy at all.

He did state that Ythan had 'annoyed' him and that therein lay part of the reason for his vote. I have issue with that.

[Thor665]

Then it's him using reasoning that doesn't promote scumhunting or actually find the person scummy but, rather, for non-role/alignment related issues that shouldn't impact scumhunting.

I'm having difficulty understanding what you're saying here so I'm going to restate it to what I think you're saying and respond to it as such. If I'm wrong please correct me.

I believe you are saying;
"Scrambles used reasoning that doesn't help scumhunting, but did so in a manner that doesn't suggest what role/alignment he may have."

To which I would reply; Perhaps.

I am personally going with the possibility he actually didn't really feel annoyance and simply claimed as such and then voted Ythan while trying to paint it as a policy lynch. He did so in an attempt to hopefully generate a bit of steam from other players (Nobody Special, Copper) who had already expressed reservations about Ythan's playstyle. In short - he was trying to get a populist wagon rolling that would be easy to stay distanced from if it turned up a mislynch.

[Thor665]

More accurate interpretation of what I said...

'Scrambles used reasoning that is unrelated to actual scumhunting and is using it to support a lynch rather than using actual reasoning to show that ythan is scum (note that annoying != scum), which makes his vote piggy backing with popular opinions while not giving any solid support - throwing Smurf into the fire, so to speak'

but yeah.

In that case I reasonably agree with you, as you appear to me.

Why does this not make him worthy of a vote at this juncture in your opinion? Certainly he apears more scummy then nobody, whom is who you are currently voting for and who, despite his lurking ways, I do not personally believe to be scum as it falls well within his normal town meta.

Attacking a person for no reason other than to attack them is

not

ad hom.

Fixed that for you.

Ythan, I actually am not sure if I've heard your take on this, so refresh my memory - what is your thought about lynching lurkers and how does that apply to SFG's current vote for you?

[Thor665]

(Methinks the policy lynch for spammers might bear some reconsideration...)

@Pomegranate - you have indicated a likelihood to have the age of a poster color and affect your opinions. What about the newbie state of a player? Do you think it is advantageous or disadvantageous to town to adjust their opinion based off of the age/experience of a player.

[Thor665]

Is SFG voting for me? I can understand the benefit of lynching lurkers but there is always someone who seems scummier to me when it comes up.

'for you' can also be written as 'in your opinion.

Thus to restate; Ythan, I actually am not sure if I've heard your take on this, so refresh my memory - what is your thought about lynching lurkers and how does that apply to SFG's current vote in your opinion?

[Thor665]

I think this obsession with players age is getting us nowhere Scrambles is thirteen, and he was a BAMF in the last game we played together. So i don't think age has anything to do with ability. (Well unless your like 7). And I have heard the Ray is also a freaking awesome player, and he is only 15. So lets stop the "curious obsession with [age]." and get to some real scum hunting!

I have analyzed the above post at great length and have found no scumhunting within it.

Please try again.

[Thor665]

I am working on hunting scum, thank you very much. I just wanted to put my two cents in about the age thing. I am currently in the process of rereading and trying my very best to find all those scummies But it is late, so i will probably continue with my scum hunting tomorrow and post what i find then

A re-read for scummy actions within the first six pages of Day 1? ...okay, cool. When you get around to the scumhunting just send me up a little signal flare so I'll notice.

[Thor665]

Also, perhaps the reason that you guys are all like "but he didn't confirm yet" and I was voting him anyways is because I didn't see anything there saying that he hadn't confirmed yet? Can someone please explain to me how you knew that he hadn't confirmed yet?

Reading the mod's posts The final line.

I am not happy to see the Troll because he was supposed to be the possible standby when I trucked out on my road trip ::shakes fist::.

[Thor665]

Hello. Reading up.

You'll find it goes quicker then the page count suggests I imagine.

When you catch up can you offer me your thoughts on lynch all lurkers?

@Cheshire - how's the re-read coming?

@Scrambles - what is your opinion of the SFG/Sajin wagon?

[Thor665]

Be on tomorrow with thoughts and what not.

I look forward to this with baited breath and bosom aquiver.
When you do please find some time amongst your scumhunting efforts to respond to the question I asked you in this post.

[Thor665]

I'm sure it'll be interesting to hear Ray's thoughts about your take on his meta.

At the very least I find his zapping of Copper for "not giving reasons" slightly odd since he's still harping on it after a post where Copper gave his reasons (well, reason) rather then responding to the accusation of not actually contributing to town.

@Ythan - do you agree with the Ray votes at the moment? You're chiming in a bit but I'm not clear on your actual stance. (also - I submit you should probably get used to the idea that weekends are often slower game days)

[Thor665]

I'm doing away with the meta, and I have to say that it is quite freeing, even if it is annoying to go against my usual and comfortable playstyle.

You are a ninja...

It's all well and good you're changing your meta - but I think Cooper has a relevant point when he questions what you've contributed thus far. I mean, I'll probably admit you've done more then Chesire or Nobody Special (or the new guy whose name I'm forgetting who replaced SFG) but I do believe it's possible to actually debate which of them you have or have not contributed more then.

Seriously, does you new meta include offering opinions on actions and votes of other players, and if so at what point do you expect to start doing so?

[Thor665]

Also you

know

me Thor I'm not going to accept slow weekends.

My personal hope is that at least you don't feel the need to post a comment about your attitudes on how weekends are slow every single weekend from here to the end of the game unless you can explain how it helps town.

To clarify just a touch - Saijin was the player I had meant to note, since he had replaced SFG, rather then Zorblag as Copper deduced and/or indicated. I certainly won't mind hearing more from either of them though.

@Sotty7 - What was it bout the manner SFG replaced out that makes you so contented in the Saijin vote?

[Thor665]

I'll apologize for this double post - apparently my brain has not fully engaged yet today;

@Ythan - do you agree with the Ray votes at the moment? You're chiming in a bit but I'm not clear on your actual stance. (also - I submit you should probably get used to the idea that weekends are often slower game days)

I have almost nothing to go on myself so I don't find votes on Ray too curious.

Okay, so you don't find them curious.

Now, to ask my question, which remains unanswered, again; do you agree with them? You appear to be edging in on them a bit in a supportive manner but it's unclear if you're actually supporting them or not. Do you agree with the votes or no, and why is that?

[Thor665]

Hate to do it but

unvote vote RayFrost

Out of curiosity, why? In this post you told me you didn't particularly find Ray's actions scummy. What changed?

[Thor665]

I don't think that a declaration of breaking meta should completely excuse a broken meta.

I would actually say a declaration of breaking meta is *exactly* what excuses a broken meta.

You're now saying you don't find Ray's actions "terribly scummy" where before you said you didn't find them "particularly scummy". Do you consider there to be a difference in how scummy you find him between those two comments? Or do you mean the same thing by both phrases?

Also, a yes or no question - do you find Ray scummy?

[Thor665]

I also find RayF's lack of participation .... disturbing

Pot, meet kettle.

anyone attempting to break their own known meta deserves to be lynched

Could you expand on this concept please? This sounds like you're choosing to paint your vote in a simple policy lynch mentality. Do you find Ray scummy, and if so why? If you do not find him scummy, but instead simply anti-town, maybe you could explain then why you support an anti-town lynch?

[Thor665]

First, I disagree. Second, no right now he's my best bet for a lynch today. Third, see second.

Let's break down my thought process on this;

1. You say that Ray is acting outside of his usual meta (he agrees with this)
2. You do not particularly find him scummy.
3. You vote for him.

If you don't find him scummy what does it matter that he's acting outside of his usual meta? Either his actions are scummy or they are not. Just because he's your "best bet" for a lynch today (and by that I'll hopefully presume you mean "most scummy seeming player") I don't understand how you get there unless you believe he is scummy which you don't seem comfortable about saying clearly one way or the other.

This seems like you are hopping on the wagon while also distancing from it.
I find that behavior scummy.

Unvote: ScramblestheDeathDealer
Vote: Ythan

[Thor665]

I've only played with Ray as town and he always acted pretty much the opposite of how he is here.

Pretty much the opposite? Disclaimer language is disclaimer...ry

I'm taking other players' claims that this is how he acts as scum at face value.

Ah, okay, I didn't realize you were just following the herd and going with the reads of others. This should clear you in my mind...how exactly?

I'm perfectly willing to accept that Ray is acting in his 'scum meta'. However, currently his actions appear simply more anti-town rather then scummy. You voted for him, distanced yourself from the vote, and changed the vote immediately after I called you on supplying some input for your vote. Voting for someone who is anti-town rather then scummy and not really getting behind that vote is, to my mind, a pretty decent scum tell.

[Thor665]

Thor when you call Ray anti town am I right in assuming you don't agree with his wagon?

A fair question.

Overall I am neutral of the Ray wagon. I am not fond of his current tack of actions (and am *really* hoping he fulfills his comment that now that we're 10 pages in he's going to offer thoughts). However, I can't ascribe any clear scum actions to him at the moment either. So all I currently see on him is a basic policy lynch of "he's lurking and/or not helping town" which though not totally unreasonable as an early Day 1 vote does not strike me as the optimal lynch for town to eventually make.

[Thor665]

If you do not find him scummy, but instead simply anti-town, maybe you could explain then why you support an anti-town lynch?

Does the difference between 'anti-town' and 'scummy' matter here? Either way he is not working with the town to find a good scum canidate to lynch, which is effect hurting town, which scummy. Just trying to get some clarification.

Scrambles who deals death in various ways basically did sum up the crux of my position, but since you asked the question of me I figured I'd ramble on about it a bit as well. If you want the tl:dr version just look at his post.

In short, there are a variety of actions that can happen in this game. Some of these actions help town, and some hinder it. However, simply because an action hinders or does not help town does not make it an action that a scummy player would do. For instance - take a self vote. Generally speaking there is no reason for a player of any alignment (with certain exceptions) to ever self vote, and a self vote does not help town.

However, a self vote is not a scummy action either because it doesn't help the scum team.

Therefore a self vote is part of a third set of actions in which you agree that the action is anti-town but cannot actually say the action is pro scum. I see Ray's current action set falling this way. Is he helping town? Most assuredly not. Is he helping scum? ...well, no, I don't see that either. Therefore I see a player who is anti-town but is not necessarily pro-scum and is therefore a less beneficial lynch in my mind from a player who is pro-scum. That is the difference betwixt scummy and anti-town.

@Chesire - So, to re ask the question, do you find Ray scummy, why/why not? If not; why do you support an anti-town lynch?

[Thor665]

@Scrambles - currently you are not voting anyone. Why is this and also, currently whom do you find most suspicious?

@InquisitorJL - you say you are happy with your Cheshire vote sine 'it's as good as anyone'. Since I think at least a few of the other wagons out there now at least have some concept of the logic of why they're voting who they are would you care to point out what you see as the strongest aspects supporting you in keeping your vote on Cheshire?

[Thor665]

I'd bet that if Ray flips scum, your his scumbuddy, and if Ray flips town (all of this is assuming he's lynched at some point), your scum.

So unless Ray is a survivor, NS is scum in your estimation?

Please expound.

[Thor665]

And to clarify my previous is directed at Scrambles, not Ythan - I support Ythan's line of questioning.

[Thor665]

Also, what is the evidence that NS is scum no matter which way Ray flips - and why wouldn't you be voting him if that's what you believe?

[Thor665]

Feel free to answer Sotty's over mine - they're basically the same question in different words.

[Thor665]

@Cheshire - so you're basically saying you're content to vote a townie who seems distracting rather then questing for a scum to vote for? Do you have any proactive plans for pursuing scum, what and where are they? If you do not then aren't you being anti-town? If you're being anti-town do you think I and others should vote for you just as much as you are voting Ray?

[1]I shouldn't have said either way he's scum, I'll admit that was a bit much, but either way to me it does look very suspicious.
[2]I didn't vote because I would like to see what NS does.
[3][Kids, the moral to this post is to never bandwagon.]

Wow... (numbered for response)

1. So basically you think he has bandwagoned on Ray and thus you feel he is scum and you claim no attitude on Ray either way.

2. You have just said you see him as scum either bussing his partner or bandwagoning. Why would you wait to see what happens? How is it advantageous to not vote for obv. scum like Nobody Special?

3. I'm pretty sure bandwagoning is a basic part of the game - how do you think people need to get on votes?

@Copper - what are your thoughts on ScramblestheDeathDealer's recent reaction to Nobody Special?

@Zorblag - what are your thoughts on Ythan's vote and unvote of RayFrost?

@Saijin - do you hate Kakarot?

[Thor665]

Though I do not find myself much impressed by Nobody Special's method I also do not find it convincing to suggest that he didn't indicate "Yes, I believe he is scum, therefore I shall vote."

In any case I would note that even if you do believe this that Ythan's vote on Ray was *far* more indicative of "Meh, everyone else thinks that, so I'ma go ahead and vote too." then Nobody Special's and you didn't seem to get excited about Ythan's actions. What's up with that?

[Thor665]

In any case I would note that even if you do believe this that Ythan's vote on Ray was *far* more indicative of "Meh, everyone else thinks that, so I'ma go ahead and vote too." then Nobody Special's and you didn't seem to get excited about Ythan's actions. What's up with that?

Re-asked to Scrambles, because, though the good Lord knows I love to hear myself talk, I would like an answer to this one.

[Thor665]

But i would much rather lynch scum, as for plans, i am just waiting for someone to slip up at the moment, so no i dont ahve any 'plans' for pursuing scum at the moment.

I do not approve of this plan since I have yet to see the game when scum post up a comment along the lines of "Hai guyz, I am scummorz and shall night kill ya soon!" If you want scum to "slip up" it is intrinsic upon *you* to generate actions, reactions, and conversation in order to create that slip up.

Can you explain how you sitting quietly on the sidelines waiting for a "slip up" is less scummy then Zorblag's attempts to "fly under the radar?"

Also, as noted by Col.Cathart; Saijin is being prodded.

[Thor665]

I didn't get excited over Ythans actions because he was one of the first voters. Being one of the first = less scummy, IMO.

Ythan was third.
Nobody Special was fourth.

Seriously now, why isn't Ythan scummy if Nobody Special is? Ythan even couldn't come out and say "I think Ray is scummy" (NS did) and instead went with the "everyone else says Ray is acting scummy" concept which you specifically cited as a scum tell in your eyes and you still haven't explained how you feel NS did this when I said I didn't see that from him at all.

This feels like a weakly concocted explanation to cover for either a lack of logic/consideration in your vote or to cover for being scummy in your vote.

@ All Lurkers - stop it.

[Thor665]

And Thor, I never said that I was voting Ray because others found him scummy. What I said was that I was trusting other players' accounts of his meta.

Other player: Hey, Ythan, we have meta evidence that Ray is scum - vote Ray for great justice!1!!

Ythan: I suppose I could ask for evidence of this being Ray's scum meta, or perhaps I could say that I agree he is acting scummy. Instead I will say that I don't find him scummy and shall also vote Ray because clearly justice is involved.

Thor665: Ythan is the scummorx!

Ythan: No, no, you got me wrong. You see I was just trusting their evidence without researching it or offering evidence of my own - that is definitely not scummy behavior.

I really don't see that defense as clearing you unless you are interpreting it in a way that is really different from me. Please extrapolate out your concept if you are now ready to actually respond to my accusations.

[Thor665]

Why'd you move your vote from IJL to Ray?

[Thor665]

Are you "just keeping" your vote on NS, or do you actually believe he is scummy?

[Thor665]

Actually I'd prefer just scum lists. I'm of the mind that full townie/scum lists tend to start helping scum if too many people do them.

It does concern me that she could quite reasonably place 50% of the players into a lurking category.

[Thor665]

Okay, I've figured it out.

There is not actually any scum in this game. Instead Col.Cathart designed a game where about half the players have restrictions on their post count and also have a percentage chance with every post that they may have to replace out.

I think I deserve a cookie for breaking the game on day one.

Dear Mod, may we please have an accounting of the votes?

I'm not seeing enough worthwhile conversation to keep delaying much and want to see some conversation and movement started to consolidate votes so we don't no lynch.

I support the Ythan or Nobody Special wagons.

[Thor665]

NS's gasket pop and some awkwardness in earlier votes does leave me reasonably contented with him. I am disconcerted that both you and Scrambles are on that wagon though, as I'm non too trusting of either of you and it sours it slightly for me. Still, I like it better then the other wagons besides the Ythan one.

@TheCheshireCat - I personally am interested by the idea of playing a game with Zorblag. Also, your vote on him is based on his lurking (nothing new there I'm afraid) and there are at least two other lurkers (Ray and NS) who have more traction then your Zorblag wagon. Either start selling the living bejeezus on this wagon or kindly move your vote somewhere useful (while you consider this please recall that Ythan is scum)

@InquisitorJL - though I do see a certain amount of logic in your vote I see more activity on other wagons and (personally) see a scummier action from Ythan. Do you disagree with this assessment? If not, why are you staying on the Cheshire wagon?

@The assembled Ray wagon - I am not fond of this wagon but will admit it is mostly for a bit of a stupid reason (frankly I feel like Ray's trying to be lynched). I would like each of you to comment on what you think Ray has done that paints him as scum (or as anti-town, but then at least admit you're voting for him for being anti-town as opposed to scummy).

[Thor665]

and later Troll sees that Ythan says that him thinks that Nobody Special is scum rather than thinking that him might be scum. That no fits that well. Perhaps Troll has more of an issue than Troll thought.

Though Thor have no particular desire to defend him - Thor will note that this aspect is well within Ythan's usual playstyle. He generally comes across as uber confident and sure of his reads which is probably one of the reasons his earlier wishy-washy nature raised Thor's mighty hackles.

Thor665 probably be getting too much credit from some for simply being active (scum in his position no would have any reason not to)

Thor agree with this, but suspect it be more of an outgrowth of 50% of the group basically lurking which simply makes Thor look more brilliant in comparison.

[Thor665]

Thor there be nothing wishy washy about Ythan's earlier voting.

I have pointed out where I saw what I discerned as backtracking and some disclaimer language used in your votes. Feel free to go and defend the logic and methods you used, but at the time you basically went 'pffft' and waved your hand to suggest the accusations would go away. For the record, your lack of confrontation at that time struck me as odd, you're usually content to argue till you're blue in the face.

