Mini 962 - Mafia In Murrieta - Over!

[AlmasterGM]

/confirm

sup cruelty.

[AlmasterGM]

vote agm

bandwagon

no u

Vote: Cruelty

[AlmasterGM]

Vote: JackALope2323

Who do you think you're fooling?

I don't get it.

[AlmasterGM]

Vote: JackALope2323

Who do you think you're fooling?

I don't get it.

I'm asking him who he thinks he's fooling.

Who do you think he is trying to fool and what is he fooling them about?

[AlmasterGM]

What is everyone's timezone? This is mostly directed towards our overseas friends who may be posting at strange hours, so that I don't expect a post from you during my afternoon in case of a tight deadline.

EST. I usually post between 11am and 3am.

What is everyone's general mafia experience?

Been playing on here almost a year, used to play on some other forum but it was quite different, play a couple IRL sessions per month.

About how much can we expect you to be posting?

My posting fluctuates. Sometimes I will post multiple times per day, other times I will be bogged down with RL and will not post for a day or two.

Anyway…

Unvote. Vote: thegeckoj

.

you sure are chatty when all he wanted was a simple answer. and pointing out that you take mafia very seriously shows me that you are going to possibly become over-aggressive. maybe a way to prepare people for your scummy-like bullying?

First, the analysis itself is poor because it equates a playstyle/personality choice with scumminess. There are MANY very good players on this site who are aggressive. There also a wide variety of chatty and quiet players. Designating these qualities as being good or bad is problematic.

Second, I consider making statements in the form of questions to be scummy. A question seeks the approval of others in the group, something scum are interested in because they require it to survive. Town usually do not exhibit this behavior. Moreover, questions-attacks are bad because they let people backpedal later because it makes them appear less committed to their position.

I am also not a fan of Scott because of this reason:

I'm going to go ahead and unvote, vote Scott. Two posts now where he's subtly undermined someone's vote. First it was after Gecko voted Ice for making long posts. Then it was to Kerrigan when he unvoted Jack to vote Gecko.

[AlmasterGM]

I think Espeonage is winning Espeonage v. SaintKerrigan.

[AlmasterGM]

Explain.

If the point of the RVS was just to be funny, why wouldn't we just take turns telling jokes? Most joke votes aren't really funny - I can't remember ever laughing at one. And the reason for that is because the RVS actually exists for the reason Esp is saying - to build pressure and try and make something happen. [/quote]

i'm here, i just don't think there's much relevant being said at the moment. it seems like there's a whole bunch of busy-talk that's not really getting us anywhere.

FoS: cruelty

If nothing is happening, why don't you do something to change that? Moreover, how can you possibly say nothing here is relevant when multiple votes and suspicions are flying around?

[AlmasterGM]

You're assuming that RVS is treated the same way by all players. This is obviously not the case. Clearly you and Espeonage handle RVS in a way that is different from mine. This is not scummy at all; it's just a difference of opinion.

No. You are wrong.

[AlmasterGM]

prod picked up, will post today.

[AlmasterGM]

SUP.

1: do you think that questioning an L3 unvote is really undermining SK's vote on gecko? for that matter, do you think that the cautiousness is warranted on SK's part?

Yes. I think the cautiousness was reasonable

Really, Almaster? Mind expanding on that, rather than a simple "You're wrong"?

Don't really want to argue theory, but here's my test for whether something is right or wrong about doing something in mafia: if everyone did X, would it be a good thing? SK's idea of how the RVS function fails the test. And I'm not saying it's scummy because of it, per say, just that I think he is wrong.

Actually, you are wrong. Kerrigan is exactly right in saying that different people view the RVS in different ways. Some people find it a nice way to start off what can be a fairly intense game in a lighthearted way. They throw out a vote without much of a purpose, and enjoy doing it.

My point is that his view is bad, not that he doesn't have alternative view.

Some people, obviously many of those in this game, find that the point of the RVS is to gauge reactions. I personally agree that this is probably what it is for, but I don't feel that it actually does it. That is why in a majority of games, I tend to introduce myself and ask the questions that I did, and then try to poke at someone's random vote. Jack poked at my random vote, and this action ended the RVS. Almost nothing useful was gained during the RVS, which is almost always the case.

