Mini 956: The Quayside (Game Over)

[Goatrevolt]

Vote popsofctown

Were you happy or sad when you got a scum role in this game?

[Goatrevolt]

So you're telling us you got a scum role. Thanks for the honesty. This whole forum mafia thing is quite a bit easier than I thought it would be.

Oh, I'm sorry. In my excitement I must have failed to answer your question. I felt pretty good when I stopped beating my wife. I was liberated from some personal barriers that had kept me restricted from being a respected and informed member of society. My wife is much happier too, and we've really started to patch our marriage back together again.

[Goatrevolt]

I mean yeah, I don't have any reason to think he's scum,

Why this qualifier?

Because he's scum.

I'd vote goat but I'm a little uncool with the domestic violence schtick that I don't understand.

You're uncool with my actions, therefore you won't vote me?

A question for all; if you were scum, how would we tell?

As scum I tend to strategically lurk from time to time (close to deadlines, when I want to get town opinions before throwing out my own). I tend to be more aggressive and controlling as town, and more laid back with calmer, logical posts as scum.

Vote: Goatrevolt

Kill before end of page.

Page 2 and I'm still alive. Thug life. For those worried about spousal abuse I don't actually have a wife.

----------------------

On a more serious note, I think pops is scum. My vote wasn't random. Something about his first post rubbed me the wrong way. I felt like he was trying too hard to appear casual/joking and it came off as forced. Then he tried to joke when I called him scum, but it felt forced again, and hell, he didn't deny it.

Since then, there is his rampant use of qualifiers for each of his actions. There is "I mean, yeah, I don't have any reason to think he's scum" which Patrick called out, and then again the "But I hope I'm not omgussing" from his most recent post. The twilight bit felt forced as well. I haven't even taken into account him not bothering to even answer Patrick's question but instead throwing suspicion on him without backing. And he jumped off my wagon for no reason once it picked up, which is also interesting.

All of his posts suggest self-consciousness of the way he is coming off to the rest of the players. If he thought Patrick was scum, why wouldn't he just vote Patrick? Instead he throws suspicion on him but at the same time notes that it could be construed as OMGUS, which suggests that he is taking note of how others might perceive his actions.

Kill before the end of this page????

[Goatrevolt]

A question for all; if you were scum, how would we tell?

I <3 bussing.

No disputes here. The only time I've seen you as scum you bussed both of your other scum buddies.

[Goatrevolt]

I'm pretty sure pops was just demonstrating that I had asked him a loaded question but I decided to run with it as a joke. If it's a GD meme, I'm not aware of it.

No thoughts on pops, SC?

[Goatrevolt]

I mentioned omgussing because I was genuinely unsure of my own ability to respond to suspicions indicated towards me. Was it really silly to cast suspicion on me like that, or does it only seem silly because I know I'm not actually scum?

All Patrick did was ask you a question. His vote was on me. You "reacted" to his question by calling him suspicious for pointing the most baseless finger day 1. He didn't point a finger, he asked a question. Why didn't you bother to answer his question...something you still haven't done?

Answers the other question, why I didn't vote for him. I hear constantly from people in seemingly every game I play that I ought to be voting whoever I'm talking about, but I move my vote as I please. I'm actually somewhat slower with my vote as town than as scum, I'm trying to work on that (slowing down my voting when I get a scum pm, that is).

@Incognito: I think scum are more likely to take RVS seriously because there really on the average isn't anything there for the first few pages. Town sit around with the mentality "when something scummy happens, i'll move and accelerate the game".
Scum sit around with the mentality "when something happens, I'll move and accelerate the game". This is kind of a chunk of the universal tendency for scum to point fingers at something that isn't a valid tell, but it's a special case because scum are even more restless in the RVS stage, they can't even give thumbsup/thumbsdown to any real scumhunting.

These are both consistent. If you are more trigger happy as scum in the RVS, then you might be inclined to find scum to be naturally more trigger happy in the RVS. I think you're wrong, but that's not the point.

Here's one question I have, though. I have easily been the most aggressive player so far and you could conceivably consider me "restless in the RVS stage." Why haven't you gone after me?

@Goatrevolt: Are you still beating your wife is a universal meme, it's kind of old and outdated and dead now but my dad still likes it.

Ok. Nothing else in my post was worth addressing?

[Goatrevolt]

I don't really like Goatrevolt's certainty about popsofctown's alignment on this page, but I don't really see it as malicious at this point.

I'm not certain about his alignment, I'm just going after what I find most suspicious. Specifically what do you find bothersome about it? If not malicious, then what do you dislike?

SerialClergyman's post 35 stuck out to me too because it didn't really address some of the major things that have been brought up on this page. SC, any other thoughts on anyone else so far aside from me?

Agreed 100%. He read and responded to the portion of my post directed at him in 4 minutes time. That suggests he was "camping" the thread. If he was just checking in from the last time he had posted, he would have had to read like 10 posts from his last post and also type up a response to mine which would probably take longer than 4 minutes, and that's if he timed it perfectly too.

The part that bothers me most is that he didn't react at all to my 3 paragraphs on pops, only picking out the part that pertained to him and responding to it. Then 7 minutes later I asked him about his thoughts on pops and no further response.

[Goatrevolt]

On a more serious note, I think pops is scum. My vote wasn't random. Something about his first post rubbed me the wrong way. I felt like he was trying too hard to appear casual/joking and it came off as forced. Then he tried to joke when I called him scum, but it felt forced again, and hell, he didn't deny it.

You mean like how your wife beating joke was forced? RL D1 of D1 of an invitational (basically) is a tough crowd, and while I have reasons for looking at pops, it's not because he's a bad comedian.

Meh. Meh. I have reasons for looking at pops beyond him being "a bad comedian" as well. Why not bother to address that? You pulled out a small part of my post, said you don't buy it, said you have differing reasons to be suspicious of the same player I am, and then ignored the rest of my post where I also gave additional reasoning. Weird...

I didn't answer the question because I hate explaining jokes. Do you know anyone that likes explaining jokes?

Ummmm...what? The question was 'why did you tack the qualifier that you didn't believe I was scum onto your joke vote?' Considering that qualifier had nothing to do with the actual joke, I really don't buy this response at all.

Why did you care about making sure we knew that you were joking? What were you worried of happening?

[Goatrevolt]

But that's what started this. You made the second post of the game, and you've claimed that the vote in that post wasn't random. All you would have had to go on at that point was pops' bad joke. Additionally, the post you're getting on his case about now can also be read entirely as a bad joke. The "I don't know if he's scum" part is essential to set up the "but he beats his wife" part. The joke, as a continuation of the "do you still beat your wife?" method of identifying a loaded question, emphasizes the absurdity of basing a vote on anything other than a scum read. By extension, it accuses Goatrevolt's loaded question and vote of being absurd. It is thus more akin to Ecto's paraphrase of SC than it is to pops' later qualifications about Patrick-suspicion, which I certainly do find to be suspicious.

You're missing the point. You're putting undue emphasis on why I initially went after pops and ignoring any of my later reasons. Do you tend to go back to page 1 reasoning on day 3 and say "well that's what started this?"

THE QUALIFIER IS PART OF THE JOKE. Geez. Is this going to be another brickwall game? I don't think I can handle another brickwall game. I really don't.

I already explained how that clause is integral to the joke. That might also be why it, durhur, isn't separated by something like a period or semicolon.

Relax.

The clause isn't integral to the joke. The clause is integral to saving face in the off chance people don't realize it's a joke.

Unvote
Vote SerialClergyman
FoS: NabakovNabakov

[Goatrevolt]

Nab: Do you think OMGUS is a scum tell?

You're acting like I'm attempting to take apart your case piece by piece. Am I not allowed to say: "I'd like to pursue this point, but I don't like that point."?

No, that's fine. I just found it odd that you picked off the weakest part of my case and said it was bad but ignored the bulk, while pursuing the same player yourself for entirely different reasons.

@Incog: I've caught scum on the first few pages before, and I think there's a lot to be learned from early game interactions, but I'm fully aware of the strength of my arguments against pops. I think I learned a lot more being aggressive and surefooted about it than I would have pussyfooting around.

@Pops: What is that last post in response to?

[Goatrevolt]

Goat, the way you left the wagon looked to be as a result of Pops frustration response. I can see why you might back off pressing someone until they break. You said you know the strength of your arguments. Could you break it down for posterity? Thanks.

Yeah, it was somewhat based on his frustrated responses. I also think I got about as much out of that as was possible and I think SC is more likely scum right now so I made the swap.

I knew that my arguments weren't as strong as I was pushing them or making them out to be. I did legitimately find everything I brought up against pops suspicious, but I was pushing it as a stronger case than it really was. For page 1 day 1, I felt this was better than what I normally go on.

What are your current thoughts on SC and pops?

[Goatrevolt]

I don't see anything wrong with goat's attacks or choice of words.

My attacks and choice of words are saying that you are scum. No thoughts on what I have said about you and no answer to my question about your stance on pops?

[Goatrevolt]

@Pops: Ok, I'm less confused now. I had no clue you were talking about me. 56 is a response to 52 and 53 is a response to 51. I see your point, although I don't get why you continue to be so pissed when I'm not even voting you anymore.

On a more serious note, I think pops is scum. My vote wasn't random. Something about his first post rubbed me the wrong way. I felt like he was trying too hard to appear casual/joking and it came off as forced. Then he tried to joke when I called him scum, but it felt forced again, and hell, he didn't deny it.

I've heard worse justifications. I don't necessarily think you're scummy for this, but I don't really understand it. Why would scum need to appear "casual/joking"? I mean, I get the idea that you want to blend in, but do you mean like scum have a harder time appearing as though they're jovial and carefree?

Maybe it's just because I don't get this from pops' opening post at all. I don't think it's forced, and even if I thought that, I don't know if I would immediately jump to the conclusion that pops was scum. Not only do you do that, but you also immediately attempt to box him in. If anything, I see

your

aggression as over-the-top.

This is coming from someone who usually sees aggression as a positive, too.

I love how you say you've heard worse justification to preface 3 paragraphs talking about how bad you think my justifications are. It has nothing to do with scum needing to appear anything. Scum could do what Elmo did and plop a vote with nothing else, or they could do what Patrick did and plop a question and a vote or they could do what pops did with jokes and a vote. They don't really "need" to do any of those things.

The point is that I felt like pops was trying too hard to look like he was making natural jokes. His post (and then subsequent posts) just came off as fake sounding to me. It's not that he needed to make jokes to blend in, it's that he was making jokes and they didn't feel like confident, natural posts.

I'm really failing to see why what I did was problematic in any way. You wouldn't jump to the conclusion he was immediately scum and "box him in" but does that mean it was wrong for me to do so? How did I box him in, what does that mean, why is it a bad thing, was my over-the-top aggression anti-town, and if yes, then why?

Nab has earned my vote

Did you forget to vote or was this just a figure of speech?

I agree it's weird he didn't vote, although I'm wondering why you haven't voted either.

[Goatrevolt]

I love how you say you've heard worse justification to preface 3 paragraphs talking about how bad you think my justifications are.

Come on, Goat. Now you're just trying to start trouble, aren't you?

I was just saying I found it humorous, not that there was anything more to be found there.

It has nothing to do with scum needing to appear anything.

What are you talking about? You said like you felt his joke came off as forced, and, as a direct result of that, you voted him. You said your vote wasn't random. Logic dictates that your vote was a result of how you thought scum would appear.

I don't know if we're just arguing semantics here or if you're missing my point or what. Scum don't need to joke around, but that doesn't mean scum don't joke around. Your argument against my initial "case" on pops was "why would he need to do that as scum?" I'm saying that he didn't "need" to do that as scum, but it doesn't mean he didn't do that as scum.

Logic doesn't dictate your conclusion. I don't have a grand theory of scum appearing as jokesters in the random phase. I just thought that pops' specific post came off as really fake and so I pressured him on it to see what came from it.

How did I box him in, what does that mean, why is it a bad thing, was my over-the-top aggression anti-town, and if yes, then why?

You box him in by asking him a loaded question, and an obvious one at that. I feel as though you're the one, and this post is another good example, who is acting "unnatural" and fake sounding. Questions are great, but this seems over-the-top. You sound defensive, almost paranoid, of my criticism. You say that you felt pops was trying too hard to look natural, but in the same breath you say that your vote had nothing to do with how pops needed to appear. Huh? Is there really an argument here, or are you just playing Mr. Interrogator?

If you think I'm unnatural and fake sounding, then by all means have at it. I'm not paranoid of your criticism at all. As for defensive, sure, I am. You attacked my stance, what did you expect, me to ignore and not defend myself? Here you are again with this needing to appear thing. Pops didn't need to appear like that, but pops DID appear like that. Scum do things every game that they don't need to do, does that invalidate them as evidence?

I'm asking you questions because I want to gauge you. Here are a few more... You don't think my actions surrounding pops were scummy, but yet you're really attacking it nonetheless. You like aggressive play, but yet you find me "too aggressive" and are taking a sarcastic jab at my aggressiveness by calling me "Mr. Interrogator". In essence, I agree a lot with what Ecto said. Can you explain these? In both cases, your actions aren't matching up with your words.

[Goatrevolt]

@pops: what's a "brickwall game"? Who did you hope you weren't OMGUS-ing, or was it a statement to hope that you wouldn't OMGUS people in the future?

A brickwall game is a game where I have to argue with brickwalls that may or may not be named GoatRevolt.

Are you seriously still going on about this? If you consider me attacking you on page 1 and backing off you by page 3 "brickwalling" then I'd like to know what you call it when someone actually does tunnel the hell out of another player. My pressure against you was minor, and I backed off relatively soon, all things considered.

You've contributed essentially nothing to the game but whining about how I went after you, and have continued to contribute exactly that even after I stopped going after you. Literally the only comment you've made on any player about whether you believe them to be town or scum is your gut town read on Elmo for his single post, a vote with nothing else. Correction: You said Patrick was suspicious for pointing the finger early on, but no followup on that has occurred.

If anyone wants an example of something pops posted that looks really fake, here it is:

I modded you in that Open game that I created. Weak M.D.

Oh yes. We hypoclaimed as town in that game and it was very advantageous. It's always good to hypoclaim in games like that. To hypoclaim by twilight at least.
Twilight.

I hate that book, Twilight.

Vote: Twilight

.

Oh I got on such a rant.

As for this game, Patrick looks suspicious. Whoever starts pointing the most baseless fingers in the RVS looks fishy to me. But I hope I'm not omgussing.

The bolded part (not the twilight vote). Call me crazy, call me a brickwall, but that just feels off to me.

------------------------------------

@Pops: Ok, I'm less confused now. I had no clue you were talking about me. 56 is a response to 52 and 53 is a response to 51. I see your point, although I don't get why you continue to be so pissed when I'm not even voting you anymore.

Missed the unvote actually.

Oh you did, did you?

The clause isn't integral to the joke. The clause is integral to saving face in the off chance people don't realize it's a joke.

Unvote
Vote SerialClergyman
FoS: NabakovNabakov

This is the post where I unvoted. You'll notice that my unvote is directly below a part of the post that

you responded to

. Interesting, no?

[Goatrevolt]

Your argument against my initial "case" on pops was "why would he need to do that as scum?" I'm saying that he didn't "need" to do that as scum, but it doesn't mean he didn't do that as scum.

I don't have a grand theory of scum appearing as jokesters in the random phase. I just thought that pops' specific post came off as really fake and so I pressured him on it to see what came from it.

You put case in quotation marks as though you didn't sit there and say your vote was serious. Are you implying that you never considered pops to be scum or that you weren't making a case?

I did consider him to be scum. I was making a case. My vote was serious. I still consider him a decent shot at scum. I put case in quotation marks because I obviously pursued it harder than what it was truly worth to see what came of it.

So you don't know how scum would appear, but you know that pops appeared to be scum? But it wasn't because of his joke, but the way he delivered the joke?

Actually, this is pretty accurate . I don't know whether scum will joke, be serious, say nothing, etc. during the random phase. But that doesn't mean that I can't pressure anything or that I can't find anything of value in that phase. I don't know IF scum will choose to make jokes, but if I find that their jokes seem fake then I'll go after it. Make sense? In this case, I felt like pops was trying too hard to make a joke, and that his post seemed fake. When people seem fake or not genuine, then I will pressure it.

If you think I'm unnatural and fake sounding, then by all means have at it. I'm not paranoid of your criticism at all. As for defensive, sure, I am. You attacked my stance, what did you expect, me to ignore and not defend myself?

Don't take it out of the relative frame with which I made the statement, but yes, ironically, I would say that the forcefulness with which you pushed your case on pops was more fake than the fakeness argument you were pushing on pops.

That might be true. I was exaggerating my position, so to some extent it was "fake." Not fake as in I didn't believe what I was saying, but fake as in I was pushing it harder than I knew it was good for.

I was just a little surprised when I made an effort to give a neutral stance of, "I don't think I buy your argument, possibly because I don't understand it, but if I had to choose I would say it makes you seem like you're reaching", you were right there ready to fire back at me as though I had my sights on you.

I didn't think you had your sights on me, because you announced that you didn't. I wasn't paranoid, you weren't voting me and you stated that you weren't planning on it. Hypothetically, even if I were scum here, this wouldn't be something I would be paranoid about. Me firing back at people who criticize/attack me is pretty much a facet of my playstyle. When people attack me I like to try to figure out how honest they are in their attack and whether they truly believe it or not. I find it easier to get a read on players that way.

You agree with a lot of what Ecto said. Ecto thinks I'm being passive aggressive, and, I imagine, he is implying that I'm subtlely rooting for a Goat wagon. Do you agree with that?

Nope. I don't think you're rooting for a Goat wagon. I agreed with Ecto in that I think you are spending your time doing "busy work." What I mean by that is you've spent the bulk of your time going back and forth with me and yet you don't even believe me to be scum, or at least you aren't pushing for it.

[Goatrevolt]

Unvote
Vote popsofctown

[Goatrevolt]

There's still something wrong with this. Maybe I didn't use enough smileys, because I still contend that I didn't see it much of an "attack". I of course understand you asking questions and firing back at me, but the proportion, I thought, was off. In a way I can't blame you, because I guess it was the biggest chunk of text I had written in one setting, but the way you jump to the conclusion that you needed to be fending me off is off-putting.

I didn't jump to the conclusion that I needed to fend you off. I really don't understand your point of contention here. You wrote 3 paragraphs on me, and I addressed them. The idea that I somehow needed to fend you off is entirely your interpretation, and it's incorrect.

SerialClergyman: What is your stance on Nabakov?

[Goatrevolt]

I post fluff with both alignments now. I found out it's actually pretty fun.

