Mini 1021: Battousai's Mountaintnous Mountain Mafia (Over)

[Nightwolf]

Just stopping by to /confirm replacement.

I expect to be fully caught up no later than 24-30 hours from this post.

[Nightwolf]

Ok. First, to get my vote where it belongs.

Unvote, Vote: Xite

.

I do support the wagon on wendy though, and strongly believe that one of these two are scum, though I suspect Xite more at the moment.

FoS: wendy

. (Preview Edit: Wow at the self vote and following no lynch vote. Talk about self-destructing. Also the alt fail. I'm going to take a deeper look into this case now that I know wendy is not a newbie and may end up back on this wagon shortly.)

Couple other quick comments before I get to the case on Xite.:

Much like other players, I did not like Kor's play at all, though do believe that LF has done much better since joining in.

4) "Setting himself up for", you are accusing him for something that he never did. Not only that but something that he might be able to do. There is a difference between saying "I think X is scummy for ABC, but D so i dont know, so vote Y" is setting yourself up to jump to X.

"I am not good" is not setting yourself up for lurking.

No, but it does set yourself up for coasting though day 1 while posting a bunch of fluff and little to no scumhunting. Note this is not a defense of CA, as I actually see it as a negative that he seemed to be finished discussing the situation without mentioning this. My mention of it is only to make clear clear that the point still stands against his playerslot in my opinion.

To those getting suspicious of tw...does that change the way you view dalt's play?

I did not agree with your case on dalt either, and no, wendy does not change the way that I view dalts play. I'm sure you probably said it before somewhere, but assuming it is true that dalt was lying, (since that seems to be what the debate around him focused entirely on) why/how exactly is dalt scummy? (I expect an answer to this that is more than some version of LAL.)

Now, the case on Xite:

First of all (I think LF brought this up), in the post with Xite's random vote, (s)he FoS's two players for a semi-legitimate reason, at least for that early in the game. Having any kind of a reason is certainly better than an entirely random vote, so I don't like that neither one received the vote. Seems to me like (s)he does not want to choose between the two that early, making it easier to choose which to vote after (s)he can see which one (s)he can make a better case on. If town, I would expect the player to vote whichever one they suspected more, or to just choose one if suspecting them equally at the time.

Then we get to Iso post 4, the start of the claimed "gambit". Xite says that a post is scummy without giving any info on why, and challenges other players to build a case on Nexus instead, which would clear Xite of responsibility for that case since (s)he did not create it. Then when that fails Xite goes to plan B, which summarized is "Attack a (believed) town player with the goal of having them make themselves look scummy and hope other players hop on the wagon (to be attacked for it later)." This is exactly what scum would want to occur, so that they can get a believable mislynch and advance closer to their win condition.

Xite Iso post 20:

2) LmL posted his "roleclaim" as Vanilla Townie. Did he realise it was a joke?

2) I don't think it was a joke. It's actually a good way to catch clueless scum in a game like this.

If you thought it was a good way to catch clueless scum, then why did you make the setup obvious by mentioning the mod's posts, effectively killing the gambit? This is not a pro-town thing to do.

Other somewhat weaker points that do not indicate a pro-town mindset:

Many times uses no reasoning other than gut or sweeping generalities to explain away actions, rather than any kind of logical evidence or examples. (mentioned by either Lat or Leetch I believe)

The false advice offered to nexus in Iso post 17:

How about this, make your own case on someone no one else has made a case one

that you think is scummy

and try to push the lynch. If you do this (well), it will greatly decrease my suspicion on you

Calling out 2 (possibly 3, I cant remember) different people for mentioning Xite because (s)he called them scummy before that.

Iso posts 23 & 39 mention clogging the thread, yet Xite did the same thing with commie when he was in the game.

@Xite: What do you see to be the difference between LmL in your Iso post 23 and Lat in your Iso post 33?

[Nightwolf]

5) Because the gambit wasn't gonna work IMO and what he did seemed like a null tell to me

You don't get the newbs get out of inconsistency card like Nexus does.

Yes. This. I meant to make a statement about the lack of consistency despite Xite's claim that (s)he has been relatively consistent, but forgot while looking up quotes. (And yes I've decided I'm keeping my vote on Xite right now if anyone was wondering.)

[Nightwolf]

1.) If you've noticed something, then you wouldn't have a need for RVS. Not to mention this:

I'm afraid I'm gonna have to agree with iamusername.

CA, I find it very odd you switched your vote from Lee, which had three people on it, to another person. That's just prolonging the RVS, especially because your reasoning's been sketchy.

Plus, your bandwagons aren't achieving anything but put you under suspicion. So, FoS:ConfidAnon

In other news, I nostalgia'd at your avatar.

First point Nexus uses - An almost replica of username's, yes, (s)he said, I agree, but then she furthers it a bit by saying that it's just prolonging RVS.

Now as she said this, it was page 3, which is still somewhat short for RVS
Also, it took us a bit more out of RVS
And it had nothing to do with what anyone else had said, so it wasn't just an oh, i agree point.
This, my friends, is her making a case someone else has made, but to make it seem like her own, tacking on a point that really doesn't add to much.

Does the same thing again as before,

this time adding an FoS but not a vote. Why is that Nexus? Are you too afraid to hop on the wagon, but want a placeholder in case it goes anywhere?

The bolded could apply to you just as well. Nexus had a random vote down and added a more serious FoS. You had a random vote and added two more serious FoS's. So according to what you're saying its fine for you to do this and not for others. You don't get to have inconsistency excused as Lat stated, especially when you claim to be relatively consistent so far.

2.) "for those who miss things" is quite a bold statement for someone who doesn't even remember what they have previously said.
Anyway, your initial gambit claim:

Ta-Da!
Here's pretty much what I did;
1) It was pretty easy to tell that Nexus was a newb which means;
a) If town, no matter what they do, if attacked,

they will probably defend in a scummy way (Making it easier to make them look like scum)

b) They'll probably overreact to almost everything
c) Usually newbscum are more reserved out of fear of being caught (the way he posts is why I'm pretty sure he's town, it's without fear/worry)
2) Try and point out a post that, if skewed ridiculously, looks scummy and ask for a case from it
3) If this doesn't work (which it didn't obviously) resort to plan B, make a case yourself and see who follows it
4) I have this knack for making believable cases when I don't even believe in them, I guess, because a few people followed it, but the way they did it seemed town enough, so I kept up the charade, hoping more people would jump on.
5)

Nexus did a great job of making himself "seem" scummy to you guys, too, exactly the way I'd hoped he would

5) Lat jumped on, which would have been not-so-scummy, if it weren't for the way he did it, he seemed to be looking for more things to throw at him and attacking him in a way that just doesn't look townish to me at all, (it almost made my skin crawl reading it, and I was glad that I didn't get that kind of an attack as a newb, it would have made me want to claim scum, even if I was town) hence my vote on Lat.

(dashes only for indentation)
--Your plan B was to attack Nexus to because you wanted to get him to "defend in a scummy way" and were happy that he "made himself seem scummy." If a person is scummy then that means that there is a legitimate reason for suspecting them as scum, therefore townies, who want to and have to lynch scum to win, would potentially see this scummyness and jump on it.
--Your stated objective was for Nexus to appear to be scum (even though you believe him to be town) and to see who else will attack him for it attack him for it. This would build a wagon with a legitimate reason and could potentially threathen Nexus to be lynched, which is something that you shouldn't want if you believe he is town.
--You also wanted to see who would attack Nexus after he begins to be scummy because it would be a scumtell. Yet, as stated above townies would hop on the wagon (as well as scum if Nexus is indeed town) because there is a legitimate reason. Therefore you are now setting up other townies to appear scummy as well.
--Both parts of plan B are helpful to scum much more than town, and I do believe that I've read at least part of this reasoning from someone else as well. Calling it a gambit is just a nice way to try to avoid any negative consequences of your actions.

3.) See Leech's reply.

4.) If you haven't noticed, myself and a couple other people have said that we do not like how much you've relied on gut for explanation. It cannot be proven or disproven allowing you to go though the game with less that can be used against you, and therefore gives very little info to the town about you thoughts and conclusions on the game.
(I could have said I have a gut feeling that Xine is scum. Vote: Xine. In that case you would have nothing to explain against to try and fight the "suspicion" and I cannot draw much meaningful attention, because there simply isn't anything to look at.)

How about this,

make your own case on someone no one else has made a case one

that you think is scummy

and try to push the lynch.

If you do this (well), it will greatly decrease my suspicion on you

5.) The blue part is the only part "worded to seem like you had suspicions on him." The green part is the actual advice. The blue and green parts do not overlap. Telling him to find someone that hasn't been attacked yet and to push a lynch on them when Nexus's suspicion could have been on someone who had already been attacked could lead to him attacking someone that he didnt truly find suspicios, and therefore being scummier and easier to mislynch (according to your belief that he is town).

