Mini 1003 Mafia - Game Over

[Equinox]

/confirm

[Equinox]

Vote: nopointinactingup

In before obvious scum buddies up to nopointinactingup's slot and makes me lynch him again!

[Equinox]

Four pages in under 24 hours? You guys are really active.

I need to catch up, and from a skim I see stuff I can pick at, so...

Unvote

Also, I'll be out for the day tomorrow, so I won't be contributing until Friday at least.

[Equinox]

All right, what was with all the vote switching? I sort of understand when you say it's a Day 1 tactic, Tasky, but, really, there are better ways to get discussion started than throwing votes around like confetti. That kind of vote switching means that, when it's time for you to truly pressure someone, your vote has no weight; you've shown that you're willing to change on a whim.

Not to mention the rapid switching makes it look like you're something-that-isn't-town trying to find out what sticks. Heck, that was the first reaction I got when I looked at your voting pattern. :/

chihuahua0, I have no idea why you voted nopointinactingup. For one thing, nopointinactingup voted Tasky before you changed votes, so your voting reason is moot. Neither AClockworkMelon nor AWA have voted, either, yet you did not address them in your post.

Nothing else stands out for me at the moment, except perhaps for AClockworkMelon's lack of a vote despite all the RVS votes being tossed around. I'd ask questions and poke people, but I'm running short on time at the moment, so that will have to wait until after my V/LA.

[Equinox]

I'm going to get to analyzing all the posts during my absence, but I guess I can do these first:

a) which role do you prefer to play (no esoteric roles please)? in particular, do you prefer being mafia or townie?
b) how would you characterize your playing-style?
c) if you were to cast an arbitrary vote, who would you vote for?
d) what do you think about bandwagons?
e) what do you think about RVS?

1. Townie. There's freedom in being a townie that one doesn't have with any other role, mainly because a townie has no worries about self-preservation.
2. No idea. Really. I just go with it. >_>
3. Wait, didn't we just go through a round of RVS? What is this question for? (For the record, I voted for nopointinactingup. If I were to vote now, it'd be Tasky.)
4. Bandwagons are a good way to get reactions from people and clarify reads, as long as it's a legitimate and well-backed wagon. Bandwagons are also good stuff to analyze, before and after flips.
5. RVS is a good way to get a game started. Better than RQS, IMO, since RQS leads to theory discussion, which is both useless and anti-town because it distracts people from scum hunting. Save the theory stuff for the Mafia Discussion forum. :/

[Equinox]

A quick comment before I go back into the pile of stuff I'm reading (which includes the catch-up in this game...):

From a skim, the wagon and the suspicions I see being flung around are mostly on active players -- chihuahua0, RetroAudio, Tasky -- with little to no attention to lurkers or active lurkers. Active players say more things than lurkers, which makes it easier for everyone else to pick apart posts. Don't forget the lurkers or the people riding coattails.

Further, I'm getting the feeling that the chihuahua0 wagon is scum-driven. He's a ridiculously easy target, and I'm seeing some signs of a policy lynch going on. That doesn't sit well with me.

This post was mostly based on gut feelings I got while skimming yesterday's and today's posts. I'll have actual logic and evidence when I'm done with the catch-up post.

[Equinox]

The "ANSWER MY QUESTIONS OR DIE" Wall of Text

All hail post numbers!

Basically, this wall is for questions. I realize questions may be missed because this is a large post, but... don't purposefully ignore the questions within. I'll just ask you again. And again. >_>

---

Was there a reason Lemon questioned Zang in post 27?

I don't see the rhetoric Untrod Tripod claims to see from Tasky. I'm 99% serious and 1% joking about that.

I don't understand this vote. Tasky fears bandwagons... why?

but even if used later in the game, how exactly is the mafia supposed to use it? by starting a bandwagon from it, just so I can change target soon after? or by accusing me to be scum try to have me lynched, but by then you know already that it's just my playing style so that won't work out either?

Are you planning on continuing this practice later in the game, when hard stances are more critical to town's win condition? I thought you said this vote-hopping was an early game tactic.

But now we have three people at L-5. It's about a 1/4 chance at least one of them are scum.

Clarification of how you got to this result, please. I don't give points to students who don't show their work.

@Mindgamer - It may be effective scumhunting, but it is also effective in diverting attention from yourself. And he probably isn't the first to act really pro-town to shake off suspicions. Obviously pro-town is usually for the town, but Magna's type of pro-town pushing seems to be doing is spreading suspicions and attention elsewhere, diverting them from himself.

What I don't understand is how else MagnaofIllusion is supposed to do it. His attacks appear to me to be well-rounded, which is a good thing to do in Day 1 as it spreads attention across the player list and prevents tunneling. I also don't see how he is "diverting [attention and suspicions] from himself." Please explain that last part.

d) what do you think about bandwagons?

If the person is condemned as scummy, yes. Policy vote wagons are fine too.

No comment on pressure bandwagons? Would you only join bandwagons on people who are "condemned as scummy"?

3> How do you feel about Magma's attack on you?

I need to go back a little bit to look at it, but I have a gut feeling that he might be using me.

How is MagnaofIllusion "using" you?

I see it as instead of possibly getting rid of a scum, or focusing our suspicions elsewhere, we focus on his newb play.

I may agree with your defense of chihuahua0 (more later), but this is a poor response to MagnaofIllusion's accusation that you are chainsaw defending. Post more evidence behind your defense of chihuahua0, or I start wondering why you so firmly believe he is town.

[Equinox]

Another wall to follow my wall of questions.

You do realise you're a lurker yourself right? And in literary every post you're talking about needing a catchup or running short on time. Take your own advice to heart.

Yes. I really did run short on time, though; I finally got a free day today to tear through the game. Now that I'm caught up, I hope I won't be so inactive again. No promises, of course... because seeing 3-4 new pages in a 24-hour span is rather intimidating.