Do you also post non-fluff or is that a relic of the past?

[Goatrevolt]

@Nab: I haven't found anything particularly scummy about any of SC's recent posts, at least nothing relevant now.

I was debating whether to keep my vote on SC or swap back to pops, but after pops decided to ignore me calling him out on a possible lie (but addressing the rest of the post, so I assume he read it), I'm feeling good about swapping back.

Iam: Can you explain your previous experience with RedCoyote? Your first post hinted at a history of you voting for him and right now you are.

To the following people who still haven't placed a non-random vote:

Incognito
NabakovNabakov
Jahudo
popsofctown
Patrick
McGriddle

If you had to vote someone right now, who would it be?

[Goatrevolt]

I waffled over having to deal with expected attacks over this next part, but I'll also reveal a second, personal layer of reasoning for my decision. When a player kicks out a starter case, you have two options. You can support their "case", or you can oppose what they had to say.
In this case, for me, who the player was that kicked off things was as important as what they had to say.
I have a problem with Goatrevolt. Not a personal problem, a game problem. He may have similiar recollections, maybe not.
I've played a number of games with Goat, and it seems we've gone head to head nearly every time. I've never known his alignment. Ever. I've never spent as much time waffling over someone's alignment. I remember having a vig shot that I wanted to use on him, but never could. Not because I didn't think he could be scum, but because

I had no clue

and so was forced to leave the judgement to others who felt they did know.
So I made a conscious decision to let him go head to head with other people instead and see if it makes a difference. It at least is allowing me to be more objective about the material. It also allows me to stay "chill".

Primarily I posted that to head off any "buddying" posts concerning Goat. This doesn't mean I'm not going to call him out when wrong, but you can expect a different treatment of Goat by me. Goat himself isn't going to like it and this could very well bring about the exact situation I intend to avoid. Ce 'est la vie. I plan to win, and this is my strategy for dealing with a player I've been unable to read in the past.

Hah! I wondered if that was coming into play at all. And actually I am doing the same thing with you. I've read you as scum (incorrectly, I believe) every single time I've played with you. We both know what happened in the last game .

I'm trying to make a conscious effort to remain more "chill" as well. I really don't want to get into the kind of back and forth we had last time around.

[Goatrevolt]

Unvote, Vote NabakovNabakov

RedCoyote is neutral/townish.
SerialClergyman is neutral/scummy.
Incognito is town.
NabakovNabakov is scum.
Jahudo is ??.
Popsofctown is neutral/scummy.
Iamusername is neutral/townish.
Elmo is town.
Patrick is neutral/townish.
Ectomancer I can't read worth a damn.
McGriddle is town.

[Goatrevolt]

Wouldn't be surprised if Serial or Pops or both are scum with Nab.

[Goatrevolt]

Unvote, Vote: NabakovNabakov

I want to see how many votes it takes for him to start acknowledging them.

It's 3 more .

[Goatrevolt]

I could actually go for a few more reasonless votes on the wagon.

I've been pretty sure Nab is scum since the point I FoS'd him but I wanted to wait it out and see how things progressed. At that point I didn't have much more than gut against him, which obviously wasn't going to convince anyone, as demonstrated by my pops case, and there was no real point in trying to push a case that had no legs against him.

One really key interaction I noted was the one between SerialClergyman and Nabakov. If Nabakov ends up as scum, I bet SC is as well. SC called out Nabakov, but didn't vote him in that post. I found that really odd at the time, and then when called out on it by Red Coyote, he votes for Red Coyote next, and never goes back to Nabakov, which I also found odd. When the Nabakov wagon picks up, SerialClergyman jumps on immediately. Distance, distance, distance! There is a strong chance the two are scum together.

I think Pops could be the 3rd. No content this game at all. I still find some of his early posting to be off, and then there is the thing with him claiming to not have known I unvoted, despite having responded to the sentence directly above my unvote. It's possible that he legitimately forgot or didn't notice, but it's definitely weird.

In addition, SerialClergyman ignored my pops case (he says he chose not to respond to it on purpose, but meh) and then after it became clear that it wasn't gaining any support, he "pops" in to say he doesn't find it that convincing and then does the whole Nab/RC thing. Nabakov tried to discredit part of my push against pops while also pushing pops himself for differing reasons, which is why I initially found him suspicious. As soon as the pops thing died out, Nabakov basically just kind of stopped putting any pressure on pops anymore.

Despite that, I'm not totally sold on pops being the 3rd.

I think RedCoyote is town, despite some skepticism over his play. This is mainly based on his interactions with other players, namely how his wagon and pressure aimed at him started up in opposition to the pressure I had on pops and opposed to Serial's "pressure" on Nabakov.

Incognito has felt town through and through.

Elmo has felt fairly town, and his interactions with Nabakov cement that if Nab is scum.

McGriddle has felt town as well. In direct opposition to Nabakov's push, I felt like his stance on pops was natural and honest.

I've picked up a few town tells from Iamusername, but I'm not sure how strong they are. Probably town if Nab is scum, though. 4th vote on the wagon for a good reason gives me a good feeling.

Patrick, not sure. Elmo thinks town and the two seem to have a history together. I've waffled some on it, but I've found his recent posts to be good, so he's not a huge suspect right now.

Ectomancer - Like I said, I can't read him at all. Might be able to peg him as scum based on virtue of process of elimination/his stances, but at this point it's hard to tell.

Jahudo - Unless he's decided to shed his busing meta, he's probably town if Nabakov is scum. Weak read, though.

[Goatrevolt]

Goat pretty genius. Current theory is that I ignored his case on a possible innocent to stick it to my scum mate.

1. "possible" innocent.
2. Your "stick it to my scum mate" involves calling him out for one thing, not voting, and never going back to it until the wagon on him appears, where you then decided it was time to vote him. You found him scummy enough to vote, but didn't vote and instead voted someone else. And then when I asked you about it, you said you weren't sold to Nab, but when the wagon sprung up you jumped aboard pretty quickly.
3. Even if pops is innocent, not joining a wagon on an innocent, especially one who is the popular suspect at the time is hardly a surprising scum move, especially when factoring in the prior timing concerns with how you handled the pops case.

[Goatrevolt]

In other words, he has twice posted a reply, ostensibly to answer that question, but his answers belonged to a different textbook.

Can you show me where both of these are?

As for Nab, I don't have time to post a case right now, but I'll try to get on that today or tonight. The general gist involves our interactions at the beginning of the game, his vote on McGriddle, interactions with Elmo, and attitude toward the wagon on him. The McGriddle vote felt like an attempt to frame a possibly scummy McGriddle as scum rather than a legitimate feeling that he was scum.

[Goatrevolt]

@Serial: why aren't you still voting RC? Explain your thought process in swapping from RC to Nabakov when you did. Your answer to #2 suggests suspicion of RC and then increased suspicion based on him trying to discredit your Ecto read. When I asked you how you felt about Nabakov, you said you weren't really sure on him. Somewhere in there Nabakov not only passed RC's suspicion but became suspicious enough to where you were fine with his lynch.

I'm not surprised by McGriddle's vote considering he had basically announced his intentions to do so already, and I agree with the idea that he'd probably try to come up with a reason based on the iso read as scum.

@Patrick: I'll look at Jahudo more closely later. You might be right. My thought is that he would bus earlier, but I need to analyze his stances with respect to the wagon closer.

[Goatrevolt]

Also, can you explain your thoughts on Patrick and why you now believe him to be town?

[Goatrevolt]

1. This shows your theory of the game is at least partially self-contradictory.

Can you explain this one as well?

[Goatrevolt]

Good responses. Your progression on Patrick matches my own, which makes me feel a bit better about you. I felt your question to Patrick earlier on in the game was your most pro-town post in that I was thinking the exact same thing about Patrick and it reflected genuine scum hunting. And I agree with your current read on him as well.

[Goatrevolt]

Yeah, I mentioned earlier that I needed to dedicate some time to looking over Jahudo, and putting together some reasons on Nabakov. I've got a headache destroying my brain right now, though, so now is not the time.

[Goatrevolt]

Out all of today and most of tomorrow.

[Goatrevolt]

Other less intelligent players in this thread do, in order to form a more perfect itinerary for the scum nightkills.

Worst argument ever. If you think the scum bother to use random townie's lists from early day 1 to decide on night kills, then you are wrong. Scum aren't stupid. They can figure out who is trusted and who isn't without requiring people to spell it out in lists. When people point out who they think are town and who they think are scum, there is more information to go off of. The game isn't just finding scum. Finding town is just as important.

Goatrevolt has the most posts. He just posts whatever he thinks. So surefooted.

Get over it.



The only points I really buy from pops case are the ones that reflect stuff I've brought up before. I didn't buy the word choice point at all. Serial's word choice in that scenario seemed pretty much exactly what pops was saying it should logically be, so...yeah.

The case doesn't really make me feel any better about pops. Or SerialClergyman for that matter. Not really worse either. I'll have to go over it in more detail later, but I'm not really reading much from it either way on either of them.

Between Nab, Jahudo, SC, and pops I think we'll find at least 2 scum.

Oh yeah, I read through Jahudo in ISO. I definitely think he could be scum. Furthermore I disagree with whoever said that pops/Jahudo don't fit as scum together. I think they definitely can. Jahudo jumping on him for a reason that wasn't very good long after the wagon died out doesn't suggest that pops is town if Jahudo is scum.

[Goatrevolt]

Elmo is town because he was the first to jump on Nabscum when Nab decided to push McGriddle. That's really unlikely to be busing.

RC: Get over it. You're not happy with me because I bothered to try to get a read on you after you said you didn't find me scummy but wrote 3 paragraphs on what was wrong with my case anyway. Look, I understand your mindset. Things seem bigger and badder when they involve you personally, but I asked you a few questions and you're blowing it way out of proportion into some sort of theory that I'm overdefense/paranoid and couldn't handle you tearing apart my case. Nobody else feels the same way as you do about this. I think that's an indicator that you're overreacting because it involves you personally and thus not giving it an honest appraisal. Considering I am called overdefensive in almost every game of mafia I've ever played and considering Nabakov already tried to tear apart that exact same aspect of my case earlier in the game, you were really jumping at nothing.

At any rate, my case on Nab will hopefully come tomorrow, and worst case Tuesday, so hang tight.

[Goatrevolt]

Does it really bother you that much that I'm not throwing myself at the marvelous Goatrevolt? You ask a lot of questions. Great. You're getting people riled up. Awesome. I'm not going to be browbeat into this mindset that Goat must be town because of all this activity, and I'm certainly not going to change my mind over a quote like, "Nobody else feels the same way as you do". That's the very definition of an appeal to popularity.

Yes it does. The marvelous Goatrevolt requires constant groveling.

Actually the reason I even bothered to respond to that is because you seem to be ignoring Nab or thinking of him as town at least partially because I'm on the wagon and you incorrectly believe me to be scum. I'm telling you that you're wrong about me and probably wrong about Nabakov as well.

As I recall, the last time you twisted my arm into reading you as a townie, you came up as scum, so this post definitely isn't helping things.

Last time you had actually legitimate points against me regarding my stance on Budja, my scum buddy, but you got too caught up in the point about me lurking, which I was able to fairly easily twist in my favor. Here, you don't really have anything legitimate at all, and I haven't twisted your arm either. I think you are the one who is paranoid that I'm scum.

I disagree with Goat on almost all of his methods, including constantly looking for a buddy of Nab before Nab's flip and the upcoming case, which will be done primarily to look like Goat has some substance rather than do anything convincing regarding Nab. In my experience, D1 is betterp layed on gut than on confirmation-biased paragraphs of language analysis. I'd prefer to see a lynch. Also - I'd lynch any one of Jahudo, Red and Nab, at least.

1. Why did you even bring this up at all? You randomly decide to just analyze my play...?
2. There's no problem in looking for a buddy for Nab. It's not relevant today, but I might not be around tomorrow, so I wanted to get out my notes on Nabakov interactions today. If he's town, then you can just ignore it all. If he's scum, then you can refer back to it. No downside, plenty of upside. Where's the disconnect?
3. The purpose of my casing Nabakov is to get the last 2 votes. It has nothing to do with me trying to save face by having a case. I'm pretty sure he's going to be scum, and in the case he's not, I could always go back and point out a case later if someone asked, so that's hardly a reason.



@Patrick: I'm pretty sure RedCoyote is town. I'd have to go back and find exactly what they were, but he dropped a few things that struck me as definite town tells.

[Goatrevolt]

I've been busy. I'm hoping I'll have time tomorrow night to make the case and I want to go over the last few pages in more depth as well.

I'm still really happy with my vote on Nab.

What's wrong or suspicious about me looking ahead or pointing out connections? It's not bad play. I find people I think are scum and I watch how others interact with them. Who cares if it doesn't mean anything to you now? Just ignore it then. If Nab is town, ignore it. If he's scum, then it's there.

SC: Can you respond to 263?

[Goatrevolt]

@Jahudo

Really? Yet another person decides to jump on Serial's "I don't like Goat pointing out connections" point?

Detrimental behavior? How could this possibly be considered detrimental. As I've said numerous times, at worst case it's unimportant information, but to say it's actually being a detriment to us is quite a ridiculous notion.

How can you say I'm setting up conditional suspicions to be independent ones? That's pure speculation on how I would play tomorrow in the chance that Nabakov isn't scum. Calling me suspicious because of how you believe I'm going to act if a conditional scenario is reached is pretty poor. You've got a lot of ground to cover if you want to convince me that you actually believe this to be true.

You don't seem to find Nabakov particularly scummy, but yet you're hesitant about me because it hinges on Nabakov's alignment? Tell me how that makes any sense.

As for Nabakov, it's half gut, half logic. I play a lot with my gut and then back it up with logic, at least early on. I thought Nabakov was scummy from the get-go when he tried to tear apart my pops case by attacking a small part of it he found wrong, but yet also agreeing that pops was suspicious and pushing different reasons on pops. It's just weird for someone to push suspicion on a player and yet try to refute arguments someone else is bringing up against the same player. Since then he did no scum hunting period until the McGriddle case, which wasn't scum hunting at all. That's when the wagon on him picked up, which he ignored, and as town I would expect him to be like "No guys, you're wrong, it's McGriddle not me" but instead he was more apologetic for his bad McGriddle case. I've still yet to see something from him that at all suggests he's legitimately looking for scum.

As for my pairing players and the way I handled the Nabakov case, here is my thought process. I thought there was a good chance Nabakov was scum from the moment I dropped a FoS on him way back when. I thought SerialClergyman was somewhat more likely, but then SC made a few posts in his defense that essentially changed my mind. I decided to go back to voting pops instead of Nabakov, because I didn't really have anything strong against Nab and I didn't want to try to push him based on just his odd stance on pops and my case against pops. I wanted to see how Nabakov would act and how others would act in relation to him without knowing I suspected him that strongly. I was not disappointed. The McGriddle case strengthened my notion that Nab was scum, and Elmo's reaction makes me believe fairly strongly that Elmo is town.

[Goatrevolt]

- The Goatrevolt stuff doesn't make much sense to me either. Namely, I don't understand why your Goatrevolt suspicions don't apply to people like SerialClergyman or Elmo who also didn't really delve into their reasoning right away and also began looking for possible ties back to NabNab too instead of fully elaborating on the NabNab case. Explain?

My take is that he saw a few other people jump on me for this same point and decided to get on it himself. Nobody has yet to provide any kind of reasoning as to why it's suspicious I act like this, only that it is. I think RedCoyote and Incognito both have town interactions with me in this regard while Jahudo and SerialClergyman don't. Incog says it's bad play but wonders why it's scummy. I disagree about bad play, but like that you are examining things beyond the surface. RedCoyote is expressing reasonable doubt, at least explained why he thinks it's anti-town, and I believe has biased read on me based on a previous game where I was scum (he has never seen me as town). Jahudo is suspicious because he went so far as to call it detrimental, as though me playing like this is actually hurting the town, which is laughable. Serial Clergyman is odd because completely out of the blue with no prompting he decided to just post his opinion of my play. I asked him to explain it and he didn't, so I've asked him again and I'm sure he will respond this time. I want to know his thought process behind writing that post.

I think there's a strong chance Jahudo is scum as well. And if I'm going to pick a 3rd right now, which I am, it's pops with an honorable mention to SerialClergyman.

@Patrick: I'm kind of undecided on SerialClergyman, regardless of how Nab ends up. There have been a few things he's done I've found town, and some things that have struck me as awkward/maybe scummy. I found his doubt on Nabakov based on McGriddle's vote to be genuine. I found him asking you for a solid stance to be good scum hunting. But then I have also found his early interactions with Nab to be scummy as well as I want to know what his thought process was behind randomly dissecting my playstyle.

I think Patrick and RedCoyote are both making genuine reads of my play. I am not playing anything like how I played in the invitational 5 game where I was scum, and I like how Patrick has acknowledged that. In the game I was scum with RedCoyote, we spent a lot of time in frustrating back and forth arguments where I felt like he was constantly misrepresenting me. Even though I was scum, he was attributing behavior or thoughts to my actions that weren't true, and I feel like a lot of the same thing has happened in this game. Our early game interaction is a prime example where he wrong attributed paranoia and "overdefensive" to a post I made, when in reality it was me trying to get a feel for RedCoyote. At any rate, we are interacting in a similar fashion this game, so I don't think it's odd for RedCoyote to feel the way he does.

RC: As for your take on my playstyle being anti-town, I disagree and I also think that you don't actually understand how I play. Me looking into the future and saying that I think X makes sense as scum with Y doesn't mean that I'm so sold to that idea and can never change my mind, just like you voting someone right now doesn't mean you're necessarily going to want to lynch them 5 pages from now. However, I like to make what I call "dynamic" reads, where I read players both on their own merits and how they fit into the game based on the big picture.

I draw the line when scum/townreads become dependant on certain flips to go in your favor.

I don't see how this is weird at all. Ties to dead scum is a huge, huge tool to use in finding townies and identifying scum. For example, I don't think my judgment that Elmo is town if Nabakov is scum is weird at all. Elmo was the first to jump on Nabakov with a vote directly after Nabakov made a post I found extremely suspicious. It's rare that a scum buddy is going to be the first to jump on something like that, and much more likely that a scum-Elmo would wait and see how others perceived scum-Nab's McGriddle vote before making a move.

My playstyle has been very successful for me. I've successfully avoided lynching town players who have been scummy simply because I've noticed that they are unlikely to be scum with someone I find even more suspicious, etc. I think evaluating players purely in a vacuum without respect to the game as a whole or their interactions with everyone as a whole is sub-optimal.

[Goatrevolt]

I'm not buying that push against SC.