Yes, the point of the RVS is to get out of it. SK does not contribute to that at all - in fact, he's antithetical to it because he thinks we should just try and be funny. I repeat: If the goal is to be funny, why don't we just all tell jokes until someone says "…ok, and by the way, I vote X." Oh wai, that's the RVS, minus wasting time telling jokes. See my "does something suck" test above.

And now the only thing useful gained from the discussion ABOUT the RVS that is already over is that you are extremely narrow minded and are willing to force your opinions on others.

I am giving you my opinion. That is the point of this game: to give people your opinion. You are free to do whatever you want. Moreover, it's extremely hypocritical for you to say that I'm narrow minded when YOUR advocacy about me is "actually, you are wrong" and then a massive text wall about why you are right.

@ Almaster – What are your thoughts on Charter and Jack?

charter: nothing bad to say here.

Jack: I think Jack is defending geko, which is a strange move. If geko flips scum, then I think Jack is in the danger zone. Speaking of which…

appreciate you not wanting to call me stupid, but ill agree with you that i am a bit naive. i have played 2 games and both i honestly wasnt super instrumental. i still dont have a complete grasp of the game and am continuing to learn. i know this is exactly what a scum might say and i understand the wifom arguement so i wont play devils advocate about that.

another part of the reason i play the way i do is because i am the exact opposite of ICE and dont really take the games seriously. of course i enjoy winning but playing the game regardless is enjoyable to me.

ill do a reread and see if i cant get a better tell on someone.

Only 3 legit posts in and he's already dropping the newb card. And the "I just want to have fun" card. And WIFOM. And undermining himself. And saying not to take stuff seriously. And admitting he doesn't have a good read on anyone.

Not good.

[AlmasterGM]

Gah, prodded again. I need to get it together. Post coming later today.

[AlmasterGM]

First, I apologize for not posting.

Second, I am 100% ready to swing the hammer on SaintKerrigan. This "self-vote to force self-claim" argument is terribad and obviously a scum creation. Moreover, SK has been playing on here MORE than long enough to know not to do this as town. Since I haven't posted in a while, however, I'll hold off for a few days in case anyone wants a chance to interrogate me before D1 ends.

Third, I want to take a look at Hoopla's replacement in. He says he has a town read on Espeonage, and while I understand the "looks town overall" argument, I think he contradicts himself when he arrives at this conclusion. For example, in 270, he says

1) Esp produces lots of weak individual scumtells.
2) But he looks town overall.

A few posts later in 278, he says

"Esp is only guilty of fencesitting and not reading posts, and these

aren't scummy.

"

How did Esp's posts go from being scummy individually but collectively town to individually not scummy and (thus) collectively town? Additionally, the analysis doesn't show how Esp. is

town,

it only says he's not scum. Where's the analysis as to how these supposedly null reads make Esp. town?
Lastly on this point, I don't really understand the fencesitting isn't scummy argument itself. Don't scum have more of incentive to fencesit so they can avoid being pinned to a particular advocacy in case it heads south?

What I like even less than Hoopla's defense of Esp, though, is Iceninja's defense of Scott against Hoopla's attacks.

It starts out with a gentle prod against the Scott Wagon and an attempt to switch the discussion away from Scott by asking Hoops for alternative targets.

While I agree that you suggest Scott is active lurking, I only partially agree because of meta read. He's playing similarly to how he did in our last game together where he was town. However, if Scott really is town, then he would help us out a lot by giving us more opinions about players and what is going on. I currently have a neutral-ish read on him because his moderately anti-town play is somewhat evened out by my meta read on him. I'm really not feeling like he is deserving of a day 1 wagon.

If your Scott wagon doesn't follow through very well, who would you be targeting for a lynch instead?

When Hoopla responds, however, he switches to offense and chainsaws by calling Hoopla "opportunistic."

I understand you point, but your entire case against him is an opportunistic vote and his play style. The way he is playing can not be interpreted as scum because he does the exact same thing as town. While his vote was indeed potentially opportunistic, and deserving of pressure, you said that you're comfortable lynching him today. That is going way too far.