---

First, I'm going to address something I saw while browsing past the RVS posts:

Throwing votes on people with little to no reasoning is suspicious.

This goes into theory discussion, so I'll only mention this briefly. Sometimes, there are reasons behind votes that cannot be said lest the purpose of the vote be ruined. Unless it's dangerously close to a hammer, wait for the voted player to respond first before jumping on an apparently unreasoned vote.

Of course, consistently voting for no reason is suspicious; it's just that individual votes may not be, depending on circumstances.

---

The argument between RetroAudio and Tasky made me go @_@. I don't process those kinds of arguments very well, so what I'll do instead of reading through those posts again -- because I'll just zone out if I do -- is keep an eye on both of them. Stance-wise, I slightly lean town on Tasky and read null on RetroAudio.

---

Anyone notice that AClockworkMelon is

actively

lurking? He is either riding other players' coattails (refer to posts where he quotes) or making short comments that don't betray any of his thoughts regarding players. Further, he jumped on a chihuahua0 wagon without his own reasoning; he basically cites youngminii and even copies youngminii's FoS. No, no, no.

AClockworkMelon is scum. Lynch him.

Vote: AClockworkMelon

I realize this is a short case, so if anyone wants a post-by-post analysis, I'll willingly deliver. I'm just not making one now because I think you guys will be quite sick of walls by the time you get to this one. (Not to mention I'm sick of typing them. >_<)

[Equinox]

I just remembered that I promised to talk more about chihuahua0 somewhere in my first wall, so I'll go ahead and do this before I hop off elsewhere to rest my boggled brain.

Yes, there is a chance that chihuahua0 is scum. However, I do not believe he is scum because he's been consistent; further, he admitted to anti-town playing style in RQS, and I have reason to believe those responses were honest. I may reconsider if something odd comes about later in the game, but for now I am reading null on him. (Null because I am not going to discount the fact that he hasn't been the most pro-town player around.)

The other reason I don't believe he is scum is the current wagon on him. Easy target is easy.

[Equinox]

Hmm... I just spotted something.

chihuahua0, you voted for nopointinactingup way back in post 62 as a random vote, and you haven't moved your vote since. Who do you think is scum?

[Equinox]

Mod: I voted AClockworkMelon in 149.

[Equinox]

EBWOP: 147.

[Equinox]

The reason I didn't answer question one because you wouldn't be asking the question unless you are going to examine my response.

Do you want us to

not

examine you?

As for the rest of your post, townies have no reason to fear scrutiny. They still win if they die, so they are free to accuse, vote, and defend as necessary. Why are you afraid of people criticizing you?

[Equinox]

Ugh. Another wall of quotes...

Thanks for answering my questions! If I don't address your response, that means I'm happy with it.

The Theory Box

Townies have plenty of reason to fear scrutiny. For one, if you die, you can't play anymore. The other, more game related, would be that if a townie dies, it makes the odds better for the scum.

1. There are other games

that need replacements

, so townies shouldn't fear dying. Fearing scrutiny could get one lynched faster, so that's one reason to not fear being analyzed inside out.
2. I see where you're coming from here, but this isn't as big of a concern early in the game. Right now, we have eleven suspects. This list needs to be narrowed down. If we get lucky, we lynch scum by the first or second day. Probability speaking, however, we're going to lynch townies. While the odds grow for scum for every townie who dies, we also increase our odds of finding scum for every townie who gets lynched.

This goes into discussion of theory, which can get distracting in a game... so I'll leave it at that.

By focusing on others, he is able to change our perspective to focus on them. What I only have is a semi-hunch.

On the other hand, if MagnaofIllusion is town, that's exactly what he has to do: focus on other players he feels are scum. This hunch feels like paranoia.

@Equinox and his typical Wall-O-Text:

Haha. Yeah, that wall I made* was pretty damn big. I'm not going to do that again... I think.

* = refers to a completed game

---

I didn't see this until Tasky pointed it out. So much for zoning out.

Extremely pro-town play can be both pro-town and mafia. I would rather leave it at more a, don't trust you completely stage. Your arguments are cogent, and I respect that, but with caution.

This looks like you're going into the "Too Townie" fallacy. Explain, particularly the part where you say pro-town play can be pro-mafia.

[Equinox]

chihuahua0: You didn't answer these questions.

But now we have three people at L-5. It's about a 1/4 chance at least one of them are scum.

Clarification of how you got to this result, please. I don't give points to students who don't show their work.

d) what do you think about bandwagons?

If the person is condemned as scummy, yes. Policy vote wagons are fine too.

No comment on pressure bandwagons? Would you only join bandwagons on people who are "condemned as scummy"?

chihuahua0, you voted for nopointinactingup way back in post 62 as a random vote, and you haven't moved your vote since. Who do you think is scum?

These are in addition to the question I asked following your post.

[Equinox]

But it seems like you are leaning towards Lemon, am I right? (I might be wrong).

No. I'm quoting Lemon because of some of the things he's saying.

My main suspect, who I want lynched, is AClockworkMelon. I'm reading null on everyone else for the moment... with a few slight-town reads.

[Equinox]

d) what do you think about bandwagons?

I'd rather people vote for someone because they think they're scum than because they want to follow a trend.

Cool. But the question is what you think of bandwagons, not what you think is optimal play.

I thought that to jump on a bandwagon was to follow a trend. My answer was appropriate.

So, was that what you did with your chihuahua0 vote?

[Equinox]

At the risk of being shouted down beneath cries of "OMGUS!",

FOS

: Equinox. The 'case' against me is ridiculous. Maybe you're looking for an easy lynch but I don't think you'll find one here. We've had 7 pages of discussion and you're indifferent towards everyone except me? I'm not buying what you're selling, sorry.