6.) Meh, I can't seem to find this in the thread even though I remember reading it, so I'll drop it. It was just an observation of something I didn't like that stuck out to me and therefore didn't have much weight to me without any complete reasoning.

67 (xite) - Saying that everyone who has used early scumcatching things "seems to have failed" rubs me wrong. Now it could be that xite thinks that CA, PD and LML are all town here, not sure, although to not be a scumslip this would have to be true. Now, this also begs the question of why xite is doing nothing to diffuse the "town on town" fighting that they would expect to be occuring here. Odd enough he called CA and LML distancing scum earlier.

Post 67: Ironically, that was my way of trying to diffuse the situation, I was getting tired of the thread-clogging on "Oh, he claimed to use a gambit, but I don't believe it" It's become annoying rereading the same case back and forth that shouldn't have gone past a post or two.

7.) So, the gambit claims by iam/PD/CA weren't early game? The discussion about the iam/PD/CA gambit claims occurred on pages 2 and 3. The example I gave of your comment at commie was also page two. Therefore your point of it being early game is not valid. LmL's "mid game rant" was one short post, so your "only 1 or 2 posts" point is also invalid. This is just more inconsistency on what is allowable for others compared to what is allowable for yourself according to you.

8.) As for "What are you trying to get at here?" the answer is nothing, or at least not yet. This is not part of the case but rather just a question I would like you to answer, hence why I specifically addressed it to you unlike the case.

I am just asking what your reasoning was for stating that you thought LmL would be scum if Nexus was scum in post 23:

Currently (and this could change), there's not so much suspicion on me. Actually, the first time I even brought up your name was a mere 3 posts ago.

Otherwise, you were largely ignored. Why is that? Because you did something really scummy, which I pointed out.

Why don't you explain your lists again. Explain why CA is so high on your list, but "not really scummy" according to a previous post.

Bolded. I hope you meant largely ignored by you, also give credit where credit is due.

If he turns out to be scum, do you know who I'm going after next?
If you guessed LmL then you're correct!

as compared to your reasoning for thinking that Lat is scum if Nexus is town in post 33:

@Lat - I could quote your whole post, but how many wall posts do you really wanna see from me? You know I'm capable of it.
Anyways, it could be just a coincidence, CA, LmL, Prana does sound better after all. That's why I posted them in that order Either way, you seem to be looking for a reason to vote the biggest wagon.

For some reason, if Nexus flips town, you're going to be super-scummy to me

Preview Addition:

Is it because you think I'm scum? Wait you couldn't because... You're not even voting me... in fact you're voting on the person that I've been pushing? WTF?

*facepalm* He had been voting you for a while and only switched recently after wendy appeared to have given up and self-voted. That much is obvious if you've been keeping up with the game.

[Nightwolf]

@Xite:

1) So you're seriously going to suffer from not placing a random vote when you have another option that is more in the town's interest?
2)I already explained that I do not believe your gambit. If it had only been plan A, I may have believed you, but plan B is just plain anti-town with the way/reason you claim to have done it.
4) Heh... the long posts are mainly because I'm catching up on topics that weren't covered to my satisfaction prior to joining the game. Anyway, I didn't say you used

all

gut, but that you have used it a lot and conveniently in places where it excuses some of your scummier actions.
5) If Nexus were to push a poor and/or faulty case, the suspicion would be on... you? Why?
7) By going through and counting up all the posts you could find on the topic, are you implying that it should not have been discussed at all?

@wendy:

3. What do you think about the Lateralus / Xite situation?

i prefer to lynch Xite today if enough people don't see the light and elect nolynch

Does this mean that Xite is your top lynch candidate at this time?

I need two flips to make any real progress.

If it could be useful after having two flips, wouldn't it be better to lynch today so that it could be useful tomorrow rather than waiting an extra day and having an extra townie dead before it becomes useful?

xite, why did you bail off of the Nexus wagon and vote for Lateralus on page 10?

It seems odd to me that you would be happy riding on the Nexus wagon at 4 votes, and then switch to someone else who was on the Nexus wagon.

Read the thread and you might find out. It's only been said, argued about, beaten into the ground, and then argued about again.

To be more specific, read the post where Xite claimed her gambit. I quoted it in #2 of my last post (which would be near the end of the last full page).

@fitz:

I maintain all my suspicion towards dalt…and it has never been solely focused on his cut and dry lie. It is based on the entirety of his posts…up through his last one where he avoided explanation.

Prehaps I didn't word it too clearly. It seemed as if the majority of the discussion that people had with you was what had been focused only on how vaild dalt's lie was. My question is that (forgetting about the discussion on whether its black and white or shades of grey), in your view, how is dalt's lie scummy?

@noone but myself really: I find it interesting that both Xite and wendy are linking fitz to each other. Im not sure what to make of it right now, but I'll have to look back at a couple things when I feel this becomes relevant.

@Mod: You have two votes listed on Xite, but they are on two separate rows, with each labeled as being the only vote on Xite. Please correct this. Thanks.

Thoughts about the No Lynch proposal

(may be a bit disjointed but my resulting position is summarized at the end):
1) The scum would already have a reasonable idea of who seems to be the most town currently from the activities that we have had so far today (if they do choose to kill who they think is most obvtown).
2) We would have more information to work from tomorrow with two flips if we lynch rather than one if we no lynch.
3) We would have another viewpoint in the discussion tomorrow if we no lynch now since there is the extra living player and therefore get more information than lynching in that way. However, the player we would have lynched might be scum, and lynching scum would cut down on the insincerities in the thread while maintaining the same number number of pro-town viewpoints. This possibility means that point 3 does not outweigh points 1 and 2.
4) There are no power roles on either side, so there is no way that a player can be suddenly confirmed, and therefore players views on each other are not as likely to undergo sudden changes as other games, except possibly due to roleflips. Continuing under the assumption that the scum will kill the "most obvtown" player each night, this means that the chance of the most obvtown player changing between the end of today and the end of tomorrow are somewhat low, so putting off the extra no-lynch-scumkill an extra day does not have a high chance of affecting its target.
5) The previous points can be applied to each following day as well.
6) We would have another player alive once we reach mylo if we do not no lynch than we would have alive at lylo if we do, giving us an extra town viewpoint and therefore more information at that time, however . . .
7) . . . no lynching at mylo does provide the scum the opportunity to kill off a player that it is fairly obvious the town will not vote for to be the mislynch (if such a player exists at the time), leaving the town less clarity.
8) Point 6 remains true for the day before mylo and the day before lylo, while reducing the effect of 7 since there is still more information to be produced by the lynch and nightkill that would bring the game into lylo if a scum was not lynched and therefore an opportunity for players views to shift a bit.
(Added clarification: Waiting until mylo to no lynch means that there would be no new information except for a townflip of a player. Everything else (not directly related to that townflip) would have already been discussed allowing the scum to be fairly sure of who they would want to use the extra kill on and possibly the effects of that kill as well. No lynching before mylo makes it somewhat more difficult for scum to look ahead and make the best choice with their extra kill.)

Therefore, my position is that

we should wait to use our no-lynch until we are in a situation where a mislynch will place us in mylo

. Since 3 mislynches will place us in mylo/lylo, this would then be the day after our second mislynch. My secondary preference would then be the day before this (the day after our first mislynch).

[Nightwolf]

@Xite:
2) So just because you claim something means I have to believe it, and forgive all your actions related to it automatically? I have explained that I have reasons to doubt your claim and as such, I evaluate your actions accordingly. So unless you can show a way that the logic I expressed about the gambit is wrong or at least offer more about what you were thinking at the time that could somehow relate to or modify that logic, I don't see much more to discuss here.
4) I just back and skimed your whole iso, and it appears that your cases on Lat and fitz have no more substance than your (supposably fake) case on Nexus did. Can you summarize what your case against fitz is for me please?
5) Only if you assume beforehand that people would have caught it. If they didn't then they would be attacking him, and they still could potentially have attacked him anyway because he should believe in an case that he puts forward and due to "because (s)he told me to" not being a good excuse. Anyway, since you believed the suspicion would've ended up on you if any came about from it, then you did make that assumption that people would have caught it, meaning that you knew it was there yourself. But if you knew it was there yourself, you wouldn't have wrote it that way (or at least have changed the wording before submitting) because it would have been simple to make the same point without turning good advice into misleading advice.
7) I think you missed the point of what I was trying to say completely because that didn't seem to adress my question at all.

7) By going through and counting up all the posts you could find on the topic, are you implying that

it

should not have been discussed at all?