[Thor665]

sry guys!!! I'm gonna be

V/LA

until tomorrow afternoon!

This is the best defense to a lurking/not contributing accusation I have ever seen. Clearly all my suspicion in this regard has been blown away in a blast of townishness.

[Thor665]

I think the thor v ythan thing is more town v town than scum, as I have to agree with ythan's defense.

Which defense of his do you agree with?

[Thor665]

Next I'd like to point out p78 by SFG. This post stuck out to me.

... Hopefully I'll do a better job at the beginning of this game than I did at the beginning of last game xP...

What did SFG flip in the referenced game? Could I get a little more info about the game in question and reference to how SFG felt she didn't play well.

Since this was made as a direct reference to me I can only presume it's the game we had each just finished Newbie 898. The link is also in my Wiki with some of my personal thoughts on the game.

In short;

SFG had openly stated troubles in dealing with designing cases on Day 1. A problem she had suffered in a previous game as well and something she was trying to develop into her play style. She ended up tunneling on another vanilla townie for the bulk of the game. She was mislynched the day before lylo after the player she was tunneling on was proven town though she had pegged scum as her second suspect. She was a vanilla townie.

[Thor665]

And simply because I feel like a mook being here and not continuing my question asking ways.

@Kthxbye

This is not the Ray I know. Also, anyone attempting to break their own known meta deserves to be lynched,

especially

if not doing anything.

When you get here please provide your thoughts on this aspect of your predecessor's game.

[Thor665]

@Kthxbye - do you see any particular advantage with roleclaiming at L-4?

[Thor665]

Thor: Is there a problem with claiming VT in your opinion? If so, why?

As much as I usually detest this sort of answer - please refer to Zorblag's post, he's pretty much nailing my attitude and expresses exactly why I called you on it (I hadn't considered the power role thing, but that makes a lot of sense too so I'll just claim I had meant that as well).

[Thor665]

Would you actually care to expand on the reason(s?) that Nobody Special was "hugely obvious scum?" Clearly a few of the other players who are not voting for him (like me) are too dense to see the clear writing on the wall and could use a few guideposts.

Other then pointing out that he was lurking (hardly a new accusation in this game) I can't recall you making much of a case about anything.

[Thor665]

Yeah...

I'd like to see a couple more Ythan votes please.

[Thor665]

I submit there is a difference between you not agreeing with my case and me asking you to provide any case at all and you saying you don't need to. Do you disagree with that? If so, why?

[Thor665]

But that still doesn't explain why you refuse to respond to any of the cases against you.

I thought you agreed with his response to my case on him. Has this changed?

[Thor665]

Sajin is a total disgrace, Inquisitor and Cheshire seemed to have completely checked out of this game, and Pomegranate's absence has definitely been noticable.

I'll pretty much agree with this though I am personally of a mind to give Inquisitor a bit more of a pass since at least when he does post he tends to post something with content that at least can be read for tells, the others on this list less so in my opinion. I'm also of a mind to still include Ray on that list since even with his current contributions he's playing evasive in his opinions.

Cheshire is continuing to play the game in a way that is making legions of scummy plums dance in my head and has officially advanced on my scum list. I would support her lynch or Ythan's at this point.

@Pom - please just provide your scum list, I actually don't even understand why it's hard to do for you. Giving one or two scummiest names should be the matter of a few seconds of work. Your dragging of your feet to provide them later concerns me - when you provide them could you clarify why you needed so much time to give two names?

@Scrambles - you've slipped under my radar a bit. When you return from V/LA could you respond to the following; Are you still content with your Kthxbye/NS vote? Why/why not. Also, what are your thoughts on the current Ythan situation?

[Thor665]

Sotty's still on that "We're close to the deadline so I can just ignore Ythan's posts and post the same Smurf over and over" kick.

Because you most assuredly haven't been ignoring stuff?
Do you disagree with a deadline pressured lynch? He has mentioned some things about you he feels are scummy in addition to the deadline pressure so I'm not sure if I really see this as only a policy lynch if that's what you're implying.

If you folks plan on lynching me you need to spit it out

now

.

I certainly intend to continue to make motion in this direction. Ythan does have a kernel of truth in his commentary insomuch as I would rather like us to get to the L-1 stage for whomever it is we're going to be lynching by the end of today so we have time for a claim and some discussion prior to hammer.

Zorblag promised commentary 'soon' and theoretically Scrambles might be back this evening. Pomegranate really owes us an appearance and some commentary as well.

Ythan, what are your thoughts as regards the Cheshire wagon?

Mod, might we be granted an updated vote count please?

[Thor665]

I will admit that I haven't given this game my all but don't discount his actions because I've done them as well. Scum points for both of us, not neither.

This is the towniest seeming thing you've said all Day Phase.

Do you disagree with a deadline pressured lynch?

I disagree with his attempt to rush to the deadline without answering anything.

What questions has he dodged?

If you folks plan on lynching me you need to spit it out

now

.

I certainly intend to continue to make motion in this direction. Ythan does have a kernel of truth in his commentary insomuch as I would rather like us to get to the L-1 stage for whomever it is we're going to be lynching by the end of today so we have time for a claim and some discussion prior to hammer.

I think it might be a mistake to wait that long. After a claim if we choose to look elsewhere for a lynch we're already going to be very pressed for time.

We're already pressed for time because everyone and his uncle has been lurking like a mothersmurfing lunatic. I was calling for vote consolidation last week for a reason. How exactly do you propose we speed up anything at this particular stage?

I am not a fan of Kthxbye's wagon.
I am neutral to the Ray wagon but overall don't really see why it has so much traction.
I'm content to lynch Ythan or Cheshire and at the moment will happily vote either way to ensure a lynch (Ythan's last post was as townish as he's gotten and at least he actually posts which puts him ahead of the cat).

Since I've changed my preference of who I'd firstmost like to see lynched;

Unvote: Ythan
Vote TheCheshireCat

I will cite going V/LA shortly prior to deadline whilst leaving a useless vote (Zorblag) on the table.

[Thor665]

Thor, I'd really like to see a game of you as scum if you have any.

I tend to be anal about questions so I'll respond to this in case anyone else gives a hoot - check my Wiki for my games, I do have one as scum but if you manage to get reads about my scum play style off of that one you are an amazing person whom should be doing something better with your amazing gift then playing a game on this site.

I still really like my Cheshire vote.

[Thor665]

Where I came from, smilies were a scumtell believe it or not.

Where I come from not really explaining your votes when you make them is a scumtell, believe it or not.

I'm going to presume you're not voting for the smilies. What are you voting for? Also, please provide at least one additional player you find scummy and a reason or two for that as well.

[Thor665]

Cheshire Cat is at L-2. While I can't find any good reason not to vote Cheshire and a patchwork town like this demands we take action sooner rather than later, it's still a little unnerving to see this speed.

What speed?

The cat was placed at L-4 during a period where it appeared we were only a few days out of deadline (to be frank, I was almost getting worried about our chances to even manage a lynch). Now we have, for the first time, a player at L-2 with us about a week from deadline. I don't see the blinding speed nor am I upset to get someone suspicious looking with some legitimate pressure on them.

What about the situation do you see as being too fast?

[Thor665]

THE CHESHIRE CAT IS AT L-1

This information brought to you by the committee of 'no excuses for "accidental" hammers.'

why would i want to tell scum my actual

stragedy

for hunting them?

(em) Your Freudian slip is correct - your scumhunting strategy is tragic.

I dont really have a strong case on anyone, i just noticed that both cyberbob and Zorblag were a little lurky.

Do you still find Zorblag lurky?
How do you reconcile your vote for lurky behavior considering your play...do you find your own play lurky?

I see where your coming from, i will ISO some ppl and see who is the most scummy.

Don't expect me to hold my breath on this.

This is mainly due to p533 and my annoyance that D1 has still provided no more information than speculation of posts. I think we need a flip.

Some flips are great for getting information, but not all flips are made equal.

What do you see as the information we will glean about other players from a Cheshire Cat flip? I see *maybe* a bit of energy towards the Scrambles slot but otherwise consider the flip of Cheshire as being fairly useless in an information gathering way.

[Thor665]

In addition, your statement clearly posits that

good scumhunting

is not useful, which is an outright lie and shows that you are, in fact, just going with the tide!

You didn't address this part of Ray's accusation, Kthxbye, and I think it's the most meaty...

...okay, it's the only meat there because other then that I agree with you and think Ray is grasping at some mighty thin straws with the contradiction accusation. Methinks he didn't recognize how to read the comma (a common mistake of child geniuses I am informed).

I WOULD HOWEVER SUGGEST THERE BE NO HAMMER TILL CSL GETS A CHANCE TO FINISH THE FINAL 3 PAGES AND EXPLAIN IN FURTHER DETAIL THE REASON FOR THE VOTE.

This bit of effeciency does echo to my mind Copper's question to you (which you did not answer in your reply to him) when he asked why you didn't clarify at the time you were putting Cheshire at L-1. If you weren't the type of player to post those warnings that's one thing, but by posting this plea/warning/demand I have to wonder why you didn't do so with the L-1 vote. Please enlighten me.

There are still no facts in this game.

And finally, just on a game theory standpoint. The discussion of Day 1 is not there to generate 'facts' that will be useful on the lynch Day 1. It is there to generate information that will make all subsequent lynch votes (hopefully) more and more accurate. If you don't buy into this then you might as well just roll dice to decide your votes and never say anything in any post other then what you're voting as the "facts" of a flip are useless with context to place them within.

[Thor665]

He is squirming more than the other wagons.

As you respond to Pom and Zorblag - and I really think you should. I will add my own question to the queue;

Theoretically town also do not want to be lynched. What do you see in his squirming that says 'scum' rather then 'town not wanting to be mislynched'?

[Thor665]

Thor665's question ties directly into the Game Theory that I was applying to my pick. Basically, that as people are less likely to be scum than other roles, people are more active when they are scum, because it is an experience they do not get to fulfill as often.

So based off of this concept you're going with Kthxbye as more likely to be scum because he's participating more?

Does lurking not seem a perfectly reasonable scum tactic? Pop in, make some promises and try to appear townish, and then fade away again and hope that the town will be distracted by more active members saying something stupid/scummy? (and, for the record, I tend to consider lurking to be universally present in all roles - though in scum's case it can have strategic advantages).

I'm not comfortable with you basing a vote on a player because he's 'more active then someone else' because, quite frankly, that seems silly. I am against policy votes for only lurking and am likewise against policy votes for looking too active.

Do you think anything Kthxbye (or Nobody Special) has done is scummy? If not then your vote is silly, and I have deep set allergies to silly.

because playing from a vote analysis perspective I am still not inclined to believe TCC is the likely culprit, or if TCC is, I put myself in a WIFOM situation of incompetency.

Let me run you through a little timeline.
1. I point out how TCC's vote (on Zorblag) is useless, and we need to consolidate votes and/or she needs to start selling her case (which she hasn't come close to even trying yet)
2. Cheshire's next post is a V/LA
3. Cheshire's next post is *also* a V/LA...now prior to deadline Cheshire claimed V/LA till Tuesday (basically two days before deadline).
4. Cheshire then doesn't show up again till Thursday *about two hours* prior to deadline.

If she was town then she decided apparently that no input (or vote) was needed from her...oh, yeah, when she comes back she finally notes my post (from #1 on the list) and then basically disappears again.

You apparently do not find this scummy. Why?

[Thor665]

People are getting all hot and bothered over the possibility of a TCC lynch, so its frustrating to have to continually attempt to bring them back down to reality. I know I've been guilty of similar slams against TCC earlier in the game, but I think I've reached a bit of a turning point. TCC isn't treating this game with much respect, that's for sure. If we didn't have as much of a replacement crisis in this game as we did, I would have scolded the Mod for not getting on top of the situation. Be that as it may, the TCC voters are remiss to point out what moves TCC from being anti-town to being potentially mafia.

...did you actually just jump in and try to answer my question to Hawthorne before he could?

I'll concede this is three parts paranoia - but for later in the game in case I'm gone I want to point out a belief from me that the clearly more experienced Copper potentially just deflected a difficult question away from a apparent more newbie player. Depending on future flips - look into this.

Back on topic;

I do believe some of the TCC voters are remiss in actually explaining their votes. However I do believe the concept of how TCC is playing anti-town in a way that is potentially pro scum has been advanced. Yes, TCC's actions are clearly anti-town. However, she is doing anti-town actions that are potentially pro scum actions (promises of scumhunting and laying low to hope the spotlight is redirected, and leaving votes on useless wagons to suggest participation whilst not being connected to any mislynches)

I can't honestly say I'm ready to abandon RayFrost, or possibly Locke, as our lynch today.

Clearly I'm missing the deep scum sign from the Ythan/Ray interaction, I personally put the whole thing down to Ythan's usual pushing of...social (for lack of a better word) boundaries. If you can clarify without breaking any rules I'd love to hear it.

[Thor665]

So based off of this concept you're going with Kthxbye as more likely to be scum because he's participating more?

That would be oversimplifying the theory and making it sound stupid, sure...

And yet I do not feel it is a gross misrepresentation of your stated concept. If it looks stupid to you then you might simply wish to reanalyze the concept behind the logic.

Again, I think it has to do more with lack of care, than lack of activity. I support this by saying that *most* scum, due to the rareness of their roles, would not sit idly by during a L-1 wagon.

I explained this in the post (Before you quoted and asked me this question, but after the post that you quoted.) That is the reasoning that I have formed by this Kthxbye vote.

I didn't disregard your 'clarification post' but rather felt my summation still encompassed it. I look again at your language here and in that post;
"would not sit idly by"
"maintaining lack of involvement"
What I see there is language that is indeed best summed up as 'Cheshire is not being active and therefore is less likely scum then Kthxbye who is being active'

In fact all you've actually managed to say is 'Cheshire is not being active now that pressure is on her and that makes me believe the lurking is legitimate as opposed to strategic' Which does nothing to support your Kthxbye vote and is, at best, a reason for you not to vote Cheshire. Yet you brought up this 'involved/uninvolved' concept as part of your case to vote

for

Kthxbye.

I do not feel it is odd for me to find it silly.

Another reason why Kthxbye appears scummy:

You mean, the first you've offered.

I can certainly understand why someone would want to end a day after two weeks of speculation. However, this was the day that he was signed in as a replacement. An experienced scum would not do this, but a noobie scum would.

Just to make sure I understand this - your theory of Kthxbye as scum is predicated on a belief he's newbie and not very good at being scum? I actually agree with you that this is potentially a revealing point on Kthxbye as I have been pursuing him on aspects of this point as well, but I'm not fully groking your logic here.

Another note, he puts up a blanket apology after pointing fingers at half of the players and calling them scum. That just seems fake to me, but I could be wrong.

I ISOed him briefly and couldn't find this. I see one of his earlier posts where he tags Ythan and calls everyone else null to townish, but I couldn't find the post where he zapped multiple people and apologized. Could you please point me to it? (is it in Nobody's iso, maybe?)

[Thor665]

That's the post i linked to in my above commentary.

the only apology I see is where he apologizes for "the wall" which I personally translate as 'the wall of text'.

What apology and what accusations specifically from that post are bothering you in juxtaposition? He really does only call out Ythan (and includes Scrambles with no real support) and I can't find "a blanket apology after pointing fingers at half of the players and calling them scum." What am I missing here?

[Thor665]

That was the apology I was referring too. Its small, but its very uncharacteristic following up those accusations. Intentionally trying to stay on the d-low.

You aren't reading into it like I am. Perhaps its reading into it too much, but you and I obviously have a different view on how to scum hunt.

Well, no, I am not reading it the way you are because I think you're misrepresenting it. Let's look at your accusation and his apology.

Another note, he puts up a blanket apology after pointing fingers at half of the players and calling them scum. That just seems fake to me, but I could be wrong.

Those are my 2 cents. Sorry for the wall.

First off - he only listed Ythan and Scrambles(Henry Hathaway) as scummy. If you squint you could even accept he dinged Copper.

That is not "pointing fingers at half the players" and I literally cannot understand how you reached that conclusion.

The apology is then a general hand-wave to posting a wall of text, which he did, and I don't see how it is an attempt to back away from what he said rather then simply being an admission he just posted a wall of text. What about if I double post and apologize? I often do this (and probably have done it in this thread) - would you think that was scummy pandering if I did it while making accusations at someone?

I also wouldn't call his apology a "blanket apology." He gave a

specific

apology for posting a wall of text, not a blanket apology after pointing fingers of suspicion.

How do you define 'blanket apology'?

My question for you: Do you dislike it when people scum hunt differently than you do?

That depends - do I think their scumhunting is actually working?

If I think someone is making wasted efforts or poor logical conclusions and calling it 'scumhunting' then, no, I specifically do not like it and will challenge it. If I think their scumhunting is more like scummy actions then townish scumhunting then I do not like it.

If I think someone just has a different method that seems to work for them and if when I ask them questions I can see some sort of concept behind it I have no issue with them simply because they do not follow my specific methods.

I didn't address you or HH in that post. I clarified, to the best of my abilities, Copper's current position on TCC. I think our general consensus is that TCC is not the best lynch today (unless the lynch is intended to be purely political).

I found the subject of your response to be immediately applicable to my question towards Henry and I also found the timing of it (coming out of the blue when no one had asked you any questions in that regard) to also be suspicious. As I said, I admit the suspicion is perhaps simply paranoia - but I do not think it is unreasonable or illogical paranoia.

I think it would be okay to say that I'm worried Ythan/RayFrost may or may not have knowledge of each other's roles in this game.

Ah, I get it. That actually makes a lot of sense and is quite interesting. Having played a couple of games with Ythan I'm not sure I totally buy into it since he's a fairly ridiculous personality anyway, but I grok now.

[Thor665]

Our methods are different, for sure, but I am not going to stop using them just because you disagree with me, hehe.

Fair enough - I do disagree with them and I certainly do not see his apology for posting a wall of text as scummy in any way.