Seriously?

You have contributed absolutely zero scum hunting in this game, and this is your first original FoS. You can hardly accuse me of being "indifferent towards everyone except [you]" when you, yourself, have posted

nothing

in terms of reads towards players or suspicions. You're either piggy backing or spouting theory. I call that active lurking.

Active lurking == SCUM.

Explain what you were doing with your chihuahua0 vote, then. That wasn't you going for an "easy lynch," was it?

[Equinox]

You had your suspicions raised because of two posts from chihuahua0, yet you did not mention this when you voted him. All you said was you were going to copy youngminii's vote and FoS. Why?

I dunno, it looks like Tasky's just rapidly switching targets. He's already voted for 4 different people so far.

I make my opinion known.

Is this QFT from you representative of your opinion of this game?

You've made only one case against one player, and you did not deliver that case against Equinox we awaited. Worse, you picked a very easy target. Normally, I don't find that as big of a scum tell as others do, but when coupled with your active lurking, it's one big, black mark on your file.

Excuse me if I don't feel like saying what's already been said. People are aware of Tasky's behavior without my making this giant post about it.

You had no problem "saying what's already been said" before. Why hesitate when it came to accusing Tasky?

tl;dr: No.

[Equinox]

I need to look at the case against RetroAudio, but for now I think I need to focus on...

I don't know whether AClockworkMelon is scum,

That looks horrible. Commit to an opinion! Is AClockworkMelon scum or not?

Relationships usually means scum, or masons.

If you think a player may be a town power role, and you are town-aligned, please don't say something like this! You're just pointing out people for scum to kill.

That said, this post looks like you are fishing for masons. Why did you bring this up?

I bet scum, but it would be rash for me to vote for one of them right now.

How would it be rash? If you think they are scum, you should be voting!

Scum driven wagon? Hmmm. At the time of this post Chi has exact three votes – myself, ACM, and Young. Which of these players is scum and why?

AClockworkMelon. Already stated why. The other possibility is youngminii, but I haven't had the chance to look more closely at youngminii's push for chihuahua0's lynch, so I'm sitting null for the moment.

You have the most posts (which is kind of a null argument), but you also have attacked the most people, and very early for insignificant slights.

How is this scummy, Lemon?

---

chihuahua0, Lemon, Mindgamer, Untrod Tripod, youngminii: Top 2 suspects with explanation, please.

Lemon, Tasky, commit to an opinion, please.

I'll try to make fewer quote walls like this. >_>

[Equinox]

Post 146

(Equinox) This is rather flimsy, but you said you might go along with Lemon on his defense (which is the n00b defense) of Chi

Flimsy because chihuahua0 continually trips up my scumdar, even though I'm aware this is his posting style and he is new to the game.

1. In reference to posts 143 and 148, WHY is chi a ridiculously easy lynch? Think carefully now...
2. This isn't a question, but I wanted to mention that I *love* THE THEORY BOX that you used in post 159.
3. In post 178, you said that ACM has only made one case against one player, and then you said that it was "a very easy target". Who exactly is he supposed to make a case against? Do you find it more pro-town if someone tries to accuse people who are not easy targets? Is it more pro-town to throw accusations around all willy-nilly? Wouldn't it only be a scumtell if he was making a case against someone who seems fairly pro-town?

1. The "think carefully now" comment gives me chills because I saw scum do this in another game... I'll still answer the question, though. Look at chihuahua0's behavior. He's practically begging to be lynched. It's an easy wagon, regardless of chihuahua0's actual alignment; it's a great chance for scum buddies to get town points if chihuahua0 is their partner, and if chihuahua0 is not scum, scum can very easily push the wagon until lynch or until deadline when it's imperative we lynch someone.
3. AClockworkMelon has said very little, and his jumping on chihuahua0 felt like getting on an easy target. I realize that sometimes easy targets are scum, but I didn't like the way he did it. No, I'm not going to immediately write someone off as town if they pursue difficult targets; that's going into WIFOM. It's just more suspicious if it's an easy target. I don't know what you mean by "throwing accusations around all willy-nilly," but that's better than the other end of the spectrum. No, I'm not going to immediately write someone off as scum if they go after a pro-town target. I'll just be very, very interested.

tl;dr for #3: It's not what they do. It's how.

You're asking a few theory questions. Theory discussion should be kept to a minimum.

I'm withdrawing my vote. Right now, I don't know who might be scum, but I'll just keep this vote until I'm sure

or to use as a hammer

.

That... was so incredibly scummy.

Regarding the answers to my questions: chihuahua0, why are you afraid that people will think you are scummy?

Also, if you don't know who is scum, maybe you think someone is. Give me your top two suspects, please. Post #207 does not count, sorry.

[Equinox]

@Equinox: Because if people repeatly lynch me and I am revealed as town, I will be branded as a noob. I am determineted to stay with this site, and I am going to develop a metagame.

As a townie, you should have no fears of getting lynched. This lack of fear leads to a bit more recklessness, which makes you look more genuine, which in turn makes it less likely that you get lynched as a townie. The fear of being suspicious just makes you suspicious. Keep this in mind.

Thanks for the opinions, chihuahua0 and Tasky.

Tasky, the rest of the quote didn't state a solid opinion either, so I just quoted the first part. I appreciate you restating your stances, though; that helps.

AClockworkMelon, the criticism for being too active is unfounded. Activity is good. Unless you're flooding games with fluff posts, I don't see why you should keep your activity level down.

My criticism of you taking easy targets was not your attacks on Tasky -- that's fine by me -- but it was your vote on chihuahua0. Seeing chihuahua0's recent posts has changed my opinion somewhat on the "jumping on an easy target" thing, though.