[Goatrevolt]

Townies and scum show as vanilla, everyone else shows as their role.

What about scum with a role?

Now that I've revealed it, it's pretty much worthless, as the only really useful thing I would think to do with it is catch scum in a lie.

And this is no longer possible? I don't see how a revealed role cop is "worthless".

[Goatrevolt]

That claim doesn't change my mind, and I don't like how Nabakov is trying to sell a role cop short as being worthless now that it's claimed. The fact that he seems unable to see the town value in a role like that suggests to me that he isn't town. If I were a town role cop, the first way I would think to use my role is to try to catch scum roles with it, and the 2nd way would be to verify claims other people have made. Claiming wouldn't make either of those potential ways to use the role worthless.

It's clear Nabakov hasn't thought of the role in terms of rooting out scum power, based on his statement that scum show up as vanilla (all scum, even those with roles? Doubt it) and the insinuation that it's worthless now because it's primary purpose of catching fake claims is no longer easy. To me, checking a suspicious player in hopes of hearing something back like "godfather" or "roleblocker" would be the obvious night 1 use of the role from a town perspective, but he doesn't seem to even consider that.

[Goatrevolt]

Huh, I'm getting pretty much the exact opposite. I disagree with a lot of what he's saying, but I'm getting a good gut feeling from him.

Exactly my stance on Red. I don't think I've agreed with a single thing he's said all game, but I also don't think any of his stances have been scummy. Elmo is one of my strongest town reads, he's wrong about me, and he's most likely wrong about Nabakov as well, but I'm not really seeing scummy motives behind these actions.

I will say that I'm done arguing with Red under the current context. It's pissing me off and is completely pointless to boot. If you want to make a case suggesting that I'm scum then be my guest. But if you're going to continually whine about how "popular" I am and how you don't agree with my playstyle, then I'm just going to ignore it. You don't seem to really think I'm that scummy, just dislike how I've played and my status among the town (which you are greatly overstating), which is pretty freaking stupid. Get. Over. It. As for my stance on Elmo, if I'm fairly certain someone is scum, I'm not going to ignore that information in evaluating other players. If for some reason I change my mind and no longer believe that player to be scum, then my reads on other players will shift accordingly. If I'm 80% certain A is scum, and 60% certain B is scum, but B makes no sense as scum with A, then I'm not going to want to lynch B. But if something happens that makes me reconsider A as town, then I may be willing to lynch B after that point. I don't see this as being ridiculous or a bad playstyle. I've found it to be successful. Generally this doesn't play a big factor into how I read my main suspect, but it does play a factor into how I read other players in relation to my guess that my main suspect is scum, if that makes sense.

Also, if NabNab really is scum, I could see this as being a potential slip:

Townies and scum show as vanilla, everyone else shows as their role. Now that I've revealed it, it's pretty much worthless, as the only really useful thing I would think to do with it is catch scum in a lie.

As Goatrevolt pointed out, a Rolecop has the ability to tell the user if a given person has a power role EVEN IF the person investigated is scum; it just won't show the person's alignment. If NabNab is the scum team's sole PR, he might have been thinking about the results he might have gotten on his potential buddies rather than thinking about how his role might look in a different game-state from what we might have here.

Bingo. Exactly the point I was going for, but worded much better.

I liked Iam's case on pops, and I still find Jahudo suspect as well. I wouldn't be surprised if the two are just distancing from each other. I'm not sure how to read their interactions with Nabakov. Both have called him scummy at various points but neither have bothered to get on the wagon at any point. My read on it right now is unwillingness to lynch the scum buddy with the powerful role.

[Goatrevolt]

The push to lynch Elmo is really weak. Have any of you ever played with Elmo before? Pops isn't a bad lynch, though.

[Goatrevolt]

I've never used my "popularity" as a justification for you to get in line. I was simply trying to show you your biased view of my play because not a single other person in the game held the same viewpoint you did about something that directly pertained to you. The point I was making is that you were overreacting to how I handled you because it directly related to you personally (emotionally invested) while the rest of the game from an outside perspective didn't see it the same way.

I hit scum roughly 50% of the time on day 1. Maybe even higher, but I would need to actually check stats on that. I don't buy into it being dumb luck or a crapshoot, and I still don't really care whether you like my playstyle or not, as you continue to show that you don't. I'm only as sure as I feel reasonable to be sure about my reads. It's no different than anyone else, I just play with connections and interactions in mind. Again, you are entirely trying to lecture me for something you think is bad play. If you think I'm scum, have at it, but you're getting nowhere by telling me you don't like how I play.

[Goatrevolt]

I don't agree with you, and I further contend that you're trying to marginalize me in an attempt to keep this majority of yours intact. The mindset you're coming from is what speaks to me. Nobody agrees with my interpretation of you because I am biased against you. I'm biased against you because nobody agrees with my interpretation of you. Elmo is your strongest townread because NabNab is scum. NabNab is scum because Elmo is your biggest townread. There's a strong chance Jahudo is scum, so NabNab is scum. NabNab is scum, so there's a strong chance Jahudo is scum.

WRONG. When are you going to stop misrepresenting me?

I have explained, over and over and over again that my read on Elmo is based on my read of Nabakov. What you're doing is INCORRECTLY saying that my read of Nabakov is based on my read of ELMO when I've explicitly said infinite times that IT'S NOT. What the **** do you not get about this? It's not difficult. I find someone who I think is scum, Nabakov, and I base my reads on the rest of the game PARTIALLY on my read of Nabakov. This is not a difficult concept. If you continue to come at me with your wrong and ignorant version of my playstyle then I'm going to seriously consider policy lynching you for being a liability.

What's that? Yes, that's right? Two can play at that game, dude. If my playstyle is such a liability to town, then I can certainly say your reading comprehension is a liability, because you are completely unable to read anything I've wrote in a way that isn't twisted.

CAN WE PLEASE LYNCH NABAKOV? It's clear he's going to be lynched, and he has no interest in doing anything pro-town at all before the end of the day. The way this wagon is struggling to finish, and the lack of care Nabakov has shown this entire game to helping the town makes me convinced we're going to hit scum.

Pops is also scum. I've already elaborated on the Pops/Nabakov interaction earlier in the day, and basically he's been pinging my gut over and over with things he's said. I know that doesn't mean jack to anyone else, but it's there.

Well it's kind of obvious that the way Goatrevolt commented on Elmo's alignment was totally out of line, and scummy too (If Nab flips scum, it's clearly the certainty tip. Even if he flips town, I think it still could be a certainty slip, because a townie would say Elmo is probtown and be unsure about his Nabkov read in the first place, it's more conceivable for scum to totally reverse the statement on Elmo's alignment rather than move it to the correct level of certainty. Gosh, I cannot be succinct today)

This is one of the scummiest things I've read today.

1. It's out of line for me to say I read Elmo as town? Hilarious. Of course it's not out of line.

2. If Nabakov is scum, then I'm scum because I was "certain" about it. If Nabakov is town then I'm still scum because I was "certain" about something that was wrong. Yeah...not buying that.

3. Correct level of certainty? HAH. I didn't realize there were levels of certainty we were allowed to have. Excuse me for having exceeded the acceptable boundaries. Won't happen again, man! You can count on me!

I love how pops jumps on me for my stance on Elmo after others have expressed disagreement with it, and he takes it a step further by attributing ridiculous tells to it that don't exist.

It's quite reminiscent of how Jahudo decided to attack me earlier! --Cue RC coming in and saying how me defending myself here is me trying to appeal to my popularity and discrediting pops.-- Bring it on Red. I've gotten over my rage at your last post and I'm ready to dance.

[Goatrevolt]

I was reading Patrick's hammer post during the night, not entirely settled with it.

Patrick is dead... ??????????????????????

FoS Ectomancer

I'm going to read over Pops/Jahudo and now Ectomancer.

[Goatrevolt]

He says he's not settled with Patrick's hammer vote post. That's fine, except Patrick is dead. Who doesn't check to see who died during the night before posting the next day?

[Goatrevolt]

Probably. What townie doesn't check to make sure they didn't die before posting the next day? In doing so he would see Patrick is dead. Assuming he did that, why would he then say Patrick's hammer post was unsettling?

[Goatrevolt]

I could be misinterpreting it. It wouldn't be the first time in our illustrious history. But yeah I'd like to see a response.

[Goatrevolt]

Alrighty. I figured that might be the explanation after Incognito made his post.

Vote Pops

In response to 385: I am allowed to be as certain as I want without mod confirmation. And saying something is "really unlikely" based on a conditional event isn't exactly a crazy amount of certainty either.

[Goatrevolt]

Hey RedCoyote, why are you using the interaction between me and pops to suggest that we're scum? I thought you didn't use interactions. BUSTED! Or, do you find us both scummy individually and believe that our interactions don't prevent us from being scum together? If the latter is true, then congratulations. You now understand how I play the game of mafia, because you are playing the exact same way I do. Maybe if you bothered to read any of my posts without trying to find ridiculous interpretations that don't exist, you would understand how I play the game and not misrepresent me over and over and over again.

Anyway...now that I got that out of my system. There's a huge ass difference between busing and going out of your way to make your scum buddy a suspect when he wasn't one and continuing to put pressure on him when it isn't necessary. What is the likelihood a scum buddy comes into the thread and jumps on Pops for his random vote and continues to pressure him for the first 4-5 pages? It's very unlikely. 99 times out of 100 a scum buddy places a random vote of their own instead. That 1 time is almost always a complete noob who thinks that busing is necessary as scum, and doesn't get how to do it properly. The only way that happens is if the scum buddy decided before the game they were going to bus pops. I'm going to call on the great god of meta and show you that in the 7 games I've been scum on this site, 4 of them were perfect scum wins with no scum casualties and I bused 1 scum buddy in each of the other 3 games, all 3 times because the scum buddy was caught based on a role or roleclaim. So yes, your argument is ridiculous, and even though I find pops scummy, he's 100% right in pointing out how ridiculous your argument is.

I'm in the process of writing an answer for your other post.

[Goatrevolt]

Anyways, I don't have much of an issue with the pops wagon right now, but I need to do something that I should've done a long time ago.

Vote: Goatrevolt

Ahhhhh, the relief. It's like taking that swig of pepto when you've got stomach cramps; Goat is my stomach cramp. XD

Why didn't you vote me yesterday? Interactions mean nothing to you, so it's not like you were waiting on Nabakov to evaluate me. After he flipped town you wasted no time jumping on me, whereas yesterday you beat around the bush all day and never got on board.

I like the pops wagon, and I'd say I have a scumread on him at this point. I don't like your getting on it, because it's the same nonsense arguments you're using to respond to me.

I haven't given my reasons for being on the pops wagon yet. But yes, I expect that anything I present shall be considered nonsense.

Look, I don't expect you to up and do a 180 with your entire take on the game. Here's the kicker, you're the one who made a big deal over the fact that, "if NabNab flips town, ignore my previous reads". Yet here you are, Ecto is suspect, pops is suspect, Elmo's vote isn't suspect. The only thing missing from that was a swipe at Jahudo, but you're too clever to make it that obvious.

Clearly you have reading comprehension issues. Go back and find the quote where I say I will ignore my previous reads. Do you mean where I say to ignore my read that pops fits with Nabakov or that SerialClergyman fits with Nabakov? Those I have ignored. I'm certainly ignoring any of my reads that were based around Nabakov's alignment, but I'm not throwing everything in and starting fresh.

I don't remember ever calling Ecto scum yesterday, so that's new, although at this point I realize I was misinterpreting so I've dropped that. I never said Elmo's vote on Jahudo wasn't suspect, I just didn't jump on it either. Lack of attack is not the same as defense, and you know that. I missed a swipe at Jahudo, but I still find him suspicious. So there you go, add that to the tally. I think Pops/Jahudo could easily be scum distancing from each other.

At any rate, the point is that you're misrepresenting me again. It's not even worth arguing with you because I know it's not going to get anywhere. You will misrepresent every single thing I say, as you have done in every game I've played with you. You take something I say, like "ignore any of my reads that are based on Nabakov being scum" and take it out of context and apply it as "ignore all of my reads' which is clearly not what I meant. And clearly me pointing this out is just more appeal to popularity, or some other argument you're going to further misrepresent to keep going at me. It's a never ending cycle.

And I knew this would happen, you know. I knew you'd end up just ignoring NabNab's town flip and going down the same path you were going down. I'm not saying all of your reads are wrong, that's besides the point (As a matter of fact, pops/Goat sounds like a pretty good team to me). I'm saying your rationale for getting there fraudulent. I'm ready for you to deny this too, because I think I've got the ammo to back it up.

You knew Nabakov would be town? I thought you found his claim suspicious. I guess not.... I answered the rest of this above. My reads that were based on Nabakov are now voided, but any other reads I have picked up on the game are still legitimate.

Pops/Goat team is ridiculous. Obviously me saying this just means I'm trying to manipulate you away from believing it, thus furthering your mindset that this is true, but I'll say it anyway. Actually, pops said it already. There is busing and there is no going out of your way to attack a scum buddy for no reason. I know you don't care about interactions, but you probably should, because they are a strong tool for catching scum. And that doesn't even take into account how I rarely bus as scum, and only bus when I feel it's necessary. In the 7 games I've won as scum here, I've bused 3 scum buddies total, and all 3 of them were busted by roles or were counterclaimed on a role claim. The most busiest bus I've had was when I jumped on Budja in the game we were in together, but even there I tried to get FHQ lynched instead (which you rightfully called me on).

Here is an explanation of how I play, again. I've said this before, but I don't think you get it. Step 1: I find people who I think are suspicious. Step 2: I watch how other people interact with those suspicious players. Step 3: I base my reads on players partially on how they interact with the suspicious players. My read on the suspicious players is based on their own actions. What this translates into is really not that different from how other people play. The main difference is that I'm unwilling to lynch people who don't make sense as scum with my main scum suspect even if they are suspicious on their own right. I think if you boil it down, that's about the only real difference in how I play from how most people play. A lot of things that people get really worked up over were just basically notes for day 2 in the case I was right about Nabakov. That's nothing new. A lot of people do that. As town I always try to make sure I give out reads before the end of the day in case I die. In this game I just decided to do it earlier. I didn't really have a reason it was just on my mind so I pointed it out.

http://www.mafiascum.net/forum/viewtopic.php?t=10447

That game is an example of a successful use of my playstyle. In that game, I found Zilla to be the most suspicious player (I also went through the same crap as I have in this game with people harassing me for playstyle, but that's nothing new). I found BeyondBirthday and Panzer to both be suspicious as well. However, based on interactions between the 3, I was able to determine that there was really no chance of BB and Panzer being scum with Zilla. Both BB and Panzer were within 1 vote of being lynched on multiple occasions, but I argued the town away from lynching them, because I didn't believe them to be scum based on my read of Zilla as scum and the interactions between them. I was correct, Zilla was scum, and BB and Panzer were both town. Had I approached the game from the perspective most people do, then I would have let the town lynch BB or Panzer without a fight, because they were suspicious on their own accord, so why would I defend them? Instead, I pushed to save them and get out Zilla instead based on interactions. We ended up lynching someone else entirely (who was scum, who I called as being the most likely scum buddy to Zilla), but still.

In that game people harassed me over and over again to not base my reads of other players on my read of Zilla, but I frankly don't think it makes any sense to NOT do that. If I'm convinced X is scum, why would I ever think someone else is scum who doesn't make sense with X? That's illogical.

What do you find fraudulent about my rationale this game? Is it that I found Elmo town because I thought Nabakov was scum? Had Nabakov been scum, I would still be convinced Elmo is town. Now that Nabakov was town, Elmo is fairly neutral for me. I no longer find him town based on that, but I also don't find him particularly scummy on his own accord. You mistakenly assume that since I didn't call out Elmo for voting Jahudo that I think he's town, which is dumb. I've let people I think are scum vote someone without bothering to call them out...big deal. I am interested to see what Ectomancer has to say, considering Ecto suggested he knows how Elmo plays. With that being said, I am fairly neutral on Ectomancer, so I'm not rushing to join him on Elmo based on his unsupported word. The other person pushing Elmo is you, and I know firsthand that you are prone to misrepresentation and reading into things that don't actually exist, so I'm not exactly eager to follow your lead.

Do you think you can handle that, big guy? Are you still going to threaten me with a policy lynch if I don't tow the line?

Hahahahaha. The fact that you are taking that as a legitimate threat pretty much convinces me that there is no value in arguing with you at all. Come on man. I said that to prove a point, I wasn't seriously advocating that position.

[Goatrevolt]

Unvote

[Goatrevolt]

RC: After I saw that Nab was town I knew I was going to get shit from you today. I have no clue what you mean by "came in all prepared for you" or why it's a big deal.

I'm both put off by the speed of the pops wagon, some of the later votes on said wagon, and I also agree with pops point that Red has avoided taking a stance again on the popular wagons of Jahudo/Pops just like he skirted around Nabakov yesterday.

I'm starting to doubt my town read of RC and doubt my scum read of pops. Serial's vote on pops struck me as off, but I can't put my finger on why exactly.

I'm going to reread day 1. Don't put anyone to claim range in the meantime. Thanks.

[Goatrevolt]

SC: Did you read my huge response to RedCoyote? I explained what reads of mine have changed based on Nabakov's town reveal. You attribute a lack of reversal of stances to be the same as a lack of change of stances, which isn't true.

Ectomancer: You want to lynch pops to maybe get a read on me? Missing is any reason why you think pops is scum, just that if he's scum then I look town by association. You draw the conclusion that one of me/pops is scum with no underlying logic to make that conclusion with and then suggest that it's not me so it must be pops. Why must one of us be scum?

SC: Top 3 suspects and why?

[Goatrevolt]

Elmo, why do you think Red is town?

[Goatrevolt]

It doesn't seem logical to paint him as shying away from the spotlight and not giving his opinions on the wagons when he just made a bold, ballsy case about someone he knew would backlash against him (and probably draw others as well). As well as not being an easy target, you also aren't an easy lynch, he could hardly have expected getting overwhelming support for his case.

I've hardly backlashed against Red. I am annoyed by him and I feel like he isn't bothering to try to get a read on my alignment but is rather just picking at anything I say and trying to manufacture scumminess that doesn't exist. If he's town, he's already convinced himself that I'm scum and is tunneling based on a game we played together that was probably a year ago or more where I was scum and I convinced him off of my case. The part I don't get is he's calling my playstyle out as scummy despite me not using that playstyle as scum in that game and him having never seen me actually play as town. He takes me defending myself or trying to convince him that he's wrong about me to be me as scum trying to manipulate him off of my case, but he fails to see the possibility that I'm town trying to defend myself from incorrect accusations.