I think this is problematic because, if Ice and Scott are scum together, Ice knows that Scott can't suddenly jump out and begin posting mountains, so he has to mount the defense for him. If Ice is scum and Scott is town, Ice looks good when Scott flips town and can use the previously setup ammo against Hoopla to get another potential lynch. The only other possibilities involve Ice being town, in which case I just don't get why he would defend lurkerannoying Scott.

That being said, I definitely want to lynch SK today. And I apologize again for not posting. This is the two week finals period for me - if ya'll want a replacement, I won't blame you. Otherwise, I can promise smaller posts until May 18th and my full attention after that.

[AlmasterGM]

Also, forgot to mention this in my first post, by Super Awesome Mega Pimp! is scummy as hell for defending SK. There is no defense agains that move. Flip doesn't even matter either - it's either defending the buddy or a lame attempt to look good tomorrow.

[AlmasterGM]

What I meant by this is Hoopla's entire case against Scott is that Scott made an opportunistic vote and has a play style that Hoopla disagreed with. I do not feel that Hoopla has done anything opportunistic.

That makes more sense. Thanks for clarifying. Even so, though, what is your opinion on how to handle Scott, who posts infrequently (according to meta) but isn't necessarily scum (because of meta … which I haven't actually read, btw, I am just taking your word for it)?

AGM, what is your opinion of Kerrigan pre self vote?

There was that whole early argument about how the RVS should function - I thought SK was very blatantly wrong and he was annoying me, but that didn't necessarily make him scum if he legitimately believed what he was saying. There were also a couple of other things that put me the wrong way that occurred throughout the day. I wouldn't have made a big deal out of them, though, if SK hadn't exploded them all out of proportion.

[AlmasterGM]

Almaster is acting like it's utterly impossible to have a town read on SK, while completely ignoring my logic for doing so. That's how scum chain mislynches.

Vote: AlmasterGM

Wow, OMGUS much? The fact is SK was scummy as hell and I don't blame anyone for lynching him over his gambit crap. The fact that you magically thought to defend him is absurdly sketch.

And I'm totally down for Scott wagon. Let's roll.

Vote: Scott

[AlmasterGM]

last exam tomorrow, activity starts tuesday.

[AlmasterGM]

Here are my thoughts post by post starting from the beginning of D2.

PAGE 15

Right off the bat, Scott and Jack get on Ice’s Esp wagon. That’s fine.

SAMP shows up and OMGUS’s. This guy needs to die. His behavior on D1 was unacceptably scummy, I’m shocked he hasn’t gotten more attention.

Then cruelty posts this gem:

hmm i'm not sure how true this statement is.

whilst yeah, lynching town is generally not pro-town, in this case i think there's reasonable justification for it. i don't like you attacking someone for what was ultimately a necessary/inevitable/reasonable hammer.

my biggest issue with espeonage is the lack of commitment to a particular issue - he's acknowledged he's been deliberately fencesitting which leads essentially to active lurking.

vote espeonage. this goes back to your play yesterday. i'm happy enough to remove it if you can (through awesome scumhunting) redeem yourself.

First, I’m not seeing the justification as to how lynching town can be protown. Give me one reasonably plausible scenario? Second, he says “fencesitting is scummy,” votes Esp, and then fencesits himself when he agrees to unvote Esp if he starts scumhunting. This is contradictory because it makes his Esp vote seem like a pressure vote when it isn’t, because he just called Esp on several scumtells. How does Esp scumhunting make those tells go away? Combined with the fact that it was the 4th vote on the wagon and Esp is now making a plausible town PR claim, this looks mad sketch.

PAGE 16

Scott then accuses me of being suspicious for agreeing to go along with Hoopla’s Scott wagon. Forgive me if I don’t put much credence in his obv-OMGUS response, especially given that he did the EXACT same thing with the Esp wagon. I don’t see anything scummy about giving Hoopla a little gas to power her wagon.

Then Scott claims he is just trying to get me to do something. I despise posts like these. First, by saying your vote is baseless and all you want is attention, you undermine its value entirely. Why should I respond if I know it has no actual weight? Second, it gives you an auto-out because you can just say “well, he started posting again” anytime you want.