Let us revisit the questions you haven't responded to;

I can certainly understand why someone would want to end a day after two weeks of speculation. However, this was the day that he was signed in as a replacement. An experienced scum would not do this, but a noobie scum would.

Question 1 -

Just to make sure I understand this - your theory of Kthxbye as scum is predicated on a belief he's newbie and not very good at being scum? I actually agree with you that this is potentially a revealing point on Kthxbye as I have been pursuing him on aspects of this point as well, but I'm not fully groking your logic here.

You have commented about how Kthxbye was "pointing fingers at half the players." I have repeatedly said I do not see that and have even provide a list (three names long) including everyone I think he even came close to pointing at (I really think the list is more like 2) in that post.

Question 2 -

How (why?) do you possibly define that as half?

[Thor665]

I concede, its nowhere near half. Oopsy

...congratulations, you have managed to answer one of two questions I asked. I really do not think the two questions were hard to spot either.

For the third time.

Question 1

- Just to make sure I understand this - your theory of Kthxbye as scum is predicated on a belief he's newbie and not very good at being scum? I actually agree with you that this is potentially a revealing point on Kthxbye as I have been pursuing him on aspects of this point as well, but I'm not fully groking your logic here.

If this has to go to a fourth without you at least acknowledging that you're avoiding this question I will policy vote and try to lynch you because I am a shallow jerk.

bussing doesn't look like this - a quiet procession of voters each silently creeping on to the wagon without acknowledgment of those at their rear.

Other then CSL (whose vote is terrible but whose lack of appearance is uncertain as of yet) do you really feel anyone else has glided onto the wagon?

The only ones I feel meet that criteria are Inquisitor (and he was the first and just requested replacement so - null) and CSL. I don't see a big, gentle, silent, glide there.

[Thor665]

Apologies for post spamming here (let's see if that counts as a scummy apology to Hathaway)

I forgot about Locke since he glided off almost as quickly from the Cat wagon. I'll agree that Locke's methods look scummish to me for the wagon in question as well.

[Thor665]

Not a single person, to my knowledge, acknowledged that there were other people voting for TCC. No one had questions for TCC or were interested in any sort of defense. Not any discussion as to why TCC's lack of content made her more likely scum than anyone else's lack of content.

Do you think I did this? Because I strongly disagree since I did ask questions and did explain why I found her lurking more scummy. This commentary is far too wide catching and general for my taste. That's why I asked you who you found scummy for this. You ought to be willing to clarify who the tell has picked up on now that you have discussed it. Otherwise this looks a touch mudsling-ingy (proper Enlish is gold!).

As for kthnx, I can't help but feel that the back and fourth between Henry Hathaway and Thor will shed some light on the feasibility of knthxbye being scum, and I want to wait on that. It's also interesting that I feel the clash between two unrelated players should be relevant at all regarding whether or not a third one is scum.

Can you explain why without giving away the scumtell you're looking for? Personally I think Scrambles was scummy and now Henry is bursting with newbie theory that may or may not be scummy (I'm not sure of my personal read yet). However the only connection between our debate and Kthx I can see is it is arguable that I am defending Kthnxbye (personally I view it as attacking Henry, but tis subjective I'll allow).

The answer to your question, Thor, is yes. I thought I made that very clear with this:

An experienced scum would not do this, but a noobie scum would.

Since your scumtell here is *based* on the concept he is newbie scum who will mess up, what evidence do you see to support this? How do you clarify this evidence as 'he's newbie scum' as opposed to 'newbie town'

I ask because even if you have a newbie tell for him then you have to be able to still show it as a scum tell. All a newbie tell does is show someone is newbie - it doesn't reveal alignment.

[Thor665]

(game post appended below)
I shalt be

V/LA (and by LA I mean no A) March 27th through to April 4th

I have discussed this already with Col.Cathart (with only minor groveling needed) and thanks to the plethora+1 of replacements we have had thus far the plan is I disappear for the vacation and return to my usual posting habits come April 5th.

If March 27th happens to roll around with a vote yet undecided I shalt attempt my best to leave what clever (and not so clever) insights I have prior to departure so that they may at least show my thoughts at that point.

==============================================

at this point, we are starting to go round and round in circles. Logically and honestly, D1 ends most the time with a mislynch. When we let D1 go on too long, it muddies the waters a tad bit once we do have the flip.

As I play more games I tend to believe this more. The question I have for you is; do you believe we've had no worthwhile forward discussion between your warning off of a hammer and this point? I do not believe we are currently going in circles and have been happy for the conversation that has happened because it has solidified a few thoughts in my head and opened a few interesting tacks.

....I'm super excited to hear your case/points on why you're voting for me in a logical organized format.

She has provided her two scum points against you. Her ISO is short and if you really want I can link them, they are in a list in one post. I am surprised you missed them, so I have to presume you saw them and decided they were not in a reasonable enough presentation? Why is this?

Thor p596: I don't see you as much defending me but actually reading my posts the way they were meant when I wrote them.

I was actually not seeking justification for my actions in that regard (I am far too cloaked in my own hubris already), rather clarification of Copper's thought process(es) as regards a scum read.

Even though I questioned CSL above, I have been burnt too many times by being suspicious of someone, them replacing out, moving on to give the replacement a chance, only to find out I was right to begin with and the initial suspicion was correct.

Does this mean you otherwise feel CSL is more scummy then TCC but that you will not change your vote because you prefer to go on initial gut reads?

[Thor665]

I really think [Pom] is very likely scum because I don't see any attempt at scum hunting outside her push on Ray. Oh and look a post promising content from Pom. I won't hold my breath....
...You are not the only person to think this, I'm also on this wagon. I'm feeling TCC town and have since her wagon built.

Do I take it you draw the difference between the two because you read TCC as lurking and Pom as active lurking? Is there anything more/less to the distinction?

[Thor665]

I'm game to play the Pom wagon. Come aboard people, it's fresh, new, and has on-board tea service and massage parlor.

Unvote: TheCheshireCat
Vote: Pomegranate

I've been mildly swayed by the commentary about how TCC got so big, and I'm really not a fan of CSL's vote on her which makes me feel skeevy by sheer association and I'm not sure how I feel about Charter's entry and maintaining of vote. I'm still not liking the Scrambles/Hathaway slot but I have to admit I'm having trouble reading the newb/scum energy there. I also am not a fan of the Ray wagon and could easily accept his odd meta shift was seen as an easy option by scum to try to lynch someone - so in that regards Pom is as tasty as her namesake.

The difference with TCC is that I got a strong newb read off her and her replacing out/lurking isn't really telling to a newbie alignment.

What do you then think of Charter's stated opinion in that regard?

[Thor665]

Thor: If your vote could determine the lynch in your next post, who do you feel most likely will flip scum?

The only sane way to answer this is by saying 'Pom, so that's why my vote is on her'

In a more general sense I feel like I have too many suspects and not enough votes. I'm legitimately buying into Copper's (and maybe Sotty's? I think someone else discussed it as well) concept as far as TCC and that wagon goes. I'm not sure I'd go so far as to say I'm against the TCC wagon but I am leery about it and I don't like the feel of a couple of the votes there. I'm unlikely to return to this wagon on the merits of my previous case, and would need something new to shift me, so if you're wondering if I'm still a potential shift back to that wagon my answer is 'not without new evidence' as I actually am fond of the Pom vote because I feel the Ray wagon move was fairly equal to the Zorblag/disappear vote from TCC and the active lurking charge has some relative meat to it.

I only switched to TCC because of the more blatant scumminess vs. a more overt scum-read of Ythan.

Either you or I have an incorrect definition of overt and how it relates to blatant. Could you re-state this using different language?

[Thor665]

Sotty and Thor, what exactly makes Pomegrante a better lynch than CSL? This is particularly valid in light of the fact that Sotty agrees with the idea of TCC being town, which gives CSL's vote a highly sensible scum context to go along with it's terrible justification, and Thor has

specifically

mentioned feeling 'skeevy' about CSL's vote on TCC but for whatever reason doesn't discuss the idea of lynching him.

Quite frankly I'm not on that vote yet due to his lurking (story of the thread).

I'm a bit of an anal dweeb when it comes to this sort of thing, but I really like to get other players talking so I can get a feel for what their logic is and where they're coming from.

Multiple posters who have played with CSL claim he is usually much more post heavy and involved, and at least one or two have noted that judging by his sig line he is overloaded at this particular time.

Therefore my conclusion is this;
1. His lurking is more overtly justified then Pom's.

2. His meta apparently suggests that when/if he does reappear he will be more talkative which will help me get a read on him.

3. Pom has, even when she's been here, been less then forthcoming - so whether her lurking is active or not my ability to get a clearer read on her is doubtful to happen anytime soon.

4. I dislike Pom's Ray push to an equal level I dislike CSL's TCC vote since I feel both showcase poor logic.


Question - if I had instead changed my vote to CSL, as you seem to desire, would you have called that "rushed" as well? Why/why not?

[Thor665]

Scrambles left no great pro-town legacy, and CSL's net contribution was an L-2 vote on TCC because where he comes from, smilies are a scumtell.

Scrambles = Hathaway
CSL = Saijin/SFG

I actually did have to re-check this myself, but I'm happy I've been correct in part of my suspicion on Hathaway.

I'll also deeply apologize for the double post spamminess to see if it gets her to vote me.

[Thor665]

I wouldn't disagree with that (referring to Copper's final paragraph re: CSL) except conversely I don't see why that has you antsy over Pom. You have, to a certain extent, advanced basic policy concepts towards the CSL lynch (he's difficult to read, he doesn't follow the best logic) which doesn't distinctly make that wagon any superior to the Pom one as far as I can see (or about half the wagons we have out here at the moment).

I second Zorblag's commentary (which was slightly a seconding of mine, but I'm seconding his added stuff) as far as Hathaway goes. I want more from that slot in addition to some of the others everyone seems to agree are lurking.

@Kthxbye - If I were you I'd double check the meaning of subvert if you're attempting to insert it into the sentence as originally constructed. I'm guessing (hoping) you're saying you felt Ythan's scumminess was slightly covert (as in not overt, like you feel TCC's is?) I'm not sure I feel overt scumminess from TCC - have you expressed where you've seen it? I feel I have done the most in that direction and I certainly wouldn't call what I have presented overt.

=====================

I want to see more vote consolidation talk at this point.

I'm happy with a Pom lynch. I'm okay with the idea of lynching CSL though that would really be more a policy lynch agreement for me so I'm not sure if it's worth it (basically he's lurked enough I'm content to axe him on that if deadline calls for it). Of the players with votes currently on them they are my preferred.

I'm still not sure why there are so many votes on Kthxbye - what's the case on him again? Anyone?

I am distrustful of the Ray wagon, I personally am of the belief that one is mostly scum driven since meta change = easy target and lack of real explanation of the wagon.

[Thor665]

That's Pom at K-3 (the number of votes till Kthxbye hammers her)

Because his promise about that needs extra mention just to help others' reading comprehension.

[Thor665]

I actually LoL'ed here...till I remembered why I put that part at the bottom on my post.../sigh...thx for taking away some of my ammo. Testing reading comprehension was part of the point (not that I'm not serious about doing it mind you). This is the first thing I've seen you post (that I recall) that I could see you doing from a scummy perspective. Sorta like, 'hey scumbuddy, watch out for kthxbye's trap'. Not saying that's what it is, but saying it's possible I suppose.

I fully support reading comprehension. I am not content to test it via hammer even on Day 1 though. Considering our earlier conversations about announcing L-1 and my reactions (echoed by RayFrost, so there were two posts about it besides my later question to you that you answered) in that regard I'm confused that you didn't expect it from me.

Considering my application of poor reading comprehension back at you over this point do you believe poor reading comprehension is scummy?

[Thor665]

I'll agree with that. I'm still not a fan of the Ray wagon but even I have to admit he's working hard to make me wonder why.

My informal and probably inaccurate vote count;

TheCheshireCat (4): Charter, Zorblag, CSL, Kthxbye
Kthxbye (2): Henry Hathaway, RayFrost,
RayFrost (1): Pomegranate,
Zorblag (1): TheCheshireCat
CSL (1): Copper
Pomegranate (3): Sotty7, Thor665, Locke Lamora

Hmmm, looks like the Ray wagon is actually pretty dead. So Ray could *really* be doing more then defending against it at this point.

@POMEGANATE - you have a wagon full of fruit from the Tree of Fail and are at the marketplace. Either start selling that stuff right now or abandon your cart and try to hook up with another.

@HENRY HATHAWAY & RAY FROST - you have a wagon full of fruit from the Tree of 'What's the Case Again?' Either re-present the case and start trying to sell the fruit on that wagon, or realize it is all rotting and dead and kindly reposition your votes.

@COPPER - actually I like your case far better then the above. I'd like to see you try to sell it more and abuse the other cases more, but you have been doing this so I suspect you just have a bunch of Huckleberry Fruit or something; people don't seem to know it yet, but they'll make a good jam and are being offered at a reasonable rate.

Cheshire is replaced out and hasn't been replaced yet, so that single vote is meh and dead more then likely.

[Thor665]

Though I will certainly agree there is an argument for a TCC/Copper combo how does this then feed in to the way Copper reacted to the Pom vote switch (in which I feel Copper reacted basically the same way as they did to the TCC upswell).

Are you going with TCC/Copper/Pom or do you differentiate how Copper reacted to the Pom and TCC wagons?

[Thor665]

A little, but I don't spend the bulk of my scumhunting looking for pairs.

I'm quoting you so hopefully you'll notice (and also so I can make the following jibe; 'you don't seem to spend the bulk of your scumhunting scumhunting either'). I will below re-quote my request to you vis'a'vi your vote. You haven't reacted to my request of you earlier. If you feel the request is silly then at least respond and tell me why it is silly.

@POMEGRANATE - you have a wagon full of fruit from the Tree of Fail and are at the marketplace. Either start selling that stuff right now or abandon your cart and try to hook up with another.

[Thor665]

I'm not sure if you're;

1. implying being just busy and so cannot address this right now
2. being snide
3. not following the metaphor
4. simply joking

I'll explain the metaphor in case it's number 3 (if it's number 2 then I blow raspberries in your general direction, and if it's number 1 it helps reaffirm some of my attitude about voting for you. If it's 4 then I'm dense, but am emotionally okay with that.)

The wagon is your vote.
The fruit is your case.
The marketplace is where you try to convince the other players here to buy your case.

Start selling or find different produce.

[Thor665]

Troll would be willing to go with any of TheCheshireCat, CSL or Pomegranate at this point. Them be the closest things to viable that be of interest and that be the order Troll would pick.

Why do you find CSL preferable to Cheshire?

[Thor665]

EBWOP

Rather - why do you find CSL preferable to Pom. (I'm awake, I swear)

[Thor665]

Dear gawd people, 24 hours till deadline and Pom and Henry are happily sitting on little fail wagons? Why does it always have to be a wait-till-deadline marathon for vote consolidation? We basically stopped producing much worthwhile information a few days ago.

@Pom - you have given your list of four names. Three of the names already have votes on them (that are not yours) and two include multiple other posters also including them in their 'would be willing to lynch' lists.

The Ray wagon is dead and you are not trying to get it moving.
Get off it.

@EVERYONE VOTING TCC (Save Zorblag who I can actively recall doing this already) - please re-state your case on TCC and also provide the person you would like to lynch second most. (or at least link me to where you already did)

Also - everyone on TCC - what are your thoughts about CSL and his two posts? Do you think he's bussing a partner or just doing reasonable scumhunting? If you don't like his actions, how do you feel about being on a wagon with him?

I would happily lynch Pom, and am content to lynch CSL. Other then Pom I am not too aware of anyone else expressing interest in the Cheshire lynch, who is not already voting that way, which is why I really want to hear more from the people on that wagon.

@Col.Cathart

- Inquisitor was replaced by charter, so the vote is where it belongs but the name is incorrect in your last vote count. Just an FYI for future vote counts.

[Thor665]

This seems silly to have to ask, but do you have any particular reasons you favor him as your new top vote?

[Thor665]

How do you find his lurking play in relation to your own?

[Thor665]

He's made two posts, each of which wwas 3 lines long, and basically only mantioned TCC. I think that I'm unquestionably providing more content.

Do you think his play has been scummy?

You seem to be voting him because he's lurking (unarguably true) but haven't really said why you think he is scum. If you feel lurker = scum then why are you playing in a scum-like manner? If you do not feel this why are you voting CSL?

[Thor665]

I'm heading out Saturday morning, so while I might be around and posting a bit tomorrow there's a good chance most of my time will be burnt on other projects. As such, I am offering up some "last" thoughts since I won't be around for the start of Day 2 till I return April 4th (and really probably April 5th for posting, depending on how much I'm Jonsing for Mafia).

we have frighteningly little room to maneuver.

Your last few posts included concern of the 'rush' attitude on recent wagons. Now you chide us for not getting stuff together in time (this one at least I agree with). I just find the two concepts in juxtaposition as they are to be unclear. The fact that you feel we have so little time to maneuver but sat on a single vote wagon and weren't here trying to sell it more makes me question why you're complaining now.

We are partly in this unhappy situation because CSL, Cheshire, and Henry Hathaway have all flaked/active lurked out of the equation and also because not enough of the active players decided to get gnarly about it.

@Kthxbye - you missed/avoided the question from earlier, but allow me to just go ahead and offer my thoughts on this. Unfortunately, as much as I would like it to be, poor reading comprehension is NOT a scumtell. just as poor logic and bad decisions can be done by town and scum alike, so can misreads, misunderstandings, and missing important notes.

Playing around with promised quick hammers as a method of scumhunting seems silly and strange and I do not support it. There are certain ways quick hammers can be useful or a tool, but to test reading comprehension for scum is not one of them.
----------------------------------------------------

For Day 2 I am personally curious of the Kthx wagon since honestly I'm still not sure what the case is, I've asked a couple times, and no one has explained it. As far as I can tell (and I'll shamefully admit it got me a touch too) we all just reacted to Nobody Special's little fit at Ythan. Yeah, it was emotional - but what was scummy about it? Other then that there's Kthx's 'over-justification' and...? So basically it's a scumcase on overjustification and Locke was the one to bring that up and he was the

third

guy on the case.