The bolded it refers to the early wagon gambit claims, if that helps to clarify the question at all.
More in depth explanation: You counted up all the posts you could find from LmL, Prana, and CA on the topic of their gambits/wagons/whatever you want to call them. After you do so, you compare it to the number of your filler comments. By comparing all of their posts on the topic to the number of your own comments that you admit are useless, it would seem that you would have to be weighing all of the posts you counted of theirs as useless as well to make it a fair comparison. Therefore, my question, did you mean to imply/do you believe that those gambit claims did not deserve to be discussed at all?


Other General Comments:

My level of suspicion on wendy has decreased by a fair amount, thanks in part to iau's link. I couldn't put my finger on what felt somewhat off about wendy's play and level of suspicion to me before, but that link does seem to match the feeling I had a bit. Going to go back and look a bit more closely at some of my other suspects, as well as deeper into some of the more recent cases (Leech's and iau's specifically come to mind here, though for different reasons), to see if anyone has passed wendy as my second most suspicious. Also, I am going to make an effort to check in a bit more to keep up with any events that may occur faster as we approach deadline.

[Nightwolf]

EBWOP:

Relatively unrelated to game (at least in my opinion): Could someone tell me how to link to specific posts such as iau did? Just something that seems good to know for situations that would otherwise be tons of quotes such as his post was.

[Nightwolf]

@ Xite:

4) How about your case on fitz pre-wendy replacing in?

@ LmL:

I'm not sure if I understand what you're getting at or not but I'll attempt to respond anyway:
Not so much iau's case on wendy as just the idea presented with the link. When I first saw that wendy was an experienced player, I looked back at his posts with that knowledge in mind thinking that I would find him scummier since nothing could be written off to newb-ness. Instead, I found some of wendy's scummy actions to be a bit too obvious for a player that knows what they're doing, even (and perhaps, especially) if they are acting the part of newb at the time. Once I saw iau's link, the idea of being deliberately scummy to draw out predators fit what I saw with some of these more obviously scummy actions to me.

@ iau:

So, when Xite explains how he attacked Nexus with the aim of getting Nexus to make himself look scummy, this certainly deviates from the norm. It even sounds a whole lot like scum motivation, as Nightwolf points out here, until you remember that Xite is explaining all this in the thread. That's where considering the motivation comes in; if Xite is scum, why would he do this? Scum players, by and large, are not Bond villains. They don't twirl their moustaches and explain their evil plans, or at least not until the game is over and their evil plans have already come to fruition.

Explaining how you deliberately attacked someone to get them to make themself look scummy seems to me like a pretty good way to stop people from wanting to lynch that person, don't you think?

1) (s)he only explained it when questioned about why (s)he switched to voting Lat rather than explaining it at the same time. Not particularly damning, but this whole gambit seems like it could very easily be an innocent guise for scum to hide behind, and I don't like it.
@ underlined:
2) From that point of view, sure. And it would also be a fine way of protecting your scum partner in the process. (Note: I am not claiming that Xite and Nexus are scum together. It is however a thought that has crossed my mind and one idea that I plan on looking at if Xite is lynched and flips scum.)
3) A player should be judged on their own actions regardless, so in my opinion it actually should not remove any suspicion from Nexus anyway. If Nexus acts scummy, then it's because Nexus is acting scummy, not because Xite wants Nexus to act scummy. Illustration of this idea - the amount of time that the wagon lived on after Xite jumped off and claimed the gambit.

That said, Xite has earned back a few town/credibility points during the discussion with me, but is still my top suspect at the moment.

But aside from that, I don't see a worthwhile case on Xite. He's done several deliberately provocative things, like the false case on Nexus, or the "I'll hammer anyone at L-1" bit, and he has clearly done these with the full knowledge that this will draw negative attention on himself, and that is not scummy.

Blah blah, if you deliberately make yourself look scummy as town you are increasing the chance that the one person you know is town gets lynched so that is anti-town. That doesn't explain why you would want to do it as scum. If you're going to look at it in such basic terms, there's no reason why anyone would want to do it.

If that second paragraph is aimed somewhat in my direction as I suspect that it is, then I will point you to my previous agreement on wendy. I'll also point out that I did not mention or care about the hammer discussion.

As for the question on CA, I find him to be an acceptable lynch, and would be more willing to participate in a CA lynch than a wendy one at this time. More comments on CA coming (hopefully) in my late night post (which is what my last couple posts have been, for reference purposes).

@ CA:

Have you read everything up to your most recent post so far?

@ Prana/wendy:

As far as I can tell, everything from post 463 on has just been a bunch of misunderstandings. I fail to see any tells that either of you are trying to point out. I agree its best to just drop it.

[Nightwolf]

EBWOP, again:

@ CA:

Had you read everything up to your most recent post so far at the time that you posted it?

[Nightwolf]

Well, it doesn't look like CA checked back in, which is disappointing. Anyway, here are more comments on CA as promised (though admittedly late):

His last post did a lot for the case against him, in my view. Stops by to avoid a prod to do what? Comment on no lynch and nothing else going on in the game since his last post. All while leaving his vote on

Korashk

. He has not voiced one suspicion of LF since he replaced in. CA also does not mention Xite or wendy at all in this post even though the one before it says that he isn't liking Xite's reactions. This is still more recent than his case on Kor (which wasn't very strong to begin with), and I would think that noticing that he isn't liking Xite's reactions would at the very least give him

something

to look for/at when he checked in this time, and either way, after a statement like that I would expect some sort of comment on his vote, which is otherwise hanging on a player that left the game quite a while ago.
(As for the relavence of my question to him and how it relates: There had been mention of no lynch previous to his "lol alt" post as well, which he didn't reply to at that time, so with no answer from him to my recent question to go by, I am assuming that he read at least enough to get to wendy specifically asking him for his view on it.)

Somewhat of additional response to previous why wasnt I voting CA question:

Post #81: Yeah, I'm still not going to let that "wrong wording" bit go. It's just straight up bullshit, I do not believe for a second that CA accidentally used the phrase "I am pushing for your lynch" when he did not mean it, and I don't know why most everyone else seems to be happy to let this slide.

This seemed to be one of your most important points when you wrote that post, and I do not agree with it (at least not to a strong degree). I view it somewhere between null and mildly scummy. Since CA has already responded when initially questioned on it and doesn't look like he has more to say about it, I'll also say why. Look at the quote in this post. It could have easily just been mirroring the language used at the time by Prana as his focus was to correct the reason Prana listed after those words rather than the words themselves.

I also did not like a CA lynch compared to a Xite one because of the lack of interactions CA has had with people (except for very early in the game when reads would still be weak) and agree to a degree with LmL that switching the vote to him this late won't add much for those who don't hop on since there isn't much time to develop opinions on him, making it more of an all or nothing decision for people. I recently thought of a couple minor things that help as a counterweight though in my view (which I'd rather not mention at this time).

Anyway, I feel good enough about a CA lynch at this point to make the following statement:
I believe there is enough support around for a Xite lynch to at least tie if not win out over a wendy lynch, so I am keeping my vote on Xite. I would not mind lending my vote to a CA lynch instead if it can get enough to win out over a wendy lynch. The only thing that could change this is if CA makes a post within the next ~24 hours that is somehow good enough to change my view of him. I believe this is very unlikely.

@iau:

If we lynch xite and he flips town, will you help me lynch CA tomorrow?

You asked this question to wendy, I would like you to answer the opposite of it yourself. If CA is lynched and flips town, would you support a Xite lynch tomorrow? If not, who?

@Xite:

I assume you realize that 1-3 were directed at iau and not yourself, so it was just me clarifying my view in the light of his post. Anyway:
2) Yeah, that is pretty much WIFOM, at the very least since I haven't looked into it yet to tell if that would have any point to stand on at all. However, 2) and 3) were just an explanation of where I stand from both points of view. I suscribe more to that within 3), but I believe that you probably had more the point of view of 2) when you pulled the gambit according to what I've seen. Therefore, I was acknowledging it as being a potential point of view, and was stating that it did not make you or Nexus automatically town to me as iau seemed to imply it should.

5) Well, let's see. I find your gambit really anti-town. You are posting a lot and yet don't seem to be doing too much scumhunting (even before everyone started the major 'interrogate Xite' phase). Your case on Nexus who you thought was town when you made it contains better reasoning (in my view) than your cases on Lat and fitz who you did suspect. Often when you do say something is scummy, you don't often support it by explaining why or how and instead let others do so if they agree. You have some inconsistencies in your posts. I can see scum motivation for basically all of your actions and find it harder to see town motivations. I think that about summarizes it.

and I don't think Nightwolf is paying attention to the rest of the game, just the "scummiest" people

I'm paying attention to the game, but no I don't feel the need to confront those who aren't near the top of my list with more than an occasional question or two. Any points against them will still be there if/when I believe they are scum.