I actually don't usually care if people harass me over my playstyle that much, but RedCoyote is pissing me off to no end because of the repeat misrepresentation and confirmation bias he is displaying.

The part that bothers me about RedCoyote is that he pushed me all day yesterday but never bit on my wagon and then today he starts out strong on it after Nabakov ends up being town and I get the "I told you so" treatment, despite his stance on Nabakov post claim being in favor of the lynch. Why didn't he jump on me yesterday? I just feel like he set me up. While I'm not likely to get lynched and I'm a hard player to lynch, I still tend attract scum on my wagon more frequently than town based on unconventional play, aggressive play, or by holding unpopular stances. Scum love to jump on that kind of stuff, and I'm bothered by RedCoyote's continued insistence that my playstyle is wrong, that wrong is scummy, and his unwillingness to assess my play with an unbiased look.

Meh, I am struggling to get a read on you. There are posts like your last one that make me think you're town and then posts like the previous one that make me think you're scum.

My views really haven't changed that much, but all views of mine that were based on Nabakov being scum are now void. You all attributed far too much of my opinion that SC and pops were scummy to my pairing of them with Nabakov, so just because Nab was town doesn't mean I'm just going to basically throw that away. I'd like both you and RC to explain how you expected my views to change and how they haven't changed based on your expectations. Is there a line of how much my views were supposed to change and I didn't quite make it there? I want specifics. Which specific stances did you expect to change and yet they didn't? Generic "your views didn't change enough" is BS, but a "I expected you to take X stance on Y after Nab was town but you didn't" might be valid.

[Goatrevolt]

I will say that Patrick's kill makes my read of Incognito as town less sure, and strengthens the case against Jahudo as well. I tried to read some of Patrick's posts today but got disinterested and didn't finish.

Does anyone else find Ecto's vote on pops weird?

[Goatrevolt]

Even though this question is rhetorical, it's so steeped in WIFOM that it's useless to anyone. I'm not about to sit here and have a WIFOM debate (because I've learned, through experience, that it isn't a good scumtell), but I think we can at least agree that you can't use WIFOM to make a townie argument, right?

I guess this would be the best place to state that I hate the term WIFOM and I think it's done far more harm than good for the game of mafia. I believe very few things are WIFOM and this specific example is something that I don't believe can be correctly called WIFOM. The only time I've seen WIFOM be used in a somewhat correct manner is when it pertains to gaming the mod, and sometimes you can game the mod fairly accurately, so it's not even always right there.

In this case, you're trying to say a statement of the form "two scum buddies wouldn't act like ______ to each other" is WIFOM and should be discarded. However, isn't answering these types of questions the entire point of the game? WIFOM pretty much says "we can't know how scum would or wouldn't act" but the fact is we can know that and we have experience and statistics and all other kinds of metrics to know that. If we couldn't figure out how scum would or wouldn't act we would never catch scum.

This isn't to say scum could never act toward each other like me and pops did, but to write if off as WIFOM is folly. I bet if you looked at every time one player jumped on another player early in a mafia game, you'd find an abysmally small result set of scum on scum. You could say it's WIFOM, but wouldn't looking at historical precedent and trying to make a case off of that one way of trying to figure it out? And wouldn't ways to figure it out invalidate the idea that it's WIFOM in the first place?

I actually think it would be a good strategy for scum to go at each other's throats right out the starting gate. Given that early wagons never amount to anything outside of that occasional Newbie Game, the scum would be comfortable in the fact that they're getting some early distancing in with no fear of repercussion.

Perhaps. I could see it being a good strategy. Just because something could possibly be a good strategy doesn't mean it was a strategy that was used, though. I don't think you are looking into this from the right perspective. You think pops is scum and I am scum individually, so you want us to be able to be scum buddies together, so you try to find to make it work. It's like you're starting from the conclusion that we are both scum together and trying to go back and prove how it could be possible, rather than starting from an unbiased perspective and analyzing if it really is a likely possibility.

For one, I saw a better candidate in Elmo. Secondly, NabNab's flip has less to do with this vote then you're assuming here (although I will admit if we had a scum flip I would've naturally had to rethink my suspicion of you). Thirdly, I made it very clear yesterday that I thought I had no chance in a Goat wagon yesterday, given the majority of players who saw you as town. Yesterday you damned me for coming after you against what was "popular", and today you're criticizing me for not coming after you hard enough then?

What changed to make me a stronger candidate for scum than Elmo?

You are putting so much emphasis in this "I damned you for coming after me because it wasn't popular" notion you've got stuck in your head even though it's not true. There was only one time where I said anything like that at all, and you are misinterpreting that statement as I have explained in the past. I never said anything like "everyone thinks I'm town so you should too" as you seem to believe. What I did try to say was something akin to "you are overstating the importance of argument X because it personally relates to you. My evidence for this is how you are making a huge deal out of it while nobody else even noted it."

I haven't given my reasons for being on the pops wagon yet.

That's not true. You said you voted him because of his interpretation in post 385. Are you trying to back away from this?

No, I never said that. You assumed that, although I can see how you could draw that assumption. I voted him, and in the same post pointed out something that I wanted to respond to yesterday but didn't have a chance to before the end of the day.

I voted pops because a lot of his votes and actions felt forced and not genuine from yesterday. I decided to unvote, though, because I realized that I needed to read over day 1 again and play this game on more than just my gut, since that obviously failed on Nabakov. At this point I'm also not sure what to make of the wagon on him. My take is that if pops is scum he's being bussed, and if pops is town then he's probably being scum-pushed away from the Jahudo wagon.

Here's the kicker, you're the one who made a big deal over the fact that, "if NabNab flips town, ignore my previous reads".

Go back and find the quote where I say I will ignore my previous reads.

2. There's no problem in looking for a buddy for Nab. It's not relevant today, but I might not be around tomorrow, so I wanted to get out my notes on

Nabakov interactions today.

If he's town, then you can just ignore it all.

(emphasis added)

Check out the orange part. When I said ignore it all I was referring to Nabakov interactions, not the totality of my reads on the game. This is also a prime example of how I feel like you misrepresent me. So many of my comments you take out of their intended contexts or take to mean something they don't actually mean and use it as fuel against me.

I never said Elmo's vote on Jahudo wasn't suspect, I just didn't jump on it either. Lack of attack is not the same as defense, and you know that.

Point taken. It still is or isn't suspect though, and you not bringing it up implies that you're comfortable enough not to ask about it.

Yes. I was comfortable enough not to ask about it. To some extent you are right about this and to some extent you're wrong. You're right in that I didn't jump on Elmo and thus didn't find his vote particularly suspect, because if I had I would have attacked him over it. You're wrong in attributing that to a town read on Elmo.

Cry me a river, Goat. If this is the attitude you're going to take, then I'll just hit you up for pathos too. I mean, news flash, I think you're scum, big guy. I'm going to engage you. I'm sorry if you don't think it's worth it, but I don't think you've done a good enough job convincing me you are town. I think you've saddled us with circular arguments, appeals to popularity, and fradulent, concocted rationale behind your reads in the game.

I don't think there is any way I can convince you I'm town. You read my posts with a biased perspective. I've pointed out a few times in this post already where you've completely taken things out of context or misinterpreted the real meaning behind something I said. It's not worth it for me to argue with you because I know it's not going to get anywhere. You've convinced yourself I'm scum, and you read all of my posts as if I am already scum, so what is the point?

And yes, I continue to debate with you...I don't even know why.

Now who's misrepresenting? I said I knew it would happen that you would ignore NabNab's flip. I didn't know what alignment NabNab was.

I wasn't really being serious with that. I am resorting to sarcasm as an outlet for frustration.

Do you deny, as pops does, that your scumpops read wasn't based in large part on his ties with NabNab?

None of my scum reads on players day 1 were based on Nabakov, just town reads. I hashed it out with pops time and time again over day 1. I thought he did make sense with Nabakov, but I found him suspicious before I jumped on the Nab wagon and found him suspicious at the end of the day for reasons unrelated to Nabakov.

Before you go back and find a post where I point out how I think Pops makes sense as scum with Nabakov, allow me to explain myself. Nabakov was the leading lynch candidate, and my top scum suspect. Pointing out how other people I find suspicious makes sense as scum with him doesn't mean that I found those people suspicious BECAUSE of their interactions with Nabakov. I believe this is one of our main disconnects. In reality, I found them suspicious and my suspicious of them didn't conflict with my read on Nab.

There is a huge difference between the two, and even though I keep trying to explain this to you I don't think you get it yet, or maybe you do but think I'm lying to you or something. At any rate, what you believe is that I found pops scummy because of Nabakov. What is true is that I found pops scummy and thought he made sense as a scum buddy to Nabakov.

Let's say the Nabakov wagon died, and we started to push a pops wagon and I jumped on board. Connections to Nabakov would not be a reason for me to be on that wagon. Maybe you don't understand that, or think that I would use that as a reason to push pops before seeing Nabakov's alignment, but that isn't true. The only reason I ever called any of that out was specifically for day 2.

Exactly what I've shown. You made a big show of connecting pops to NabNab yesterday, the team was either NabNab, Jahudo, and pops/SC, right?

YOU made a big deal of this connection, not me. I pointed it out for day 2 in the case Nab was scum. That's not really that ridiculous of behavior. In Patrick's last post of the day he mentioned suspicions of Jahudo and related them to Nabakov's alignment. That's essentially what I did as well. I just did it early enough in the day that I guess everyone found it absurd.

Jahudo is still scum today, pops is still scum today, and SC is still suspicious today, even though the primary reason, that you gave multiple times, was that pops/Jahudo looked like scum when paired with NabNab.

That wasn't my primary reason on any of them. I agreed with whoever told me to go back and look at Jahudo's posts that he was suspicious. I have played with Jahudo as both town and scum and when I read him in ISO it felt more like Jahudo-scum than Jahudo town. When Jahudo jumped on me for something that 3 other people had already jumped on me for but yet made it out to be a far bigger deal than it really was, I thought that was extremely suspicious. He was exaggerating how grievous my actions were, and then when I called him on it, he gave it up and never went back to it.

As for pops and SC, my reasons are fairly well documented within the thread. I called out SC numerous times on day 1. While I paired him as scum with Nab, my reasons for finding him suspicious were a lot of various posts that had nothing to do with Nab. As for pops, I had a lot of different things I jumped on pops for during the day.

Maybe I need to read back through my own post history and see where you are getting this from, because I don't really understand where you're coming from when you think that all of my reasons for finding people suspicious were based on Nabakov.

With NabNab's flip, surely you we can all "ignore your reads", as you instructed us to do, only to find that you're still content with calling pops and Jahudo out, you don't have an issue with Elmo, and Ecto, who you suspected yesterday, is still suspect today.

I don't remember calling Ecto out yesterday, although I've found him to be off and on suspicious all game. I explained the "ignore your reads" part above. You took that out context. It was clear I meant ignore my reads on INTERACTIONS WITH NABAKOV not all of my reads, period.

I got that feeling as well, but that doesn't necessarily mean it has to be correct. As SC will bring up later (although he discredits it), the ferocity with which both pops and Goat leveled toward the suggestion that they would be scum together is sort of an actions speak louder than words moment for me.

The idea pissed me off because it basically meant that I can expect you to ride my ass all game regardless of other player's alignments. I also found it completely absurd and an excuse for you to suspect two people who don't make sense together. Of course I'm going to shoot down a ridiculous idea with ferocity.

You've got this idea in your head that if I deny something, that means it's right and I'm trying to manipulate you away from believing the truth. But if I were to leave an accusation unanswered, I'm sure you would call me out for ignoring it. You've left me no option of how to respond to something you bring up against me without you using it to further your idea that I'm scum.

Despite all Goat's attempts to connect pops and NabNab, should we look past that in favor of Goat's supposed sincerity? At the moment I don't think so, do you?

I'm not sure the point you're driving at here. What do you think my agenda as scum is? It seems like you're pushing two different ideas that are contradictory.

You think that pops and I are scum together and that I am busing him. However, my actions concerning pops and Nabakov don't fit this busing scenario you've attached yourself to.

Assume for a second that I'm scum and pops is my scum buddy. Assume again that my basis in believing pops is scum is based almost entirely on his connections with Nabakov. That is what you believe, and I'm going to assume it's true so I can prove it wrong.

If I am trying to tie scum-pops to town-Nabakov who is going to be lynched, then you can conclude I'm not interested in busing pops, because my reason for finding him scum is going to be proven false once Nabakov is lynched. If I'm suspecting my scum buddy for reasons I know will eventually be proven false, I'm doing it to distance and to "semi-clear" him once those reasons are proven false. I can conceivably change my mind on pops and view him as town the following day, because my reason for thinking he is scum was just invalidated. That would be the motivation for goat scum to pair pops-scum with town-Nabakov.

Instead, I jumped on pops immediately today before anyone else did. This would suggest that hypothetical scum-goat is very much interested in busing hypothetical scum-pops*. However, if scum-goat so badly wants to bus scum-pops, why would scum Goat ever try to tie scum-pops to a dead townie, since that would weaken/invalidate scum-goat's reason to bus scum-pops? It doesn't make sense.

*Kind of like lollipops but they taste like shit.

I think they are. I'm very cognizant of this heavy-handed Goat as I have been smacked down by it before.

Just so you know, Goat is much heavier handed as town than scum, and you've never seen me as town. Why don't you ask Ectomancer what he thought of my play in our last game together?

He doesn't intimidate me in the slightest, his stream of increasing threats, "maybe I should policy lynch you!!!!", "okay, I wasn't serious about the policy lynch jeez lighten up ", and "I'm rethinking RC as town!", his penchant for circular logic, his reliance on appealing to popularity to attempt to squelch dissent, and his need to connect his reads directly to a flimsy, unexplained NabNab vote are all scumtells to me.

None of my threats were serious. I use tools like sarcasm and imitation to prove points. I've never policy lynched anyone before.

You keep bringing up some of these same incorrect points I've showed you are wrong time and time again. Reliance on appealing to popularity I have debunked probably 5 times already if not more, including again in this post. I've hardly been a popular player this game. I've taken a good deal of shit for my play and being wrong about Nabakov after talking about how good I am at lynching day 1 scum is just more fuel on the fire. Did you read the game I linked to you? I was town in that game, and I connected all of my reads to Zilla, my main scum suspect. It's an example of me doing this as town. Ectomancer again can attest to me doing the same thing in our last game together, when I paired him to Main and Eldarad day 1. On the other hand, I don't think I've ever actually done this as scum before, including NOT doing this as scum in the game we were in together.

I think this just exemplifies what SC just observed about you, that you become irate at the idea of someone questioning your authority. Basically what you said here is "scum question me; town don't".

Nope. Town question me too. However, when I'm town I'm usually good at convincing other townies to not find me suspicious and scum are the ones who linger on my wagon a long time, generally via ignoring my defenses, misprepresenting them, or just keeping the same invalid points.

What I find scummy about you is that you continue to stick on me for some of the same points I have answered and responded to 5+ times. You don't bother to address my response and then a few posts later you bring up the same point again. That's scummy. When it's day 2 and you are still bringing up stuff from early day 1 that is based on you taking something out of context that I have explained...infinite...times, I am bothered. I get the impression that you don't actually care what I have to say and are wagoning me without regard to my defense.

All in all, I still think you're probably town. You're definitely not weak-willed or worried about how others will perceive you for going after me, which is a town tell. If this is all just a show, then you're doing a good job of faking it.

[Goatrevolt]

I hear constantly from people in seemingly every game I play that I ought to be voting whoever I'm talking about, but I move my vote as I please. I'm actually somewhat slower with my vote as town than as scum, I'm trying to work on that (slowing down my voting when I get a scum pm, that is).

Your vote has been moving around extremely fast this game, ever since you quit posting fluff and started making legitimate posts. Can you explain why you are playing up to your scum meta?

[Goatrevolt]

Where are Goat and Red leaning on a top suspect at the moment? Besides each other if that's still the case in any way.

You.

Red was never a top suspect of mine.

[Goatrevolt]

I find Iam's posts to be worse here than Incogs, and I agree that the "Jahudo is easy wagon" is a bad point. Which wagon has 5 votes on it? Pops is a far easier wagon than Jahudo, and if pops is scum, which he might be, you can bet your sweet ass he's being bused.

[Goatrevolt]

It's an easy wagon because most people, maybe even everyone besides Elmo has expressed suspicion of pops, so it's not hard to justify being on that wagon.

You said you found me and Patrick scummy, and then your elaboration was the "detrimental, maybe setting up conditional suspicions to be independent" ones post. I'd definitely say that's calling me scummy. The part that gets me, though, is how you backed off completely when I called you out, and never came back to it, even today, when RedCoyote built a huge case on me based on the idea that I

was

taking conditional suspicions and making them independent ones. I just feel like you saw how strongly I reacted against you and figured you were better off not calling me scummy anymore in hopes I would leave you alone as well. I was set against Nabakov and there would be no reason to maybe convince me to look elsewhere.

I'll vote when I'm ready to vote. I do appreciate your encouragement to hop aboard your wagon, though. Sometimes I just need a push to get there.

I haven't read day 1 yet, which is why I haven't voted. I would like to actually read over everything again and improve my reads before throwing out a vote willy-nilly, especially considering pops is sitting at L-1 right now.

[Goatrevolt]

I was set against Nabakov and there would be no reason to maybe convince me to look elsewhere.

If I was scum, why would I have tried to derail the Nab wagon?

My impression was not that you were "trying to derail" the Nab wagon at all. Can you show me this? You pushed for pops, but I distinctly remember you bringing individual points up against Nab despite not actually jumping on the wagon.

[Goatrevolt]

I was set against Nabakov and there would be no reason to maybe convince me to look elsewhere.

If I was scum, why would I have tried to derail the Nab wagon?

My impression was not that you were "trying to derail" the Nab wagon at all. Can you show me this? You pushed for pops, but I distinctly remember you bringing individual points up against Nab despite not actually jumping on the wagon.

I wasn't trying to; when you said "no reason to maybe convince me to look elsewhere" I thought you meant me giving you a reason to look elsewhere.

Ah, ok. Well that was the point I was making basically. I jumped at you for pushing me, and you backed off immediately. I'm saying it's possible that you saw me react strongly against you and wanted to back out as to keep me focusing on Nabakov and not on you instead.

[Goatrevolt]

EBWOP: "A question just for McGriddle; as the only player who didn't join this game by invitation, how do you feel about the player list?"

I like the player list, I know half of the peeps from previous games already so I am kinda confident that my playstyle will not come as a shock to them.

(I tend to be a little too aggressive when it comes to following my hunches)

You haven't been aggressively following any hunches this game. Why not?