[Equinox]

Hmm... I missed AClockworkMelon's vote switch. Seeing as he has a case and he's pushing for it:

Unvote

I'll need to examine Lemon and RetroAudio. Most likely Lemon's posts first.

[Equinox]

@Quoi: Good argument, even though you're attacking me.

By the way, you forgot to unvote, or the mod messed up the vote count.

Are you going to defend yourself, then?

Quoi may have made a convincing argument, but it's not a good one if it's wrong. If you're town, you

know

it's wrong. Don't just throw your hands up in the air like this.

Unless Quoi was right?

---

Unvote

Need to look more closely at Lemon, nopointinactingup, possibly Tasky, and youngminii. Unvote is for the same reason as post 221. My reading will have to wait until tomorrow, though.

[Equinox]

make up a sample post (very approximative, you can also explain what would be in it), which could be written by chihuahua0 and which satisfies following conditions:
a. It would make you vote for him if he posted it.
b. If another post was even slightly less scummy than that post, you would not vote chihuahua0 for it.

What is the point of this exercise?

[Equinox]

@Quoi: Good argument, even though you're attacking me.

By the way, you forgot to unvote, or the mod messed up the vote count.

Are you going to defend yourself, then?

Quoi may have made a convincing argument, but it's not a good one if it's wrong. If you're town, you

know

it's wrong. Don't just throw your hands up in the air like this.

Unless Quoi was right?

<_<

[Equinox]

You could have just said that and not asked us to make a coaching sample post for scum to use...

I'm giving chihuahua0 the newbie pass only for as long as my tolerance permits. chihuahua0 is not unlynchable. At some point, either he's a huge liability or newbie scum. I'm giving him a huge leeway because some of the stuff he says feels more newbie to me than scummy -- which just points to null.

[Equinox]

Vote: Tasky

Your constant insistence on this is horrible. You are asking us to make a post that would coach scum,

perhaps you

, on how to not draw suspicion. This is, at best, a very anti-town request. I am not going to comply, and I will ask others to do the same.

We know what the limit of our tolerance is. If chihuahua0 reaches that limit, you will know. Until then, since this is not a newbie game, I have no obligation to tell you how someone needs to play.

[Equinox]

everybody scumhunts in his way... just because you don't like my way, that doesn't mean it can't be effective...

Your method of asking us to create a hypothetical post helps scum more than it helps town.

[Equinox]

but you see the problem with chihuahua0, do you?
he has done nothing but make scummy posts and we are supposed to let him go because he is a noob... I want to know where the limit to this madness is...

chihuahua0 has apparently reached the limit of your tolerance. My limit is none of your business, scum.

Drop it. Compliance with your request is anti-town, and with the exception of Lemon, everyone else who defended chihuahua0 has already put their foot down. Find some other way to push for a chihuahua0 lynch. It's clear your method is not productive.

[Equinox]

Your request was, initially, addressed to whomever was defending chihuahua0. After I confronted you, you narrowed it down to nopointinactingup and Lemon. Now that you've seen more antagonism, you claim that you made the request specifically for Lemon. None of this adds up. If it was your intention to directly address it to Lemon from the start, you should have said so; lack of specificity just means anyone can answer it.

Oh, were you not pushing for a chihuahua0 lynch? I thought the purpose of the request was to determine how far chihuahua0 needed to go before we could lynch him.

No, chihuahua0 has not yet reached my limit. Otherwise, my vote would be on him and not on you.

I'm open to new ways of playing this game. Your idea was just of more benefit to the mafia than to the town, and your insistence led me to believe your request was made to benefit you in particular. I do not appreciate your accusation that we are being close-minded. I do not see any evidence of that going on here; however, if you have a problem with the way we're playing this game, take it to Mafia Discussion.

[Equinox]

I see you did ask for input from Lemon and nopointinactingup the first time you asked. My apologies for missing that.

and how is [determining limit for lynch] = [pushing for lynch]?

What, you had a different reason for determining this limit?

and why aren't you voting him? the noob pass?

Initially, I did not vote him because of the newbie pass. When he didn't actually defend himself following Quoi's case, though, I was close to lynching him out of pure irritation. His replacing out has changed things.

Yeah, we don't have the benefit of body language and voice tone here, so techniques in face-to-face mafia won't work so well.

[Equinox]

On the other hand, burnout takes a while to sink in. He may not have felt the stress until he noticed he couldn't catch up with his posts (he's only posting once a day now), or until something IRL came up, etc.

Speculating on replacing out is WIFOM.

[Equinox]

Hiya, redtail896. Thanks for replacing in!

[Equinox]

I love you people. Big cheers for Espeonage, redtail896, and Shattered Viewpoint!

In the meantime, hoping to hear from you about all this good stuff.

[Equinox]

There are many reasons for replacing out. It may not even be game-related. Speculating on this is pointless and, IMO, stretching for a case.

[Equinox]

Although it is fairly insubstantial, there's still no way it could be a town tell.

There's also no way it could be a scum tell.

I don't have anything else to say at the moment.

[Equinox]

That may be because two of our slots (one of them currently under fire) have gone V/LA.

[Equinox]

Tasky is V/LA until the end of the month.

[Equinox]

PS: I'll be

V/LA 15.07 - 31.07

Unvote

I'm a bit lost at the moment, so I'll set a vote down once I get my thoughts about this game collected again. Too many replacements at once... @_@

[Equinox]

HI. Nice timing there, sir!

Vote: Tasky

[Equinox]

OMG WALLS. I'm already slacking off here... now I'm even less willing to go through stuff. ;A;

redtail896 brought up an interesting point about Shattered Viewpoint. I thought he wasn't done reading, though...? (I still have to look through youngminii's posts anyway. Might as well do it now while we wait and see about Tasky's V/LA situation.)

His "return" from V/LA is also very suspicious.