Magna asks if I find Scott more scummy than Esp or SAMP. My order is as follows (at this point in the thread): SAMP > Scott > Esp.

Esp posts a give-up post. Normally, I’d call him out on this, but recently I’ve seen 3 give-up posts and all 3 of them have been from town, so I’m reevaluating whether this is actually a scumtell or not.

Ice then posts the case on Scott. I am confused as to why he didn’t keep pushing for someone else to make the case, especially considering we didn’t really need another wagon at that point. Here are the possible conclusions: If either Esp is scum, then it’s scummy because there’s a motive to actively direct traffic away from the Esp wagon. Otherwise, it’s a no tell, and Ice maybe even gets town points for presenting alt-options.

PAGE 17

Cruelty votes for me. I’m not surprised, cruelty votes for me at every possible opportunity he gets. I’ve already explained my Soctt vote and I stand behind that explanation.

Scott comes in and agrees with ice

again[/i.] *echo echo echo*
Ice says he can’t “catch SAMP on anything.” This is because SAMP isn’t posting. If Ice is able to call ME out on not posting, why can’t he call out SAMP? Also, @ice, don’t you think SAMP was hella scummy at the end of D1?

SAMP makes another useless “hay guyz I’m here, focus on AGMs inactivity instead” post.

PAGE 18 + 19 later.

Also, preempt to all the cases on me: Yes, I didn't post for awhile. That was my mistake; I should not have joined this game. If I get lynched for this, fine, there is nothing I can do about it now except not do it again in the future. Therefore, I am not going to argue about it with anyone.

[AlmasterGM]

PAGE 18

by holding fire, i mean i'm not really pushing for his lynch right now. whether i do or not is dependent on how he makes his comeback.

What's a comback?

Bullshit. First in your above post you say all three times you have seen a self-vote it has been townie. So you've never seen a Mafia self vote. So how can you claim to lecture me on how a Mafia self-vote differs when you have not seen one?

I've seen it. Lots of times.

My suggestion is that we have him hide behind someone we think is scummy. If he turns up dead in the morning, we've found some scum. If he doesn't, we lynch the scummy player in the future. If they flip scum, we've nailed Esp. If they flip town, then we haven't gained any ground, but we haven't lost any either becuase we lynched someone sucmmy.

PAGE 19

the problem with getting him to hide behind playerX is that the mafia knows who he's hiding behind and can get a two-for-one special (if the claim is legit).

True, but if we hide him behind someone scummy then the mafia kill basically becomes a Vig shot, seeing as they are taking out people we want dead anyway.

Hoopla and Charter discuss this post:

Ok if you look at how late in the day it was you will realise that we were approaching deadline.

Going by standard Votecount scumhunting procedure that means that there is a better than likely possibility that Jack and scott are scum. Jack doesn't seem like scum to me at this point.

Vote: Scott

I agree with charter. If he just CLEARED Jack, why the hell would he indict him as scum? Also, no breadcrumb? WTF? If Esp flips scum, Hoopla loses major town points for endorsing the claim. Also, let's not forget that Hoopla replaced getko, who was scummy.

Either way, though, I don't think we should lynch Esp today. Instead, hide him behind Scott or something.

Unvote. Vote: SAMP.

[AlmasterGM]

I read through SAMP in ISO as promised. I'll get to other players later. The overall thing I noticed is that SAMP has been uncharacteristically lurky and with his massive ego in check. Either he's calmed down some lately, or he's playing his game differently. I'm not going to read deeply in to it, but I'm definitely waiting for his flip in a game we played together that I'm dead in.

Why are you voting for me and not SAMP? Aren't we both guilty of the same thing, except I was actually claiming to be busy whereas SAMP has no excuse?

[AlmasterGM]

If Hoopla is right and Esp is town, what is your opinion of her then?

[AlmasterGM]

I proposed policy lynching Espeonage day 3 if he survives simply because the night kill protection the comes with the hider claim, combined with the fact that this is not a themed game leads me to believe that the likelihood of it being a false claim is much higher than the likelihood of him actually being a hider. This is also augmented by the fact that Espeonage has played fairly scummy, and claimed at L-2 when no hammer threat was posed.