Also, I hope everything is going alright for you in real life. Sorry to hear about the hospitalization.

[Goatrevolt]

That last post by Red makes me doubt my town read on him.

It's hard to argue Jahudo as scum when no one is really standing behind it.

This coming from Red is the biggest load of crap I have ever seen. Red harassed me incessantly day 1 for what he believed was me saying that since nobody else agreed with him about me that he should drop the case. And now he's saying that since nobody is strongly pushing Jahudo that it's hard to argue he's scum? Are you kidding me with that?

Jahudo has given offense and defense, and I just don't see what he's done that has made him special in anyway. If it's his ties to NabNab, then why not me or Ecto? If it's his vote on pops, then why not McGriddle or SC?

How long have you played mafia? Scum defend themselves. Scum attack people. It's why people do things that matter, not what they do. Your defense of Jahudo feels forced here. Really forced.


I can't tell if pops will be scum or town, but mark my words. If he's scum he's being bussed, because this wagon is shit.

[Goatrevolt]

Jahudo having no votes currently is irrelevant. Incog and Elmo were on the wagon and I've expressed suspicion of him. SC has him in his top 4, etc. It's not like Jahudo has been under no suspicion this game.

The argument isn't that Jahudo is scum because there isn't a wagon on him. It's that saying he's town because there isn't a wagon on him is faulty, and furthermore using that as a reason to get on the pops wagon is ridiculous/scummy.

[Goatrevolt]

Ok, but Red Coyote was the one arguing I was scum WHEN NOBODY ELSE WAS and furthermore he was making a HUGE deal out of his perception that I was telling him "nobody thinks I'm scum so you're wrong", which is exactly what he just did there in regards to Jahudo. It's ridiculous for him to say something like that.

In his post where he wants pops to claim is literally nothing about how pops is scum, except a comment about how pops is "all over the place".

[Goatrevolt]

Where are SerialClergyman and Iamusername? Riding out the day?

[Goatrevolt]

For one, pops hasn't claimed yet, which he should. Secondly, the "I'm not posting anymore because I'm already voting pops who is probably going to be lynched" is dumb. You had no problem continuing to post day 1 when you were on Nabakov's wagon in the same manner.

As for what you can say, well you can try to convince people to join the wagon if you feel so strongly about it. Or you can argue against opposing wagons, or comment on things people have said, etc. I'm on the popular wagon on someone I think is scum so I have no need to post is one of the dumbest things I have heard in a mafia game. Find other scum. Do something useful.

SC: You're going to need to explain why Iam is obv. town. He is the biggest lurker in this game behind McGriddle, and while he's had some good points from time to time, nothing he's said has been earth shattering or something I think is really that unlikely to come from scum.

Right now there is a strong push for pops and a good strong push against Jahudo. If we lynch wrong today, assuming 3 scum and a successful kill tonight, we'd be facing down lylo tomorrow. While I haven't particularly found pops pro-town, I'm definitely thrown off by bad votes on his wagon, the strong defense/opposition to the opposing wagon, and the insistence that we have to lynch pops today.

Serial Clergyman for one plays by town tells, has 4 suspects, suggests he is fine lynching any of them, but is only pushing for pops and seems very set on a pops lynch. That doesn't jive. That strikes me exactly as the kind of scum play to get a mislynch and drive the game into LYLO. The entire game, save myself, Incog, Elmo seems driven towards the idea of lynching pops. I am fairly certain Incognito is town at this point. He's definitely played the most pro-town game of anyone, so if he's scum then we're in pretty deep shit as it is. Elmo, I an strongly leaning town on. He's called out and jumped on a lot of things that have struck me as suspicious as well. It feels like he genuinely is pursuing things that jump out at him.

Everyone who I think has a reasonable shot at being scum is either Pops himself or on the Pops wagon. If Pops is scum, then the other scum are dead set on busing him as they've made no move to push alternative wagons.

If pops is scum, then McGriddle is probably town. McGriddle called out pops really early in the game as either a power role or scum. I just don't see that coming from a scum buddy at that stage in the game. I still believe Jahudo and Pops can be scum together, as their fight while ignoring Nabakov at the end of day 1 strikes me as scum distancing while a townie goes down. Ectomancer has had an interesting interaction with pops this game. He jumped on pops early when I did, supporting my gut read (maybe with a gut read of his own) but backed off when I did. Again today, he has jumped on pops based on the "reverse townie bus" argument, which I understand, but still find it odd how he maneuvered that. Clergyman makes sense as a buddy. Iam too, even though he has the case against pops. His play this game hasn't really struck me as the kind of "townie who truly believes what he's pushing" kind of play, so I'm not ready to clear him if pops is scum.

If pops is town, then Jahudo is more likely to be scum based on the strong push to get Pops lynched today rather than Jahudo. Clergyman is probably scum as well. Beyond that I don't know. I've only read a few pages of day 1, but I plan on reading more of that tonight.

[Goatrevolt]

I don't have a really strong scum read right now or else I would.

What do you find suspicious about Incog? The only thing I have against him is Patrick's death, but that points more at Jahudo than Incog.

Have you been avoiding the thread because you haven't checked it or because you simply don't have anything to comment on? On one hand you say that you haven't done anything with mafia over the weekend, but here you are arguing that you don't have anything to comment on. There are plenty of things for you to comment on. Elmo, Red's post where he wants pops to claim, Incog v. Jahudo, how you feel about Pops recent posts, etc.

My "diagrams" are based on the seemingly foregone conclusion that pops is lynched today. It is what I think if he ends up as scum, or if he ends up as town.

As for the wagon on pops, it's got a lot of force behind it, but not a lot of meat. It feels very similar to the Nab wagon, which I was guilty of being on, and it has a lot of the same people pushing it. I'm very wary of the end result, despite not feeling pops as particularly townie on his own merits.

[Goatrevolt]

Your posting frequency and whether or not you are avoiding the thread while your vote sits on the popular wagon is directly related to whether or not you're a strong suspect of mine. You've seen my posts today. You've seen how displeased I am with the way the pops wagon has sprung up. I don't see why you would find it odd that I call out two of the pops voters who disappeared after dropping their pops vote to get back in the thread and say something. Both of you happened to show up not long after I did. Would you still be lurking had nothing been said? Who knows...

My stance is that regardless of pops alignment, the scum are on his wagon. The one real difference is that if Pops is scum, then I think McGriddle is likely town. I think Jahudo is probably MORE likely scum if Pops is, although I think he's a good bet either way.

Can you link me your most recent game as scum and your most recent game as town. Do you generally make cases as either alignment?

As for IAM. How could you possibly know if he's "concerned" about him or any of his scum buddies facing suspicion without knowing who his scum buddies are? I don't think he's commented on you in a relevant fashion the entire game. He was certainly opposed to Jahudo picking up suspicions. As for himself...what suspicion? The amount he's picked up has been quite minor, and most of the game has expressed a town read of him, some of them quite strong with very little real backing behind them. His pops case was hardly difficult to put together as scum. Town or scum, pops has done a lot of things that could easily be tied up against him. Now, I'm not familiar with Iam's play, since the last time (maybe only time) we played together was at least a year and a half ago, but he threw out his pops case, stuck his vote there, and has done precious little else. I don't see that as being particularly pro-town.

What scum hunting have you done this game? You've taken stances. You have town reads, scum reads, good insight on various topics, but I have never gotten the vibe from you that you really seem to actually care about finding scum, or that you have really probed very deeply into any situation to try to ascertain scum/town reads from it. Do you generally play this game as town? The sit back and make observations, but don't really put pressure on people game? That's basically what you've done so far, and I'm curious to see if this is consistent with your town play or your scum play.

[Goatrevolt]

To be honest though, I think meta isn't the right way to look at me, because I'm conscious of my own meta. The best thing you could do is work out if my play is coming from someone who believes what they are saying, believes the points they make and if the motivations behind them aren't tainted, and I'm sure my alignment will become pretty obvious.

This is what I'm trying to do, and I get mixed reads. Some things, like you doubting the Nabakov wagon based on McGriddle's poor vote strike me as genuine reads. Other things, like how you jumped on the Pops wagon today have struck me as not very genuine. I've gone back and forth on you a lot.

In terms of what you are suggesting is a fallacy, my point is that I dislike the pops wagon. I think a lot of people have poor reasons to be on it, and nobody seems to be very interested in anything besides pops. Basically, there is very little opposition to pops being the lynch, and there has been almost no resistance to it. Even Elmo/Incognito have done very little toward actually stopping Pops from being lynched despite finding him town/not being on the wagon. If pops is scum, the most likely thing is that he's being bused. If the scum aren't interested in busing, they would probably be pushing an alternate wagon and trying to save Pops. If your scum buddy is going down, you're either on board, or you're trying to save him. Standing idly by is dumb scum play because it draws you fire by not being on a scum lynch and your buddy still dies anyway.

But if pops is town, then it stands to reason that there are scum riding the easy town lynch as well. It's definitely possible there is a scum between Incog/Elmo who is avoiding the town-Pops lynch, but judging by the speed and weakness of the wagon chances are there are at least 2 scum on board.

Based on the way the day has played out I'm fairly certain scum are on that wagon. Jahudo is my top pick, but I could really see any of the people on that wagon be scum and it wouldn't surprise me greatly, save McGriddle in the case Pops is scum and being bused.

And I know I "should" probably be voting Jahudo right now, but I'm not entirely sure I should be trying to stop Pops from being lynched, so I haven't really made an effort to. I'm not sure I could even do so if I tried. That's why I'm spending a lot of time working on conditional reads.

[Goatrevolt]

I note you didn't say anythign in defence of incog though, was that a conscious choice?

Forgot to answer this. I read your points on Incognito and really didn't have a response. Incognito has been the most active player, and has consistently weighed in and provided his stance/opinion on things as they have developed. I haven't noticed anything that struck me as decidedly fake from him, and there hasn't been anything where I've felt he's shirked away from adding his 2 cents or waited for others to hop in before throwing his own opinion into the mix, etc. If he's scum, he's playing an excellent game. My guess is that he's probably not.

[Goatrevolt]

I'm not necessarily saying that he's the most pro-town. I think you mistook my statement. I said his actions were the most pro-town, as in he's been the most out in the open/vocal player in the game. He's done the most visible probing, etc. That doesn't necessarily mean he is my strongest town read (and actually I'm having a hard time getting strong town reads so far this game...which is a problem. I'm a lot like you in that I like to work process of elimination from town reads).

When did you change from thinking he was town to being unsure about him?

[Goatrevolt]

In your game as mafia that you linked me, you said the following at one point:

Shotty scum or not, Kise is no doubt scum

In this game you seem to have a problem with me taking a similar stance on Jahudo. Are you lying when you say that you hate those kind of "fallacies" or were you committing that "fallacy" yourself at the time despite not liking it?

[Goatrevolt]

The Stop, Hammertime thing SC did in this game is pretty much identical to what he did as scum, even down to the "let's see Nab's flip" being similar to him saying something akin to "so are you scum" in that other game.

The big thing I wanted to check out with your meta is whether or not you do things like say "let's get that done" before every single vote you make, because that is what you've done here. The meta wasn't really very conclusive. I don't think you did that much as either town or scum in those games.

One thing I noticed in his scum game was that he did a lot of buddying to Albert, and used a ton of smilies and a ton of "lols, rofls", etc, something that has been missing from this game, so I think that's a town meta-read off of what I was shown.

All in all, I didn't learn a whole lot, but it was worth reading through, anyway. I'm going to settle to not having a good read on SC for now, and try to work out his alignment in other ways.

[Goatrevolt]

Fine:

Player A is scum whether player B is or not.

Not fine:

Player A's interactions with Player B make me think he's scum, no matter player B's alignment.

I don't see a huge distinction. Your read on player A based on the "fine" section is no doubt a product of how player A has interacted with the game or other players as a whole. We read players based on how they interact with everyone else, based on what they find suspicious and how they go after people, etc. In most cases, what you consider "not fine" or a collection of events you consider "not fine" are what compose the suspicions that cause someone to find Player A suspicious enough to make the "fine" comment.

In this case: I think Jahudo's attacks on pops are scummy, because the way Jahudo has gone about it seems unlikely to come from a town mindset. Therefore Jahudo is scum. Jahudo is scum whether or not the player he is attacking is scum.

I don't see much of a distinction if any.

[Goatrevolt]

When did you start thinking RedCoyote was town and why?

[Goatrevolt]

I don't think that's valid. 'In a scummy manner' implies that you understand the motives behind his attack, but if you can't tell if the person he's attacking is scum or not then how can you understand the motives behind his attack?

Really? Town attack town all the time thinking they are attacking scum. Town attack scum thinking they are attacking scum. Scum attack town knowing they are town. Scum attack scum knowing they are scum. It's definitely possible to attempt to figure out the motives behind an attack--in other words, whether the attack is a genuine belief or not--without knowing the alignment of the player who was attacked. How would you even scum hunt day 1 if this wasn't possible?

I'm surprised to hear you say you considered voting me. Not sure if that is believable or not, considering you have stated you consider me town the entirety of the game.

[Goatrevolt]

I think it's highly unlikely that RedCoyote and Elmo are both scum. If one is, the other is most likely town.

For one, RC jumped on Elmo right off the bat, and secondly RC didn't pay close enough attention and mistook Elmo for someone else. It's unlikely someone doesn't pay enough attention to figure out who their scum buddy is and also unlikely to fake something like that for "distancing" purposes.

[Goatrevolt]

That's a good point. But even then, I think you need to focus on the fact that it's a bad attack, NOT that they are linked to this player.

Sure, and I am. I'm just saying that my read isn't dependent on Pops' alignment. You're the one who is assuming I am trying to link my read of Jahudo to pops, when all I'm saying is that regardless of the flip of the likely lynch today, Pops, I still think Jahudo is scummy.

[Goatrevolt]

If either Ectomancer or Jahudo is scum, the other is less likely to be scum. Ectomancer randomly called Jahudo out as likely to be town, which is an odd thing for scum to randomly say about their scum buddy unprompted and without stated cause.

[Goatrevolt]

I've read up to partway through page 9, but I have to go to work so I won't finish until later. I've posted a few key connections I've noticed. I'm still working out individual reads.

Pops should claim. Please don't hammer yet.

[Goatrevolt]

Weak Doctor dies when protecting scum but survives and protects a town player? Correct me if wrong.

[Goatrevolt]

Please, nobody hammer. I'm thinking the role is likely true. Weak Doctor would be a fairly interesting/unusual fake claim.

Why did you choose me?

[Goatrevolt]

Wow.

[Goatrevolt]

Well that explains the weird feeling I had that Pops was trying to buddy up to me today, and my lack of understanding for why he didn't suspect me.

The masons are probably town. I'm paranoid that it's a gambit, but I will have to check back at their play and see how it adds up. I'm also paranoid that we're looking at too much town power. Vig, Weak Doc, Role Cop, Confirmed Mason pair.

Ectomancer's claim is oddly timed, and I agree that it's weird he would be so skeptical of a doc claim knowing full well that a NK was thwarted if he is indeed a town vig.

If I legitimately was protected from a NK, then that is pretty funny because I thought there was no way I was getting NKed and was almost hoping for such because of how poor my reads on the game were.

Vote RedCoyote

This is my preferred lynch. Clergyman is 2nd, McGriddle is 3rd.

--------------------------------

I want pops to announce his target in advance. I think this is necessary for learning something useful out of it, even if he dies. And yes, it could be roleblocked or any number of different things, but that information has a way of working itself out by the end of the game. More information the better here. Pops targeting someone random and dying at night would tell us nothing of value. My personal picks would be Incognito and Elmo.

I'm wondering why I was chosen to be NKed, assuming Ecto/Pops are to be believed. I thought I was a pretty unlikely choice, all things considered.

[Goatrevolt]

I think massclaim sounds good.

My order would be:

RedCoyote
Clergyman
McGriddle
Incognito
Elmo
Myself

although Clergyman claiming first and then popcorn is also fine. I don't foresee it being a huge deal either way.

I am also feeling fairly confident that RedCoyote is scum and would love to lynch him. McGriddle could be scum, but he's not my first pick.

I'm worried that Ecto is a SK of sorts. If so, he's cut off his ability to kill again until endgame, though, so I don't see him as an immediate priority. Ecto is probably not mafia, although that possibility exists. 1-shot vig claim reaaaally makes me suspicious, though, especially with a shot on Patrick and the lack of belief of pops claim despite knowing there would have to be a doctor on the loose because of the missing N1 kill.



My suggestion is to lynch RedCoyote. If he's town, then Pops checks Elmo. If he's scum, then Elmo is most likely town by virtue of RC/Elmo day 1 interactions that seem unlikely to be distancing. In that case, I'd suggest Pops check Incognito.

As for why I want to lynch RedCoyote. Day 1 he spent most of his time arguing about me despite never voting me. Day 2, he jumps on me immediately and has an overdone "ah feels so good to finally vote Goat" statement that didn't feel sincere. He had ample opportunity and "reasons" to vote me all along and didn't. Most of his pressure on me is based on misrepresentations, something that is more likely from scum than town. He seems unwilling to evaluate my alignment or consider my defenses in an attempt to discern whether or not I am town, but rather has "made up his mind" I'm scum already and precious little will sway him.

Then he unvotes me with no fanfare, which was odd. There was pretty much nothing I said that hadn't already been said before, and he had already been stubborn beyond belief in his suspicions of me so I'm curious why that even happened. It didn't seem like a genuine backing off the wagon. Perhaps it was to set up the Pops hammer.

The worst thing is his jump onto the Pops wagon. Read his post where he declares his intention to vote pops. There is 1 sentence about pops being scummy, and that sentence is simply about his votes moving around a lot. He doesn't bother to even suggest why that's scummy, just declares that it is. The rest of the post is about two people who Red decides to "clear" and that he can't vote for, so therefore he decides he needs to vote pops. Terrible. Why would you not being able to logically vote two players mean you have to vote Pops? Red has no problem avoiding a popular wagon and he has no problem pushing a solo suspect as he demonstrated with the Nab wagon and me respectively, so this is a load of BS. His reasons to not vote for Jahudo were bad, especially the bit about nobody strongly pushing for him, because as you will recall, Mr. Coyote had no problems pushing for me when he was alone in that venture so obviously he doesn't believe that at all.

I also think SerialClergyman is scum, but that's a much harder sell. My thoughts on him is mostly that I don't think he cares much about finding scum. I don't see a lot of genuine effort and hunting from him, and I think he was too confident in his town read on Iam for what it was worth. I also think he was pushing far too strongly for pops to go for someone who relies more on town than scum tells. It felt agenda driven, and I never much cared for his post where he placed the vote on pops. In the meantime, he did zero scum hunting. He didn't bother to look for other scum at all.