@LmL:

I'm still shocked at the number of people who continually forget the main rule of Occam's Razor. Paraphrased, the simplest solution is generally the correct one. Instead of saying "TW/Adel must have been running a gambit", why can't we say "TW/Adel was incredibly scummy, has numerous cases pressed against him/her, ans should be lynched." Instead, you go out of your way to include a NEW ASSUMPTION about the situation. (Adel would NEVER play like this as scum. It's too obvious.)

As for the part in parentheses at the end, if it was meant to take my position to the extreme then I cant really say its wrong. The only thing I wish to clarify there is that by specifying Adel in that statement, you seem to think I have meta on him. I do not other than the general idea that Adel is at least somewhat known for making complex charts and/or graphs, which is something I do not believe is likely to be affected by whether he is town or scum. Therefore, my position is more that "I find it rather unlikely that any experienced and competent player would leave the kind of tells wendy did in the way that he did (aka a fairly obvious way), even when posing as a newbie." I could provide a few examples of my train of thought with regards to some of wendy's actions, if you'd like.

As for Occam's Razor, strictly applying that would often leave out room to consider a player's motivations on most if not all cases, leaving the only option to often be simply counting up supposed scumtells and lynching the player with the most.
A perfect example:

Dalt's first incorrectly parsed vote was on Saga, who is Nightwolf now. In the stone age, it was commonplace for new scum to vote their partner out of the gate as a way of 'distancing.' It's odder that Nightwolf currently is defending TW's actions (former Dalt's actions) by playing the "Adel would never do that" card.

It also makes me wonder if the Alt was possibly outted on purpose for that rationale.

Occam's Razor. The simplest solution is that wendy being Adel's alt was revealed on accident. It does not include any assumption of a motive behind revealing that fact. So please do not try to push an idea that you even broke yourself, ok?

Quick note:

I haven't read this last page (page 21) as closely as I should have yet, so if I missed something that I was supposed to reply to there I'll make sure to get to it next post.

[Nightwolf]

@ LmL:

I actually don't like the Xite lynch right now.

As far as I know, that's been your first and most specific mention of a position on a Xite lynch, so I'd like to ask: Why do you not like a Xite lynch right now? You can be as specific or general as you like, but I'd like to see some kind of statement about it, even if its just agreement with something that another person said on the topic.

@ wendy:

Could you explain what post 522 was meant to communicate?
Also: If you could choose anyone in the game right now to be the day's lynch, who would it be?
Who would your choice be if you had to choose someone that there was at least another couple players that you could get to support the lynch?

General Statements:

Has there been anyone else that has expressed any potential support of a CA lynch besides those voting him and myself? I dont want to end up rereading 5 or so pages again just to find out that the answer is no.

I agree with a couple specific statements wendy has made over the last couple pages, and one of them is related to an item I said that I would rather not mention, so I am not pointing out specifically what they are yet.

[Nightwolf]

@ fitz:

and the only way I would move to Xite

would be to avoid a no-lynch.

Can you explain this statement? And more specifically explain it in reference to the underlined part?

[Nightwolf]

Holy post explosion!

@ wendy:

Are you thinking about advocating for a last minute switch from Xite to CA?

Yes, it was something that I was thinking about a little, and was planning on going and rereading a few things involving each of them if there was still any possibility that it could happen before LF checks in and moves his vote, which would kill off any remaining chance that wagon had. Now however, I'm putting that off so that I can reread a different person, you. Seriously, get your act together already or I may even hop on and hammer.

Why would you wait so long to give the hard no-lynch push anyway, if it was really what you wanted. There is NO chance (in my view) of it going through this late and close to deadline. If you wanted to push any theory of it at all the best time would have been when people were still voicing their initial opinions on it. Heck, I wrote up a full section analyzing it with just some of the basic thoughts/arguments that could be used for and against it. You could have used that as a starting point mentioning why some aspect was wrong or adding other arguments into it.

Also, from quickly reading this whole explosion just now combined with a bunch of your previous posts, you don't always even seem to know where you stand. Half the time you're pushing for day 1 no lynch and the other half your emphasizing that the main concern is that it has to be before mylo. Guess what, at least a few people here have considered that it should be before mylo as well. I believe you even said it would be "the first time in the history of the site" or something like that (cant be bothered to look up exact wording right now), so why can't you at least be happy at that much?

Preview Edit: Oh great, a double replacement now as well. I can't say that the thought that it might just be best to lynch wendy('s slot) now didn't cross my mind as soon as I read that. /goes on to reread.

[Nightwolf]

I just thought of something after seeing wendy's quote in iau's post that says iau and LF have to vote Xite before CA can vote wendy in order for the Xite wagon to win. wendy voted himself before dropping out, putting that wagon up to 6 already. How is the Xite wagon supposed to get to 6 first now that wendy dropped assuming 1) that wendy is too aggrivated to check back at this game again and 2) there isn't a replacement already lined up that can hop in almost immediately to unvote. It seems wendy may have killed himself off either way now.

[Nightwolf]

I'm torn. At least more so then I was earlier this morning when I made my other posts. But now that I've cooled down a bit (just reading overly angry posts tends to get me to a similar level of anger for some reason), my calmer mind is telling me to stick with Xite.

@ LmL:

Define/explain "and just placed the swing vote" in the current context.

[Nightwolf]

@ LmL:

@ LmL:

I actually don't like the Xite lynch right now.

As far as I know, that's been your first and most specific mention of a position on a Xite lynch, so I'd like to ask: Why do you not like a Xite lynch right now? You can be as specific or general as you like, but I'd like to see some kind of statement about it, even if its just agreement with something that another person said on the topic.

@ Xite:

1) Nightwolf did you forget this whole case right here?
2)What have I done that we haven't talked about?
3)Did wendy even say anything about this?
4)This looks like hardcore fence-sitting
Again, when I get lynched today, I really expect a Wendy lynch tomorrow.
And then now more of a nightwolf lynch than an IAU lynch

1) No, the primary purpose of that post was to add pressure to wendy to see how he would react. You may noticed that what I talk about in it is not the idea of no lynch itself but why pushing it that late. I wanted to see his reasoning and opinion on why and how that became the discussion this close to deadline in an attempt to salvage some sort of actual information from the page or two the discussion lasted. (Anyone else's reactions, if relevant, would have been a bonus.) If I didn't like his response, then perhaps I would have hopped wagons. Unfortunately, as I was writing the post, he requested replacement, meaning that there wouldn't be a response and I would have to come to my own conclusions while rereading him. So...
4) ...yes, the post did indicate that I had moved closer to the fence, and I can even understand to a degree you calling it fence sitting. At least until this:

I'm torn. At least more so then I was earlier this morning when I made my other posts. But now that I've cooled down a bit (just reading overly angry posts tends to get me to a similar level of anger for some reason), my calmer mind is telling me to stick with Xite.

The first part again recognizes that I am closer to the fence than I was previously, but the rest then goes on to clarify that I'm sticking with my vote on you. I also mentioned that I had calmed down since the other post to make it clear that that remained my position after rereading. So, if you want to call the first one fence sitting, fine, but then this post would have been hopping off of that fence.

2) In fact, something new was just added:
3) No, wendy requested replacement prior to the post, remember? Speaking of which, that makes the following really shady:

1) On that note, wendel, could you explain in as much detail as you can recall the circumstances surrounding your alt slip? Why were you logged in as Adel, and why did you think you were logged in as tomorrow wendy? Thanks.

1) Hey wendy, wanna answer this? How about anything that has been directed at you without the rage and AtE?

1) Again, wendy already requested replacement, and you're aware of this. Calling him out to answer you then is quite an interesting way of throwing extra suspicion on him, considering that you already know there won't be a response.

Confirm Vote: Xite

@Mod: It doesn't really matter since were about to hit deadline, but there are no votes on CA anymore.

[Nightwolf]

EBWOP:

4) Yeah, but about 80-90% of the noise is her. Also, shouldn't we take her own advice and lynch solely to shut the person up?

You can add this on similar to that last point as well. wendy is already shut up, as he is being replaced, so this is not a valid reason you're pushing here.

[Nightwolf]

I've just started working on a full reread myself (I'll get my vote up after I'm done with it, which should be later today or early tomorrow morning at the latest), but I do want to toss a few questions out there before I forget them. Please do not respond to anything that is meant for a player other than yourself. Thank you.

@ LmL:

Even though both Xite and wendy are now dead I would still like a response to what I asked of you yesterday.

@ LF:

Did you ever finish reading the thread before deadline hit? If so, what was the last post present at that time?

@ Nexus:

Would I be interpreting your posts correctly if I say that your current theory is that scum killed wendy because he was suspicious of them? Elaborate.

@ fitz:

Is your suspicion of LF based solely on Kor's play? If not, what do you find scummy from LF's play so far?

@ Prana:

What were your views on CA and fitz prior to seeing the two flips? What are your opinions of them now?