It was very poor timing, but I think it's more of a null tell than a scum tell. For all we know, he may be telling the truth. However, if he can't post every 2-3 days, we're better off replacing him.

[Equinox]

Just noticed something while looking through votes...

Chevre: Who do you think is scum?

[Equinox]

Equinox: I think Tasky is most likely to be scum.

Why aren't you voting?

[Equinox]

Uh, I

finally

looked at youngminii's posts. I am ashamed of myself. I put off reading 15 posts for two weeks because I was too lazy.

SO, MOVING ON.

youngminii has a

lot

of fluff posts for someone with such a short posting history. I'd argue the first post with game-related content is this one, as the one where s/he slightly defends Lemon's use of "h8" is still not quite there. Anyway, youngminii went after the easiest target on the block -- no surprises here, as I think most of the town did as well -- but it's funny to see s/he use an IGMEOY instead of voting.

In RQS, youngminii claims to "let other people post most of the content" in early game. Um... setting up to lurk, much?

Hmm... RetroAudio's and youngminii's attacks on chihuahua0 seem to parallel each other. I would say I'd look at this, but I know I won't. Worthy of note, anyway.

youngminii continues to bring up WIFOM attacks against chihuahua0, which can be summed up as: "You're acting scummy. You might be a newb acting scummy, or you might be scum acting scummy." Argh. That was also the basis of the newbie defense, by the way. I don't know what to think of this, really.

The only other suspect youngminii left was Tasky. The case was just a one-liner. Not very helpful.

I'm going to continue with Shattered Viewpoint.

First four posts out of seven are not game-related, mostly "I'll post later"-type stuff.

Here, the focus is on chihuahua0 and Tasky. I wonder why he's waffling with the read on chihuahua0; first is the "seems really newbie" and then the "could be Tasky's partner." O_o

Okay, that post was really a gooey mess. Summary coming up next.

[Equinox]

Shattered Viewpoint:

Any particular reason your suspects mirror your predecessor's?

What do you think of everyone else?

Why do you suspect chihuahua0 of being scum?

Why do you suspect Tasky of being scum?

[Equinox]

I think we'd all do well to remember that the person with the most votes is lynched at deadline. So unless Tasky's wagon brilliantly falls apart at the last moment, he's dead.

Do you have a problem with this wagon, Quoi?

Thanks for the reminder, though.

[Equinox]

Equinox: I don't find him scummy enough for a vote. It's highly unlikely that he will get scummier before deadline, though, so I will likely vote him before deadline.

Do you have any other suspects? Why aren't you voting, in general?

[Equinox]

Mod: Please replace Tasky. His last post was on July 18.

I'd like to hear from Tasky's replacement. In the meantime,

Unvote, Vote: Shattered Viewpoint

[Equinox]

Equinox: I don't find anyone scummy enough to vote. I thought that would be obvious.

No, it wasn't obvious. You've barely said anything in any of your posts. If you don't find anyone scummy enough,

find someone

. We've had 15 pages of content, and if everyone else has had the chance to post reads, you should as well. Or maybe everyone else is just too townie to accuse, eh, scum?

If Tasky is your top suspect, how is it that he is your top suspect but "not scummy enough" for a vote?

[Equinox]

I know you're not in the habit of explaining, Espeonage, but that vote really needs it.

Looking at you in isolation, you're sold on Tasky being scum. What's changed?

[Equinox]

Untrod Tripod, Untrod Tripod, what do you see?
I see an OMGUS looking at me!

Unvote, Vote: Chevre

Classic.

If Tasky is not scummy enough to vote, then who is? Where did this suspicion of AClockworkMelon and chihuahua0 come from? Has this changed with chihuahua0's replacement? Are your accusations against Equinox and Untrod Tripod based on evidence? Are you jumping on Espeonage just because of that vote? What about his predecessor?

[Equinox]

You're kidding me, aren't you? You cannot seriously be this blatant. Don't play the victim, Chevre, when it's clear you simply lashed out at the two players attacking you at the time.

Tasky is your top suspect. You are not voting him because he is not suspicious enough to vote. NO, I DON'T GET IT.

That's some

shoddy

evidence right there. I'm not defending Tasky. That's pretty clear. I'm attacking you because, right now, you're orders of magnitude scummier.

Don't you dare accuse me of trying to prevent majority when

you aren't even voting

. Your lack of a vote -- face it -- has no reason behind it whatsoever.

[Equinox]

Oh and look at Tripods case while pretending Tasky is confirmed scum.

Are you talking to me?

Agreeing with Untrod Tripod is fine, but not explaining is a bit shady...

I'm not going to complain right now, though. I have my scum, and I want my lynch.

[Equinox]

Heh. I think I should be able to tell if you aren't. In any case, your meta is a mighty good cover for scum... so I can't lessen my suspicion of you until I know where you're going with it.

[Equinox]

Were you not paying attention, Chevre? I was pushing for the Tasky wagon until I realized your slot hadn't done anything. Add some pressure from Untrod Tripod and Espeonage, and what we have here is someone much scummier than Tasky.

You keep saying over and over that you want Tasky lynched, but you are not even volunteering. That makes me think you're the scum, not Tasky.

People, lynch Chevre already. Or we can let her flail for 2 more days for our entertainment.

[Equinox]

This is the best and funniest implementation of OMGUS I have ever seen...

Chevre, let's get this straight.

Tasky is your top suspect, but he isn't "suspicious enough" to vote. You have other suspects, but since your top suspect has yet to receive the honor of your vote, you aren't going to vote them either. You're not going to explain why you refuse to vote, except that they just aren't quite there yet. Tasky is your top suspect, but you have "never said [you] wanted to lynch Tasky."

We're two days from the deadline. This is no time to be waffling on your so-called "top suspect." Either Tasky is scum or he isn't. Now which is it?