Mostly I feel his push on pops was far too strong and he wasn't bothering to consider alternatives or look for other scum or try to even evaluate if pops was the right lynch. I felt that coming from day 1 Nabakov being town, a town SC would be a bit more undecided and do more scumhunting and considering his options before jumping so strongly onto pops. The segue from Nabakov town to pops with such strength of conviction and such lack of other scum hunting simply doesn't strike me as genuine town play.

[Goatrevolt]

Deadline is 3 days. Mass claim is cool and all, but we need to get our lynch on.

[Goatrevolt]

I thought Patrick was fairly likely to be town. I thought his interactions with me and Incognito suggested a legitimate desire to understand our alignments. At any rate, we should focus on that and Ecto tomorrow, not today.

SC: Why did you choose Red second over McGriddle, who you are voting currently for, with the popcorn?

We seriously need to get a move on toward lynching. If people are fine with McGriddle going and don't care about looking into it any deeper than that, then at least say so. Can I interest anyone in a RedCoyote lynch?

[Goatrevolt]

Therefore, this is still inaccurate, just like it was when you brought it up earlier in the day. With D2's NabNab flip and your pops vote, you catapulted yourself into the number 1 slot; I didn't just arbitrarily decide you should be the vote.

You made it quite clear that Nabakov being scum wouldn't influence your Elmo read because of his limited content. Why did Nabakov being town influence your Goat read? And my vote on someone you thought was probably scum is scummy? Do explain. How did Pops catapult into the number 2 slot? Why did Elmo drop from 1 to 3, especially with Nabakov being town?

I don't know what Goat calls my unvoting him if it isn't "evaluating" his defenses. Why else would I unvote him? To top it off, I'm scummy for listening to him and others. So, it's like, if I kept voting Goat... that means I'm unwilling to evaluate him. If I unvote him... that means I'm odd and not being genuine.

There are plenty of reasons one might unvote another player without regard to their defense. One such reason might be a need to get on a different wagon, say pops. Your unvote on me lacked any real reasons why you decided to do it except that you didn't think I would go through all that work. Did you really think that me making a few long posts is too much work for me as scum and drop me to about middle of the pack on your reads because of it?

I said you were unwilling to evaluate me because you used the same recycled arguments against me over and over and over again and never bothered one time to respond to or try to refute my rebuttal to those poor arguments.

It was obvious that pops had been climbing up my scumlist over the course of the game. If Goat can find an instance where I ever said that I was uncomfortable with lynching pops or that I didn't like his wagon, he's more than welcome to call me on it. He won't find it, because it doesn't exist. I even went back to indulge Goat by laying out a more traditional case structure for him, which he has yet to bring up. I didn't find it necessary, because my suspicion of pops wasn't anything new.

I'm not going to find a post, because I'm sure it probably doesn't exist. That's not the point. The point isn't whether or not you liked the pops wagon or showed proclivity to it in the past. The point is purely that when you made a move to get on the Pops wagon, your reasoning behind it was terrible.

You made a big show of saying how you didn't like the main two alternate wagons of the day and somehow that boils down to you wanting on the pops wagon. There are some big issues here. I'm going to address this below.

Why would you not being able to logically vote two players mean you have to vote Pops?

Perhaps because I want a lynch before the end of the day?

This is terrible. Alarms should be going off here.

Your post was a full week before deadline. Pops was at L-1 and he wasn't going anywhere. If your purpose was to get a lynch before the end of the day you had plenty of time to explore other alternatives.

Here's why this is a huge problem.

1. He didn't try to lynch Nabakov day 1 for reasons like this. Nab's lynch happened much closer to deadline than Red's post, and Red never made a move to get on Nabakov based on needing a lynch by deadline. He continued debating with me/Elmo all the way up to when Patrick hammered. So I really don't buy that he really wants this lynch by the end of the day so he needs to make bad justifications to get on the pops wagon that is sitting at L-1.

2. Pops is his number 1 scum suspect, based on his handy little ordered list. If pops is his number 1 scum suspect, then his reasons to vote pops surely should have absolutely nothing to do with A. needing a lynch by deadline (7 days out) or B. doesn't like either of the other two wagons so it's pops by default. Instead, it should entirely be "This is why pops is scum. Bam."

All in all, take a good hard look at this and tell me if it makes sense. His number 1 scum suspect is pops, yet in his post where he declares his intentions to hammer pops, his reasons are that he doesn't like the other two wagons so by virtue of wanting a lynch before a deadline a week away, he's going to vote Pops. This is a huge, huge problem. A town player is going to want to lynch their top suspect because they believe their top suspect is scum. Their reasons are going to be because they believe their top suspect to be scum. Their reasons are not going to be because it's near deadline and they need a lynch and because they don't like either of the two other wagons, so therefore they will get on this one.

tl;dr he's scum.

His reasons to not vote for Jahudo were bad, especially the bit about nobody strongly pushing for him, because as you will recall, Mr. Coyote had no problems pushing for me when he was alone in that venture so obviously he doesn't believe that at all.

1) Why would I vote someone who I didn't think was scum?
2) Both Elmo and Incog, the biggest proponents of the scumJahudo argument, abandoned the wagon for iamausername, which in effect meant that the wagon was being pushed without anyone being on it.
3) I had no issue pushing to lynch Goat because

I was on the wagon

, which wasn't the case with Jahudo.

1. Your reasons for thinking Jahudo wasn't scum were
a. He's not the biggest lurker.
b. He's done offense and defense
c. The people pushing his lynch are on a different wagon

Both A and B applied to pops as well. Both showed a complete lack of desire to actually look into Jahudo any deeper than whether or not he's attacked others or defended himself to others. What attacks were good? What defenses were good? None of these are real reasons to think someone is town. Every single player in this game has done B. Only one player in this game is guilty of A. C has nothing to do with whether or not Jahudo is scum but is about those two players instead. You provided nothing legitimate to believe pops is scum and you gave nothing legitimate to believe Jahudo was town.

2. You pushed me as suspicious day 1 without being on the wagon. Surely you don't believe the load of crap that since they weren't on the Jahudo wagon they couldn't believe he was scum or that the case against him was any weaker as a result.

3.

Sometimes it's like I feel very distant from you, but other times I think you're right on the nose. I obviously don't agree with your conclusion, but you're right about how the D1 lynch should go. From where I'm standing, McGriddle, Elmo, or Goat should eat the first lynch.

Regardless what anyone thinks about NabNab, we really should bring someone else under fire at this point. NabNab should not be allowed to coast into the noose, especially if he flips town. Who is a reasonable alternative? I've said Elmo or McGriddle, but I think I'd now be supportive of pops as well.

I'm pretty sure those quotes from day 1 say it all. You were fine with McGriddle/Goat/Elmo/Pops lynches yet you weren't on all of those wagons at the same time. You certainly couldn't have taken issue with them wanting to lynch Jahudo despite not being on the wagon, since you yourself were game to lynch any of those above players despite only being on the Elmo wagon day 1. In other words, your arguments in favor of Jahudo being town were pure crap.

[Goatrevolt]

How about everyone just claims when they next post. I'll claim last.

[Goatrevolt]

Why Red over Incognito?

[Goatrevolt]

To clarify, that's directed at Clergyman as to why he picked Red 2nd for popcorn.

[Goatrevolt]

Why is McGriddle scummier than RedCoyote?

[Goatrevolt]

Meh, I don't really care for the less of a loss argument. If Red is scum, then he's more of a loss being in the game than a scum McGriddle would be.

[Goatrevolt]

Funny. Don't have time to fully respond now, but I will do so later. I'm glad to see you haven't bothered to stop the misrepresentation or appeal to "the big bad" as I'll put it. You continue to act as though I'm on some sort of a pedestal and everyone is too afraid to attack me or call me out, as though I have this reputation that is unbreakable and untouchable by all. That's obviously not the case.

You act as though I have this belief where I cannot possibly be wrong ever. If that were the case I wouldn't change my mind on who I think is scum as often as I do. I understand that I'm not always right. I was wrong about Nab, probably wrong about Jahudo, and regardless of your alignment I've been wrong about you at some point this game. You've spent the entire game trying to discredit everything I've said as being irrational or wrong, and you have held on to this same list of grievances I've made despite me having responded to them infinite times and you failing to respond to any of my defenses. Again, in the above post you list that same tired list of things I've done wrong. Again, all of them are misrepresentations. Again, I have addressed them over and over, yet you choose to ignore that. The appeal to popularity point, debunked. The "fraudulent reasoning" point. Debunked. Yet you bring it up yet again as though I've had nothing to say on the matter.

Your circular arguments, popularity appeals, and fraudulent, artificial rationale behind your votes and reads... this all still applies, you know.

Addressed. All of them. Infinite times. You bring them up again without regard for my defense. You don't even acknowledge that my defense for these exists, despite me making the same defense innumerable times for all of these points. In essence, you proved the exact point I was making by doing the exact damn thing you've done all game, which is ignore what I actually have to say and stick to the script on me.

[Goatrevolt]

I think Clergyman is trying to ride out the day without taking a strong stance on RedCoyote.

I also dislike how RedCoyote has had SC at a relatively high point on his scum meter the entire game but has done no investigation or probing into SC.

Some commentary by everyone else would be nice.

[Goatrevolt]

I also dislike how Clergyman is yet again on the popular wagon and again doesn't seem to be very interesting in probing people off of it.

[Goatrevolt]

I just don't get the sense from your play that you legitimately care about finding and lynching scum. You seem very content to place your vote on a wagon and sit on it without much regard for other players.

While you are posting frequently, updating your views, etc., you are much more content to sit back and let things happen and change your mind based on it rather than actively make an effort to find scum. Others are guilty of it as well, yes, but they have things going for them like claims, etc.

I also get a distinct feel from your play that you have an agenda, or are invested too much in particular wagons over other wagons. I felt with pops that you were trying to avoid any kind of discussion that might push away from a pops lynch and you quickly jumped onto his wagon and really never bothered to do much besides that until I called you out.

Now, here you've jumped on McGriddle and again I don't really sense from you any kind of a feeling that you care whether or not McGriddle is scum. You also don't seem to be interested in what comes of the Red/Goat battle, despite him being (I guess?) your number 2 scum pick. Like I said, you seem very content to lynch McGriddle and don't seem too worried about the outcome or whether or not he's the right lynch. While your views have changed based on the claims, again you jump on the popular wagon and again you don't seem very interested in what happens outside of it.

Also, for the position on wagons argument in terms of McGriddle, I think it's a valid point, however Red was the last on the pops train, despite being suspicious of him for a long time, which I find suspect, and he would have been last on the Nab train (as he just pointed out) had Patrick not hammered it home first. You've also had a middle of the road position on all 3 wagons.

One other thing I want to point out about Red is that his suspicion of pops seemed to grow at roughly the same rate as the wagon on pops. Pops was an "I guess pops as well" candidate at the end of day 1 for lynching, when there wasn't too much pops-support. Day 2, he comes in firing at me with pops as a secondary, but then pops ends up being his number 1 later on. I'm not sure anything ever really changed in the pops case during that time frame, so I'm not sure exactly why Red's suspicion level regarding him did as well.

[Goatrevolt]

I agree with the above. Who would you prefer to lynch, Ecto?

[Goatrevolt]

None of the people you've fought hard for have ever been in danger of being lynched. Being vocal with reads is not the same as scumhunting. You're vocal with your reads as either alignment, I would imagine. And based on that game I read with you as scum, this isn't a far stretch to assume.

With Ectomancer's claim, Pops is probably town. The only way I see it as any different is if Pops-scum skipped a kill to clear me as town in an attempt to clear himself as well, which would be odd. The alternative is both Pops/Ecto and Ecto is covering for pops by claiming the scum NK was a 1-shot vig attempt on Patrick, but again that seems very, very unlikely based on the interaction between Ecto/Pops and the idea that if Ecto were to die, the plan would go belly up. If Ecto were trying to clear pops, he probably would be far less skeptical of the claim and far more supportive of it, because his claim would be done specifically TO support pops.

So I think Pops is almost definitely town. The mason claim is probably true. I've seen a successful scum-mason gambit before but the chances of them trying it are low. There does seem to be a case of "too much town power" so I'm not totally convinced here and wouldn't mind having pops check it out.

Ecto, not positive on. However, it's not worth dealing with him today.

So yes, that leaves the 5 SC mentioned. Out of those, Red is my top pick. If Red is scum, Elmo is likely town based on interactions between the two of them. I think it's unlikely that SerialClergyman and Incognito are scum together based on Incognito calling out SC for ignoring the early pops push back on page 3 or 4 or whatever it was. It seems unlikely that would be scum calling out scum that early on.

[Goatrevolt]

Interesting.

[Goatrevolt]

Go ahead and claim now.

McGriddle. If you shoot tonight, make sure to shoot someone amongst Elmo/Incognito/SerialClergyman/RedCoyote.

[Goatrevolt]

I'm inclined to believe the McGriddle claim.

[Goatrevolt]

Jahudo/Iam: You two are confirmed to each other, right? I think you said this, but I want to confirm.

When are you allowed to talk to each other. What have you two discussed during said period?

[Goatrevolt]

The mason claim is probably legit. I went back and skimmed over their posts and I'm not seeing anything to suggest it being a lie. If they are scum they planned this pregame or went back over their posts night 1 and saw it was possible so they jumped on it. Either sounds unlikely.

I'm buying McGriddle's claim right now. I think he should shoot either RedCoyote or SerialClergyman.

Ecto's claim is a bit more odd in light of McGriddle's.

[Goatrevolt]

Yep. I definitely buy his claim. Do you really think McGriddle is going to claim even night vig as a scum fake claim? I highly doubt it. It's such an odd claim, testable tonight as well. It makes little sense as a fake claim. Plus, I felt like he was genuine about the wanting to not replace out because he got to shoot tonight part.

We should lynch RedCoyote. Why would you want to lynch a testable McGriddle over RedCoyote?

I'm all for lynching RC and having McGriddle shoot SC.

[Goatrevolt]

It could mean a lot of things in terms of Ectomancer. I have a theory or two, but it's not worth spitting out right now. However, I think it means town in terms of McGriddle. Also, fake claiming vig with an already claimed vig would be really odd. And why claim his night to shoot is tonight, when we can easily test him tonight?

If it's a scum fake claim, at best it buys him 1 day. I'm fine with taking that day, especially with other perfectly fine lynches lined up to go.

[Goatrevolt]

It's definitely possible that he hasn't realized Ecto's claim, but in that case, it would be very ballsy as scum to just claim on a whim without bothering to go back and look at other claims first, especially if he's lying about an easily testable claim. He asked if he should claim, and then just went ahead and claimed 6 minutes later. That screams a town claim, not a scum fake claim. Everything about the way he claimed suggests that he's town.

[Goatrevolt]

And me.

[Goatrevolt]

But, it's like, I don't think you're looking at this game from my point of view.

If you're scum, then I'm not. I'm looking at it from the town point of view.

Regardless, I've spent just as much time with other players in this game as I have with you, and I'm expected to sit quietly and take the hyperbolic barbs like, "RC's spent the entire game trying to discredit me!" You just cannot honestly make a statement like that. You know I've attacked McGriddle, Elmo, pops, and SC. You know I've defended iamausername, Jahudo, NabNab, and Ecto. You're rationalizing now and trying desperately to convince yourself I'm scum, now more than ever.

Ummmm....yeah. It has nothing to do with time spent, or who you have attacked/defended. It has more to do with comments like this:

I take some solace in the fact that at least SC has the cajones to call you on your irrational, overinflated diatribe, and I encourage anyone else to stand with me in shouting you down until you're willing to take a look at yourself for two seconds.

Or the countless words this game you've spent trying to suggest my playstyle, reads, or analysis is fraudulent, wrong, circular, should be ignored, etc.

Do both you and SC know something about Incog that I don't?

Hahahaha. You know I find you more suspicious than Incognito. You know I find SerialClergyman more suspicious than Incognito. Why is it a surprise to you at all that I want my top two suspects dead? I didn't mention Elmo either, and neither did Serial but you don't seem to care about that.

You don't seem to be very happy to cross me off your lists of suspects based on Pops' claim. I'm sorry.

I take it you believe McGriddle's claim, then?

[Goatrevolt]

It's also difficult to confirm McGriddle. Say we wake up tomorrow and just I am dead. Is McGriddle a vig? Is pops a doc? Was his doc successful? Who knows?

Doesn't matter. Even if the night happens in such a way to prevent us from being able to confirm McGriddle's role he still is going to attempt at the very least to kill one of the narrowed down scum prospects, which is a benefit to us. If he's scum trying to skate by on an even night vig claim and is going to use the scum NK to support his claim, then that's one scum NK directed at a preferred lynch choice.

[Goatrevolt]

Was he scum in Precision mafia? If he was town then that point is meaningless.

I still believe the claim. I don't really care for setup elegance, considering town role cop and weak doctor are already surprise roles that suggest Hoopla isn't exactly trying the tried and true "cop + doc vs. roleblocker" setup. It's still a weird claim to fake, and I think "even night vig" would be a truly bizarre and unlikely fake claim, especially from McGriddle, based on what I know of him so far. He says he's bad at scum, I don't see a bad scum pulling off a claim like that successfully. Give him a night to test it out.

Agreed about lynching RC, though.

[Goatrevolt]

tbqh if SC is mafia he's acting exactly like someone who knows they have a roleblocker and hence he won't get shot. This bothers me. If we're going with killing Red+SC, what's the effective difference between what's on the cards and lynch SC, McG shoots Red? I haven't read back, but Red seems rather more inclined to defend SC than vice versa.

I agree. I was thinking this exact thing. I also think SC is very hesitant to lynch RedCoyote, possibly because RC is the roleblocker.

I'd still rather lynch Red. And I agree that there would still be a 3rd scum unaccounted for in this hypothetical, and that is something I do not know or have a strong idea the answer to.

[Goatrevolt]

I'm vanilla.

[Goatrevolt]

I don't see the lack of replacement as a scum tell at all. It's not in his win con to replace out as either alignment, and I believed him when he said he was looking forward to using his role tonight.

I'm not opposed to lynching SC either. He and Red are my top 2.

[Goatrevolt]

Can we please not lynch McGriddle?

[Goatrevolt]

24 hours for 3 more votes on RedCoyote.

[Goatrevolt]

Why do you believe McGriddle's claim, Red?

[Goatrevolt]

I don't think Red is proven scum. I'm actually kind of surprised by SerialClergyman's vote.