I support the usual thoughts as far as checking people depending on how Pom flips. Her interactions with Ray and with Scrambles/Hathaway are of particular interest to me as far as information from the flip goes. This potentially feeds back into some of my reads on the Kthx wagon.

All of you who are town can also try to act less scummy, that would be of great help as well.

General Scumdar and reasons

(no particular order mostly because I've been too bewildered by all my choices);
I am not fond of Hathaway, but shall admit most of it is for Scrambles' actions and also the interaction with Pom whom I find scummy. I think a lot of Hathaway has been newb reads, and unfortunately that extends to this sudden disappearance after promise of offering thoughts. If Pom flips scum I consider this a high priority. If Pom flips town and Hathaway sudenly reappears then I advise more pressure on Hathaway for his actions and disappearance.

Ray hasn't done anything that is scummy particularly, however he has hardly been helpful to town either. The best theory I had to explain his actions I feel loses its justification once we are in Day 2 (frankly I felt it lost its justification by halfway through Day 1, but that's perhaps forgivable). If his play does not improve and he continues in his current methods I become more suspicious of him.

I am confused by Locke, but will admit to positive feelings towards Ythan's play (especially the period around when he suspected he was to be lynched). Locke has not earned such energy from me so has (like a bum) dragged this slot back down to middle of the pack for me. If I am alive tomorrow I shall definitely be working hard to keep him talking and explaining much more then he has.

Kthxbye feels newb to me. As with Hathaway, he might be scum but I am having a hard time working through the newb tells to discern that. I want to hear the case on him.

CSL...I dunno. His first post I have no real issues with except for the fact he then went uber lurky (if he had been more active it would have made much more sense). His second post is terrible in my opinion. My gut read is anti-town, but I do want more from this spot.

Copper - hard to read, a bit good and a bit bad. I follow his logic on both the Ray and CSL cases but I'm not sure if I personally paint them in a town light.

Everyone else is varying shades of acceptable, though I think probably they (and I) have all been glossed over with a bit too much pro towness simply because we haven't flaked, haven't made any crazy accusations, and at least seem level-headed. If there are a lot of town players in my earlier list you owe it to your team to hunt a bit more and lurk a bit less.

[Thor665]

@Thor665, Troll's preference for CSL was based on the timing of his TheCheshireCat vote and the timing of the Pomegranate wagon. It no was a hugely strong preference but the convenience factors seemed to indicate that it was a slightly better way to go.

Just as far as the first point goes (TCC timing) doesn't that generally suggest either you're accepting them as scumbuddies or TCC as town for it to make sense?

If that's the case isn't it two scenarios of CSL as scum vs. one scenario of TCC as scum - which begs the question why favor TCC over CSL?

[Thor665]

The fact that a legitimate collection of separate minds can lecture you so easily on cognitive dissonance is telling.

And the winner of the "Funniest Line Since I Went on Vacation Contest" goes to....

Okay, when I first got back I thought '2 pages? Aw man, lurk city.' But these two pages have been amazingly good even though, as usual, it is mostly a small hand-full of players driving through the conversation.

On the whole I am not sure about the negativity towards Copper. I see the following as the best aspect of the Copperscum case;

Once again, when a player's only contribution is a joke vote that puts the largest and fastest growing wagon to L-2, you don't think that's scummy?

No, how that does that benefit him as scum more than town? I don't see much benefit regardless of alignment. The only way you could say it helps him if he's scum is if TCC is town and he has two buddies that can hammer. Here you are assuming TCC is town, when there's no good reason to. Now that I think about it, this reeks of you knowing TCC would be a mislynch.

At the very least I think this showcases the weakness of Copper's CSLscum case which they still seem sold on as infinitely superior to the Pom wagon (I still say relatively equal value to them at the time and have already explained my personal logic in that regards). But really that's the best I see as scummy. Maybe Copper was pushing CSL a little harder for relatively questionable evidence, and it was a push on a (to my eyes) fairly obvious lurker. I do believe that can come across as a bit scummy, but it's about as good as anything I've seen on Copper thus far.

I'm not sure I see where charter is going with the presumption Copper is making of TCC=town making Copper scum since Copper was claiming that fairly early and fairly often and charter never commented on it then, certainly not with a vote.

I'm having a mixed read of Socrates. I actually think his defense towards Fate is pretty decent, but on the flip side his 'serious scumhunting' post was one long self-defense post with no references beyond the point he replaced in. Though I haven't found his play particularly townish thus far, I would love to hear more of a scum case on him then simply "he's good at being scum" I think he's fairly accurate when he questions the validity of that as a case.

My 'Ray may be town with a plan' concept is fading faster then anything. He is either scum or is being anti-town to the point of damaging our chances and I am not fond of it at all.
==================================

@Ray, please either replace out or contribute - at the very least answer the very relevant question asked to you earlier by Socrates about how you have helped town.

@charter - Is the Copper clearing of TCC the crux of your case, or does it have to be paired with the "scum tell" of NK speculation? If you think he did it to score town points for defending a townie TCC how do you feel about his Pom defense the same day which was infinitely weaker and he explicitly distanced from a defense of it when I asked him about his attitude towards the two defenses?

@Locke - what are your feelings towards Socrates play thus far?


I'll probably re-read through this again later when I am more awake and aware (though I cannot promise being anymore brilliant), but I was actually looking forward to getting back to the game and wanted to get out some initial reactions and questions.

[Thor665]

@Ray - your above post, as usual, contains nothing actually relevant to the game.

Replace or provide content. Thank you.

[Thor665]

Dear gawd, Ray. I seriously thought there was actually a plan or something from your actions Day 1. Hopefully next time we're in a game together it will be one you have time for as I enjoyed our last one. Hope you feel better soon.

@Michel - as far as things you should be aware of - please don't flake, I think by the end of this game we'll have added a few gray hairs to Cathart's head.

Of most relevance in my mind is you simply getting up to speed and offering a fresh glance at where we were and where we are. As a general question in and amongst that work effort, I would like you to clarify your position as regards Ythan/Locke and how your opinions coincide or disagree with theirs.

[Thor665]

The only thing there really is to key in on for me is the TCC wagon explosion, and the subsequent attempted push on CSL getting passed over in favor of Pomegranate, but I can't be bothered to look at it that closely right now.

To my mind that doesn't make a lot of sense.

I agree with you on the TCC explosion quite possibly = easy target for scum. I'm also agreeable to the thought that the Pom wagon had scummy riders as well, that seems inevitable.

But the rest doesn't follow. SFG/Saijin got some initial heat from Pom and Sotty before Pom twittered off to Ray and Sotty eventually leapt to the TCC wagon (and then later Ray, before heading to Pom).

Copper opposed the TCC wagon and got on the voter there he found most suspicious - CSL (aka Saijin, aka SFG). In my opinion he never really pushed the wagon and at most it seemed to have grudging acceptance from a handful of players as a reasonable 2nd or 3rd option.

He eventually got Pom to come join him (though personally I think this was because I was pressuring Pom to do anything useful with her vote, and the only other reasonable wagons were TCC and her own so she had to try to get some momentum added to the next best wagon - choosing CSL over TCC for lurking - go figure.)

What about that seems to have keyed you in to CSL being overlooked? How does that tie in to the Ythan/Locke/Michel wagon, or does it? How does this all connect back into your Fate (aka CSL/Saijin/SFG) vote especially since the "starter" of that wagon is Copper (an early pressure player over Ythan's playstyle)?

[Thor665]

I agree with you on the connection possibilities of scum between the Ythan and Pom wagons.

I think we're you're losing me is when you are then voting Fate. Yeah, his slot was in on the TCC rush, but I don't recall him ever jumping on the Ythan wagon at any point. By your logic shouldn't you be gunning for someone who was part of both wagons? (I'll admit with all the replacements it's not easy to track - but I think the only dual voters for each of those wagons are me, Sotty, and Kthx - feel free to double check as I'm just doing it off Col's ISO).

Basically it feels like you're presenting two separate issues and somehow combining them. If you're just presenting the two thoughts as distinct concepts I'm following, but if not I'm still lost.

@Copper - I can't recall if you've addressed this before; but Socrates has presented a bit of commentary I agree with (Ythan's wagon was pushed by scum hoping to easy mislynch the annoying player). I know you've expressed thoughts about this as regards TCC, do you have the same read on Ythan's wagon? Why/why not?

[Thor665]

request extension - vote 1 of needed 6

@Copper - where are you on the Ray/Ythan connection (now Michel/Saint Kerrigan)?

@charter - A lot of the TCC votes (at the very least mine) did seem to swell up due to a feeling of active lurk/lack of contribution. Socrates has been accused by you of being scummy early, but clearing it up a bit later (which I guess is mostly his defensiveness and NK speculation?)

What I'm getting at is, do you feel the TCC/Socrates slot is scummy only in connection with Copper's defense of it, or do you feel it is scummy as a separate entity unto itself.

I will echo an agreement of your displeasure towards Kthx's reveal, and with him replacing out I'm bewildered how to respond to it as a strategy.

[Thor665]

But the rest doesn't follow. SFG/Saijin got some initial heat from Pom and Sotty before Pom twittered off to Ray and Sotty eventually leapt to the TCC wagon (and then later Ray, before heading to Pom).

Wait, wait, wait. I never voted TCC and was with Copper in thinking that slot was town since around the mid of day one. I went for SFG, to Ray, to Ythan, back to Ray and then to Pom.

You're absolutely correct. I probably was just transposing TCC for Ythan in there. I have no excuses besides just wading through all the replacements but I'll blame Ythan anyway because he's not here to defend himself.

Thor why was it important to get Michel to state if he agrees with the people he replaced? I don't remember you asking any other replacement this, it seems kind of strange. I would rather hear Michel's own opinions on what went down.

For the second part of your question - then ask him. Certainly me asking him for his reads on his predecessors has very little to do with preventing you from asking him for his own reads. I don't even begin to understand your issue here. Also, his reads on his predecessor's actions *is* his own opinion.

For the first part - mostly just frustration with the replacements. I liked certain aspects of what Ythan had done and had town reads off of some of it. I wanted to see how Michel would react to it.

[Thor665]

As someone who has read his posts in mafia discussion I'm not sure whether to be really intrigued or really scared by this news.

[Thor665]

@Sotty - I'm not sure I see what "twigged" your gut there. I do know that I asked questions to Saijin, HH, Kthx, and probably others when they replaced in (the Kthx one is in some ways a very functionally similar question to the Michel one since it asked for a read on a predecessor's action).

So either this isn't much of a tell for me (or a tell at all) or at least if it's a tell between Michel and I it's also probably a tell between Kthx and I and you can see if the vibe there is similar or different to what piece of wood is or is not in your gut.

[Thor665]

Also, someone had better come up with a real good reason as to why we haven't massclaimed yet.

Because I'm pretty sure you're the only one who really accepts that theory? (though I thought the argument I read from you on it was quite reasonable and interesting)

To recap shortly;

Everyone is lurking, I am town.

To recap more lengthily;

Day started with a couple varied wagons with argueably the two strongest early ones being an argued policy driven one on Ythan (aka Locke Lamora aka MichelSableheart) and the other being an argued scum driven one on TCC (aka Socrates). Ray also got a lot of heat for basically lurking and also for claiming a meta change (of which as far as I could tell the new meta was to lurk more)

Copper argued against TCC (and was probably the biggest proponent of calling the wagon scum driven) and offered the alternative of CSL (aka Fate/Saijin/SFG) citing how scummy he looked getting on the wagon. Sotty also argued against TCC and eventually started up the Pom wagon leaving his previous focus of Ray.

Eventually the votes sort of went to the compromise/deadline candidate and Pom was lynched and flipped town.

Night kill targeted Scrambles/Henry Hathaway who had generally been getting newbie reads (at least from me and Zorblag) and who had seemed to suspect Kthxbye (aka you and Nobody Special)

Day 2 opened with some new faces as Socrates (TCC) showed up and got in an early brawl with the other new arrival Fate (CSL/SFG/Saijin) over Fate calling Socrates scummy for TCC's actions and because Socrates is very good as scum.

Fate later shifted to Copper due to NK speculation from them and also due to Copper's defense of TCC during Day 1 (which while I will accept possible chainsaw here, since we only have half the equation for a chainsaw I'd rather lynch TCC/Socrates over it rather then Copper who has seemed otherwise fairly townish) meanwhile the camps seem to be drawing up for a Fate or Copper lynch (I'm on the vote Fate lynch side if that's the choice though I have not voted yet). Zorblag has also gotten some heat for being very lurky at this point (and I know I wish to hear more from him). Plus we have a slight slow down as you have replaced in, as well as quite recently getting Michel to replace in and Saint Kerrigan (replacing Ray after I asked him to replace out or contribute - make of that what you can).

Personally I'm waiting for the replacements to start talking as I still feel quite in the dark as concerns Ray and am also hoping the fresh eyes might see something I've missed as I'm not sure how I feel about the Fate/Copper choice being where we're ending up.

[Thor665]

Greetings,

Just to say where I am at the moment (in a computer chair). I'm still favoring Copper in the Copper/Fate question. I think whichever head of Copper just posted did a good job in putting out the odd flow of post analysis from Fate there and when that is paired with Sotty calling foul for misreps from Fate it is starting to paint the slot fairly scummy. Definitely near the head of the list for me.

I'm not sure if I follow the whole Michel stuff here (I'm guessing it's a basic IoA claim on him, yes?) I do have one question for him;

@Michel - you (rightly) dinged Ray on his relative participation. But then claimed Saint Starcraft Lady as having no problems yet off of something like two semi-relevant posts posted over the course of not even a week. Yeah...within that timeframe it's a solid number of posts but it seems like the sample size is too small to be making any claims on her participation quality at this point - thoughts?

I don't know about the rest of you but I'm very dissatisfied with my read of the Ray/Saint Kerrigan spot at the moment and am contentedly keeping it higher on my scumlist until...well...anything comes out of it.

Kthx/Pie is probably about at the same level since my most solid read on it thus far was - newbie. I am happy to have a player in it who will help shift that read along the scum/town axis.

@Pie - thus far your contributions have mostly been all on the massclaim question (which is interesting in light of your minor FoS on Michel. Irony thy edge be double bladed one susposes). I'd like to hear your current read on the Fate/Copper question.

[Thor665]

@ Socrates

Pie=Kthxbye and as I've noted is certainly a slot of interest for me.

Do you have no opinion whatsoever on the Fate/Charter Sotty/Copper exchanges other then saying it doesn't seem useful? Your name and slot (via TCC) is pretty well enmeshed in that discussion and I'm surprised you don't have an opinion about it especially considering you're currently voting Fate.

[Thor665]

Anyway, how would you feel about a pie wagon, Thor?

Moderately okay?

I feel more scummish towards Fate and Ray/Kerrigan. Probably you and Pie are about equal in my book and occupy the 3rd and 4th slots give or take. I felt TCC was pretty scummy but Copper did sell me pretty well with that 'speed of the wagon' concept and it's had me unsure of my read on the slot since then. Pie is pretty much, as I've said, doing a lot of theory discussion in a slot that I thought was really newbie before. I never really bought into the Kthx as scum concept and a lot of my grinding on Hathaway on Day 1 was over how bad I thought that case was. I do think Kthx's support of the Copper wagon was pretty weak, but that's about my worst read on him and that paints Fate just as badly in my book since I think he was selling that wagon on weak merits.

[Thor665]

You guys seem pretty shocked that I spent some time trying to convince everyone to massclaim.

If you're referring to me - I am not shocked as this appears to be part of what you're known for. However I am not sold on your theory discussion as a town tell either and wish to keep noting that all you've done thus far really is just that theory discussion and will continue to do so till other conversation is made.

I'm not impressed by Fate's soft sell of it as scummy (not sitting well), if it makes you feel any better.

[Thor665]

- Thor changing his mind about Cheshire in 575?

Eh? At the very least if I "changed my mind" about her I probably did so in Post 477 when I voted for her. Though frankly I think I'd been expressing doubt about the slot throughout Day 1.

Other then that bit of minutiae I am still where I was at my last update except I'm even more content with my read on the Copper/Fate question. My scumlist(blob) remains the same.

[Thor665]

With Sotty having claimed, (and Ktx having claimed before) massclaim suddenly became much better IMO. Keeping powerroles hidden isn't really a concern with an info role out in the open. Unless there are serious objections, I'm going to claim next.

Five bucks says Pie is with you.

If we're going to massclaim then let's do it popcorn style with Sotty counting as the player who went first, otherwise it seems too haphazard to just have people randomly trickle in and bleat out their role.

What do you see as the worse case scenario that scum will do if we don't claim?

[Thor665]

Thor's vote for Pomegranate in #618 feels very uncharacteristic of him. He lists the other possibilities, but completely ignores the Kthx wagon even though it was the second most popular at the time. He also doesn't comment at first on why Pomegranate is actually scum. He later claims to agree with the "active lurking" accusation, but makes no attempt whatsoever to actually verify this. In particular, I don't like how he calls a vote for active lurking on Ray as bad as the completely unexplained CSL vote. His is a very suspicious vote.

My "uncharacteristic vote" (by the way - what's a 'characteristic' Thor vote? I'm quite serious with this question.) came at a time when I was clearly against the Kthx wagon and had become convinced that the TCC wagon was scum driven. At that point one's goal is to either start up a wagon or support one that seems reasonable - I'd liked my read on Sotty and I hadn't liked Pom, so I was all for the wagon.

As far as me not having issue with Pom's active lurk? Eh, I feel I had been fairly vocal about not liking her attitude towards actually supplying information and had multiple times pressed her for info and also multiple times expressed dissatisfaction with her contributions.

As far as the Kthx stuff I believe you, as others did then, are taking a newbie aggressiveness and painting it in a scummy light. Could you at least assess why you don't think the aggressiveness is newbie oriented?


Moving on to the mass claim - I am in favor of it at this point as I think Michel's argument about the scum figuring out better role claims later holds water and on just a theoretical level I'll admit I'm intrigued to see Pie's concept at work. Seems like we'd have to really hustle to make this work though.