Oh, and before you accuse me of twisting your words, you'd better find evidence. These are your words, not mine.

[Equinox]

Hey, Untrod Tripod, stop active lurking. Are you going to just run away now that you've accidentally thrown Chevre under the bus?

[Equinox]

No one is going to get my vote until I find them suspicious enough. No one has achieved that yet.

How high are you setting the bar, Chevre?

[Equinox]

I'm not sure, but I'll know it when I get there.

I'm sure you're already there. You just can't vote yourself.

I was writing a longish post, Equinox

Heh. The pear and the GIF were worth the wait.

Have we hit lynch yet?

Unfortunately for us impatient people, it's 7 to lynch.

[Equinox]

Content includes suspicions, questions, votes, pressure, and whatever else it takes to find scum. You barely met that requirement with your "suspicion" of Tasky earlier, but your absolute refusal to vote does not justify your tunneling of Tasky at all. Quite contradictory, really...

I wouldn't give up hope yet about my vote on you, Chevre. I have been known to unvote. Just try not to dig the hole any deeper.

[Equinox]

I'm tunnelling now?

Well twice (when I replaced in and when I returned from V/LA) I read through what I missed and found it very lackluster, so I asked if anyone had anything specific to address. The only thing was who I found suspicious, and that was Tasky, and now we've started a big circle.

Right now, you aren't. You pointed at your attackers and declared it a great mafia conspiracy. That's not really tunneling.

Before, though, I'd say you were. Your focus was on Tasky, and you didn't really mention anyone else. I had to drag that out of you.

Your problem here is you refuse to be proactive in finding scum. You stated previously that you'll vote Tasky if he becomes scummier, but you chose not to pressure him or, at the very least, try to get him prodded/replaced. Your stance on votes is that you only use them when people are "scummy enough." Apparently, your bar is pretty damn high, yet you haven't done anything to push anyone close to it.

[Equinox]

2. Because it looked like Tasky was todays lynch, but Equinox merely pointed out someone who wasn't as active and got a bandwagon on them. That is derailment to me.

Oh. I totally forgot about that. I meant that to be a pressure vote on Shattered Viewpoint.

[Equinox]

Chevre, we don't trust you to abstain from voting Tasky at the last minute and creating a tied vote, thus forcing no lynch at deadline. Vote now.

I doubt Chevre would do that. Someone forcing No Lynch on Day 1 will immediately go under fire on Day 2. It's not a good action for any faction. Lack of a hammer shouldn't be the fear.

[Equinox]

Equinox: I actually meant me.

Then your accusation was unfounded. When I voted you, I had a case.

[Equinox]

It seems I missed your questions. Sorry about that. Now I feel like I was unfair to you... No matter; that feeling will go away really soon.

@Equi: A) Do you think that just because a player is absent, they are any less scummy? B) If you had a gun in your hand, and HAD TO shoot someone right now, who would that be?

A) No. However, I'm not willing to lynch someone who is V/LA. That's a jerk move.
B) Probably you because of youngminii. The alternative would be to shoot Chevre and lynch you.

By the way, I took off the pressure vote a while ago. Telling me to take it off probably wouldn't have worked, anyway.

The wall of responses:

1) Because we're both excellent scumhunters?

Talk about youngminii's case, then.

2) I think Chevre is the new Target.

Chevre != everyone else

New questions:

With chihuahua0's replacement, any thoughts about nhammen?

[Equinox]

2. Because it looked like Tasky was todays lynch, but Equinox merely pointed out someone who wasn't as active and got a bandwagon on them. That is derailment to me.

I did the same thing as Equinox, starting the wagon on SV, but you never accused me. I think this makes your suspicions look much more like OMGUS rather than actual scumhunting.

Chevre meant my vote on her, not my vote on Shattered Viewpoint (420[/quote] and 423).

5. Probably all three, because then I have no way of knowing. And you're not a suspect as I have responded to above.

You do have a way of knowing. If you suspect someone, question them until you're sure. I realize the attacks I laid on you yesterday probably prevented you from doing anything productive here, but I'm done. Your turn. Question me, question Untrod Tripod, and question Tasky's replacement. Analyze our posts, and not just the ones addressed to you.

Right now, your "suspicions" look a lot like OMGUS because you lack evidence. Read, analyze, question, and then vote. Though if you're scum, you could just sit back and let us lynch you... I wouldn't mind.

Chevre is obviously a scum flailing, I will put her at L-1 and ask her to claim.

Remind me to keep an eye on you. Something about this doesn't seem right to me...

[Equinox]

EBWOP: Major tag fail!

Chevre meant my vote on her, not my vote on Shattered Viewpoint (420 and 423).

[Equinox]

Taking away the chance to hammer is the "pro-town" thing to do. It is going to look bad no matter how Chevre flips. I'm going to wait and see, though.

[Equinox]

No, the action itself isn't bad. The motivation behind it could be, though.

[Equinox]

Why ask for a replacement directly instead of a prod? Especially given that it was only 72 hours since his last post when you suggested this.

It had been 8 days since Tasky posted game content. If Tasky couldn't catch up soon after requesting that he not be replaced, I doubt he'll be able to with limited access.

I'm glad some people are going to note what Equinox and UT did. It appears to be a quick (and successful) derailment of the Tasky wagon by scum. Please take this into account later.

Piece of advice: Never build cases based on OMGUS. Perhaps you should take some of our words to heart... I have welcomed you to look into all of our other posts and analyze. Your case now has absolutely no basis and does nothing to help town, as its very roots are that Equinox and Untrod Tripod attacked you, and you accused them of being scum for doing so. I say this, then and now, independently of my alignment. Please consider it for this game, as your defense, and for future games.