That's not a policy lynch because you're lynching him for acting scummy, not because his play is inherently anti-town. Semantics aside, though, what is the point of lynching him if we never verify the identity of the person he hid behind? Shouldn't we try and set it up so he hides behind confirmed scum and survives or dies (assuming we have the time to do so, of course)? Sure, Esp gets to stick around awhile longer, but we're finding scum in the process, so it's not that big of a distraction.

[AlmasterGM]

assuming we have the time to do so, of course

We DON'T have time. We're using him as a cop of sorts, this isn't to gauge him being scum or not. Espeonage is going to die, scum or town. We're going to use him to determine who to kill.

Who are we telling him to hide behind?

[AlmasterGM]

1. AlmasterGM. His D1 post attacking me for defending Kerrigan is a textbook example of scum setting up a mislynch. He never shows how my defense is scummy, he just vaguely suggests that there's no way town would do it. I've been questioning him on this all day and he's been avoiding 'em.

How is saying you think someone is scummy and that they should be lynched "textbook setting up a mislynch?" AFA the questions go, requote please and I'll answer?

giving mafia a free two-for isn't particularly pro-town either imo. i find the attitude shift questionable - it's not ok to lynch scummy town (given that they're unquestionably going to be a liability later on), but it's ok to let the mafia potentially kill 2 scummy town?

I never said (and there's no such thing) as "scummy town." If you're scummy, you're not town, and we can lynch you. We were discussing players who are antitown, meaning they are probably town but still aren't helping the town out. I think it's better to just let these people live and lynch scum.

But look at it. He talks about a scumhunting procedure, that is very rigid and deterministic, but then gives an out to Jack anyway. He wouldn't do that if he didn't have other information that trumped this logic in his mind.

What's the "out"? sure, he's not voting Esp, but that wagon probably isn't happening anyway. It doesn't seem like he's suddenly happy with Esp living and thinks he's town.

He shouldn't hide with Almaster and he can't hide with himself. Charter is next, followed by any of my neutral reads (Scott, you, cruelty). Since the consensus appears to be hide with Scott, I went with that.

Why should he not hide with me? Because you don't want to NK me hmm?

[AlmasterGM]

You say that my defense of Kerrigan is scummy regardless of flip. You never explain why, even when questioned. Your argument is nothing more than "he disagreed with us and was right, so he must be SCUM!"

No, my argument is "he disagreed with us and was right when he had no reason to do so." You keep leaving out the KEY PART which is that your defnese of SK, while correct, was just too miraculous of a brainwave.

I explained my rationale for SK being town in great detail. Why are you acting like I just said "nope, he's town"?

I don't care what your justification was. what SK did was scummy, end of story. You thinking to come up with this elaborate defense is really random and uncalled for from someone who has no additional knowledge of the situation.

And how do you get "focus on AGM" from a post that focuses on Espeonage? Here's the post in question:

My point isn't that you said that explicitly. It's that your posts are designed to make it appear as though you are here without actually talking. Combined with the fact that I was inactive, you fell totally off the radar becuase if people were going to go after an inactive player, they would go after me, and if they were going to go after someone saying stuff, it wouldn't be you becuase you weren't saying anything.

No, because you should be a-hangin'!

obv dodge is obv. Presuming I live through the night, why shouldn't he hide with me?

[AlmasterGM]

People acting lurkey, and posting without saying much tends to not benefit the town, and therefore not playing towards a town win condition. Actively posting and hunting scum is playing towards a town win condition. Only really good scum can fake this good enough to not get caught on their voting patterns. However, I'll never policy lynch a lurker unless I have a really good reason to do so. I much prefer to put pressure on them in order to get a better read.

Ok, so if someone had hammered me today you would've been upset about that?

Deadline is coming up soon. Who has not reread SAMP's posts? I ask because I really think we should be able to get a wagon on him, but it's not happening.

I agree. Is anyone actually reading SAMP in iso? It's an incredible experience you shouldn't miss out on. SAMP is insanely scummy on D1 and he really hasn't improved.

@Ice - why are you so anti-SAMP wagon?