Massclaim Question

(popcorn style)

Voting Aye (3): Pie, Michel, Thor
Voting Nay:

It's also probably past time I voted. I'm going to back Copper on his Kerrigan vote (whoever it was with the Thor/Copper team feel free to take note) as I think it's criminal how little we've heard out of that slot (Michel - do you still like the contribution level from this slot?).

Vote: Saint Kerrigan

[Thor665]

by the way - what's a 'characteristic' Thor vote? I'm quite serious with this question

Based on reading this game, I would characterize you as a player who is quite serious, uses a lot of questions to establish an opinion and who is concerned about players actually voting for reasons that are indicative of the votee being scum. I found nothing like that in the post where you voted Pom.

The question though is did I do that previously and subsequently or not. I do occasionally go for more bandwagonee votes but at least I'll admit I do usually post a longer case in my vote post so that this makes sense. I will note that the post I voted her in did contain discussion of my feelings on other wagons of the time. I feel this supports my earlier commentary of why I went to vote Pom.

Reading you in ISO from the point where you voted TCC, I see you strongly questioning Henri's reasons for voting, but I do not see how that means you are against the wagon as a whole. In fact, ISO 63 and 64 contain some serious questioning of Kthx, on topics that weren't mentioned in your discussion with Henry.

Thor (Ray is grasping at straws)
is (I am not a fan of Kthxbye's wagon)
against (my 'going away post' still don't like the Kthx wagon am curious of who is on it)
Kthx Wagon (why are there so many votes on Kthx?)
(I also know I had a conversation with Zorblag where he and I both discussed getting newbie reads off Kthx, I'm just too lazy to track that one down)

Yes, I did still question Kthx on other issues that I found scummy or potentially scummy - that's called scumhunting. That said; I didn't like the wagon regardless of whether I was scumhunting on Kthx.

Did you [have issue with Pom]? In my summary of the game, the post where you voted Pom is the first of yours where I have listed you as significantly commenting on her. Reading you in ISO, I find (ISO) posts #57 and #58, which were made just before Pom posted her scumlist in #474. If you weren't satisfied with that scumlist, I would have expected you to question her further. Instead, you don't comment on Poms behaviour after that till the post where you vote her. Can you please back up your statement that you were fairly vocal about her activity with post numbers?

As I discovered in my ISO, if you want me discussing her prior to my vote I am woefully low and you hit the remotely major ones I did post. I certainly discussed her after that fact, but for prior to the vote you are correct that I did not.

getting angry at Ythan without actually responding to the accusation) are far more likely to come from someone who is intentionally lurking, IMO.

Just as far as this one goes - I was in a previous game with Nobody and Ythan where they developed a bit of an 'attitude' towards each other. I'm still reading NS's reaction there as stemming from his personal distaste for Ythan rather then coming from an in-game reason.

[Thor665]

Michel argues in favor of it because he wants to give scum less time to come up with fakeclaims, and making them stay true to their fakeclaims longer. In my experience, most scum simply claim vanilla when forced to claim in a hurry.

But wouldn't that then be the point? Scum would have to claim a powerrole and fake it for a while (which would be difficult) or they would claim vanilla and we'd know scum were amongst the vanilla.

[Thor665]

@Thor: I'm always a little cautious when people spin massclaim as my personal pet project.

This is theoretically something you should only worry about if I then try to lynch you over it. I'll retract my statement that implies you have any connection to the current mass claim if it makes you feel fuzzier inside though.

I'm liking some of Kerrigan's points on Pie. I think they hold water.

@Kerrigan - why the sudden flurry of activity? Not that I'm complaining per se' but the apparent connection to suddenly having activity after some votes are on you seems obvious.

[Thor665]

Sorry I skipped this, I felt others had already offered a reasonable reply. Below is mine;

What advantage do we procure by "knowing" scum is among the vanilla? For that matter, how do we know that we don't have a scum that is fakeclaiming a power role?

You are the one who advanced the likelihood that scum would go vanilla and now you want me to defend your own supposition? I think either scum will claim vanilla or they will be forced to guess at a power role to claim that then they will have to maintain their role as for much longer.

The scum who claim as power roles will become obvious since, as you yourself noted, scum are going to kill power roles and also because they'll be obligated to provide us with information about their actions.

The scum who claim as vanilla will be in the easy suspect pool of the vanilla townies and won't be able to falseclaim as a power role later in endgame situations.

The points are you getting him to mention his acceptability with your lynch and then forcing him to justify that statement. It looks like he's now extended out on an interestingly thin limb and it's also almost the first non-theory declarative statements he's made this game and I'm happy to see that happening in general.

[Thor665]

The scum who claim as vanilla will be in the easy suspect pool of the vanilla townies and won't be able to falseclaim as a power role later in endgame situations.

Do you think the scum don't have any power? What's to stop them from then just making sure that whatever power roles town-sided are taken out?

I do not know how much power the scum have - but I tend to see worst case as likely a roleblocker or maybe some scum investigation role. I do not see them having multiple kill powers in a game of this size. That means worst case is one dead power role (investigative) and one blocked power role (defensive). If we have multiple defensives then we get our investigatives off, and if we have multiple investigatives we get them off instead. Also, since I believe in a roleblocker as a reasonable possibility - Sotty isn't giving us any more info at this point anyway. Plus we'll be in a situation to not waste time maybe lynching a power role which can narrow our field some more and hopefully provide more accuracy in this Day's lynch.

That said, there is a clearly large portion of the group who are against the mass claim (I have it as 4-5 against and even if Cyberbob goes pro Massclaim I don't see that as a ratio to demand it at) - so I am content to drop the assertions that we should at this time.

@Thor: Ah, I missed your "Ray is grasping at straws" post. If you felt two out of three votes were poorly reasoned, I can understand why you felt against the bandwagon as a whole. That does remove part of my suspicion against you. What do you think about Locke's argument that Kthx overjustified his vote though?

Since you identified me as someone who often posts up large amounts of info before making a vote I think this won't come as a surprise - I considered the "tell" neutral at best. It didn't seem an unreasonable case for Kthx to make and I didn't see the inherent scum tell of providing 'too much information for a vote' Also, as further discussion with Kthx showed, he was very big into his lynch for info concept - I disagreed with it, but I considered it safe to believe it was a regular part of his meta and thus wasn't a scumtell as Locke believed it to be.

@Thor: As SK said, what points?

As I have already said to Kerrigan when she asked - getting you talking, making a stance, and I personally do see energy scored when you admit you're okay with a wagon but have no real scum read on the wagonee in question.

The scum who claim as vanilla will be in the easy suspect pool of the vanilla townies and won't be able to falseclaim as a power role later in endgame situations.

Why is claiming a vanilla townie putting oneself in the "easy" suspect pool? I fail to see where you draw this conclusion. In my mind, trying to deduce the alignment of an alleged vanilla townie is harder than trying to deduce the alignment of an alleged power role, since we can't use role information to potentially trip up someone.

Switch 'easy' to 'obvious' and I believe my sentence will hold the same intent I had wished it to have and will also answer your question. I feel that Scum claiming PRs will be under a lot of pressure to maintain that claim, and scum who choose to go for the quick hide in vanilla will receive more immediate scumhunting upon them which will help us find them. Does this grok with you?

"If I did something different, would you still think I'm scummy?" What purpose does that serve? SK, did you hope to find some telling reaction from Thor to this question? Hmmm I see Thor hasn't even answered this question. So I'd like you to hold off on answering me until he responds, but I want to hear your thoughts on his response.

As Kerrigan pointed out, this was directed at Copper, not me. If it makes you happy my response would be; no, it wouldn't have affected my current vote if she had maintained her activity levels but had also voted. I can accept the game is difficult to read, but the inability to have added anything at this point seems exceedingly sketchy to me.

[Thor665]

I can see SK and Pie as scum, will say why later.

So far though I find SK scummy.

I can see a Soc/Charter/Pie team.

I'm as dumb as a stump so I have to ask...buh? I really can't tell where you're going with all this. Please expound.

[Thor665]

I personally do see energy scored when you admit you're okay with a wagon but have no real scum read on the wagonee in question.

I don't know what "energy scored" means. I also don't know where you're getting that impression. I've been saying that I do have a scum read on the wagonee in question, but that this could very easily be overruled when I actually, y'know, read the thread.

She has a Scumcannon RX (built at Smith & Cathart's I believe) and it fires scumhunting energy. Instead of easily blasting the energy away you are instead absorbing it.

We can call energy points again if you like. Or change the phrase to, I think she's scoring scummy reads on you for me if that makes you happy.

I do have to say - in the debate you and Kerrigan are having the Saint's points make more sense to me then yours and I see the discussion her way. This suggests either you are scum and are wavering around because you got caught out, or at the very least are phrasing things in a very odd way. I'm feeling more of the former.

[Thor665]

-That my opinions/story have been "wavering" and that's a scumtell?

The closest one you listed is thus. I think your initial commentary on Kerrigan (not a bad lynch but not for lurkitude) was then challenged successfully by Kerrigan (what are those other reasons?) and responded to weakly by you (you're saying stuff that others want to hear, but I wouldn't vote for you on it) and then hit home by Kerrigan (then why am I not a bad lynch?)

The whether or not you are voting Kerrigan thing is meaningless to me, the above makes me believe you were implying there was more on Kerrigan then you were willing to stand behind and looks like an attempt to help soft sell the wagon.

I'm intrigued by Fate's movement to the Kerrigan wagon and also his clarification that Pie=Kerrigan in his initial scum chart. This could simply be confusion due to replacements (I know I've had some) but it could also be scum happy for the new wagon to pile on to avoid his own potential lynch.

I like Fate's points on charter as they make a lot of sense.

Though I disagree with some of his conclusions, I'm liking the energy from Cyberbob at the moment as he's clearly working hard to slog through what he's missed.

I'm feeling Fate or Kerrigan as the lynch today. I'd like to hear more from Sotty and charter.

I'll make Michel happy and clarify that I am pro gunclaim (though will also say I'm not sure if it's worth trying to push through without majority consent - and I don't take Cyberbob's silence on the issue as neutrality, I take it as he's not reading the new pages right now - otherwise I doubt he'd be pushing Copper as part of a scumteam in light of Sotty's claim.)

[Thor665]

I am in 100% agreement that the "you're saying stuff that others want to hear" read is a pretty weak one that can easily be later overturned.

Then why is Kerrigan 'not a bad lynch' if all you have is a weak scumtell? Do you have only weak or no scum tells on everyone else?

I will again state my issue with whether or not you are voting Kerrigan isn't an issue for me at all. My issue is how the reasons make Kerrigan, as stated by you, not a bad lynch, but are also then self stated by you as being weak.

[Thor665]

The quote was "A Kerrigan lynch wouldn't be the worst thing in the world," and it was my way of weighing in on the emerging Kerrigan bandwagon.

The quote continued with (paraphrasing) 'not for lurkitude but for other reasons.'

You then admitted 'other reasons' were weak.

Why was a Kerrigan lynch 'not the worst thing?'

Now he is also attacking the lurker who is not around to defend himself. Why did it take you so long to come out against Charter, Fate?

On a related note - do you believe charter is lurking? (and if so is it of the scummy or non-scummy variety?)

[Thor665]

I don't really like the push on Pie. I'm not seeing the trouble with what he said about SK like other people are. SK is still stalling I want to see his ISO work, I want to see some cases or solid opinions on people and we're just not getting that.

TBH I don't get Thor's attack on Pie either, but thats not why I am voting him, and I don't believe that is why Mitchel is voting for him.

Thor's attack on Pie is helping Thor get reads on Pie because the Pie is not being the most forthcoming of players.

What points of his do you like? I thought they were all pretty terrible.

His analysis of you Day 1 is fairly accurate in my opinion and is making me reassess certain thoughts I had about you.

I also thought he had scored a solid one with your Ythan lynch commentary because I recalled even at the time you made it I wondered why you were being so vehement about it at a point where the player and the problem were long gone. Your subsequent defense of it in your response post makes sense. Clearly it is intrinsic upon me to go back and look at that stuff again and see what my read is.

[Thor665]

#901 might just be the fluffiest post of D2, but he makes no attempt to hide that fact. So to that I say, "that's nice, catch up please."

Though I am not fond of Pie's #901 it is a "legitimate" response to my accusations because he's continuing with his ridiculous standpoint and is choosing to dismiss my accusation by spouting a non-sequitur.

Though you may or may not agree with his method, it is unfair to suggest this is a fluff post. It is a response to an active question upon him.

[Thor665]

EBWOP - "ridiculous standpoint" is meant to imply his defense against my accusation wherein he call it ridiculous.

[Thor665]

I have no gun.

Let's see, left between Cyberbob and Michel, eh?

Cyberbob I choose you.

[Thor665]

Thor is town but incompetent.

I prefer to think of it as 'Thor is town, and is still learning'

Also, If I'm able to send out a clear town signal - in certain ways I'm more helpful then a better scumhunter who happens to look scummy to other town players.

@Fate - though I agree with your little power role list (gunsmith, 2 gun roles, hopefully protective) being a 'little much' I fail to see why we should presume there is a protective role, and gunsmith plus two gun roles seems a reasonable spread.

Are you sticking with Kerrigan simply because you aren't buying her gun claim?

[Thor665]

I was reading his town/town point as being between him and Copper not him and Socrates. I personally think you're misreading it.

[Thor665]

@Saint Kerrigan - what is the SFG meta that suggests this isn't her town play?

[Thor665]

She tends to be a lot more aggressive as town, and her post content is considerably more substantial than what I saw in this game.

Considering she flaked out - gauging a town read by how much she did or did not post seems questionable as a plan. I'll agree that I've seen her play more aggressively in a town role, but I am unfamiliar with her scum meta vis'a'vi her aggressiveness.

@Michel - could you restate why you feel Pie is the lynch for today? Other then the stuff SK and I went at him with and a general accusation of non-contribution I don't really see the case there.

[Thor665]

I played with her in Newbie 898 (replaced in Night 1) where she lamented her efforts at coming up with a case Day 1 and declared the whole process of forming cases on Day 1 was against her habits and helped lead to her tunneling for much of that game.

@Kerrigan - Kthx declared vanilla townie during Day 1, what is your pet theory for why Ray chose to track him?

[Thor665]

EBWOP "her" in the post above is SFG and the comment is in response to Kerrigan.

[Thor665]

Ugh. My brain now hurts.

I think my gut reaction is to accept Kerrigan's claim since, as Michel pointed out, it seems really odd to claim tracker w. a gun. My biggest issue with this is why Ray opted to track a claimed vanilla. However, to be honest Kerrigan's supposition doesn't seem totally out of left field, and also (Again being honest) I'd forgotten about Kthx's roleclaim until he did it a second time - so who is to say Ray didn't also, especially considering how checked out of the game he seemed at the time.

I'm not sure what to make of Pie's push on Kerrigan. It certainly does a bit to help validate for me my own suspicions of the Kerrigan slot, but at the same time it seems very aggressive and sudden and I think the suddenness is what's leaving me uncomfortable about it.

I really desire to hear Sotty chime in with thoughts, and Copper too for that matter.

[Thor665]

Thor, if you believe the claim of SK, why are you still voting him? Either make a case that you actually still belief him to be scum, or vote for one of the other bandwagons. We don't have much time left.

I have already expressed thoughts on Kerrigan (muddled though they be) I will note as far as the claim goes my comment was that my gut reaction was to believe it, not that I did believe it. I still am not sure if I believe it, but the arguments against nailing a claimed powerrole right at this point seems reasonable.

I wasn't really feeling desperate pressure to shift my vote till (in child-like whiny voice) I got what I wanted and Sotty and Copper offered opinions. Apparently I only get half my cookie. I'm not sure what to make of the last minute shifting, but I generally buy into the idea that a lynch is preferable to a no lynch and at least my other top suspect is the one now in hammer range.
--------------------------------------------
In other news...stop, Hammahtime!

No whammy, no whammy...

Unvote: SaintKerrigan
Vote: Fate

[Thor665]

Which reminds me, why the Smurf did we not at least get a claim out of Fate before dropping the hammer?

Because I dropped the hammer at approx. one hour till deadline and the likelihood of Fate showing up to claim during that hour was minimal at best?

Do you think any other lynch was happening? Cyberbob might have floated back to SK as deadline loomed, but both Michel and Copper were clearly not going to vote SK (and neither was SK, I presume)

That meant the alternative was waiting for Socrates to show up and get him to change his vote - I didn't see that happening, did you?

[Thor665]

Presumably charter.

Pie, in light of how the lynch and flip went do you still suspect SK?

I'm still suspicious of Pie, by process of elimination I'm angling towards Socrates and Cyberbob as also high on my scumlist though I will admit considering Fate's pressure on Soc in early Day 2 that he seems less likely. I definitely need to re-read the thread now to see what Fate's actions can or cannot show me.

I support the mass claim motion.

[Thor665]

Thor, can you please explain a bit further why you are eliminating charter from your list of possible scum? He may have been the first on the bandwagon, but his vote for Fate doesn't strike me as obv town. In fact, I would list Socrates as more likely town then charter.

His early voice for Fate strikes me more as more town then scum performing either bussing or a 'vote for your partner while no one else really is so eventually if they are lynched some day phase you'll earn town points' stratagem.

As I noted in my above post I do consider the early Fate/Socrates interactions potentially clearing of Socrates but until I get up the verve to actually do a re-read of the thread I'm content to leave Socrates on my suspect list.

Thor, same question.

Pie. I guess it wasn't fully as clear as I intended in my above post, but there is a reason he was listed first and before the 'process of elimination' comment.

Thor, care to explain what you were doing last night?

This is interesting because I actually don't trust you all that much and am still not sure if I buy your claim. To a certain extent I see a pro-town action here in fishing for this info from me, but I also see a potential scummy reason insomuch as you might be fishing for info to back your fakeclaim.

I will answer with - if you indeed tracked me, you wouldn't be worried by the result.

[Thor665]

Eh. I can actually see some logic from charter on that angle, insomuch as I was doing a lot of voicing from pretty early on about Fate but never really tried to lead the charge.

I will say I find it really odd he calls a hammer one hour prior to deadline with no other wagon in contention a "quickhammer" That seems a bit of a misrepresentation of my action in a more scummy light without actually focusing on what I did or did not do that was scummy. I'll accept it was a hammer of a case I did not lead any charges on, I will not accept it was a quickhammer.