@ iau:

Are you still interested in a CA lynch now that he has requested replacement?

@ Everyone:

Recent developments have made me a bit more in favor of using our No Lynch today than I expected I would be. Here is a quick survey on the topic to see where everyone stands: (you can state reasons with your answers if you wish but I request that people do not debate this topic with each other (or myself) until most/all remaining players have responded)
1) What day would you favor using our no lynch on?
2) At what point in that day do you believe the no lynch should occur? (Examples of what I mean here: Quick-hammering no lynch, Waiting until the town gets close to deciding who would have bene that day's lynch, Somewhere inbetween, Etc.)

[Nightwolf]

...but I do want to toss a few questions out there before I forget them. Please do not respond to anything that is meant for a player other than yourself. Thank you.

. . .

@ Nexus:

Would I be interpreting your posts correctly if I say that your current theory is that scum killed wendy because he was suspicious of them? Elaborate.

I don't even know why...I guess we should try and wade through tw's posts and see who he was most suspicious of.

*will do that today*

Doesn't make sense for the mafia to kill him because of his suspicions, because there's no reason they should expect that inHim would have the same suspicions that wendy did.

/sigh

@ Prana/Nexus:

Please respond to 2).

@ Lat:

What are the numbers you've inserted in your case? I'm still working on rereading, but my own case on Prana has been building along the way and I'd like to check some of what you mention that is not part of mine so far.
Please respond to the survey as well.

[Nightwolf]

Sorry everyone. I've been having internet problems the past few days. College just started back up today for me, so that's how I'm posting now. I have an appointment set up tomorrow and I'm hoping they can fix whatever the problem is then, but until it is I'll be able to post from here between classes. Anyway I have to get to class now so I'll be back this afternoon when I have more time with an actual post.

[Nightwolf]

Ok I'm a bit more pressed for time than I thought I would be due to long lines at bookstore etc. but I do have time to follow up on a couple previous comments and add a few general statements.

I skipped most of the Lat/Prana wall-o-thon after about 2 posts each since I don't have the time to properly look into everything being argued there. However, from the bit I did read and sentences I glanced at, I can say that I don't really like half the argument from either side. Will form a more complete opinion on this once I have time to read it. Since I had mentioned I was "working on building my own case on Prana" before I'll summarize what I remember it containing (I believe they are all addressed in the Lat Prana debate already anyway so this is just for those wondering, I do not require Prana to repeat himself): The idea that Xite was a good lynch -> not having much of an opinion on Xite, Timing of votes (my notes are at home so I can't really specify what this meant until I see them again), and the possibility that Prana actually drew wendy into the two page worthless argument rather than the other way around.

As for my comment/survey about no-lynch: 1) It seems that I have all the responses I'm getting from that since almost everything has turned into Lat/Prana recently. I may have missed some while going through recent developments as well so I'll go back though and look at these responses another time.
2) I said I am more in favor of no lynching today than I thought I would be, and this is due to the unexpected event of wendy being NK'd. Follow-up explanation of my thoughts at the time: As far as I could tell, the situation was one of two things:
a) The scum were confused for whatever reason and ended up killing wendy when he could have likely been an easy mislynch today or later on, or
b) The scum have some sort of specific plan that killing wendy helps them to execute.
In the case of a), no lynching today means they have to make another kill while still somewhat confused, and in the case of b) no lynching could throw off their plan a bit since they were probably planning a later no lynch since that is what most had voiced approval of. If we were to no lynch today I would say it should be done right after CA's replacement came in and posted his initial thoughts, though I was making the assumption that CA would have been replaced by now (I do not believe it is too late for this just yet though if he is replaced soon). Otherwise I am also in favor of a relatively quick hammer on no lynch the day before mylo as I previosly alluded to.

New(er) thoughts: I am getting a bad vibe from LmL right now, I'll call it gut at the moment though I do believe I can offer a couple reasons when I have time.
The non-Lat/Prana posts on this page seem to contain some pretty bad fail, unsure what to make of them at this point since I don't have time to look back more closely at their related events.
My vote is very likely to end up on either Lat or Prana based on how I feel about the two of them after analyzing their exchange. Until then, VOTE: LmL.

Case(s) on at least one of LmL/Lat/Prana (depending on who I find scummier) to come tomorrow. I have to go.

[Nightwolf]

A few more quick comments/questions before I start my day (main post to come later):

@ LF:

I did not know who CA wanted to lynch.

Wolf seemed to express some interest to lynch TW over xite to cause a lynch.

If I voted no lynch, it left the worst possible option (TW lynch) as a high possibility given how few people were interested in a no lynch. That is why I said right before deadline, as it would not allow anyone to get a vote in preventing a no lynch. By voting for xite when I did, it ensured that my prefered lynch would occur if a lynch did happen.

Could you specify what you are referring to here with the underlined?

@ Lat:

First off, I'm very disappointed in all you. I was hoping we would be able to get more pressure on Prana and get his partner to bus him

but now he's gets to hide behind a oh the walls were long so I didn't read them disguise.

And who said this exactly? I don't recall seeing anyone make that claim.

Also, "citing evidence without reading it" is complete BS. In fact the following could have been written by me (of course this is as I was reading to catch up when I replaced in, but even if I was in the game at the time I highly doubt it would have changed anything):

Now read carefully here, I DID NOT read it because I DID NOT THINK IT WAS NEEDED.

I took it at face value of "Dalt has played here before", there's a link showing he's been on the site before, I thus felt whoever posted it would have checked it beyond "yep, Dalt's name is in there". Turns out that wasn't the case, and so I changed my views as soon as somebody pointed this out.

I will not comment on the other points until later today when I've read the wall-o-thon in full.

On LmL:

To clarify, I have actually been getting a slight gut scum read on LmL for a little while now, it was just that his last couple posts made the feeling much stronger. Anyway, I looked at a couple potential reasons for this from his last couple posts and they don't really hold up after further investigation, so
UNVOTE: . New vote to come next post.

@ LmL:

Nexus,

I more meant that I found you were posting not as much content, not number of posts

. I actually, again, find your reaction overdefensive..

Please say what you mean in the future. As it stood, it was a false accusation, and therefore deserved to be defended against.

[Nightwolf]

@ Mod: At the time of the last vote count, Prana was voting Llama and I was Not Voting.

On the Lat/Prana exchange:

Wow. Could the two of you repeat yourselves 5 more times before I respond please? Seriously though, that exchange wasted a huge chuck of time to read for a whole bunch of nothing. I think each side made about 1-2 good arguments through the whole thing (not counting repeating themselves). As it stands, I do not find Lat's case very convincing, and if I were to make one against Prana the focus and presentation would be a bit different. Going into much more detail on the matter would be pretty long and tedious, and since that is not my main concern right now, I am not going to bother. I will add one thing to the end of the conversation for now though:
@ Lat: This is a perfect example of misrep right here:

It annoys me that what I accuse you being scummy you reply with an explanation that gives you off as anti town. Mainly the

"Oh I didn't read the thread"

Two examples of this

Now read carefully here, I DID NOT read it because I DID NOT THINK IT WAS NEEDED.

That quote from Prana is talking about the link fitz posted to show that dalt had "played" here before. That is not part of this thread and is in no way an example showing that he did not read this one.

@ LlamaFluff:

Please respond to this:

@ LF:

I did not know who CA wanted to lynch.

Wolf seemed to express some interest to lynch TW over xite to cause a lynch.

If I voted no lynch, it left the worst possible option (TW lynch) as a high possibility given how few people were interested in a no lynch. That is why I said right before deadline, as it would not allow anyone to get a vote in preventing a no lynch. By voting for xite when I did, it ensured that my prefered lynch would occur if a lynch did happen.

Could you specify what you are referring to here with the underlined?

And this time I'll add something extra: VOTE: LlamaFluff.

[Nightwolf]

I am pretty sure that Wolf, Lat and now fitz are town. IAU still probably but gut is making me wonder there, as I think the TW kill is either a move from a highly experienced or newbie scum team. I can see a few reasons that TW would be the correct kill for scum.

This type of NK speculation is always very detrimental to town. You're pigeonholing the scum team in one way or the other, and that type of thinking leads townies to their demise. With that,

Vote: Llamafluff

. This would put LF at L-2. IAU still makes me a bit uncomfortable with his actions today, and I will be keeping a bigtime eye on him, too.

And what makes that any different from this?

I'm gonna bold this for effect.

My scumsenses tell me that both mafia members were on the Xite wagon.

Looking at this game, I think that the TW kill was to throw the scent off of the Xite wagon, since "both wagons were equally wrong."

[Nightwolf]

That last post was @ LmL. LF's post snuck in without me noticing. Response upcoming in an hour or two.