[Goatrevolt]

Two confirmed town masons.
1-shot Vigilante
Even night Vigilante
Town Role Cop
Weak Doctor

I believe McGriddle's claim. I believe Ecto's claim in that I fully believe he has the ability to kill. Serial makes an excellent point about the unlikelihood that Ectomancer is mafia, which means SK or town. Pops' claim is supported by the lack of N1 kill--if he's scum, the scum no killed to set up his claim and/or Ectomancer is lying to support his claim, which I already touched on the unlikelihood of.

I think the most likely power role claims to be a lie are Iamusername and Jahudo as masons. Right now I'm highly doubting the mason claim.

There are too many town players right now.

Elmo I am reading as town. Incognito I am reading as town. McGriddle I am reading as town based on the claim. Pops I read as town based on the claim.

That leaves:

Jahudo
Iam
SerialClergyman
RedCoyote
Ectomancer

If we assume the masons are town, then the scum team basically has to be RedCoyote/Ectomancer/SerialClergyman.

The problem with that analysis is that it means the scum were seriously effed this game, with such a huge number of confirmable town roles, and Ectomancer doesn't make sense as mafia as stated already. I highly doubt every single claimed role is true and that all the scum are within the vanilla claims.

The other idea is that I'm wrong about Elmo or Incognito. I feel fairly confident that Elmo is town. I feel slightly less confident but still good about Incognito.

I really think we might be looking at Jahudo/Iamusername + either RedCoyote or SerialClergyman as the scum team here. If that's the case, I'm actually leaning more towards Clergyman being the scum in that situation and not Coyote. With Pops' claim, Jahudo was going to get lynched. If Jahudo gets lynched, then Iamusername is next on the table to go. If they planned in advance to claim masons, then they shut down that avenue and basically win the game. Two more mislynches is all a 3 man scum team needs in this situation.

And if you want to talk role setup elegance, the two man confirmed town mason team is the most inelegant piece of this setup, by far.

I asked Jahudo what he and Iam talked about as Masons and his response was "table tennis." Did they really not discuss the game at all as Masons? They didn't talk about Pops and how they wanted to lynch him? There is something hugely fishy about all the roleclaims, and I'm getting a huge feeling it's coming from the mason corner.

A little history: I played in a game on MTGS salvation a year or two ago called Harry Potter Mafia. I was a neutral survivor and won that 24 man game that lasted 9 months...what a test of freaking endurance. Anyway, that's not the point. In that game two scum claimed masons with each other. They were both scummy, and both likely to be lynched in the upcoming days. They ended up going all the way and won. The one defining characteristic of their play was that they did nothing beneficial to town the entire game. Jahudo and Iam have provided absolutely nothing of value to us here as we're nearing lynch. They had no useful discussion in their mason topic, and they have both been scummy this game.

All in all, I think it's the masons.

Unvote

[Goatrevolt]

Some of you live under heavy atmospheric pressure...

The *smart* thing to do would have been to follow my example and claim 1-shot as well McGriddle. When you read "even" in your PM, did it not bring any speculation into your head at all? Even after my claim?

ffs...

I was pretty sure this was the case when you so readily accepted the claim.

It's the masons. It has to be the masons. That's the claim that doesn't fit the setup. I don't think we're going to lynch one of them in 24 hours time, but today's lynch HAS to be either Red or SerialClergyman. McGriddle should shoot the other of the two, and then we need to lynch a mason tomorrow.

Actually... we need to be careful not to leave too many dead tonight. If we mislynch today. If Pops dies from his role, a vig shot and a scum NK, that's 4 dead players. If none of those hit scum we're screwed.

Pops, I think you should protect me. We need to keep as many confirmed players alive as we can. I don't think we have the opportunity to risk you targeting an unknown and dying at this stage of the game.

I think McGriddle should shoot a mason. Not sure that's going to go over well, but I really think a mason HAS to be scum. I don't see how it works any other way.

[Goatrevolt]

Sorry, I'm rambling a bit here and thinking as I'm typing.

[Goatrevolt]

I'm getting definite 2nd thoughts about RedCoyote.

I do think both Red and Clergyman make sense as scum with the mason team.

Clergyman paired Jahudo to Nabakov, and then after Nabakov was town Jahudo dropped down his list of suspects, and he pushed strongly for Pops to go while avoiding and not being terrible receptive to the simultaneous wagon pushed on Jahudo. That is perfect scum-partner to Jahudo play.

He has strongly defended Iam as town all game, and has buddied up to him at various points. He tends to ask a lot of "Iam do you remember this game? Iam, I'm pretty sure this is the right play" type of questions. That feels much more like scum buddying up to town, and makes me slightly less confident it's Clergyman.

As for Red, he had that post where he tried to explain why Jahudo was a bad wagon and why he was going to hammer pops, which still strikes me as a hugely scummy post. Other than that, Jahudo/Iam have been relatively low on his suspicion list all game and he has had very little interaction with the two.

Vote SerialClergyman

I'm going to stick my vote here for now. I think SC is slightly more likely than RedCoyote for scum at the present.

Allow me to reiterate that the masons are scum, though. It is the only way this game makes sense. There are too many town roles, and too many people don't make sense as scum outside of the masons being scum. The masons don't fit the setup at all. 4 confirmed or confirmable roles exist. Ecto/McGriddle/Pops/Nabakov. Do you really think there are an additional 2 confirmed to each other town masons in the mix as well? I don't. Iam has been extremely lurkerish and has provided very little useful information to this game. He's been completely MIA around this important deadline, and he's thrown his vote onto every wagon this game has seen (Nab/Pops/McGriddle). Jahudo has provided nothing of relevance here at deadline either. A weak bandwagon vote on my Red push, and a weak attempt to get a consensus going, and a small jab at SerialClergyman with no oomph behind it. Jahudo and Iam are clearly the two players in this game who are most scummy here at deadline. Clergyman or Red, whichever is scum, have at least been active and useful at deadline.

[Goatrevolt]

If people want to rally up and lynch the masons, I will get on board with that. I just don't see it as hugely likely with 24 hours to go.

[Goatrevolt]

That's the thing, Elmo. I am getting the feeling Red is going to be town as well. I am fairly certain you are town. I

think

Incognito is town as well, or at least he has played a very, very good pro-town game as scum. The more likely situation is that he's town. Both vig claims make sense, especially if you are capable of reading between the lines with Ectomancer. Pops is very, very unlikely to be scum, and if he's town he cleared me as town as well.

There's nobody else who CAN be scum except the masons. And when you think about it, the masons really don't fit the setup at all. Two very suspicious people claimed masons, in a setup that doesn't support a mason claim, who's response when I asked what they talked about was "table tennis" and an avoidance of answering "when can you two talk with each other?" It's not adding up. They are the most suspicious players at deadline here.

I don't want pops to target a mason. I don't want him to die tonight. I want pops to protect me, or target either Elmo or Incognito, to confirm my feeling that they are town. I think McGriddle should do one of two things. 1. Not shoot. 2. Shoot a mason. I don't think anything else is a good idea.

I really don't think we're going to rally enough to lynch Jahudo or Iamusername today, but our lynch if not them needs to be SerialClergyman.

And tomorrow if I'm dead, don't forget what I'm saying about the Masons. They are the scum.

[Goatrevolt]

BY the way, I'm still rolling my eyes at those posts, Goat. I mean we all get things wrong and for all I know you're spot on about the masons, but I'm 98% sure you've just shat on the town from a great height. There's a 1-shot vig and a even night vig, and you think the MASONS are the ones that don't fit.

...

Lost for words.

Absolutely. How closely do you read Ecto's posts by the way?

[Goatrevolt]

If it must be SC or Red today, then I guess I'd pick SC, but I really don't think either of them are scum. I think it's pops + Goat + other (probably Incog).

I would love to see you justify this.

p.s. we can talk at night only, the table tennis was just a random bit of flavour, I don't know why Jahudo felt the need to mention it. Last night we made one post each in our QT giving a brief summary of our reads at the time.

Jahudo was suspicious of pops, primarily, and also Goat, SC and Patrick.

I was (and still am) really convinced that Red is town, not sure about anyone else, mostly suspicious of Incog, McGriddle and especially pops. Neither of us have been making much use of our ability to communicate in

public

, so it shouldn't come as any great surprise that we didn't do much with private communication either.

Why are you and have you been convinced Red is town?

Out of curiosity, did you go back and look at Jahudo's posts during day 1 to make this bolded statement? I have a hard time believing that as a townie Jahudo would have actually given those suspicions. Allow me to demonstrate why:

* PATRICK:
I don't know if its his style, but Patrick kept his random vote on Goatrevolt for most of today without finding him suspicious. It looks like he calls Goat town in Post 146 but he doesn't unvote until 258. This non-vote has allowed him to push cases without taking ownership or possible backlash that might come from a vote with holes in it. By that I mostly mean the Nabakov wagon, which he started to agree with when it was at L-6, in Post 146, but he doesn't say he'd vote or not until Nab's at L-2 and Patrick wouldn't want to be the L-1 vote. It could be stalling if Patrick didn't have more reasoning to be on the wagon since 146. And that's what I'm trying to read into with his posts and the evolution of the wagon.
@Patrick: What about the Nab wagon looked better by 196 that wasn't around by post 146.


* GOATREVOLT
I can't find where he makes a case of Nabakov being scum, which paired with him already calling out scum connections to Nabakov looks like very detrimental behavior. It looks like even if Nabakov is town, he's still setting up conditional suspicions to be independent ones because they had no basis in Nabakov in the first place.

This is the post where Jahudo expresses that he's suspicious of me and Patrick day 1.

Patrick looks okay to me now.

Later he says this about Patrick

You said you found me and Patrick scummy, and then your elaboration was the "detrimental, maybe setting up conditional suspicions to be independent" ones post.

I said I had bad feelings about you, and I wasn't confident enough to reveal until I was brought under pressure to reveal them. I didn't call you scummy. Quote me if I'm wrong. And town can be detrimental, if I think they're strategy is hurting the overall scumhunting process. Since my confidence in reading your actions was low,

I was still considering you were town

and not considering all the long-term ramifications of unnecessarily spreading suspicion across multiple people given variables that were still unknown.

The part that gets me, though, is how you backed off completely when I called you out, and never came back to it, even today, when RedCoyote built a huge case on me based on the idea that I

was

taking conditional suspicions and making them independent ones.

Your initial response sufficed my doubt.

Then he says this about me.

Here's the point. Iam just said Jahudo called out Patrick and Goat as suspicious in their mason discussion night 1. I'm calling BS on that. Why? Because Jahudo in thread said that he was fine with Patrick after they discussed it further. And later on he told me that my initial response sufficed and that he was

still reading me as town

. So either Jahudo was lying in thread when he said he found me AND Patrick town, or Iam decided to go back through day 1, compile Jahudo suspicions and try to pass it off as what they discussed in their nightly mason talk. This situation REEKS of Iam going back through and looking at Jahudo's day 1 stances and trying to fake what they talked about and doing a poor job of it because he forgot the parts where Jahudo mentioned that

he wasn't suspicious of Patrick and me anymore

. Hah.

I don't buy it. They are lying. We cannot make it to the end of this game without testing those two.

[Goatrevolt]

No way it's the masons

Justify this. Rather than feign shock at me calling the masons scum, I want legitimate rebuttals to my arguments.

[Goatrevolt]

p.s. we can talk at night only,

the table tennis was just a random bit of flavour

, I don't know why Jahudo felt the need to mention it.

Anyone else want to step up and claim random bits of flavor? The townie PM sure doesn't have any.

[Goatrevolt]

You are suggesting that Iam's town read on Jahudo for the whole game was just him defending a scumbuddy, even when he was really open about it with little reason. You're suggesting that iam would risk his own neck if Jahudo ever got lynched or killed or investigated. I just don't believe it.

The town read didn't happen until Day 2. After a night phase. After they would have had time to plan it out.

Not to mention Iam has been obviously town all game. We've been over this, but it's just there. He's been making waves. I think he made two excellent cases against scum in pops. He had no reason to ever start the wagon on pops, by the way - he could have just sat there and said nothing, but instead he stuck his neck out and made the case late in D1. He's made the logical switches in vote.

He's been on every bandwagon. He's lurked near deadlines, jumped on wagons and sat on them without contributing anything, and has generally failed to do anything that suggests a legitimate desire to find scum. The "making cases" point is bullshit and you know it. Pops has made more cases this game than he has. That case on Pops was hardly as good as you made it out to be and not anything difficult for scum to pull off.

And I don't think Iam is the sort of scum to take a massive gamble by claiming mason. Jahudo didn't claim it, so that means iam would have had to panic (or massive gambit) and make that claim, and that's just something I totally don't see him doing.

Planned night 1 or pregame. Of course he didn't make the claim out of the blue. They planned to do this in advance. That's why on day 2 they called each other town a few times, but yet day 1, the only reference to each other was Jahudo one time listing Iam as town after everyone else had already said they had a town read on Iam. So yeah...

Plus, on top of all that, mason claims are almost NEVER false. If any of you can link me to a game with a mason fakeclaim by scum I'd be genuinely shocked.

Not sure if you are actually reading my posts or not, but I already told you that I have played in a game where two scum fake claimed mason and won. They were both scummy on an individual basis, and they both provided nothing of relevance to town the rest of the game. Sounds a lot like Jahudo + Iam. It was on MTGS when I still played mafia over there. Harry Potter Mafia. I'm too lazy to dig for it right now, but maybe later.

[Goatrevolt]

Goat - if iam wanted to fake night talk, and went back to D1 in order to find out the suspicions of Jahudo, did he just not see that posts that you're talking about? Did he go to the effort of finding the reads but somehow missed that jahudo re-addressed them?

Yes. The part where Jahudo talks about me is a post from TODAY where Jahudo addressed the situation FROM day 1. My guess is that Iam only looked at day 1 posts. Come on, you don't find it a bit suspicious at all that the only 4 people Jahudo called out all game where the 4 people he "called suspicious in the night chat" and somehow the part where he later calls two of those 4 people town doesn't factor in at all? It's bullshit.

I would love to lynch a mason today, but there isn't enough time.

Pops, don't target someone that is going to get you killed tonight.

McGriddle. I think it would be pretty awesome if you shot a mason to test the claims. I wouldn't claim which mason you're going to shoot. Worst case, IF they are true, a big if, then we go down 1 mason and still have the other one alive tomorrow.

[Goatrevolt]

At night I said Goat could be scum for being a spam poster. Its so much noise and so little information that I could follow. But I didn't know how to form a case on him or Pat without it being torn down too quickly. I was truthful that it was over with the tells I thought I knew, but I guess I was misleading on gut tells. I didn't want pressure coming back around so soon.

BS.

[Goatrevolt]

I want to see Elmo/Incog/Ecto/Coyote's stance. I'll put my vote behind a mason if they are on board, but I'm not going to risk a no lynch today by disbanding the Clergyman wagon only to find a wagon on the Mason's fail.

[Goatrevolt]

I hope Clergyman is just pretending. If not, then I think it's the masons + Red.

Pops 799 could be true. Could be a way for them to claim masons and not even be fake claiming at all. All in all, the mason claim doesn't add up, though.

[Goatrevolt]

I'd like to hear again from Red/McGriddle/Elmo before the end of the day hopefully.

[Goatrevolt]

By put under the microscope I hope you mean put under the old oak tree out back with a noose around the neck.

[Goatrevolt]

McGriddle?

I'm also very curious who Iam thinks is scum.

[Goatrevolt]

Ectomancer: You and McGriddle are the only living players who have claimed to have a blockable night action and you can't both use it on the same night anyway.

If there is a roleblocker and you're town, then you're going to get blocked anyway. I agree with Incog. I'd like all info on the table and confirmed right now.

[Goatrevolt]

I tried to kill Jahudo.

Were you roleblocked?

Based on a 3/9 mix, I'd say we are in LYLO.

Agreed. My guess is Masons + Red.

The other possibilities are Incog/Red/Elmo--all PR claims being town seems unlikely, especially with the relative strength of them--or One/Both vigs and Red--McGriddle's claim still strikes me as pro-town and Ecto's claim seems an unlikely one for a mafiate. In other words, the alternative options don't seem very likely for me.

Elmo I read as town. Incog I read as town. Ecto I don't really have a strong read on one way or another based on his play, although I'd say the role in conjunction with McGriddle seems more likely to be town.

I'm a bit skeptical of the lack of a vig kill last night by McGriddle, but the manner in which he claimed still strikes me as strongly pro-town. It's just a bit convenient to get roleblocked. And the way his role lines up with Ecto's suggests that they are both telling the truth or both lying. McGriddle couldn't have assumed Ectomancer was an odd-night vig based on his one-shot claim and claimed even night as a fake claim to match up to a town claim. I think it's highly unlikely a scum-Ecto and scum-McGriddle decided to both fake role claim alternating night vigs and then claim the scum NK as their own night 1 (requires knowledge of a Doc/RB to pull off without being caught) and fail to shoot and claim a RB night 2.

The only real way I can see the masons as town is if I really badly suck at this game and am wrongly reading both Elmo and Incognito AND if the town is stacked out of their ass OR if one/both vigs are scum and made a ridiculous claim as such.

As of now I'd prefer a Red/Mason lynch.

[Goatrevolt]

Yes, odd night. If McGriddle or I were to die, it would reinforce the others claim.

This is true. Based on Iam's proposed scum team yesterday of me, Pops, and Incognito (despite how ridiculous that is), I did not expect Pops to die. My guess was that the masons would kill Elmo or yourself. Incognito, if town, is a needed mislynch. Same with Red. I was protected by Pops and my guess is they needed to roleblock McGriddle to keep him from shooting one of them in the face so they couldn't roleblock pops and kill me to frame him.

At any rate, I think the masons make the most sense as scum, and Elmo/Incognito don't really fit too well with them based on the way they were wagoning Jahudo THEN Iam yesterday. Red, on the other hand, makes great sense as scum with the masons. Bad defense of Jahudo anyone?

[Goatrevolt]

I'm still a tad irritated about it too. There was no reason to know I even needed to be blocked and had someone thought about their claim more, it wouldn't be an issue.

I'm taking this as a claim that you're an odd night vig. Correct me if I'm wrong.

[Goatrevolt]

No lynch would be the dumbest idea of all time. No lynch just means a town player who is unlikely to ever get lynched gets killed and instead of needing 4 out of 5 town players on board to guarantee a scum lynch, you would need 4 out of 4.

Because games I'm modding take precedence over games I'm playing when I'm short on time. But more because they don't require me to think about things when I'm short on motivation, and because Goat just kept relentlessly piling on with more and more crap that I have no defence against at the end of yesterday and convinced me that we are going to lose this game because a) I played pretty crappy because I thought being a mason made me immune to lynching and b) the setup is totally stacked with power roles, and all that made me too depressed to want to think about this game overnight.