[Thor665]

I can easily see charter scum voting fate there. He couldn't keep his vote on Copper after Sotty's claim. He couldn't really vote SK, because an L-1 vote on such a rapidly moving bandwagon would draw quite a bit of heat. He had the choice of voting Pie, Fate or Socrates. Why wouldn't he vote a partner there when at that point it didn't look like it would likely lead to a lynch?

I'm not saying charter is obv scum, but I'm not willing to rule him out completely either.

That's a good point, I'll try to keep that thought in mind during my read through.

As far as the read through goes (work in progress) I'm up through the beginning of the CSL era of Fate/CSL/Saijin/SFG and will note the vote/disappear trick CSL pulled on TCC (aka Socrates) with the later pressure Fate then also put on Socrates this does cast doubt on the possibility of it as a bus attempt and makes me think Copper was quite accurate with the 'wagon growing too fast' comments about the TCC wagon. This does seem a good reason to see town energy from Socrates.

@Pie - you list Socrates as your number one suspect, considering the above how does that work into your concept? Was all the TCC/CSL and Soc/Fate stuff simple bussing? Why do you see it as such?

[Thor665]

- I got a sense of excessive neutrality reading your posts, which I think is a very strong indication of a scum mentality.

I strongly disagree with this claim. I feel I have done a solid job in being open and clear about my suspects on a regular basis and have made loud and long defenses and accusations against various players. I spit upon this accusation ::ptoo-ptoo::

I cannot refute your other two points on me. I probably should have been more active over Fate, but I let myself get pulled into a lot of the claim conversation that ate up a big chunk of Day 2. Also, maybe I should have unvoted you sooner, but I didn't particularly trust you and Ray had made the slot scummy to me as I'd said earlier in the day and I was quite content to leave the vote there, it was only Copper and Michel's strident arguments against the action that really sold me otherwise, and those came quite late in the day. I'm not sure why it's a scumtell that I hammered Fate, couldn't I have just lurked and "missed" the deadline?

What makes you so certain Michel will be NKed and not you?

[Thor665]

Thor deserves scum points for his overly broad, "you wouldn't be worried by the result", which indicates to me that he's trying to feel out SK. I think a town Thor may have been more quick to throw cold water on SK's accusation, as opposed to leaving the question open so that he may still have an exit strategy whether or not SK saw him doing something.

My disagreement with this is twofold;

1. Yes, I was trying to feel out SK because I had already stated in that post that I could see town or scum energy from the feeling out SK was attempting. Why was it town for SK to feel me out and scum for me to feel SK out?

2. Why would I need an exit strategy "whether or not SK saw [me] doing something"? If I was scum, I must have known SK was roleblocked unless the scumteam isn't very communicative.

@Thor: I have to agree with SK on that one. A very large part of your posts is devoted to asking questions for everyone and everything. Your actual accusations and opinions are far less obvious.

Okay, in that case I'll withdraw to 'I was

attempting

to make them clear'. Though personally I do think I have made many strong and obvious stances throughout the game. I will offer the counterpoint of my feelings about the case on Kthx which you thought wasn't clearly made and I provided multiple examples of me being vocal enough about it to show that I had.

I have already admitted to being slow around the SK situation. It is clear for many of the other players here it was a much larger 'towntell' then it was for me, and to that I can only say I'm sorry that I apparently am still working on my scumdar. It wasn't as clear to me and thus I was slower to react and was still trying to get everyone to comment on the situation before I felt comfortable enough to move on anything.

[Thor665]

I see Copper has already dug into this a little bit. I agree that I have a hard time seeing why you simply didn't say "I didn't go anywhere," which is not only less ambiguous than what you said, but also more honest. Why give a statement that doesn't make it absolutely clear what you did?

Okay, here's the possibility as I saw it. Let us say you are scum and false claimed. You then open up with a "Hey Thor, what'd you do last night?"

Now, my option is to declare either I had a target last night, or I didn't.

This makes your question to me, basically a bit of role fishing in addition to possible scumhunting. Depending on my answer you, if scum, could always go 'ah, well that clears Thor because I actually investigated (insert other player), do you have anything to say about what you did last night?"

If you had come out with a more open - Thor I investigated you, please declare your night action, you probably would have received a more open answer from me. Instead you came out shady and I replied shady, and now apparently that makes you townish and me scummy which I do not get the logic of.

Copper also makes mention about how you didn't refer to me in your opening post of the day despite your claims that you didn't trust me or my claim.

I mentioned you the Day before and my opinions on how much I trusted your claim. Why do I need to restate it at the beginning of the next day? I listed my top suspects, and I did have you as more town then them, that doesn't mean I had you as obv. town.

Michel gave a pretty good example of your ambivalent neutrality. Your behavior towards me today is another example. You say you don't trust me, but you don't come right out and say I'm scum. You don't commit yourself one way or the other.

This is true. But I'm not committing myself because I'm not confident one way or the other. I listed the players I thought were more likely to be scum in my first post of the day, that is making a statement about my beliefs. Me saying I don't trust you fully is also making a statement. I do not believe I need to say that I think you're town/scum in order to make a clear statement about my beliefs on you.

You're mistaking clear statements of beliefs with clear beliefs. I admit I do not have the later and have said as much at other times in the thread.

I let myself get pulled into a lot of the claim conversation that ate up a big chunk of Day 2.

And that prevented you from going after Fate how, exactly?

...because I let myself get sucked up into it. You are correct, I *could* have still gone after Fate. I didn't and I said why. I'm not saying it somehow prevented me from doing so in an absolute sense, rather that it distracted me and I didn't press a Fate case as hard as I clearly should have.

You even found time to go after Pie for the little discourse he and I had. There's absolutely no reason whatsoever why you couldn't have pressed Fate more or <gasp> placed a vote on him.

I pressed Pie because I needed a read on him, and I said as much when pressing him. I had my read for Fate, and I said as much in my first posts on Day 2. You're right, I probably should have voted him but I am often a bit gunshy about placing votes on Day 2.

If you want to argue that voting for Fate doesn't make you scum, then do you think everyone who voted for Fate isn't scum? If so, why? If not, why should we think any differently of you?

I'm not saying me voting Fate doesn't make me scum. I want to know why you think me voting Fate does make me scum. If the one side of the equation is silly (as you seem to suggest and I agree) then why isn't the other?

[Thor665]

But if you didn't do anything last night, what was the point of hiding it? I just don't see why you, assuming you're a vanilla townie, felt the need to not be forthright and say you didn't do anything.

Presuming I'm vanilla - by claiming vanilla with no need to claim vanilla I help scum power role hunt.

Presuming I'm a power role - same as above, except here I'm claiming a power role and putting a target on my back. This is also different then an organized popcorn massclaim as it's basically a request by you for a claim from me without there being any order to the scumminess of who is being asked when.

I was one of your top suspects yesterday. You gave no indication yesterday that your suspicion of my slot changed, even as you hammered Fate. So if I don't get placed on your suspect list on the first post of Day 3, without even a statement like "I feel better about SK now," isn't that a little odd?

Clearly I don't think so and clearly you do.

You're missing the whole point. One thing about scum is that they don't like to commit themselves to a particular course of action until the last possible moment, to avoid getting saddled with a belief that they have to live up to for the rest of the game. This results in scum appearing to be neutral about game events and player slots. That's the behavior I'm seeing in you, Thor. Stating that you don't have clear beliefs doesn't really help you out.

You're using my "clear belief" of suspecting Fate all Day on Day 2 to paint me scummy.
You're then also saying i don't present my beliefs clearly enough and am scummy for that.

Why are both of those statements true?

Admitting that you were distracted from going with the correct course of action does not excuse the fact that you didn't go with the correct course of action.

And how exactly was I supposed to know my Fate suspicion was the correct course of action until today? I'm not saying my reasoning is perfect.

Pushing Pie is fair enough. However, I really don't think it's fair to say you were gunshy about placing votes yesterday, especially since you had no trouble placing a vote on me for less reasoning than you had given for Fate's scumhood.

What do you see as my reasoning for Fate's scumhood? I actually never presented much of a case on him because a lot of my suspicions on him were gut based, same as my suspicions of you. If I'd presented a giant case on Fate this would make more sense to me, but I really didn't.

Where exactly did I imply that you voting Fate makes you scum? I agree, saying that you voting Fate makes you scum is a silly notion. But that's not why I'm voting you, now is it?

You implied my hammer of him was scummy.

Also, you ignored an important section of my other post. Namely, the part where I outlined why you had no good reason to be voting me towards the end of Day 2. Just thought you should know.

I put my vote on you because I was following Copper and placing a vote on a slot I had previously said during the Day that I found scummy.

I left it there, as I said Day 2, because I wanted to hear more from other players before moving my vote.

I have also said I was slow to move it off until Michel and Copper were so vociferous against lynching you.

So I feel I have already addressed this, you may feel free to disagree with my beliefs but you can't say I haven't provided them - what do you feel I haven't addressed?

Re-asking this;
@Pie - you list Socrates as your number one suspect, considering the above how does that work into your concept? Was all the TCC/CSL and Soc/Fate stuff simple bussing? Why do you see it as such?

Also, has SK now become your top suspect?


@SK - you list Pie as your top suspect - why didn't you track him?

[Thor665]

@charter

If you think my answer to SK's question was dancing around it because I didn't want to answer it, do you then feel her question was definitely phrased in an open and normal way? I have explained why I answered the way I did and why I thought her question was more rolefishing then legitimate - specifically why do you think I'm wrong on that point?

[Thor665]

@charter - Col.Cathart also specifically asked you to claim your role, and you were sitting in a guilty spot since you'd targeted the NK.

My answer of - if you tracked me, you wouldn't be worried - is an open claim of, at the very least, not targeting the person who was NKed. That is a reasonable answer to my mind, especially if I did not wish to roleclaim at the time and manner.

Let me ask you this, if SK had asked you the same question as she asked me, and you did not wish to roleclaim to her, how would you have answered in a protown way? If the only way to answer in a protown way is to roleclaim, then why is that?

[Thor665]

If you were townie, visited no one, and were resistant toward SK, then why not make your suspicions forthright?

Personally I thought I did when I said in my initial reply post to SK that I could see either a town or scum reasoning for how she was asking the question. Don't get me wrong, I'm not saying SK is obv. Scum I just don't believe SK is obv. town and have been reacting with that as a concept.

This is pretty close to AtE for me. I appreciate you wanting to explain yourself and apologize if you don't think you're being clear enough, but I don't want you, as townie, to back off what you think is right either. If I don't think you have a backbone, then that's usually a big scumtell in my eyes.

I stand by my actions. At the point you're responding to this I'd already explained why I took longer to back off SK then other players and had been told (in so many words) that my reasons aren't good enough. At that point a shrug and an apology is all I can offer because those are my reasons. See also; my reason why I didn't scumhunt Fate more. I have been told it's unacceptable and bad reasoning, and have stood by it because it is what my reasoning is. I was being polite for the sake of politeness not because I was attempting to generate warm fuzzy feelings towards me. I won't be rude for the sake of avoiding feelings of AtE in my posts because I find being rude...rude.

Nowhere in my posts did I suggest I backed off of what I thought was 'right' and I'll note, as an easy and recent example, no one has got me to admit my response to SK's probe of me is wrong. I am quite comfortably staying here and saying why I believe my response was the correct one. I do not believe I have shown a weakness for any opinions I believe are right, I can be swayed from weaker opinions, but when that happens I do claim the new opinion as my own as well.

Agreed. Pie tying himself to Thor makes me feel as though we're doing something right. Thor is already effectively tying himself to Pie by means of suspecting SK's claim as much as he has. This makes me think one of them is likely to be scum and one of them is probably town.

I can more see the Pie scum/Thor town (not that this should come as a surprise) I see the obvious connections of Pie defending me and I grok how me suspecting SK puts me in a similar general theme as some of Pie's postings. But what is the logic behind Thor scum/Pie town?

The 'suspicious of SK thing' was opened up on Day 3 by me in Post 1003 when I asked Pie for his read.
I expressed my own suspicions of SK in Post 1007 in response to her question/fishing of me.
Pie expressed an uncertainty of his read on SK in Post 1009.
He later attached himself to the SK suspicion wagon after my stance was clear.
He later defended me after the SK v. Thor situation was already in full swing.

I see how he connected himself to me, I do not see how I connected myself to him. I'll admit I rather like his dinging of SK because I am less fond of SK at this juncture, but I still consider Pie a more likely scummer of the pair.

The fact that you are still entertaining the possibility of claiming a power role really does shock me.

I do not believe I have been put in a position where I'm obligated to claim yet. Until such point I do not intend to claim. I do not see this as shocking.

When Sotty gunsmith'ed (good grammar is good) you your reply to him was 'yes, our role doesn't have a gun' This is an acceptance of the investigation without actual claiming of anything.

When I was tracked my answer was 'you wouldn't be worried' which to my mind is at the very least saying 'I didn't target the NKed player' which, is already an acceptance of the investigation and a reasonable one to my mind.

How on Earth would visiting someone as a power role give you the idea that a Tracker, "shouldn't be worried by the result"? Just because you don't visit the person who was killed doesn't mean squat.

Fair enough. As a theoretical - if you didn't trust SK as much as you apparently do how would you have responded to the question in a pro town manner? Do you think it was appropriate that I role claim to SK's question?

[Thor665]

TL:DR

Part 1 is me discussing my read through - I suspect Pie.
Part 2 I discuss more defense of myself I noted through the re-read.

==================Part 1=====================

"People" is only Copper...well, okay, "people" probably is the correct word to use there, but I do believe only that slot has put those thoughts into print. (though I myself said I could see Piescum/Thortown - I don't see the other one though)

Finishing reading over Fate and I'm, as usual, feeling more confused then brilliant. Apparently admitting this is scummy, but here's where I'm at.

1. Reading over Fate seems to clear Socrates pretty well as he really did hunt him more then seems needed and at a time it really looked like he was trying to revive the TCC energy.

2. He avoided discussing his thoughts on myself, Cyberbob/Zorblag/Cyberbob, and Pie to a certain extent. He starts off commenting mixed reads on Zorblag, is pressed by Sotty, clarifies to town, later shifts him (now Cyberbob) to neutral, and after Cyberbob votes Fate quickly puts him to 2nd biggest suspect. Pie basically stays a neutral read throughout and I remain an un-discussed town read.

3. Cyberbob is the second vote on Fate. It seems he could have easily enough gone for Pie or SK at this point (prior to the role claim, post gun claim), yet he happens to target the scum. He claims he'd be willing to switch to SK to ensure a lynch (he later does this, and then switches back at Michel's and Copper's bequest). I'm getting some bad energy here, but will admit maybe I'm being colored by his voting for me in the present. I personally would not be surprised if he put his vote on Fate during a low threat time for Fate, and figured it would be an easy way to float over to SK 'to ensure a lynch'. I think there's a good chance this ended up being a bussing.

4. Pie's SK vote still looks the worst to me from the wagon as he claimed he got on it for the sake of a wagon and no other solid reason. He also did this at a point Fate's wagon was gaining some steam and it feels like an attempt to push it over the line.

I think Pie is a good head and shoulders above the other potential scum here.

=================Part 2================

For my defense I would like to point out the following.
During the lynch situation my shift to Fate and 'hanging on' to SK have been cited as scummy. I would like to note that my last post prior to the hammer was on Sunday evening and I was still discussing my reads of the claim and requesting to hear more from Copper and Sotty (I also admit I don't like Pie's push on Kerrigan for those keeping track)

In between is when Michel and Copper 'rally the troops' to switch votes to Fate.

My very next post is Monday morning, and I hammer.

I'll also note that both SK and Cyberbob's cases on me cite the obv. neutrality of my posts...while citing my suspicions of Fate all Day 2 (SK) and my protown/buddying vibe towards Copper (Cyberbob). I find it immensely obnoxious to have those used against me in addition to being told that I'm too neutral and not offering reads on other players. I'll again do not believe I have been too neutral.

[Thor665]

I don't think I put words into your mouth, so I'll quote where I was coming from in your own words and explain that way;

I'm still thinking about Thor. The "all questions no positions" point certainly is a valid one

This is where I got the feeling you were dinging me for neutrality. I'll rephrase to suggesting you were dinging me for not taking a position if you prefer. I consider you saying I'm not taking positions to be the same as saying I'm staying neutral. I'll accept there is some differentiation - but when you then tag me for acting protown/buddying towards Copper clearly I'm taking certain positions which is my issue with then having the neutrality thing cited alongside those positions as part of the scumcase on me.

[Thor665]

1. I was discussing Fate in that paragraph. Cyberbob became Fate's second biggest. That's why you're listed in there as a neutral read of his - because Fate had a neytral read of you throughout and also why I say 'he' avoided discussing Pie, 'he' is Fate.

2. Is the pattern that you had insufficient reasoning? At the very least the people complaining about your read on me have a point since you declared me as town yesterday and cleared me again today - so it stands to reason you already had your read finished on me at that point. Whom do you see as most likely scum if not you and I? Do you still need to finish reading Fate again before you can say, as with your Socrates suspicion?

3. Do you support shameless bandwagon votes near deadline on Day 2?

[Thor665]

But how exactly do you interpret "Thor, care to explain what you were doing last night?" as anything other than me saying I tracked you?

Because since I know what I did last night I know that if I'd been tracked you wouldn't have approached me like this. Therefore I saw it as plausible you are a fakeclaimed scum who was fishing to help verify your roleclaim.

So no, the only valid interpretation of my statement is that I tracked you, and I definitely implied that I had something on you.

And again - since I knew that if you had "something" on me via tracking that you had to be lying so it fed back into my belief of you as fakeclaimed Tracker. My basic disagreement is that I was obligated to roleclaim the instant you asked me what I had done last night. No one has come up with any reasoning of why I should have done so (charter basically answered with - "I would have roleclaimed" which via his link he proves he does as scum, so I'm not sure how that makes it either a scum or town tell to roleclaim).