Your reactive playing style is a liability to your faction -- you need to actually look for scum like you look for Easter eggs in the lawn. Those eggs aren't going to leap into your hand.

EBWOP: WHOA. What happened to the quote boxes?! I'll respond to Shattered Viewpoint in my next post.

[Equinox]

Emphasis mine.

I still think Tasky is; but Chevre came up from nowhere to ping my radar. Town: You, and

(as much as I hate to say it)

Equi.

Is this comment related to this game, sir?

I can understand deliberately not listing town reads, but you've just listed yours. Incidentally, you chose to list the most obvious reads. What about the others? Are they all null or something? You are done reading, right?

[Equinox]

Interesting. I guess you didn't bump into the people who had a problem with it... Still, refusing to vote like you did in this game, lashing out at ONLY your attackers, and refusing to proactively question people -- that's not pro-town, IMO.

I did not intend to say that "independent of my alignment" to make myself look better. I know what I am, and I know how I look to scum. I don't need little statements like that to find scum. I guess I'm a bit too used to giving advice like that in newbie games. Still, please consider it. Wait until I flip if you have to.

Lastly, I derailed the Tasky wagon way before I jumped on you. You can verify this yourself. I voted Shattered Viewpoint for the same reason I later voted you; he'd been quiet, and his previous posts (and his predecessor's) were not particularly townish. I only pushed your wagon when it became increasingly clear that all you did was OMGUS, OMGUS, OMGUS. You're still doing it, and I don't understand WHY. Scum shouldn't be insisting on such a baseless case like this.

I'm still lynching you. You're either scum or a massive liability, and I'm confident it's the former.

[Equinox]

I forgot to mention why I had jumped off Tasky.

He's V/LA. I may be a total jerk, but I don't like lynching people while they're V/LA unless I'm as close to 100% as humanly possible certain that they are scum. Usually it involves a role claim or strong process of elimination. That's not what we have here.

[Equinox]

-_-

You think I'm OMGUSing you? Chicken or the egg, Chevre?

If I'm getting to your high bar, THEN VOTE ME. What the bloody hell is all this hem-and-hawing for? Do you always wait until 35 seconds before the deadline to vote? What purpose does all this delaying serve?

[Equinox]

Oh, I wasn't being literal. All you've done since your return to V/LA was delay, delay, delay. 'Tasky is scummy, but he's not suspicious enough for me to vote him.' 'I have other suspects, but they're not as suspicious as Tasky, so I'm not going to vote them, either.' There is absolutely no reason for you to delay like this when there are many reasons for voting other than to lynch. You need to show scum you mean it when you say, "You are scum."

Bring your case against me, Chevre. Just as you have high standards of scumminess, I have my standards. Don't waste your breath with the whole "derailing the wagon" stuff; we know all about that, and I won't waste time shooting that down again. Analyze my other posts or lack of other posts. Am I providing content? Am I hunting scum or am I just a scummy faker? Am I doing this thing and that thing with pro-town motivation or pro-scum motivation? If I'm scum, I'd have slipped in many more ways than simply jumping off Tasky.

You were also suspicious of Untrod Tripod. Build a case, ask questions, track down evidence, and analyze.

By the way, you have no business calling the Tasky wagon a "valid" one when you didn't even bother to participate.

[Equinox]

Second sentence should read:

All you've done since your return

from

V/LA was delay, delay, delay.

[Equinox]

Mod: Chevre voted Equinox in 460.

[Equinox]

If you had to choose, Equinox, would you rather have someone who switches their vote easily and often, or someone who doesn't vote until they are quite sure?

I choose the happy medium. Chevre and Tasky were at the extreme ends of the spectrum, which does not sit well with me.

This is on Page 6, and in your sixth post of the game so far. By saying this, you have effectively pointed out the lurkers (which I believe included yourself) yet no one would suspect you because you brought it up. I see that Mindgamer brought this up earlier.

Guilty as charged. More out of laziness than an actual intent to lurk, but there's no way of verifying that.

And for thinking chihuahua0 isn't scum and even calling him consistent, you sure ask him a lot of questions.

chihuahua0 wasn't exactly transparent. I'm calling him consistent because his play was consistent with his meta, which is just naturally scummy. I'd rather be a bit more careful with players like those.

Also, your six posts in a row at the end of page 6 and beginning of page 7 (Posts 146-149, 151 and 152) seem like a surreptitious way to boost your post count, as to avoid any confrontations as the one previously mentioned which was done by Mindgamer.

Are you in the habit of appropriating motivations to meaningless acts? This is almost like your case on Tasky's V/LA. That said, I post when I want to, not to boost my post count. As you can see by my site-wide post count... it's kinda high. (Average site-wide, though.)

If that's the case, then scum have no reason to fear scrutiny either. They still win if they die and another scumbuddy survives to the end.

But it's harder.

Let's suppose this uses the standard 3-9 setup -- one townie dies, there are 8 others to take up the banner. No biggie. One scum dies... the other two start panicking because the dead scum may have had connections to the other two, which can out the entire team. I see reason to fear scrutiny.

It appears that your whole case hinges on me not voting, which I believe is a difference in playstyles and NOT a scum tell. I'm not you, Equinox. I'm not going to use my vote the same way you are.

No, my case is not entirely based on play style; it's based on the fact that your reaction to Untrod Tripod and my initial accusation. Your immediate reaction was to accuse us of being scum. Big no-no in my book.

The part that is about play style -- yes, I will admit it: Not voting irritates me. I keep track of votes, and I look at patterns. Not voting denies me this and forces me to take the extra step of looking up your scummy butt. In other words, not voting is a way to deny town information, which in turn helps the scum. So scummy.

And in that period, you were focusing on both me and SV, but now it looks remarkably like vote-hopping. I think once Espeonage voted me, you realized that it would be a successful wagon, and joined it. You weren't getting anywhere with anyone on SV.