Boohoo. I'm one player. You've surely had people suspect you when you're town before and I'm sure it didn't cause you to completely give up on the game. The other part that doesn't really make much sense here is that according to the below and your posts yesterday, YOU THINK I'M SCUM. Really? One player who you "think is scum" is going after you and you call the game quits and want to give up over it?

Why would the setup having a lot of power roles make you depressed?

But, McGriddle has confirmed the presence of a scum roleblocker, so pops may have been right in this post. And since we know Incog, for one, picked up on pops' breadcrumbing, it would make sense for him to be blocked N1 is Incog is scum, so I'm not going to write Goat off as town. And he was also a strong component of the shift from Red to SC yesterday.

Seriously? You were Mr. I have a really strong town read on RedCoyote. I was the reason there was ever even a wagon on RedCoyote in the first place. I put the first vote there, I encourage people to get off the Pops wagon and get off the McGriddle wagon to try to get that wagon going.

[Goatrevolt]

Actually... we need to be careful not to leave too many dead tonight. If we mislynch today. If Pops dies from his role, a vig shot and a scum NK, that's 4 dead players. If none of those hit scum we're screwed.

Pops, I think you should protect me. We need to keep as many confirmed players alive as we can. I don't think we have the opportunity to risk you targeting an unknown and dying at this stage of the game.

I think McGriddle should shoot a mason. Not sure that's going to go over well, but I really think a mason HAS to be scum. I don't see how it works any other way.

This is interesting. If Goat is scum, then he is trying to set up exactly the situation he warns against here. And, in fact, managed it, but perhaps couldn't be sure that McGriddle was going to shoot a mason? I don't know, even though McGriddle never confirmed either way, I think it was still pretty clear that was what he was going to do. Certainly I think it would be worth the risk for scumGoat to leave McGriddle unblocked last night to make this happen.

I thought it likely he would shoot a mason and that was my hope. And by having Pops protect me I was guaranteeing that he wouldn't die from his role and was keeping me the mostly confirmed townie alive in the process.

No lynch would pretty much mean "Goat dies and we're in the same position tomorrow."

[Goatrevolt]

Actually... we need to be careful not to leave too many dead tonight. If we mislynch today. If Pops dies from his role, a vig shot and a scum NK, that's 4 dead players. If none of those hit scum we're screwed.

This is also why the setup is not unbalanced. Swingy, but not unbalanced.

Meh. I think it's unbalanced for the town to have 2 confirmed to each other masons, and 1 role (pops) that can confirm both as town as well as 1 role (Nabakov) that can confirm that both are masons, along with 2 vigilantes who can confirm themselves.

That's 4 roles that can be confirmed and 2 roles that know each other are confirmed town and can be confirmed by 2 other roles.

[Goatrevolt]

But anyway, that surplus player gives an opportunity for one of the vigs to kill me or Jahudo without it being insta-lose, so No Lynch totally is a bad idea.

Yes, definitely this.

Who do you want to lynch today?

[Goatrevolt]

As I see it, Red is probably the best lynch today.

If the masons are scum, Red is the most likely partner to them.
If the masons are town, Red pretty much has to be scum.
If the masons are scum AND truly masons (as pops proposed, would create a neat interaction between weak doc/town rolecop/scum masonry.) then Red would be the scum roleblocker.

So basically, I think a Red lynch + an Ectomancer vigging of a mason would be the best route to take today.

Elmo, while it is possible for Ectomancer to be scum and McGriddle town, it does seem very unlikely to me. That means that Ectomancer either has the ability to make a vig kill as scum in addition to the scum kill or that he claimed the Patrick night kill as his own. If he claimed the Patrick kill as his own it helped to suggest pops was town by suggesting that Pops had blocked a scum kill attempt on me which also helped to suggest I was town. Not sure if you can attribute Ectomancer as being able to think that far ahead, but that's not the outcome he would want from that claim as scum. Scum having an extra kill every other night is unlikely, and if he really did have that, I doubt he would claim it. So no, I don't think Ectomancer is likely to be scum here.

He claimed one-shot vig as an even night vig, and then rather than saying nothing and allowing people to be skeptical about McGriddle's claim, he stepped forward to defend McGriddle, an unnecessary play if he's scum. There would be no reason for him to step up and help confirm McGriddle as town, especially with the wagon on McGriddle and Clergyman pushing his claim as fake or wrong. The only way that play makes sense from my perspective is if both Ectomancer and McGriddle are scum together, and I don't think McGriddle is scum.

[Goatrevolt]

This makes me unhappy.

Joined: 07 Sep 2007
Location: happy

Lynch all liars.

[Goatrevolt]

However I find it hard to pair Elmo and Incog together when he said this:

And I'm almost positive that Elmo is town here too. Unless Elmo figured out how to play a scum game completely unlike his normal scum game, I just don't see him as scum here at all.

What about that makes it hard for you to pair Elmo and Incognito?

[Goatrevolt]

If I'm scum, it means pops got roleblocked night 1 when targeting me AND the scum killed Patrick along with Ectomancer (or Ecto is also scum). That alone is an unlikely combination but it also means the following: Night 2 he targets me and dies and we skip a kill AND roleblock McGriddle. The only way that could make any sense is if the scum team is me + masons, which is a fairly illogical scum team based on the way I've been pushing them as scum so fervently. Any other scum pairing with me and I would have killed a townie, let Pops die when targeting me and let McGriddle shoot a townie for 3 town deaths giving hypothetical goat-scum team the win last night.

[Goatrevolt]

I still think the masons could be scum even with the pops kill as well simply because as long as Pops is protecting me, he and I form a semi-masonry of sorts in that it's unlikely anyone lynches pops and similarly I won't be NKed while he's in the game (and I wasn't going to get lynched either). It was probably better for them as scum to get rid of that rather than shoot a player like Ectomancer or Elmo or McGriddle. McGriddle being shot would confirm a roleblocker and make Ecto look better. Ecto being shot makes McGriddle look better and gets rid of a potential mislynch, and Elmo being shot confirms that a role-holder has to be scum (either a vig or mason).

[Goatrevolt]

Elmo:

They are quite possibly scum masons. Hoopla was in Zoraster's Caught in the Crossfire, and it had scum masons, and we both reported enjoying the role. Scum masons would be quite a fun interaction with a role cop. It says their ROLE: they are masons. You still have to figure out if one or the other is town or scum to determine the other's alignment.

Also, Masons with Weak Doctor = two confirmed townies for the price of one doc protect, which seems extremely town balanced, not even taking into account 3 other confirmable "town" roles.

The interaction between Town Role Cop who can see they are masons, Scum Masons, and a Town Weak Doc who would be naturally inclined to protect the masons (and thus die, but cast suspicion on them) sounds like a pretty elegant setup design to me.

[Goatrevolt]

I'm going to be gone for the next two days probably without internet. I may check in a time or two during that period but I wouldn't count on it.

I'd like to see what Jahudo has.

If we really think that both the Vigilantes are telling the truth, then how can you not advocate lynching a Mason? Wouldn't it be a sure thing, if you took that point of view?

If I were Ecto, McGriddle, or Goat, the team of me, Elmo, and Incog honestly wouldn't seem rational.

I don't think the scum team is You/Elmo/Incognito. I don't think you and Elmo fit as scum together, for one.

I've already pointed this out before, but I'll go ahead and say it again.

If the masons are scum, you are the most likely scum partner to them. Elmo and Incognito both make much less sense based on how they were on Jahudo and then swapped to Iamusername day 2. It seems unlikely that they would try to wagon both of their scum buddies in opposition to the pops lynch. And if the masons are scum, then both vigs are probably town, leaving you as the remainder.

However, if the masons are not scum, then you are almost assuredly scum.

That means the scum team is between the 2 vigs and the 3 vanilla players. In that scenario, I doubt both vigs are scum and I doubt McGriddle is scum. So out of the 4 players Elmo, Ecto, Red, Incognito, all 3 others would have to be scum, and I read all 3 of those players as more townie than you.

The problem with lynching you would be the possibility of losing to a Masons + Incognito or Masons + Elmo team that could have been avoided by simply lynching a mason, but that risk is balanced by the possibility the masons are town.

And if the scum team is you + masons, then you're much more likely to be the roleblocker because of the possibility that they actually ARE masons.

[Goatrevolt]

Goat threw me off because he led me to believe there was something in NabNab that I wasn't seeing, but it turns out he was really just on the wagon because Elmo was.

Totally untrue. I don't know how you could honestly believe this.

At any rate, I'm back now and pretty disappointed with the activity. Iam's case on Incognito doesn't really convince me at all. A lot of the points with respect to Incognito's stance on Jahudo actually suggest to me that Incognito is town and trying to genuinely hunt for scum rather than the opposite. I agree with Incognito about Jahudo's play during day 1 fitting the scum-Jahudo meta and I don't think Incognito's "Jahudo reading Command Point game in 20 minutes" thing to be bad either. I did the exact same thing with SerialClergyman early day 1 and there didn't seem to be problems with me doing that.

I want to lynch Red Coyote. I don't think this is town Red. He seems completely distant from all discussion in the game. It's hard to explain this well, but he's given basically no analysis on the mason claims, and didn't on pops claim or McGriddle's claim until pressured to do so, etc. He comes into the thread periodically and addresses things pointed at him or plops a vote on Elmo (that he really isn't pushing), but I don't sense from him any kind of indication that he cares about lynching scum today or piecing together who the last scum are or anything like that.

I'm also really put off by his stance on me post Pops claim. It strikes me as a "but I have points I can use against Goatrevolt, so I don't want him to be confirmed town because I can no longer use those points!" kind of position. That's purely a scum position. A town player is happy to have a suspect become confirmed town because it takes them closer to finding real scum. If someone becomes confirmed town and you are a townie and thought that person was scum, the only reason you might care about whether or not you have points against them is if you doubt that they are confirmed. Red, however, has never expressed doubt as to whether or not I am confirmed. He didn't shed doubt on Pops claim or try to say that he doesn't believe I'm not confirmed, but yet still expresses disappointment that he can't use his shiny points against me.

If you're scum and someone becomes confirmed town that you have points against, you're disappointed because that's one less townie you can lynch and likewise one less townie you can put your vote/arguments against in order to appear to be town or appear to be scum hunting. I feel like Red is unwilling to relinquish his points against me because those same points are his claim to townieness. His "scumhunting" in regards to me is the basis behind how he is appearing to be a townie, and he's unhappy to have that ground fall out from under him.

Vote RedCoyote

[Goatrevolt]

Incognito, if the masons are scum, who is their scum buddy?

[Goatrevolt]

These reads were intrinsically tied together; we talked about this ad nauseum on the first day. You said several times that if NabNab flipped scum, then you were sure that Elmo was town. You also said to discount your Elmoread if NabNab flipped town. I discounted it, but apparently you didn't as your Elmoread hasn't changed one iota. Do us both a favor and don't sit here and deny that Elmo's vote didn't influence your NabNab vote, please. There's no sense getting into that argument again.

Apparently there is sense, since you still don't get it. My NabNab read influenced my Elmo read, not the other way around. How many times do I have to say this for you to get it? Sheesh. I really don't understand why this is so damn hard for you to understand. My read briefly changed to Neutral on Elmo after Nabakov was town, hence me asking Ectomancer to elaborate on his Elmo read. But then I went back to thinking he was town again.

After reading your post, I'm pretty sure you're scum. My vote stays.

[Goatrevolt]

To explain further, I don't think you are being genuine/sincere/town-like in your posts today. Jahudo jumped on you yesterday. I don't know why you waited for now to call him scum for 180'ing on you. You also don't seem very convinced or enthusiastic in your stances. If you thought he was so likely to be scum, why did it take you so long to come to this conclusion after you had posted a rebuttal to his case on you with nothing more to it almost 24 hours ago?

[Goatrevolt]

But you only voted NabNab based on Elmo's case and Elmo's vote, Goat. Do you really contend that Elmo had absolutely nothing to do with your original NabNab vote in post 148? If that's your position, then we'll leave it at a misunderstanding. Obviously you have no reason to be dishonest, but I completely misread that post. Fatally so, it would appear.

Elmo had absolutely nothing to do with my vote in 148? Why would you assume he did? I never said anything like "I'm voting Nab because of Elmo" or anything like that at all, nor have I ever said anything like that. In 188 I further explained how I had thought Nab was scum from the point I FOSed him (far earlier in the day, like page 3) but was waiting to see what happened. This right here proves the point I've been making all game that you misrepresent me, don't read my posts accurately, or what have you. And then when I explain what I truly mean or what the real interpretation is, you don't bother to listen to it.

RedCoyote does have a point on Ectomancer, though.

Unvote

I would like to hear more from Elmo, Ecto and friends before proceeding.

Everyone needs to say right here and right now who they want to lynch. If we're sitting at 5 townies 3 scum right now, where are the other 4 townies who actually care about lynching scum? It's really sad how dead this game has been the last few days and how uninterested people seem to be in getting the right lynch today.

[Goatrevolt]

Goat and Ecto may remember that Innocence Falls only had 3 VTs.

And I was vanilla, Ecto was a vig, and you were a mason in that game. If Ectomancer is truly a vig in this game, that would make 3 games where I've played with Ecto and he's been a vig...

I think it's highly unlikely that Ecto is scum if the masons are scum. One out of 2 vigs is scum and the mason pair and all claimed vanilla townies are actually town? Pretty unlikely.

Iamusername: Who do you think is scum beyond Incognito?

[Goatrevolt]

So you think the mod would make all PR's town? Interesting. I haven't thought about this before because it is so town heavy... But considering the probability of all the claimed VT's being scum is highly unlikely.

What if they were 3 scum power roles? Something like RB + Tracker + Godfather?

They might've chosen to claim vanilla instead of their power role because it would otherwise look like there were too many town power roles. Without knowing what the scum have, I don't know how confident we should be in saying the town is over-powered.

Maybe, although those games are still heavily town balanced. Adding scum power roles is not an acceptable balance to too much town power. However, what theoretically is a balanced game is not necessarily the same as what this game is.

Vote RedCoyote

[Goatrevolt]

I'm not 100% convinced the masons are scum, and if they are scum then Red makes the most sense as a scum buddy to them. I'd rather lynch RedCoyote today, and attempt the vigging of a mason tonight. I think that's a stronger overall play than risking the game on the Masons being scum.

[Goatrevolt]

Owned. Well played scum team. Let me just say how surprised I am both vigs are scum. I was definitely doubting my read on the mason team as scum that last day, which is why I really wanted Red lynched over a mason and Ectomancer to shoot a mason the next night. I can't even say that I was close to getting the scum team, though, so yeah... I was thinking the team might be something like Red/Incog/Ectomancer, but I never had both vigs pegged as the scum.

The signs were there. McGriddle's claim of being roleblocked was definitely sketchy. That post was highly suspicious to me, and I thought about it while I was gone and meant to ask more about it when I got back from my trip but completely forgot. Ectomancer's claim was highly suspicious as well and more attention should have been placed there.

All in all, I got thoroughly thrashed. Nice job.

[Goatrevolt]

"I guess my biggest fear is for Goat or someone else to look at the pops-kill and say "hm. would it make sense for a hypothetical IAUN/Jah scum team to kill him when they were trying to push the idea of a him-scum during D2?" Night-kills right before LyLo just concern me a lot because night-time WIFOM analysis usually works WELL during LyLo."

Damn. I did say that. I just didn't pay it enough mind. And my next target was RedCoyote anyway

[Goatrevolt]

Probably the biggest mistake town made (I think) is after the claims we lynched two vanilla when it was clear we had way too much power. Worse than that, two groups of two of the power were CONNECTED, so if we'd hit one scum, we'd get the other one.

Very true. We might have come to this conclusion had we more time. The deadline rush thing sucked a lot, though. .

Man, I made so many mistakes this game. Live and learn I guess. I just hate to play poorly .

[Goatrevolt]

Hate to say I told you so...

but I kinda' did. (At least about McG)

Oh well, gg.

[Goatrevolt]

I liked the bankable deadlines. I don't like random fluffing around at the end of the day after a lynch is decided either. You did a great job modding the game, Hoopla, by the way. You were quick, on top of things, and ran the game cleanly throughout.

The RedCoyote lynch was mostly just the easy way out. I wasn't sure enough about the masons to risk taking a shot at them, and I figured that regardless if it was the masons that Red had a fairly good shot at being scum (since I was convinced Elmo was town). Like SC said, we needed to take a shot at the masons or Vigs on day 2. Also, after reading through the dead player quick topic, I will say that a lot of the dead players had correct reads, but it's hard to act on those reads when you're not pushing them very convincingly. Like Pops was correct about Ectomancer, but thought 9 other people were scum as well. Or SC was right about McGriddle, but your last comment at the end of day 2 was about how we should have lynched Pops who came up town immediately afterward. All in all, I will say that Patrick's death did contribute to really the only suspicion of Incognito I had all game and SC's strong town read on Iam combined with Iam's clearing me as town + pops death were enough to give me at least reasonable doubt in lynching them day 3.

If I had chosen the right VT between Red/Incognito, then we would have seen Incognito flip roleblocker, and then when there wasn't an Ectomancer vig kill the following night, the game would have been unlocked. Sigh.

[Goatrevolt]

I'm still pretty damn surprised McGriddle thought up that claim on his lonesome. More attention ought to have been paid to the idea he was couched into it, possibly with daytalking, but eh.

With his accident, it appears he really was...couched...into it. (Sorry if that was in poor taste).

Agreed, though. That was a very legit-seeming fake claim. The only time I questioned it was when he said he targeted Jahudo, didn't announce that he was roleblocked, and didn't even speculate on it. That seemed way too convenient/fake to me.

I'm never letting Ectomancer off the hook again. I may read him as scummy in every game, but he's just going to have to deal with it when he's actually town .

[Goatrevolt]

Thinking that Elmo is town is a scum tell.

And yes, there is always paranoia that people who currently trust you are going to turn on you when you're scum. I don't think that's uncommon at all.

[Goatrevolt]

Haha, for me in this game it might have been. I was beginning to think my defense of him was beginning to seem unnatural at certain points.

To some extent I was bothered by how closely you two were agreeing on everything, but I read Elmo pretty strongly as town and for some reason I connected the two of you in terms of alignments, so my read of Elmo as town somehow trickled down to you as well. I was pretty bamboozled this game, though.

[Goatrevolt]

I think Elmo just likes to argue.

[Goatrevolt]

I had no problem with your play. You put more into the game than most of the rest of the town, and whether or not others will admit it, they obviously didn't care too much about the game either.