Note to other players: With this statement Thor attempts to dismiss the argued point without actually coming with valid reasons for doing so. Here is the point he's trying to dismiss:

I was one of your top suspects yesterday. You gave no indication yesterday that your suspicion of my slot changed, even as you hammered Fate. So if I don't get placed on your suspect list on the first post of Day 3, without even a statement like "I feel better about SK now," isn't that a little odd?

By stating that he doesn't think the contested point is odd, Thor attempts to restructure the argument into a difference of belief.

You asked me if I thought it was a little odd - I said 'no' how is that me restructuring anything? I specifically answered your question. How could I have possibly answered this in any way that would not have been either an agreement or disagreement of opinion (belief)?

What do you see as my reasoning for Fate's scumhood? I actually never presented much of a case on him because a lot of my suspicions on him were gut based, same as my suspicions of you. If I'd presented a giant case on Fate this would make more sense to me, but I really didn't.

You know what...you're right. Going back over your posts again, I don't know how I saw a ginormous Fate case in there, cause now, when I look at it, there's hardly anything there. Let's see how many times you mention Fate in your ISO (excluding Day 3):

I will note that I believe you are tunneling me to a point you're losing sight of your initial case on me. In an earlier post I was scummy because I voted you on not much and had a giant case on Fate.

Now I point out that I didn't have a giant case on Fate and apparently I'm scummy because I never pressed a giant case on Fate. (which is apparently good, because that would have made me scummy)

If you are town I suggest you relax, because not everything I do has to be scummy for me to be scum. I'll also say from your presented points that I feel it shows scumhunting and opinions from me towards other players and coming out on the side of some major debate points and trying to get others to weigh in as well.

[Thor665]

@Pie - For pro massclaim I know we have myself, you, and SK.
Anti massclaim is Michel

I don't think anyone else has actually weighed in on the question.

When are you expecting to finish your read on Fate?

[Thor665]

So, bottom line: the vote (and the circumstances surrounding it) was scummy, the fact that it was a hammer is not. Does that clear it up?

I still think my expressed preference for a Kerrigan or Fate vote since early on in Day 2 shows that my votes didn't come out of nowhere. But, yes, I am happier you've now clarified the hammer aspect.

Why did you need to hear more from other players before removing your vote?

You have cited my constant questions as scummy and I cite them as scumhunting. Basically I wanted to hear more from people about the vote because, as I'd said, I wasn't confident of the way Pie had moved onto it. Why wouldn't I want to hear more from other players? You're ending this post I'm responding to requesting to hear more from Socrates.

Again, not everything I do needs to be scummy.

Both of these can be summed up with "If you thought I was faking it, why not call me out on it?" Calling me a liar instantly polarizes the day into SK vs Thor.

As I said - I could see both a town and scum reason for it. I didn't wish to polarize town into Thor vs. SK because I wasn't certain you were scum. I just didn't want to roleclaim nor did I wish to hand you my nightaction as getting you to say it out loud yourself would have cleared you for me and it wouldn't have mattered if I had said anything or not.

You didn't say "no." You said, "Clearly I don't think so, and you do," which makes it into a matter of belief instead of a matter of facts.

Okay - I'll say 'no' now, does this solve the problem? ('Clearly I don't think so translates as 'no' in my universe) But your explanation at least explains what you're looking for so I'll provide it below.

Here's another way to put it: I'm questioning the logical progression of your suspicion of me.

The suspicion went as such.
1. Suspected you Day 2.
2. With Fate's flip and your part in it I am obligated to reassess (much as other people who you and I both agree are town clearly did as they decided not to lynch you)
3. Opening suspicion Day 3 doesn't include you because you're lower then the 3-4 I did list as at this point I'm reasonable on you as town.
4. You perform what I consider possible rolefishing at me.
5. I deny the rolefish because I consider it a potential scummy tactic, I answer the question in a roundabout way and wait for you to declare my actions yourself.
6. You call me scum and claim roleblock.

Before, my issue was that you had a good case on Fate but voted me for "lack of content" while putting Fate on the back burner, so to speak. Now that I look and see what you've actually posted regarding a case on Fate, there's surprisingly little there. Yet you had Fate as a top suspect. So now, instead of asking "why did you vote me over Fate for so long," I'm asking "why was Fate a top suspect when there's little evidence to show it?"

You were both suspects, as I've already said, largely on gut. I went with you first because I really wanted more out of your slot. I stayed with you as long as I did because I had felt you and Ray were scummy and wished to lynch you. I shifted not really because I believed your innocence all that much, but because Copper and Michel whom I thought were both town were so strongly against lynching you I figured, hey, why not lynch my other top guy. I really would have happily lynched you yesterday but for them.

You did also include quotes where I did point out little comments and opinions about Fate's actions that I found scummy and said as much. I pointed out soft sells, I pointed out irregularities in logic, I pointed out how I felt about his case on Soc and Copper. I also was commenting about my attitude for the Ray slot and how I was keeping it on my scum list. My attitude is there, I just never presented a giant case.

[Thor665]

@Thor, Pie: you may have said it before today, but I lost track of your opinions in the long discussions with SK. Would you please be so kind to tell me who you believe is scum, and why?

Top suspect is Pie. Current case is bad feelings about his sudden push/vote for SK yesterday, overall paucity of content, and lack of commentary between that slot and Fate.

Secondary is Cyberbob. Current case is the way he voted Fate, said he'd switch to SK to prevent 'no lynch' did so, eventual switch back as SK lynch became no go. Also had an odd connection in Fate's suspicions insomuch as he went from town to neutral to suddenly scum at the 11th hour which I read as potential last minute distancing.

Re: the Buffalo sandwiches. Besides making me want to eat a BFC sandwich I don't get SK's issue. Pie has been using that commentary in the same way one might go 'Bah' to reply to a post. I don't find dismissal pro town but I think it's pretty obvious she's either connecting emotions to it and not reading it clearly, or is overplaying the implications of it.

[Thor665]

Eh, as far as the bit about SK my argument would be that you basically got to vote your scumbuddy (Fate) which helps distance, and then set yourself up to get on the SK wagon 'to prevent a no lynch' which allowed you to vote her without actually listing any reasons or even connecting yourself to the wagon.

[Thor665]

Also, random thought, how could I have "subconscious OMGUS" if I was scum?

[Thor665]

@Pie - seriously, third time I've asked, when will you have finished re-reading Fate and offer your thoughts on who is scummy?

Isn't Michel already confirmed town as it is?

Only in a situational sense of choosing Fate over you (so for you, perhaps so).

My accounting says we're five for at least an amended massclaim (Pie, me, Cyberbob, SK, Michel) with charter, Copper, and Socrates not having weighed in on the question. That's a plurality of at least 3 to 2 for town wanting massclaim.

Roleclaim: Vanilla

Cyberbob, a bag of popcorn is in your lap now.

[Thor665]

Still makes me wonder why you didn't just call me out when I claimed you did something, but we've done that argument to death, so I'll leave it alone for the moment.

As you bring it up... My answer remains the same, I thought you were rolefishing and wanted to obligate you to actually state what you had tracked. You never actually claimed I had done anything, your post was worded to allow you to back out and I wanted to force you to be decisive on it - you then claimed roleblock.

As far as Michel - sure, though all you did was describe more in depth his choice of Fate over you (and, as I noted, you use evidence of you=town in your discussion which is evidence only you can feel 100% on). I agree with you on the Michel case as presented, I do stand by my belief that it makes him more obviously cleared for you then for other players.

[Thor665]

Until someone does that, I don't see any reason to at least put him on the town side of things.

And I do believe everyone is doing that - but why would Copper's desire to clear him more then be odd?

[Thor665]

Pie, you're doing a lot of defending and discussing, but you're not actually pointing out any reads other then a gut suspicion of Cyber. If you're not scum, who is?

This is why I keep pressing you on the Fate re-read, because you've said you wouldn't really have your assessment until after that re-read.

[Thor665]

Thor claiming he's vanilla is just the icing on the cake for his shenanigans at the start of the day.

My shenanigan of not role claiming when you provided a link to you roleclaiming when scum. Clearly scum will roleclaim at tracker pressure which makes me doubt that there is any validity to a belief that me not claiming is scummy or townish.

I still don't like the way Kerrigan's question was so open ended, and still don't understand why open ended from her = town and open ended from me = scummy.

[Thor665]

I can grok that - but if you accept that scum will do what they think town should aren't you then obligated to show the scummy motive for why I did what I did other then simply pointing at it, saying 'shenanigans' and calling it a day?

I ask again; why was Kerrigan's fishing towards me townish and my fishing back at Kerrigan scummy? Are you set on the belief that she is tracker and I was scum who was worried town had a roleblocker to block our roleblocker? If I was scum and knew she had been roleblocked was my only goal to make her have to reveal she had no read on me? If that was indeed the case why wouldn't I have come out more aggressive against her, saying 'I'm vanilla, I sat at home, why are you implying anything about that obv. falseclaim tracker!?"

Instead I rolefish back at her...what was my scum motivation for that?

[Thor665]

Just woke up, but I wanted to comment on this. Copper's confirmed town, so is there any reason why he needs to claim?

Copper is confirmed no gun, what makes him confirmed town? I'll accept he's unlikely to be scum at this point, but that's different from confirmed.

Thor, the town motivation for being vague like Kerrigan was is what I showed you in that other game. The tracker caught me without revealing what he did.

Eh, I disagree. The Tracker's claim in that one was for you to say what you did last night 'you know the reason'.

fixed the quote - Cathart

Kerrigan simply asked me what I did at night, with no implications attached (not even verifying that she tracked me). I still don't see why, 'you wouldn't worry about it' is an unreasonable answer to a request like that. She might have tracked someone else and was just scumhunting on me, or she might have been scum looking to verify her falseclaim. I feel those were reasonable suppositions on my part and that my answer was a townish way to field her question.

[Thor665]

@Cyberbob

You're putting me in an interesting pickle, because the possibility of Kerriganscum is very appealing to me since it would justify everything I've done thus far. However, I'm curious as to how you have fluctuated so much to have been voting for me (and I believe the case of voting for me is largely predicated on a belief that Kerrigan is town and thus I was dodging her) to now voting for Kerrigan?

Am I still second most likely scum to you/ If so, how do you justify that considering you're also voting Kerrigan (i.e. what is the Kerriganscum/Thorscum connection?). If I am no longer suspicious to you, what has changed to affect that?

[Thor665]

@ Thor: Do you agree with Cyberbob's case on me? Why or why not?

As already stated; I like it insomuch as it would help justify my own attitudes towards you from earlier, and I do believe that your Tracker claim is, at best, only potentially clearing of you since I could still see it as a scum fakeclaim which had to claim roleblock after I didn't acquiesce to your fishing on me.

I don't like the case insomuch as he went from suspecting me (and I think any case that suspects me has to believe Kerrigan = town) to then suspecting you, which seems a dramatic mental flip that he says is explained in his stream-of-consciousness post, but I feel really isn't. He just opened up a post commenting that he now suspects you and Michel.

If Cyberbob is scum I'm not sure why he'd have this sudden pressure on you though, unless he's partnered with...Pie? I guess it could be a defense of Pie by trying to amp up a case on you, which could also explain why he was working on me as well since he's looking to explore lynch options that aren't Pie.

[Thor665]

Maybe I'm just reading this funny, but why do you feel your attitudes towards me need justification? If you think they're valid, shouldn't that be enough in your eyes?

Justification insomuch as it shows I am not alone and have other people agree that the way you approached your track of me was not radiating town energy out of its pores - which up until this point seems to be what everyone keeps saying and I have no idea why.

Why wouldn't I want justification of my beliefs?

I'm don't think that the act of switching reads on me from a townier point of view to a scummier point of view itself is scummy, providing he bring a valid argument to the table; but in my opinion he's bringing a bollocks case against me, and after two rounds of debate he refuses to address my current rebuttal to his case, and

that

is scummy.

You think his case that you're scum is weak? Shocking.

I actually think the 180 turn shows a likelihood that he has an easily flippable opinion. I recall someone (both you and Cyberbob) saying that my neutral attitudes showcased scumminess because I was leaving options open/fencesitting/etc. How then does sudden opinion shifts not equate to scumminess?

I don't find his unwillingness to debate with you scummy for the same reason I don't find Pie's Buffalo Chicken Sandwich commentary scummy. I will point out as a flip of your logic here - I openly opposed your case and engaged in debate points with you and you still found me scummy. If the lack of debate makes someone scummy, then the presence of debate should make them townish. Since I do not believe the latter is true, why should I believe the former is?

[Thor665]

Thor, didn't you mention that you thought there was something to be said about finding scum between you and Pie?

Finding scum between me and Pie?

I recall answering a somewhat similar question from you (the question was along the lines of how we were 'attaching' ourselves to each other). I pointed out that I saw more attempts by Pie to attach to me then for me to attach to Pie but by dint of making that argument I'm sure I either explicitly or implicitly agreed to the idea connections were there. Since I have been stating since the beginning of Day 3 that I find Pie the most scummy, I'm sure I've agreed to the idea he is scum - I've certainly not agreed to the idea I am scum or that I've connected myself to him as some sort of scummy plan.

I also recall during that answer asking you where you saw my attachment attempts to Pie, which you have not offered thoughts on.

[Thor665]

Thor, any reason why you're not voting?

I feel my standpoint of voting Pie is pretty clear but saw no real need to put a vote on him until after he did his re-read as I feel his attention is already too focused on defense over scumhunting.

[Thor665]

@Pie - is some of your earlier commentary (suspecting Charter, Cyberbob, and SK0 coming post a re-read of Fate or no?

@charter - no desire to hear from Socrates first?

[Thor665]

I feel my standpoint of voting Pie is pretty clear but saw no real need to put a vote on him until after he did his re-read as I feel his attention is already too focused on defense over scumhunting.

This seems a little counterintuitive to me, to be honest. Pie's been upfront about his reads. What do you hope to learn? I think you should be more upfront about it.

I disagree about Pie being upfront about his reads (well, let me clarify to, he's been upfront - but he hasn't offered many). At the time I posted that response his 'reads' seemed to consist of townish towards Thor and Michel and suspicious towards SK.

Since then he's dropped SK and now lists Cyberbob and charter as top suspects. He has also maintained that he has yet to go back and look over Fate's actions, something I clearly have been desirous of him to do.

[Thor665]

That's actually quite excellent, and very clear. I've never actually considered meta for a specific game, which is an interesting way of looking at it.

@Col.Cathart

Could we please have another prod on Socrates, he hasn't posted since Friday.

[Thor665]

My desire, as already stated, is to hear from Socrates prior to the end of Day.

[Thor665]

I accept you disagree with my reasons, but my reasons are there. Besides, as already shown if/when I hammer him if he's scum that will make me scummy in your eyes since I suspected him for most of the day and didn't vote him, and presumably if he's town I'll be scummy for helping to lynch town. So I might as well at least wait and see if I get the commentary I wish to have prior to placing my vote.

[Thor665]

I will admit since we are now in a replacement looking stage at roughly a day out I don't see anything useful coming from the slot this phase. I'm content to hammer.

@Michel - do you want Cyberbob to respond to your question this phase? If so, say so and I'll await his response prior to hammer, if not, I'll hammer. I'm certainly around enough that I should be comfortably on top of it one way or the other.

[Thor665]

No kidding, you'd be in the firing line if SK died and flipped scum.

I would like to point out that Cyberbob's scum suspect and likely partner are both of the remaining claimed PRs. 3 scum vs. 8 town and 1 gunsmith doesn't seem likely to my mind.

I'm not sure if I'll have enough time to read the thread before deadline hits (fairly sure I won't, actually), so cases would be appreciated.

I can provide cases;

Oddly enough I don't really see anyone else presenting a 'case' on Pie, so I'll go ahead and list my case against Pie which I guess is relatively close to other player's.

Cyberbob's case on SaitKerrigan.

Pie has withdrawn his own case on SK and his thoughts and reason for his current vote placement can be found here
---------------------------------------------

That all said, I'm providing most of the above to the shovel as reference reading for the Night Phase as verily it doth be mine intention to hammer in this post...with Mjolnir. The shovel would, at best, have shallow thoughts to offer or would drop the hammer itself, so it might as well be done by me now.

No whammy, no whammy....

Vote: Pie_is_good

[Thor665]

Well, thanks, Thor. I ISO Pie, go to the university planning to ISO kthxbye and NS to get a full picturewhen I got back and then come home to find the thread closed. Also, I'm noting that you didn't mention SK's no-result on Pie nor do any of the linked posts mention it. Which is very much consistent with a Thor-SK pairing.

And seeing how your first post in, with extra days to get caught up, is basically listing SK as scummiest I don't see why I did anything terrible by hammering when I did since you're even still commenting on how you haven't finished catching up. Unless you expected to vote SK and get a lynch there (Michel and Copper were openly against an SK lynch, which means you would have had to convince both charter and myself within the span of a few hours) all I did was hammer Pie a few hours before you would have or I hammered Pie a few hours before you would have come in, voted SK and I would have hammered Pie.

I find Copper as the NK target to be really odd considering we have two claimed PRs lurking. Even if the scum have a roleblocker it is really odd to choose to RB a PR, and NK a townie while leaving another PR alive. This seems especially true when you consider that, for as townie as Copper was, people seem to generally have an equally townie read on Michel.

@SK - you say there was 'no surprise' that Copper was the NK target. Yesterday you had predicted Michel as the obv. NK target. Why doesn't the Copper NK surprise you now, and why do you think scum didn't block or NK Michel?

[Thor665]

Also, why did you neglect to mention SK's no-result on Pie?

When I discussed my reasons for voting him? Because it wasn't one of my reasons for voting him. I also didn't discuss the Buffalo Chicken Sandwich thing, which SK cited as a point against Pie - does my absence of mentioning that apply in the same way that I didn't mention the track? I didn't put overmuch value on the track because he could have been scum that didn't target anyone or SK could have been lying about her claim.

You asked for a quick mention of cases - I supplied that. Nowhere did I claim my case covered all possible bases to suspect or not to suspect Pie, it simply covered the reasons I suspected him and was presented as exactly that.

[Thor665]

It has to do with my speculation as to what Michel's role is. Since I don't wish to give the scum any ideas they might not otherwise had thought of, I'll refrain from elaborating further on this subject for now.