[AlmasterGM]

@Ice: SAMP vs myself for today's lynch. Your pick is?

[AlmasterGM]

I don't get the Hoopla claim. You aren't getting lynched today. Why not try and squeeze a track out tonight and claim tomorrow?

I don't like the Ice wagon hop. Magna didn't really do anything that charter hadn't already explained, in my opinion. It looks to me more like, "well, AGM wagon revival attempt is failing, so I might as well get on the bus."

Otherwise, though, I'm happy with the SAMP lynch, as I was before.

[AlmasterGM]

I don't get the Hoopla claim. You aren't getting lynched today. Why not try and squeeze a track out tonight and claim tomorrow?

I don't like the Ice wagon hop. Magna didn't really do anything that charter hadn't already explained, in my opinion. It looks to me more like, "well, AGM wagon revival attempt is failing, so I might as well get on the bus."

Otherwise, though, I'm happy with the SAMP lynch, as I was before.

[AlmasterGM]

Almaster's post 510 is an absolutely awful attack on SAMP. I wanted to respond to this after SAMP had a chance to defend himself about it, because it was truly bad.

For the record, I'm not doing this to defend SAMP, I find him moderately scummy. However, let's take a look at the pieces of this attack.

No, my argument is "he disagreed with us and was right when he had no reason to do so." You keep leaving out the KEY PART which is that your defnese of SK, while correct, was just too miraculous of a brainwave.

He thought that Kerrigan was town. He wasn't the only one. Why aren't you questioning Espeonage, who hammered despite feeling Kerrigan was town? What about Cruelty who wasn't on the wagon? Fitz thought he was town, and it was probably one of the reasons he was night killed.

I don't care what your justification was. what SK did was scummy, end of story. You thinking to come up with this elaborate defense is really random and uncalled for from someone who has no additional knowledge of the situation.

This. This is what makes me feel comfortable you are scum. You just blindly defy the possibility that maybe people have town reads, and maybe people have different perspectives than you. SAMP tends to get town reads on people and stick with them, so this is not unusual behavior from him. However, he DID justify it. Granted, SAMP said very little about the Kerrigan wagon before his self vote, which is scummy, but once Kerrigan did the self vote, SAMP pointed out that every single time he'd seen someone do this, they flipped town. I really don't think scum is going to make up something like that to defend an easy mislynch wagon.

SAMP has some statistically odd information. It is like seeing a bunch of male black cats, and no female black cats. There are both, sure, but SAMP has only seen male black cats and therefore is going to assume all black cats he sees are male. Faulty logic, yes, but not his fault. What if they were ducks with green heads? You're never going to find a female one of those. Strange analogy, I know, but the whole Kerrigan self voting thing was ultimately a null tell. Some people disagree with me on that statement, and they're allowed to based on personal experience.

Someone coming in here busting through saying "I don't care how many male black cats you've seen, that black cat was a female, it was blatantly obvious, and you had absolutely no idea whatsoever to say otherwise", when you were wrong is just bad.

My point isn't that you said that explicitly. It's that your posts are designed to make it appear as though you are here without actually talking. Combined with the fact that I was inactive, you fell totally off the radar becuase if people were going to go after an inactive player, they would go after me, and if they were going to go after someone saying stuff, it wouldn't be you becuase you weren't saying anything.

Some of his posts do this for sure, but lately he's been a lot more meaningful in his posts. A fact that you seem to be hell bent on misrepresenting.

obv dodge is obv. Presuming I live through the night, why shouldn't he hide with me?

That wasn't an obvious dodge. You lynch your biggest suspect, and investigate (send hider to hide with) your second or third biggest. That is exactly what he's planning on doing.

The day is drawing to a close, and you seem to be the most likely lynch candidate. I understand that your attacks on people are getting desperate, but honestly you're losing this push. Now, charter's points against SAMP are a lot better, and he's done a lot more to convince me that SAMP is scum than you. However, you're just not the town player in this argument.

Unvote, vote AlmasterGM

.

I really liked Magna's post of SAMP. It was well thought out, and makes really good points.