[Nightwolf]

@ Llama:

Those two quotes were in the part of the thread that you did not read at the time, and therefore they would not have been able to make you think that there was a chance that I would switch over to wendy. Try again?

@ LmL:

Can you define and/or list the criteria involved for someone to be considered "defensive" in your view?

[Nightwolf]

fitz, you may want to reread Day 2 (skipping over Lat's and Prana's posts).

Anyway,

Nexus

I completely forgot that Nexus was in this game. That is certainly not a good thing, though not necessarily a bad thing either. Anyway, my next task while I wait for something to happen is to look back at my notes on him and his posts to refresh my memory and position on him.

[Nightwolf]

Prana, I think you misunderstood my post.

I wrote that under the assumption that he already read everything (including that debate), but if you look at fitz's post that prompted me to make the suggestion I did, you may see why I made that specific suggestion.

[Nightwolf]

@ fitz:

What I would like you to see is the events of Day 2. If it was my intent to point out something more specific at this time then I would have done so already.

May I ask what your vote is currently waiting on (as in, what needs to happen either on your end or on someone else's before you choose to place one)?

Same question

@ Nexus

as well.

[Nightwolf]

Perhaps you should give D2 a closer read

No, actually you should. Most of the questions you have out have already been answered D2, hence me suggesting it in the first place. They may not be the type of answers you are looking for, I wouldn't know, but the way you asked them makes it pretty obvious that you haven't noticed the answers in thread already.

[Nightwolf]

@ fitz:

And since I doubt that will happen...how about answering my questions to you in my last post?

You mean these?

Is there a rush? Should I not wait to get answers to my questions?

Let's see... no there's not much of a rush, though there is deadline coming up in a few days and when you're waiting for answers that are already present in the thread that is just wasting time for no reason. I also believe its been mentioned a couple of times by this point that in general it is usually better to have a vote placed than not to, and I feel this is especially true with a deadline approaching (unless the vote would land on a player at L-1 or L-2, in which case it would be ok as long as the intent to have the vote on that player is still declared.)

@ LlamaFluff:

and last was Wolf voting me for... saying he was gonna vote tw, which apparently he really didn't and I was just hallucinating or something or maybe it was someone else, I can't remember who it was but I really thought he said that. I could've sworn someone said it at the time I was reading that "oh ill vote tw over Xite at the very end to have a lynch" or something like that...

So let me clarify this, are you retracting the entire statement that someone said they were going to 'vote tw to have a lynch' or are you just retracting my name from that statement? (or something else entirely?)


Awaiting what LmL has to say if/when he shows back up.

More comments to (possibly) come when I wake up tomorrow morning. A couple things I just read made no sense at all and I think thats probably because I'm too tired right now.

[Nightwolf]

UNVOTE: Llama

As for my top 2: Nexus and LmL, though LmL may move up or down depending on his response post that is supposed to be in the works. I'll update this if either of these 2 do change during the remainder of this game day.
VOTE: Nexus

Cue "Wha? How is the person you were just voting for not in your top 2?"

I'll get to that later, along with an explanation of these top 2 and a response to Lat's 787 in various posts throughout the day. (This is just a quick stop-by post before I leave for class. I have the day off tomorrow so I don't have to worry about homework and as such will have all of today free aside from classes.)

@ Nexus:

You looked ready to have Llama lynched on the last page. What makes LmL suddenly a better vote in your view?

@ Fitz:

When voting for Nexus you cited post 740 as your reasons. Was that your whole case on him at the time of your vote?

Also, I'm not asking for details, but do you have any clue on how long RL will be "kicking your ass"? (I'm not trying to deny or criticise that it is, just wondering if it is a situation that you can estimate will be done with in approximately X amount of time)

[Nightwolf]

Fail... "You looked ready to have Llama lynched on the last page." refers to page 31, the page before Nexus placed his LmL vote. I didn't realize that my post would be starting a new page.

[Nightwolf]

Well it would no longer put Llama at L-1 since I just unvoted him. I don't know where you are headed or how much time you'll have to check in, but if it is possible to stop in later this evening or early tomorrow, it would be appreciated as I will have more directed at/about you posted by then.

[Nightwolf]

I will be covering mainly vote related matters in this post and leaving the response to Lat until a bit later tonight.
__________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________

First, a summary of my actions

re: LlamaFluff:

Some may have noticed that in contrast to the others who have voted for him, I did not give any reasons for the vote, instead pairing it only with a general question. When I first asked the question I had yet to read all of Lat v. Prana and assumed that once I did one of those two would come out as being my top suspect. I did see what I thought (at the time) was a potentially scummy contradiction in Llama's explanation for his end of day events though, leading to the question. After reading Lat/Prana, neither one did reach the top of my list, so I was left without a clear place for my vote. Llama had posted after I asked the question but did not respond to it, and so I chose to add the vote on for extra pressure on the building wagon thinking that he could be my top suspect depending on his answer.

It turned out that he gave exactly the answer I expected and hence said I would respond in an hour or so, thinking I had a case against him. I didn't get around to sitting down and typing it out until the next day, at which time I realized that my case was actually built on two plain errors, 1) I assumed knowledge of the rules for one part of my reasoning while acknowledging his ignorance of them in another part and 2) didn't realize the fact that wendy would've been lynched if not for his vote (I had remembered Xite getting to 5 first, for some reason). This left me with only some random thoughts that weren't really scummy to me by themselves and no way to clearly tie them together anymore. I felt some potential was still there to make something out of it though, so I just showed that he was wrong and asked for a response to see if it would lead me to another case or way of bringing the thoughts together. He retracted at least part of his statement, which I did not expect at all at the time and I asked for clarification. I don't think he ever did, but either way I looked back at the situation and do not believe the conversation made him out to be that scummy in my view, so I let it drop.

I will also note here that I did not agree with many of the reasons used against Llama (about his own play, not Korashk's) by others, with the only main approval going to this one from Prana:

ISO 21

Targets me in regards to... the Dalt stuff and my voting Korashk? I could have understood if he had mentioned something about the Xite stuff as even I admit that was shitty play on my behalf, but the Dalt stuff and Korashk stuff (which feels stuffed in there to fluff the post out)... that's half hearted scum hunting at best.

__________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________

On LmL:

I did not like LmL's vote on Llama for the speculation at all (especially right after my own vote) since he had done it himself along with others. I would have voted him at the time I pointed it out except I had just committed my vote to questioning Llama and did not want to pull it off right away as that could kill some of the power behind the question and potential case if Llama gave me what I considered the likely scummy answer to my question and I tried to build off of it. I don't have much more of a case on him than iau has built (which I do approve of) since picking up that point, and this is why I would still like to see his response post before coming to a more definite judgement on the situation.
__________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________

On Nexus:

I didn't really care much for Nexus's Day 1 play, but much of that I wrote off to being new. Day 2 I am not finding it so easy to do so. First I will remind people of the "voting for your 4th suspicion" thing from Day 1 that I think most agreed was scummy. The rest will be from the current Day phase since I don't remember much else I considered very strong from Day 1:
Format:
Post# (Iso#) - Comment, explanation, or question on post.

637/638/642 (56/57/58) - Pushes suspicion onto people that wendy was suspicious of, despite clearly acknowledging that wendy was being replaced the day before in iso posts 50/51, nullifying the assumption mentioned that scum would kill wendy because his suspicions were accurate since he is no longer around to push them. If anything, killing wendy after replacing out only validates those suspicions since they are now known to be from a town player (which happens to give Nexus a convienent argument to try to spread new suspicion around).

655 (61) - This does not feel like it comes from a pro-town viewpoint since the reason stated is not to lose 2 townies again. A lynch at least has a chance of hitting scum (and therefore not guaranteed to be 2 townies) while a no lynch is a guaranteed townie death that the scum get to choose. (I am not considering the other arguments for no lynch here because Nexus makes no mention or implication of them, and also because he said that he is not in favor of a no lynch today in iso 59 which means that he does not currently find those arguments convincing.)

707 (64) - "His sudden decision to stop supporting a lynch on CA is very strange." - Heh, it wasn't sudden at all. He had stated a couple times that he would vote Xite if it came down to Xite and wendy and LF waited as long as possible for something to develop on CA before switching. Nice try.
--- "Surely Prana defending himself is a good thing, would you rather, if he was town, he rolled over and let you lynch him?" - As I think Lat brought up before, this makes no mention of the possibility that Prana is scum or at least that Lat clearly believes Prana is scum. And just the general idea of a person defending themselves has little to nothing to do with their alignment anyway. Saying that Prana defending himself is "Surely" a good thing and providing only the idea of being town as reasoning sounds a bit like saying "Surely Prana is town."

