Mini 352- Saints and Sinners Mafia - Abandoned

[Yosarian2]

(shrug) Sure, that's as good a reason as any for a day one randomish vote.

vote:MoS

[Yosarian2]

So, looking at the roles, it sounds like the Bishop could give the town two lynches every single day if he wants to? That sounds really powerful. What does everyone think; would two lynches a day be better then one?

[Yosarian2]

Well, yeah, I agree, in that case it's be huge. The stratagy question I was posing, though, was; would it be better for the bishop to give us 2 lynches every single day, or just to get our normal 1 lynch a day?

By the way, I am reading that role, right? The bishop can do it every day if he wants, no limit?

[Yosarian2]

Ah, I see, never mind then.

In that case, yeah, it's probably best to use it late-game when there's an even number of people left to get us back on odds.

[Yosarian2]

Original Roll String: 1d12 (STATIC)

1 12-Sided Dice: (8) = 8

Heh...you know, you could just use an 11 sided die, and not randomally vote for yourself. If you wanted, anyway.

[Yosarian2]

Well, that depends on what you think the point of random voting is (if any). Lot of different views on that.

[Yosarian2]

(Or do it when we have 3 alive, double lynch FTW!)

Heh...well, no, that dosn't work. Because by the time you'd get a chance for the second lynch, there'd only be two people left alive, and one would be scum.

[Yosarian2]

This tokiyoh bandwagon is pointless, and it's not going anywhere. I think I'll do something else.

unvote:MOS

vote:nonny

[Yosarian2]

There can't be much to pick between who to wagon first. For what it's worth I would rather wagon a lurker than non lurker. Which tends to lurk the most?

Well, that's why I'm voting nonny, only 1 post so far this game.

[Yosarian2]

I didn't think it was pointless...

...but you're not on it, either. I've got to say your behavior hasn't made much sense to me so far this game.

[Yosarian2]

I didn't think it was pointless...

...but you're not on it, either. I've got to say your behavior hasn't made much sense to me so far this game.

I think it's pretty clear I had no problem with this bandwagon.

I don't think tokiyoh's responses have been that great. He's a bit defensive.

I'm a little concerned that I've made myself an easy target. I think I've been helpful, though.

Ibby, you should be like me and

vote: MOS

if you want off of tokiyoh. MOS is supposed to have told us who the scum are by now.

...

I still don't get it. If you really thought tokiyoh's reaction was over-defensive and suspicious, why weren't you voting for him? Why aren't you voting for him now? Why push the bandwagon but not join it on day 1? And why support another bandwagon now? Why MOS, anyway?

[Yosarian2]

Unvote, Vote: Yosarian2

Any specific reason for that, guy?

[Yosarian2]

1. It makes no difference, I could easily have been voting him
2. I didn't think his responses were terrible, even if I don't agree with ibaesha's characterization of his responses as under-defensive.

It just seems odd to me; right now, it feels like you're trying to have it both ways on the wagon, to both support it and be able to say "Oh, I'm not a part of it", which can be a scum tell. And now feels like you're going back on fourth now even on if he's been overly defensive or not.

5. Due to your move from MOS to nonny, attached to a criticism of the tokiyoh bandwagon. Are MOS and nonny that different? I was a little skeptical.

Actually, no, not really. I was just looking for a lurker to vote for, but yeah, now that I look at it you are correct, MOS has been just as bad of a lurker so far this game, and we should also put pressure on him to post some content. If Nonny starts posting content (and a "I haven't read everything yet" post when there's only 4 pages does not cut it for me, at ALL), MOS wouldn't be a bad lurker to pressure next.

[Yosarian2]

You later comment still on her flip flopping between her saying he's overdefensive and underdefensive and such, but I'm not seeing where these discrepencies are at, and that's making you look suspicious in my eyes.

Well, this looked like...if not quite a flip-flop, like a direction change.

I didn't think it was pointless...

I don't think tokiyoh's responses have been that great. He's a bit defensive.

Here, she's defending the tokiyoh bandwagon, saying she dosn't think it was pointless, because she didn't like his responses and he was being a bit defensive.

Then, when I asked her why she wasn't voting for him if she thought that, she said this:

2. I didn't think his responses were terrible, even if I don't agree with ibaesha's characterization of his responses as under-defensive.

I understand that in the strictest sense, it dosn't quite contradict the earlier statement, as she could say "well, i didn't think his responses were great, but they're not terrible either." However, it does seem like when asked why she wasn't voting for him ,she said "Well, his responses weren't terrible", and yet when she wanted to support the bandwagon without being on it, the reason she gave was "his responses aren't great". That looks to me like she's trying to have it both way.

Honestly, I'm still more confused by Kelly's behavior then suspicicous of it, which is why I'm not voting for her, at least not yet. However, I would like her to clarify herself more; for example, Kelly, which posts did you find "a bit defensive"?

[Yosarian2]

I'm gone till late July 30th. Yosarian, I'm watching you.

You do that.

[Yosarian2]

I was going to comment on this, but apparently Kelly beat me to it. Why switch off of me and bring attention to nonny instead of keeping pressure on me, since I only had 2 posts at the time, and they both involved my random vote?

(shrug) You were a random vote. I don't take my own random vote into account when I decide who to vote for; why should I?

So when I decided to go lurker hunting, I went through the list, found someone who was both the worst lurker in the game and who had not recieved any attention, and voted for him. When I go lurker hunting, partly it's to get the lurker to react, and partly it's to draw attention to who is lurking so that either the town or possibly the mod can act on that. Ideally I tend to look for people who are both lurking and who no one else seems to have even noticed are in the game at all, in the hopes of drawing them into the game.