It essentially says the same thing AGM and charter have been saying,

and after doing another more detailed read of SAMP's scumhunting, I'm starting to really see how SAMP has been just coasting. Now I generally don't lynch people based simply on that, especially when they avoided the day 1 mislynch wagon, but I can certainly see a decent argument for having SAMP lynched primarily because I don't really have any intensely strong scum reads besides Espeonage, who bought himself another day with his claim. For the moment, I'm still feeling like Hoopla is the best lynch, but unless someone other than Magna or Scott voices suspicion for Hoopla, I'll see a SAMP lynch through.

Unvote, vote SAMP

We need to hear from cruelty, hopefully some updated opinion, along with Scott taking a stand and Jack hopefully picking up his prod.

Note the vote / full case in the first post and then the bold emphasis (mine) in the second. After actively defending SAMP, saying he wasn't that suspicious, and chainsawing onto me with a full-blown case, Ice suddenly decideds to vote SAMP at the last second because Magna made some relatively short post that, as Ice himself admits, simply rehashed what charter and I had been saying the whole day? And then SAMP convinently flips scum?

Like I said yesterday, this couldn't look more like abandoning the attempted (and failed) counter-wagon for the bus if it tried.

Vote: ICEninja

.

Also, we definitely need to hear who Hoopla tracked and Esp hid behind; seeing as SAMP was roleblocker, we better have some results.

[AlmasterGM]

This was the first piece of the thing you quoted. I found SAMP scummy, yes. Your attack on him was absolutely awful though. Charter and Magna brought up the good points about him. You had a case that made sense to you and such, but the points you brought up simply weren't good.

How can Magna bring up "good points" when you said in your own post that he said "essentially the same thing that charter and AGM have been saying"?

And you can say all you want that you weren't defending SAMP, but the reality was you were finding excuses all day not to vote for him by saying he was only "moderately scummy" and that you didn't really "get" the scum read on him. Seeing as that was your advocacy the WHOLE DAY, I want you to explain specifically to me how a single, short summary post from Magna can changed your mind, especially given you had just posted a massive case on me 24 hours prior.

[AlmasterGM]

Assuming the second NK was a Vig and not a SK, we have 3 lynches remaining. Esp and Hoopla are claimed PRs. Scott is basically confirmed town unless there's a four-person scumteam, which I strongly doubt. Therefore, I suggest we let all three of that group live another night and focus today's actions on one of the following people:

charter
ICEninja
Unsight
And I suppose, for all of your purposes, you can place me on that list as well if you so wish.

[AlmasterGM]

Why is Scott confirmed town?

Because (assuming there is no anti-town 3rd party) if Esp is telling the truth, then Scott and Unsight are town because he would've died if they were mafia. If Esp is lying, then that makes him, cruelty, and SAMP mafia, meaning that if anyone else is mafia, the scumteam is 4+ people, which is highly unlikely for a mini normal with (apparently) few town PRs.

What about Jack/Unsight?
Did Esp hid behind him D1? If so, sorry, forgot about him. Then he's cleared too. Basically charter v you, in which case I obvpick you.

Are you still assuming Espeonage's claim is valid?

It doesn't matter whether it is valid or not; see above reasoning.

Haven't you considered how smart is would be for scum to claim a town PR that won't be night killed?

I'm not assuming Esp is telling the truth; my argument holds water regardless of what his role is. My other point (about letting him live) is this: for every name he names, whether he's scum or town, that's one more person who becomes a confirmed townie. And remember, if Esp is scum, he can't just NK the person he hides behind because that would mean he would die.

Scum could have easily killed Scott for a double kill and getting Espeonage, too.

Did we decide he was hiding behind Scott? I thought he was ambiguous about it yesterday.

They also ignored Hoopla, a claimed power role, in favor of a pro-town player who lynched scum. This just looks downright fishy to me.

Doesn't this make Hoopla look fishy, not Esp?

I really don't see any way out of lynching Espeonage unless we have a power role that can confirm him as town. If he flips hider, we've got 2 confirmed town (Unsight and Scott), and that is worst case scenario. More likely we lynch Espeonage and we have a scum flip, which could potentially end the game.