760 (66) - First 3 lines: basically summarizes the case others have put forward on Llama, even though some of the points are factually wrong. I also see a few signs that Nexus doesn't really believe in the case he is voting for (Formatting added):

Llamafluff "debating to set alarm to force no lynch"-no. That was never going to happen, in any way, why would you even think that?
Absolutely hooked on the idea of a no lynch, despite the fact it's only D2. No lynch was never an option on Day 1. Noone wanted it besides TW, you didn't really mention it D1, I don't think. He basically hammered,

he's completely misread the rules.

Lateralus blames Prana for the walls of text meaning we ignored him, but I'd say he is as at fault, but eh.
Fitz: joke votes don't help anyone, it's Day 2, it's not really necessary, but whatever.

Nightwolf:

My vote was waiting to see how Llamafluff defended himself.

Not reading the rules is not acceptable.

I don't understand why you wouldn't check the rules.

I just can't see past Llamafluff being scum. I thought he was scum D1, and he's done nothing to convince me otherwise today, so VOTE: Llamafluff I realise he's defended most of these accusations, but I wanted to reiterate why I was voting.

I think that puts him at L-1, but I wanted my vote somewhere.

1)

Italics

- If you wanted your vote somewhere, then why didn't you have it placed already? Llama didn't do anything extra to further convince you of his scummyness, you only placed your vote after I asked about it.
1a) He also discredits the significance of placing the L-1 vote in the 2nd italicized part, treating it very casually like any other vote since his sudden want to have his vote somewhere outweighs it according to that sentence.
2) 1st underlined - says Llama read the rules but did so poorly. 2nd underlined - says that Llama did not read the rules at all. This is a blatant contradiction in his own statements and so he must not have thought about the case he was pushing very much if he doesn't even have a consistent line of thought about it.

763/769 (67/69) - (Formatting added)

Jesus.

Damn it was a sign of annoyance, that iam had presented such a good case on LmL that

I wanted to give him a chance to see what he said before fluff got hammered

. I think Llama is scum, and I now think LmL might be too.

I didn't want to deprive the town a few days to discuss-

I didn't think there were any other massive suspicions, UNTIL iam posted. So I unvoted as soon as there was more massive suspicion.

No, it doesn't change my opinion on Llama.

I do think the LmL accusations are valid, which is why I unvoted to explore them further.

No, I'm not his buddy. I'm nobody's buddy.

Underlined bits - The case on LmL had already been built before Nexus voted. iau made it pretty clear that it was a strong suspicion and I hinted at it originally as well. All iau did in between Nexus's vote and unvote was restate the case. LmL even pledged to provide a reply before Nexus placed his vote, so if he really wanted to give him a chance to defend himself then he wouldn't have voted in the first place.

Italics

- You were annoyed that a good case had been presented and that there could be more information generated from the current Day??? That is clearly something only scum would feel.

Rest of posts - He votes his second suspect just to have his vote somewhere, even though previous posts would suggest that he is much more confident about Llama being scum than LmL and doesnt switch back until it is pointed out that it would no longer be the L-1 vote. Apparently that one extra vote that was on Llama has suddenly become a big deal even though nobody else has expessed suspicion of Llama to hammer and discounting its importance earlier (see 1a above)

@ Sotty:

I would like to think that the above would answer your question, considering how general it is. Anyway, basic short version: I find Nexus to be a bit scummier than LmL right now, and my opinion of LmL could still potentially change for better or worse pending his response post, so I am voting who I find more likely to be scum. Also, I think that if Nexus flips scum then it could point toward LmL as his partner (though this probably works the other direction as well, and I would still need to look at interactions with some other players if either flips scum, but I do see a potential connection there). Anyway, is there some reason you think I should be voting for LmL instead?
__________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________

Ugh, sorry about the wall... I didn't think it would take this much time or space to make this post. (If you do stop by to read this Nexus, just comment on whatever you feel is most impostant that you have time for, from me or others) Still counting on getting some form of response to Lat before going to sleep tonight.

[Nightwolf]

@ fitz: Ok, no problem. I was just wondering if we should be expecting any significant increase in your level of participation any time soon, but apparently not.

[Nightwolf]

Skimming down through the first few posts of the Lat/Prana debate (because after that is mostly repeating) with a quick thought or two about each topic discussed, and who would 'win' each topic in my view:
(#'s are just the order I see things while skimming back through, not a reference to any specific numbering used in the posts)

1) The whole "evidence to prove otherwise" thing (re:dalt) - I already commented on this one and I do not believe it has much if any significance. I had a similar reaction as Prana when I was first reading through after replacing in of taking fitz's statement at face value. The only difference is that when fitz posted the link my thought was more along the lines of "Ok, I can understand his case and where he is coming from" rather than that it made me think of dalt as scummier. Of course that thought still went out the window once it was mentioned that he only made 2 posts and replaced out.
Advantage: Prana

2) "Opportunistic vote on wendy" - I mentioned timing of votes when I said the things I could remember having against Prana, and this vote was one of those that I didn't care for as wendy's post that triggered the vote was asking a fairly legitimate question about the topic even if it was from page 1. The further discussion on this topic fell into a discussion of wagon size and reading vote counts, which really is not even worthy of comment (other than the initial point of Prana hopping on the growing wagon

with a fairly weak reason

(emphasis added to highlight which part is more important))
Advantage: Lat

3) Xite is a good lynch --> Not much of an opinion - I mentioned this was a point I supported and I think even Prana admitted it was pretty poor somewhere in the discussion.
Advantage: Lat

4) The whole section where you say to assume wendy is town and explain his posts accordingly is pointless. While I did see some of what you explained in that section (which is what I was basically trying to hint at when I originally said that wendy seemed too deliberately obvious to me), thinking that everyone is going to see the same idea at the time it is actually happening is pretty naive. Also, by criticizing Prana for not seeing that viewpoint, it should also apply to all the others who also wanted wendy dead for it.
Advantage: Prana

Those are the only ideas that I find good or bad enough to be worth my time to really mention, most if not all of the rest is either a) the same topics over again in different words or b) pretty much null/worthless to me.

Short version: I came out of that discussion with no more against Prana than I went into it with.

[Nightwolf]

I will vote Nexus out of self-preservation before deadline, but would almost infinately prefer to see a LmL lynch.

I have no problem switching over to LmL if the situation requires it, since according to the given top 2 lists the town as a whole would rather have him lynched than Nexus, at least according to currently available information.

[Nightwolf]

@ Llama:

Has LmL overtaken Prana as your #1 preferred lynch?


Preview edit: Does that mean that is the last time you'll be checking the thread?

[Nightwolf]

I think something was misunderstood there. I meant, does your other post mean that 3-4pm is the last time you'll be checking the thread this game day.

[Nightwolf]

That last bit was @ Llama.

And Nexus, you may not have noticed but when Leech voted you he moved off of Llama, so right now there are three wagons all at 3 votes from what I can tell, top to bottom being the order they would be lynched if they remain tied:

LlamaFluff - Prana, LmL, Nexus
LmL - iau, Llama, Sotty
Nexus - fitz, Wolf, Leech

[Nightwolf]

Hmm... ok. I would prefer more time for people to have a chance to see that Nexus is a potential lynch than that, given the low activity levels recently, but I should get home about an hour before you then so I'll think about it.

[Nightwolf]

Last mention of it I've seen was this:

LoudmouthLee has been prodded! Deadline has been extended to Sep 10th at 2300hrs (UTC-5)

(and I looked it up - UTC is the same as GMT)

[Nightwolf]

I will vote Nexus out of self-preservation before deadline, but would almost infinately prefer to see a LmL lynch.

I have no problem switching over to LmL if the situation requires it, since according to the given top 2 lists the town as a whole would rather have him lynched than Nexus, at least according to currently available information.

I'm a bit surprised you (Llama) didn't wait for me to check in considering the above post. I did think about it and this does still apply though, so taking your last post into account:

UNVOTE: Nexus
VOTE: LmL

If I don't see your vote moved back in an hour or two (by which you say you should be checking in again for potentially the last time) I'm hopping back to Nexus.

[Nightwolf]

Couple quick things:

1) Lat (or anyone else stopping by), do you happen to know around when it was first mentioned in thread that Prana and Nexus came from another site? I couldn't find it with a quick skim of his iso and I don't have enough time at the moment to look much closer for it.

2) Llama has about 20-30 minutes left before I move back to Nexus. If Lat chooses to vote Nexus instead of LmL, then I will be moving back to Nexus either way, since there was no previous indication of him supporting a Nexus lynch over an LmL one.