I admitted that my vote on Shattered Viewpoint was a pressure vote to get him to respond. If I meant to get a wagon moving, I'd do it the same way I pushed yours. I'd say I would have been just as successful...

Something I else I've noticed...you seem to play a "my way or no way" game. Many a time did you say you'd look at the RetroAudio case, but you never did and ended up focusing on your own stuff. Sure, it's great and all that you can come up with your own thoughts, but yours aren't the only ones out there.

Guilty as charged to your former. I don't see how that's scummy... probably rather irritating, but that's how I roll. Makes really good NK bait.

I did say I'd look at the RetroAudio case. I also promised to look at nopointinactingup, Lemon, and youngminii. The only case I really looked up was the youngminii case, hence the vote on Shattered Viewpoint. I'm way too lazy to look at the others right now... especially when I have a top suspect right here.

tl;dr -- Case is a stretch, but I'll let the others judge for themselves. I also admit to a few charges brought by Chevre, though I don't see any pro-scum motivation behind what I did/do. (I might be a bit biased, of course.)

Okay, that was a huge wall... wasn't expecting that. I'll keep it brief from now on, as I'm not a great fan of wall battles either.

EBWOPreview: I see a hammer has been made. Well... not much to do here.

[Equinox]

Meh. I admit to things that I do. I rage when I'm accused of something I didn't do. I don't think it's scummy.

[Equinox]

nhammen, your response in 477 does not match the quote. Chevre is at L-1; no hammer has been made. redtail896 was pointing out my error. I guess the question can still be asked of Shattered Viewpoint; now I'm interested in the answer.

Minor avoiding of negative attention is fine. After all, if you get lynched, you failed your town. But actively skirting scrutiny or constantly being afraid of how other players read you... that's something else.

[Equinox]

So, was 477 directed at me or SV?

[Equinox]

Espeonage: Hell no. We are hours away from deadline. If you're trying to force a No Lynch, I will rain fire balls on your scummy butt.

[Equinox]

Deadline is July 23 at 9:00 pm EDT

6 hours and a half, if my count is correct.

[Equinox]

@ Manga: Waffling?

Being indecisive.

and god help you if we catch you pancaking

Pancaking?

[Equinox]

@ Manga: Waffling?

Being indecisive.

I know what it means. I just didn't agree with it.

Then how did your case on Chevre suddenly fall apart upon the words "confirmation bias"?

[Equinox]

...wow. You have managed to cut yourself off from your opinion of Chevre and base it completely on a flip that isn't going to happen today. If that's not scummy, I don't know what is.

[Equinox]

Well, Shattered Viewpoint... care to enlighten me about your reads and why you chose the most obvious and extreme ones?

[Equinox]

It appears so.

Twilight talk: Look into Espeonage, nopointinactingup, and Shattered Viewpoint.

I await the flip.

[Equinox]

I will argue back with the scum motivation behind doing that:

It's a "safe" stance to take. No one is going to attack you when you read scum on Chevre and Tasky. In fact, no one has. No one is going to attack you when you read town on Equinox and MagnaofIllusion. They're quite obvious.

However, if you start reading everyone else... then you're open to attack.

So, are you reading pure null on everyone else, or is there a spectrum we're working with here?

[Equinox]

I got mass-prodded.

Same questions, same suspects... same promise to read people's posts later.

[Equinox]

Ew... NK speculation.

nopointinactingup, I fail to see how all the arrows definitively point to Tasky being scum. For all we know, scum chose to do that to drop suspicion on Tasky; speculating on reasons for NKing might be useful sometimes, but it's also heavy WIFOM. For me, the two kills on people who suspected Tasky were coincidental.

Why would you point out MagnaofIllusion's comment?

Espeonage, does it matter who killed whom? Until we can figure out the SK or vigilante situation, speculating like that is useless. SKs can kill from a town perspective, too. It substantiates their later vig claim.

[Equinox]

If Tasky returns before a replacement is found, I guess we get to grill Tasky again.

NK speculation... depends. I think it would be a better tool in late game when things become more clear-cut. Early in the game, not so much. Scum can also use NK speculation to pretend to generate content, which is why I'm usually wary of it. /theory

I didn't like the speculating that just went on because I feel the circumstances around these deaths are too vague to be of any significant use right now.

[Equinox]

Mod: Requesting prod of Quoi, Shattered Viewpoint, and Untrod Tripod.

[Equinox]

I should have said this earlier, but I have requested replacement. Sorry, everyone.

[Equinox]

Excellent job cracking the case at the end, town.

I apologize to everyone for replacing out suddenly like that. I ran into information sometime in the middle of Day 1, but I hesitated because of the number of replacements Zang had to find. In hindsight, I definitely should have replaced out immediately, since my play was affected. I'll keep this in mind for next time.

Chevre, sorry about that. Good job calling out the scumbag. I looked at your play in Open 218 when I replaced in, and I went O_O because it was like a different Chevre in there. In the future, less Mini 1003 style, more Open 218 style. Holding back a vote in the manner you did here can really hurt.

Tazaro, how on Earth did you get me lynched?

How?

Complaints aside, stop vote hopping. If you think someone is scum, stick to your guns, dammit. You jump all over the place for almost no reason at all, which frustrates everyone except the mafia. Playing in 8 games at a time wasn't the greatest idea, either.

Untrod Tripod, your gun still had bullets. >_>

I don't think I have anything else to say. This was a fun game to play and later watch; I hope to see you folks again in another game!

[Equinox]

how did my gun still have bullets?

You could have convinced town they needed to lynch the 'serial killer.' At least do

something

. Giving up like that when nothing was 100%... ehh.

Out of curiosity: Why did you kill the people you did, and why did you leave MagnaofIllusion alive until the end?