There was no double-kill N1. It makes a LOT more sense for there to be an even-night Vig, one-shot Vig, roleblocked Vig or a SK variation of those than two mafia families. At the point where that's true, we have at least 3 more lynches left. That's one each for Esp and Hoopla if they're lying (which at this point, I believe Hoopla's claim because unless there are more PRs lurking out there, Vig+Hider (assuming Esp is telling the truth, he might not be)+Tracker vs 2 goons and a roleblocker is very reasonable), plus one to spare. Why not give our claimed PRs another night? We can spare it.

Looking at the flavor text, it seems like both of the dead scum possessed something used to kill the mayor, which would suggest they're in the same mafia family. It seems like cruelty's death (staked to the ground) seems more like a serial killer than a vigilante flavor, but I won't assume anything from that. However, I will assume that both of the dead are of the same mafia family, and probably not a second mafia family. We can expect 2 deaths again tonight, unless we kill a vigilante or serial killer today.

First, going off flavor is a bad idea. Second, Why do you keep going on about these two families? This kind of set up is rare, isn't it? I've never seen it in a mini normal. Killing PR or 3rd party makes MUCH more sense.

We also shouldn't hammer until we hear who Hoopla tracked.

[AlmasterGM]

EBWOP:

What about Jack/Unsight?

Did Esp hid behind him D1? If so, sorry, forgot about him. Then he's cleared too. Basically charter v you, in which case I obvpick you.

[AlmasterGM]

I just ISO'd cruelty looking for links between him and Esp. Here were two posts that caught my eye:

vote espeonage. this goes back to your play yesterday. i'm happy enough to remove it if you can (through awesome scumhunting) redeem yourself.

no.

wait until agm is back. once he's back then no problem.

i'm concerned that we have this guy who has active lurked through the first day phase and a significant portion of the second and we're letting him away with it. i find espeonage scummy, but the dude is here and active, we can hold fire for a little bit and force agm to play or replace out.

In the first one, he votes Esp but gives himself a free out with the "it's a pressure vote only" argument.

In the second, he's trying to get away from the Esp wagon and onto me - the exact same move Ice used at the end of last round.

Neither of these are incredibly conclusive, but it's something to consider.

Next, I agree with massclaim. We need to locate the individual who made the extra kill last night.

Lastly, the fact that Hoopla didn't get a result is VERY odd. If nobody claims the extra kill, this could indicate that there are two scumgroups, each with its own roleblocker. Either that or Hoopla is lying. Honestly, this makes no sense to me.

[AlmasterGM]

I'm VT.

Just Scott left, right?

[AlmasterGM]

Tracker

and

Cop?

Yeah, ok, Esp is a Serial Killer and the last scum is charter. That or 1) Unsight is lying about being a cop, which would be a pretty dumb play considering he's mostly off the radar or 2) Scott is Godfather, in which case we have an extra lynch waiting for him.

Nice bus last round, charter.

[AlmasterGM]

Yo Esp, since you're going to die anyway, want to die a hero and help the town out by telling us who you shot Night 1?

Also, @Ice for when we move to night: jail charter, no NK means gg?

[AlmasterGM]

Unvote. Vote: Espeonage

[AlmasterGM]

are you sk just admit it

[AlmasterGM]

Vote: charter

We have at least one extra lynch left. Even considering the possibility of interference, we are not letting charter live in favor of someone who has been cleared by the cop or a claimed town PR, all of whose claims are very believable at this point given what we know of the setup.

[AlmasterGM]

FAILPROOF PLAN TIME: Why don't we just no-lynch repeatedly and let Unsight and Hoopla scan every single person left in the game? SK's usually have to kill every night, so we'll nab them eventually. That, or 1) they'll have to make a non-charter move in order to not get caught, in which case charter is cleared, and we lynch Scott and then myself (I know I'm not the SK but remember, this plan is foolproof) or 2) we'll turn up totally blank, in which case we are 100% sure it's charter.

gg, sk why don't you just concede now and save us some time.

[AlmasterGM]

wheeeeeeee

[AlmasterGM]

Yay, a win.

I do have to admit that the cruelty SK shot and the lack of a N1 mafia kill were pretty lucky breaks. If those didn't happen, we would've been in a lot more trouble. I do think, however, that we did a good job with SAMP and Esp.