[Nightwolf]

UNVOTE: LmL
VOTE: Nexus

It was a general declaration. If you look at the post of mine I quoted recently it states that part of my willingness to vote for LmL over Nexus was that most of the town had LmL in their top two while it seemed the only people that wanted a Nexus lynch at all were the 3 of us voting for him at the time. However, with another person changing to favor a Nexus Lynch over a LmL one, that tips the scales back where I would have kept my vote on Nexus otherwise. If you want a better explanation I should have more time to offer one closer to deadline (I will definately be stopping in again within an hour or two of it either way)

[Nightwolf]

My current two tells for Nexus town are

1) His reaction towards TW at the end of day one. He seemed genuinely frustrated that TW created a black hole of attention near the end of the day.

**Counterpoint - Nexus was voting TW. "Wasting the day" is only something to get upset about if someone is town.

2) Recent non-vote. I made a statement that said that I would vote Nexus, putting him as the tiebreaker deadline lynch, and he did not react with a self-preservation move that he easily could have made thanks to past suspicions.

My gut just says that Nexus is probably town. There are worse lynches out there but not many.

Is #2 talking about a) the time between when you made the statement and when you actually voted for him or b) the time between when you voted for him and when you jumped off of him.

Also this is likely my last post of the day as well, though I'll hang around for a little while before signing out.

[Nightwolf]

Vote: No Lynch

I'm here.

[Nightwolf]

How much discussion should there be here today?

No other discussion.

[Nightwolf]

VOTE: No Lynch

[Nightwolf]

@ Prana:

What was the reason for the first No Lynch?

[Nightwolf]

Sorry I havent had any time to devote to this recently, this past week has been hell. I havent read more than a couple posts into the day yet but I'll catch up and get some content in when I wake up, the amount of content depending on how much time I have (my dad may have to go in to hospital, etc., so i dont know for sure how much thatll be)

[Nightwolf]

Ugh. Since my last "in the morning" thing didn't work out, and since I haven't even managed to finish all my hw for Monday yet, I'm going to be staying up most of the night to finish my hw and finally catch up on this... expect a few posts throughout the night.

[Nightwolf]

Ok I went through everything and gathered most if not all of my thoughts/points in my notebook, including some older posts after skimming some isos. I've decided that I'm not going to place my vote just yet though, as I want some responses to a few questions/comments first.

@ Llama:

1) I'm unsure if this was actually asked already or not, but why did you choose to make the video post earlier?

2)

This glazes over the fact that I did not want Nexus lynched,

and only voted for him to get a LmL lynch to happen.

Please elaborate on the italicized.

3) In your second post of Day 2, you write "Anyone want to no lynch?" Why did you ask that when I had already posed the question to everyone while yet ignoring my question on that topic at the same time?

@ Sotty:

1) "the Lat kill is

too

perfect" Why? Please explain what this meant.

2)

There is no way I would class Nightwolf as new player, he knows exactly what he is doing.

This statement just strikes me as odd. If you know that I know exactly what I am doing, then that would imply that you have an idea as to what I am doing as well, and therefore a stronger read on my alignment than you are currently displaying by listing me as one of your top suspects and yet not voting or pressuring me at all.

@ Prana:

1) Why do/did you think that scum would want to draw when we were heading toward the third no lynch?

@ Leech:

1)

So, you ignore my votes on you, and brush off my Fitz vote as RVS. It was at the beginning, but as time progressed I became more comfortable with it being there. It went from being my RVS vote, to an actual vote, before Xite made me change it. I guess I should have made that clear in the thread.

What was it that made you more comfortable with your vote on fitz?

2) What are your thoughts on iau updating wendy's chart?

3) From near the end of Day 2:

We lynch Nexus:
1. Nexus flips scum, the possibility of Nexus bussing is a distinct possibility.
2. Nexus flips town, then a lot of the reason to suspect LmL is no longer there.

Please elaborate on #2 (as if it were before Nexus and LmL flipped).

4)

Ok, you consider Nightwolf experienced...Now why would be be making such horrid moves as scum with that level of experience?

What about the scums' play so far do you consider horrid? Why?

[Nightwolf]

Deadline lynch rules. I voted Nexus to put him at top forcing him to vote LmL, who I then revoted, putting him the frontrunner for tiebreaks. By voting Nexus I essentially was increasing the chance of a LmL lynch.

Then why would you have voted him at all, since I had stated intentions of moving my vote if nothing else happened? We had even discussed for a moment when it was that you would be checking in so I knew how much time I had, I mentioned that I could stop in approximately an hour before you to do so, and yet you made a point to beat me to the thread and say "this really sucks" and "it is my only vote to not get lynched," when you knew I would be stopping by just a bit later. So again I ask, why?
Also, you mentioned towntells for Nexus at the end of the day, would i be correct in assuming that since he didnt vote LmL after you voted him like you wanted him to would be the exact reason for that tell you mentioned?




My top suspect right now is Prana, and my other questions were meant as a tiebreaker for second (and to see if anything jumped out that would move them to first). I'll say why when I get back from class in 90 minutes, but I can mention for now that the freshest evidence has to do with post 876. My vote is not on Prana as I do not want an L-1 situation yet.

[Nightwolf]

Ok, as I mentioned earlier, the highlights of my case are focused around post 876, so lets start with quoting it:

I'm assuming he means this rule:

12) If the game goes to 72 game hours (3 day and night phases) with no deaths, all living factions will forget why they were killing in the first place and will live happily ever after (draw).

Which means as it stands, the town are looking for a draw?

The second No Lynch vote was bloody stupid anyway, it was obvious scum had chosen not to kill as we returned from night early, just like we have here. So why did we just repeat the damned cycle? Both sides were damned stupid there anyway.

Town should be trying to lynch,

the first No Lynch was good, I agreed with it and went with it, the second was just a massive waste of for all involved as the outcome was known before it was done.

Scum on the other hand are supposed to be trying to win,

and evidently

have gone against their win condition

by not doing so. So I haven't a clue what's going on, but we do need to stop the damned No Lynches.

First, the bolded. Very interesting word choice here. Town should be trying to lynch, while scum on the other hand should be trying to win. On the other hand? That phrase tends to imply a difference of some sort, so the town must not be trying to win as they lynch, their only concern is that they should be lynching. That is basically a scum claim in itself since he wants to win and yet winning is exclusively associated with scum there.

But what if it was just poor word choice? Ok, then lets forget the whole "on the other hand" for a moment. Still the actions mentioned of lynching and winning themselves create a similar effect as before, just not as strongly.

There are other things off about this post as well though. Example: the underlined. The rule was just added after the second no-lynch/no-kill, so the conclusion that town is looking for a draw cannot be obtained from the first two no lynches. The reason for the second no-lynch was (at least in my opinion) more than just getting the scum to kill as well. Because that is one thing Prana is right about, it was known at the time of the second no-lynch that the scum would no-kill again as long as they were able to. However, the game cannot go on forever, so added onto the reason of trying to get the scum to kill and norrow the field is (as I said, at least in my opinion) that of seeing if, how, and when some sort of rule would be implemented in order to stop the game from entering an endless loop. I would think that the idea a rule would have to be added is common knowledge, and whatever that rule would be, it would provide more information on the best course of action and would not solely be "looking for a draw."

Then we have the italics as well, which says that the scum are not playing to their win condition by not killing. Prana does admit though when asked that it would be in town's favor to get scum to kill. This would naturally mean that it would be in scum's favor for them not to, making it their best play.

The last point mentioned (not blatantly in this particular post, but in following ones) is that of the scum wanting a draw and town giving up and giving it to them if there is another no-lynch. Now lets think about this for just a moment. Only townies have died so far. There is no evidence that anything has happened that would go against the mafia's plan or get them worried. They even had control over the last death to have happened at the time. Therefore, if they wanted a draw, they must have been playing for it for the very beginning, which is totally unlikely. I could end my point here and conclude with saying that everything Prana did yesterday was throwing around a bunch of poor reasons for avoiding another no lynch when it is most likely the best play, but let me take one extra step and point out one other (somewhat) potential angle. The scum has been messing with us as evidenced by their kill choices, and most if not all of us agree on that. Now, since Prana seems convinced that the scum are playing for a draw. As I said, for that to be the case, they wouldve had to decide that from the beginning with the way they have played. So the is the possibility (though I wouldn't consider this entirely likely myself) that the scum play was for the exact reason of being able to use the argument of handing the scum a draw in order to avoid the otherwise inevitable no lynch when it would occur.

And let's not forget about the Xite ordeal of course. You can consider my vote on Prana as of now, except as stated I don't want an L-1 just yet.

Extra info:
Out of the four I asked questions to*, I also have a couple of (not entirely thought out yet but very likely) theories on Prana's flip:
Prana = scum --> Leech = scum
Prana = town --> Sotty = scum
*Note: I said out of the four people I questioned because I haven't looked as closely into possible implications a flip would have on our other two players yet (fitz and iau), so this part could be subject to change. I'll try to update it before the end of the game day if it does seem that Prana will be the lynch.



Preview Edit: The 2nd? Crap. I thought we had until the 4th.