Though you did already ask if Michel still wanted to keep his role hidden. If you don't want to give scum ideas why are you nudging for Michel to claim now?

[Thor665]

Thor, who are you most suspicious of?

Cyberbob, and then probably a mix of Kerrigan and you.

What about yourself, who are your top suspects?

if SK is telling the truth, then there's also a scum roleblocker, which means the no-result is fairly significant.

Wait, so you aren't talking the Night 1 track of Pie but rather the Night 2 roleblock claim of Kerrigan? I was discussing the current cases which were Cyberbob's on Kerrigan and Mine on Pie and also Pie's general outlook. I linked to the cases in question so you could read them in the original poster's language, why would I mention Kerrigan being roleblocked when I was listing my own case on Pie, and whether or not Cyberbob discussed Kerrigan's roleblock claim (which actually I think he did) would be inside his case on her, why should I mention it specifically when linking to his case?

[Thor665]

My case on Cyberbob has been made already and is best found here and here

My case on you, Kerrigan, is fairly much the basis of everyone else's case on you, and that is that you were scum, falseclaimed to earn town cred/safety, and that your odd 'track claim' on me was in fact rolefishing to cover the fact you couldn't accurately claim what the track was and then you claimed roleblock when I didn't pony up the info you wanted. I'll also happily admit that your continued roleblock with Michel left alive and Copper NKed just rings as all sorts of odd play to me (so if scum were hoping to discombobulate town - mission successful on me).

charter is in there somewhat because Pie got so heated on him, and Pie's stated belief in a Cyberbob/charter team did gel with some of my own feelings. I also felt that charter's pressure on me yesterday perhaps best quickly summed up here was an awkward pushing of the Thor case on questionable merits (Thor didn't immediately roleclaim means Thor=scum, as proof here's a game where I was scum and immediately roleclaimed...buh?)

[Thor665]

TL:DR - I'm answering SK's response to me.

I support assumptions as part of a scum read.
I explain the appeal to popular support as intended as a dig at her 'Thor is too neutral' point.
I explain how I feel charter could have sort of surprise bussed Fate
I note an agreement with Pie's charter/Cyberbob both pressuring me feeling.
================================

@ Thor: I fail to see how your second link is a case against Cyberbob, unless you're referring to the part about Cyber's 180 turn.

It is about the 180 turn and is an outgrowth/explanation of the expressed case from the first link.

As for your case against me, it is entirely made out of assumptions. The main assumption is that I'm scum, and then from there you assign scum motivation to the other actions noted in your post. You also claim that your case has the same basis as "everyone else's," which sounds like an appeal to popular opinion (otherwise known as "well my case is okay because other people are using it too"), which is typically a scummy thing

I'll agree that my case is based on an assumption. That doesn't make the assumption wrong, however. As far as everyone else, I was noting that because I found it funny that other players were using my case on you as part of their own (it's the same reason I noted to the shovel that mine was the only clearly presented case against Pie that I found) mostly it's digging at the accusation of how 'Thor is a neutral fence sitter' which I still strongly disagree with.

(lesser town players sometimes make cases based on popular opinion, but I don't think you are one of those lesser players).

Good lord, why not? In any case, thanks for the compliment I suppose, though we'll have to wait to see if I'm remotely worthy of it.

Regardless, cases based on assumption depend entirely on the main assumption being correct. What evidence do you have that the main assumption in this case is valid, or that the other assumption (I am town) isn't possible?

I pointed out how I felt your question had potential scum methods to it yesterday, that is a belief free of the assumption of you being or not being scum. Yes, I am assuming you are scum when presenting a scum case on you - I don't see how one can do otherwise.

To clarify deeper - I believe Michel and the shovel are town. I know I am town. With a presumed two scum out there from the remaining three players I am presenting my reasons for suspecting them as scum. Personally I don't consider my reasons on you any better/worse then those I used on Pie (incorrectly) and Fate (correctly) when you figure out the 100% scum detecting method free of all assumptions please let me know. I am dismissing the 'you are town' assumption because I see enough sketchiness in the way you offered your tracking question to me to make me believe it was not a total townish probe.

My main issue with a Charterscum case is that I still have a hard time believing Charterscum would tunnel Fate to the grave. What is your opinion about this?

In short - there's a reason I suspect Cyberbob more then charter.

To address more in depth; I'll offer up the concept that it doesn't seem unreasonable that charter was on Fate to distance from him, and then when the wagon exploded near the end of the day getting off of it would have been more harm then good for the scumteam.

As for the rest of it, I don't see anything to show why a Cyberbob/Charter team gels with you, and your link is a case of arguing over the definition of a town action.

I agreed with Pie's read that both of them hopped on him. I felt similar energy from both of them towards me during Day 2. The link was explained already by me as to why I didn't like charter's actions from that link. If you expand on what you don't get or offer a specific question I'll try to clarify - but I already said why I felt it was relevant.

[Thor665]

Could I ask where you're getting town reads on chamber and Cyberbob from?

[Thor665]

I'm Charter, I don't think Chamber is in this game..

...um...well he's in the wonderful game I'm playing in my head. Yes. (I covered that up pretty well)

What's your big deal about wanting Michel to claim? Theoretically if he had information to help us he would claim that info in lylo, and unless you think he's scum there's not much point to barking up that tree. Are you advancing a Michelscum theory? He wasn't on your previous top suspects.

[Thor665]

If there's three scum, then today is Lylo. Michel wasn't one of my suspects, but now I'm finding myself suspecting him because I've ruled out everyone else.

Personally I'm going with a three scum setup since that is pretty normal for games this size and also because, personally, I think Col.Cathart basically said as much in his story post to start the day.

If you're going with Michelscum as a possibility then doesn't the rest of the scum team pretty much have to be SK, as otherwise I can't figure out why Michel would have led the charge on Fate Day 2.

If the scum team is Michel/SK then it suggests that either we only had one PR (or that 1-3 of us who claimed vanilla all lied) which doesn't seem likely. Thoughts?

[Thor665]

@SAINTKERRIGAN

Pointing out how an action could have scum motivation doesn't automatically mean the action is scum-motivated. And I'm not talking about the assumption one makes when presenting a scum case -- my concern is with a case that is based around the unproven assumption that I'm scum, and using that assumption to paint my subsequent actions as scummy. Sure, you could assume I'm scum and assign scum motivation to most of my actions. I could do the same for every player in this game if I wanted to. That doesn't mean the assumptions are right, or the actions scum-motivated.

Fair enough - how do you draw the distinction between how I am doing it and how you have done so when presenting your cases on charter and Cyberbob? I do not believe you can and thus I am not sure why you have such issue with my case on you and such confidence in your cases on them. Both your and my cases explain scum motivation for their actions and come from the basic assumption that the target of our case is scum.

This opportunistic shift is certainly strong enough to negate my belief that you wouldn't tunnel on your scumbuddy. After all, if you can change your opinion on me like this, bussing a scumbuddy is hardly something you'd shy away from.

Could you explain this part of your case on charter better? It seems silly.
======================================

@MICHEL

I see a lot of logic in your Copper NK logic. There's probably also some logic to the concept that Copper wouldn't have been a mislynch they could get so one might as well get rid of him. How do you feel about SK's obvious lashing out at anyone who questions her?
====================================

@CHARTER/CHAMBER

You also called Cyberbob "ultra scummy" for not answering my rebuttal. Yesterday you have him scummier than me, and today you've pardoned him because he can't be my partner?

This is a valid point SK has raised and I'd like to hear your reasoning for this shift.

[Thor665]

If you feel this is not what you are actually doing, feel free to explain why.

Because from my perspective, at least, you are starting with the assumption that I'm scum, and from there assigning scum motivation to my actions as support for that assumption. What I'm doing is taking the actions of Saint Kerrigan, and from that I'm drawing the conclusion that you're scum. In other words, you're starting with the result and trying to make the actions fit that result, while I'm starting with the actions themselves, and using them to come to the result.

This is a question that cannot be cleanly answered and there's a reason your response is a valid one for me to use. Simply because I'm comfortable admitting the assumptions within my cases doesn't make them any more or less valid then your own.

The quote in question is explaining why my previous reason for thinking Charter to be likely town is no longer valid. I hadn't thought scum Charter would tunnel on a scumbuddy like that, but after the opportunistic shift he had on me, then the idea of him bussing Fate becomes more plausible in my mind.

Why? Because he's opportunistic? I still don't see the connection and it feels like a grabbing of straws to beef up a case.

Incidentally, do you disagree with my accusing Charter for his opportunistic shift? Why or why not? (Anyone is free to answer this question.)

I agree it's a shift, I'm still debating if it's a scummy one. I'm actually surprised that after the last Day phase that suddenly I'm lower on everyone's scumdars then you are and I have commented about how I found that an odd movement (at least in Cyberbob's case). Lots of people made comments yesterday that my actions in our debate looked like the scummier actions, and then 'whango' - Kerrigan is a higher suspect. Denmark is past its expiration date in some manner or other here, I'm just not sure I'm smart enough to figure out how.

SPS, any comments on the goings on?

Kerrigan is full of win on this point, we need more spade posts.

[Thor665]

This is how I'm viewing your case on me. Please explain how you described it in the first quote applies to what you said in the second quote.

It was sarcasm.

I missed.

The difference I perceive in our approaches is what makes the difference.

Fine - and I believe that the difference is all in your own head and have been saying as much.

@ SPS: I didn't think Charter was the type to tunnel early and hard on his scumbuddies. I also didn't think he'd go from having a fairly townish opinion of me to calling me scum based on bad reasoning while pardoning his other suspects because they can't be my buddies. Both are aspects of scum opportunism, so if he's capable of doing one, why wouldn't he be capable of doing the other?

Why did you need the second example in order to decide he was capable of scum opportunism? What about the first situation and/or your meta on him ruled it out?

[Thor665]

As I said yesterday, Cyberbob's case had very little merit. And if I look at the way suspicion is developing against him today, I would not be surprised to see that scum is pushing for a mislynch there.

On Cyberbob?

SK and I have listed him as suspicious and charter has listed him as townish. The shovel currently has him on his list as more townish then either me or SK (if I recall correctly). You have stated you believe SK to be town.

That leaves me as scum pushing for a mislynch on Cyberbob alone with the help of someone you consider town.

How exactly do you see this as a scum mislynch attempt?

[Thor665]

Ah, the pronoun was 'SaintKerrigan' not 'Cyberbob' (your English teacher should waggle her finger at you for this)

Okay; so you're saying Cyberbob's case on SK is weak (hence the lash out)
and then you're saying that it looks like scum is pushing a mislynch on SK, and from SK's perspective you believe charter looks suspicious (not that SK has been subtle in this feeling)

Up till now I've been more or less clearing Socrates in my mind because of Fate's push on him at the beginning of Day 2. What are your thoughts on that and on Socrates?

I ask, because if I clear Socrates for that, and I clear you and SK for the PR claim (since 3 PRs vs. 3 scum w. roleblocker does feel balanced) then that leaves obv. scumpair of charter/Cyberbob which seems unlikely since I agree with you that the dual distancing towards Fate seems unlikely. Therefore either my Socrates clearing reason isn't valid, or you or Kerrigan are lying about being town PR. Thoughts?

[Thor665]

thor have you considered the possibility that sk is lying about his role

I have, I'm even pretty sure I was the first one to do so (well...besides Fate, who I think did so at the end of Day 2).

What does my consideration of that possibility, which I even mentioned in my previous post, have to do with anything at this particular juncture?

[Thor665]

and I clear you and SK for the PR claim (since 3 PRs vs. 3 scum w. roleblocker does feel balanced)

And 2 PRs vs. 3 vanilla goons doesn't feel balanced? I don't see why you're lumping SK and Michel together here. Their claims are very different.

How do you see their claims as so different?

I've finished ISOing people and I'm currently leaning towards a Thor-charter scum team with SK-Cyberbob and Thor-SK as close second and third respectively.

By the way this is written up you seem to suspect Kerrigan and myself more (each of our names show up twice) why then is our pairing the third most likely scumpair in your opinion? Is it just that you suspect us both individually so you might as well have a scum pairing? Earlier you had stated you were ruling out that particular pairing - why is it back?

[Thor665]

If the scum team is Michel/SK then it suggests that either we only had one PR (or that 1-3 of us who claimed vanilla all lied) which doesn't seem likely. Thoughts?

I've been in a game where I was the sole power role as town and it was much worse than a gunsmith (3 scum, 9 town). So a one power role game is certainly possible.

Doing some re-reading (trying to pretend I'm gleaning info while I'm at it).

This one jumped out at me a bit again and I think it needs more consideration. charter is claiming innocence on Cyberbob, Socrates, and myself (which is appreciated), and that really is leaving him at a scumteam of Kerrigan/Michel. I'm at least mentally ruling out half of that team at any point on the basic concept of game balance. A Gunsmith/3 scum/8 town build just seems highly unlikely to me. To my mind charter is either wrong in his conclusions or is scum having to twist around a bit since possible scumpairs are disappearing at this point.

I'm going to do some more re-reading - I want to re-read the day of Kerrigan's rolefish/accusation on me now that I'm more withdrawn from any pressure over it so I can look at who else was pressuring me and how. I also think I want to re-read the Day 2 lynch of Fate. I'll definitely get all that done within the next three days at which point I'm going to force myself to vote as I'll doubt I'll get any smarter after that.

[Thor665]

I've finished ISOing people and I'm currently leaning towards a Thor-charter scum team with SK-Cyberbob and Thor-SK as close second and third respectively.

Why do you think I'm scum? Why do you think I'm scum with Thor?

Process of elimination. I don't particularly think you're scum (note that the other two pairings I mentioned don't include you) but Thor-charter is the pairing that would make me the least wrong out of all the pairings.

What is it that makes charter my partner and Cyberbob SK's partner. Why is it not likely for the pairs to be Thor/Cyberbob and SK/charter?

[Thor665]

@charter
@Cyberbob

How does your SK = scum case justify Fate's pressure on the SK wagon Day 2?

Here's where he hopped on

Third person on the bus. No real pressure on himself yet. Actually has to re-clarify himself that he didn't mean Pie but rather SK on some earlier stated suspicions.

[Thor665]

(the point is that even the strongest - or weakest in this particular case as charter pointed out - of votes can be distancing ones)

How do you divine (and perhaps define) the difference?

[Thor665]

Honestly Cyberbob if you need to have the concepts of subjective and objective explained to you then I have very strong doubts about whether the town can win this one.

Okay, back to the reading.

[Thor665]

If you're going to accept unproven assumptions as a part of your case, then you have no right to invalidate my explanation for those events because I make assumptions about why scum have done things.

Isn't this what you were dinging me with earlier, because I made assumptions of your actions from a scum perspective?

In any case, I'm not getting much of anything useful out of the charter/Kerrigan back and forth. So unless either of you thinks you're convincing the other one or you think anyone else is being sold on this debate, please feel free to stop it.

Still re-reading, some thoughts and questions;

Thought one; at the moment I cannot figure out how TCC?Socrates/shovel/et al isn't town.

That leaves me with Cyberbob, charter, Kerrigan, and Michel as the suspects.

It looks blatantly and bizarrely obvious that they're lining up as either a Michel/Kerrigan scumpair or a charter/Cyberbob scumpair. This seems horribly too neat to be true, so I'll probably be embarrassed to have advanced this idea in the post game, but that's where I'm at.

@Michel - You have cleared shovel for the same reasons I have. You have also openly and extensively discussed how you feel SK is cleared. You then have continued with a belief that scum is pushing a mislynch on SK but that charter and Cyberbob really can't be scum together.

Why aren't you voting me then? I'm the obvious partner at that point.

[Thor665]

Ok, Thor, SPS. Please look at this utterly Smurf case Kerrigan is pushing on me. His points are total garbage. None of any of this even happened until I said I was suspicious of him, then he conjures up a case out of thin air. It's really obvious that his case is Smurfpoo.

I don't like Kerrigan's case on you particularly - but since I also find you one of the two scummiest players currently (you and Kerrigan - during the re-read CyberbobZorblag/Cyberbob has been sliding more towards town) I can't fault her, if town, for finding you scummy.

I agree you have the point with the timing of it.

I'm finished up re-reading Day 1 and Day 2 (not in that order oddly enough) and I want to re-read Day 3 as well. At that point I'm going to make a vote and it will be for one of you barring any magically marvelous insights in that re-read. I wish to look again at the pressure on me from Kerrigan and you that Day and I know Pie advanced a strong scum read on you/Cyber and a town read on Kerrigan that I want to look at again to see if any bakery laden brilliance comes through to me.

[Thor665]

Despite this, he doesn't vote me. Why? "I didn't feel like it." Why would a townie not feel like voting for someone they're certain is scum?

As an interesting aside - I explained how per Michel's expressed opinions I am the blatant scum partner to his charter/Cyberbob scum. Do you think it's scummy that Michel isn't voting for me?

As far as that aspect of your case on charter goes - what is the scum advantage to not voting you earlier after he expressed you as his major suspect? If we are in lylo, which I believe, he could afford to unvote and quick lynch for a win if anyone puts down enough suspect votes so it's not like there's any reason not to have a vote on whomever he wishes at any given point in the day.

Other then that a lot of your current debates with charter are based around some of the same stuff you were debating with me - of course I'm not buying into that as a case, I've already expressed that my play theory is different...except where now you're arguing from my standpoint sometimes. I'll note again this below point which I do feel shows some (I'll use the word but am not meaning it in a scummy sense at this point) basic hypocrisy in how you're debating theory of the game;

If you're going to accept unproven assumptions as a part of your case, then you have no right to invalidate my explanation for those events because I make assumptions about why scum have done things.

Isn't this what you were dinging me with earlier, because I made assumptions of your actions from a scum perspective?

You attacked my case as weak because I used assumptions. You then use assumptions in your defense and act shocked that others consider them weak. This is silly - assumptions are either functional methods to use within the game (which I believe) or they are not. Pick a side.

[Thor665]

EBWOP - I say we're in lylo, when in fact we're in mylo. Just because I'm a touch anal retentive.