Honestly, I hadn't even realized you were lurking until Kelly had pointed it out. There had been so many random votes for you, responses to you, discussion about your method of random voting, votes for you, ect, that I didn't actually notice you were lurking until Kelly pointed it out and I did a "read all posts" on you.

[Yosarian2]

This is probably true. It's day 1, and weak reasons are often the only reasons to go on. The Kelly wagon seems a bit lame - "She's acting weird" is legit late game and means nothing early on.

Huh? Why would it be a better tell later in the game? I would hope that by late-game we'd have better stuff to go on than "someone's acting wierd".

[Yosarian2]

If it were possible to use the double lynch every day, the ONLY reason not to do so would be to get more cop investigations.

What on earth would we gain by letting mafia make MORE of the kills?

Well, more town night abilities in general, but yeah, that makes sense.

Especally if it's set up "lynch, reveal alignment, lynch" instead of "lynch, lynch, reveal both alighnments". If it's the second, it's more iffy.

No it wouldn't. We would discuss each lynch. Discussing and making a lynch takes a lot more time than a night phase. It gives us more information, too.

Someone needs to back me up on this. I can't believe this is controversial.

Ok, now I get at what you're saying. Less days, but they would take a lot longer, and with a higher lynch/nightkill ratio, the whole game would probably last longer. That does make sense.

First of all it's not that neutral to give fake claims or to interagte if you don't care either way. And fake claims? it's an open set up why would he need your help? and why on earth would you offer?

It is a trap. It's like good cop / bad cop. You guys hammer on tokiyoh, I win over his trust, he hits me up for a fake claim, we nab him. Good job making me spell it out, I'm sure tokiyoh is reading this. I seriously doubt he'll fall for it now.

You relize that makes no sense, How would you give him said claim after he has already been hammered? And how would you give it to him in the thread with out everyone noticing? Unless you have some night talking to the dead so they can claim the next day ability o.0

1. by "hammer on" I just mean "attack"
2. I wouldn't, that's the point

This dosn't make any sense...I assume it was a joke at first, that you were joking you'd give him a good fake claim in an open role game, but you oddly now seem to be defending it as a serious scum catching tactic. I'll admit I'm a bit confused here.

[Yosarian2]

(huh...what happened to my other post? I typed up a long post about this last night, but it's gone)

Anyway, first of all,

unvote:nonny

now that she's stopped lurking. Hopefully she'll continue positng.

Now, looking back, this post by yellowbounder just seemed off to me.

I personally think that the strange things about Kelly is her acting towards tokiyoh, I still don't understand about the fake role claims, she actually supported the idea of using a double lynch ability, every single day, and she justifies her behavior by claiming she wants to have fun during the easy going day 1.

In the light of this:

Unvote: Bacde
Vote: Kelly Chen

THe whole post seems odd. He's just taking lines other people have typed, and piling them together without really explaining any of it, saying anything new, or really saying why he's voting for Kelly.

The "strange thing is her acting towards tokiyoh" and because she "wants to have fun". Why does that make her suspicious? He "dosn't understand about false role claims". She "supports the use of double lynch". So? Why do you disagree with that?

The post seems like just a string of excuses to join the biggest bandwagon in the game, without ever actually giving a reason WHY he thinks Kelly is scum.

vote:yellowbounder

[Yosarian2]

First of all, i can't completely disagree with Yos's wagon starting post, but like i mentioned, it seemed like he was pulling over someone else in order to slip Kelly off the focus. Given Yellow's posts and the fact that it was a starting vote, this probably doesn't matter all that much. But i'm uncomfortable with how Yos brought a new easy target to the front, because it reminds me too much of the last time i saw Yos as scum.

(shrug) I've hardly been trying to get the focus off Kelly this game. I think I made clear that there were some things she's done that seem odd to me, and I asked her several questions about these things. However, one of my personal favorate day 1 scum tells is to look for someone who's joining a bandwagon late in some way that seems off to me, using crap logic. That's something I always look for, because it's just such an easy mistake for scum to make, especally on day 1.

[Yosarian2]

Hmm, I appear to have stacked up about five votes between this post and my last post.

Well, when you don't post for 6 days, that'll happen.

Okay, there was some critism of my last post. Fair enough, but the reasons I gave were ones that I had observed myself.

What reasons? Why did you join the wagon? You made some observations, but never explained why any of them made you think Kelly was scum.

I then looked back at the thread, and observed that, Kelly is acting beyond normal towards tokiyoh, like they have some sort of running joke, or something along that lines. She has comfirmed that she was both serious and joking about the fake role claims, which are strange enough, and this is adding to the "insider joke impression" I'm getting from Kelly.

Not exactally sure what you're getting at here. She made a joke about "giving him a safe claim", which seemed to be to be obveously a joke because it's an open role game. Why does that make you suspicious of her?

She has supported the idea of using a double lynch every single day, which suggests to me, I don't know about anyone else, that she doesn't mind excess townie death.

Why would a double lynch each day cause "excess townie death"? Wouldn't it be just as likely to cause "excess scum death"?

She made some good arguments for why a double lynch each day would be good for the town, and I think I agree with her. Double lynch each day would mean the town would get to lynch a lot more people, and the scum would therefore get to kill a lot less people. Seems like that would only be helpful. The only downside would be less nights for cop investigations.

I don't see why I am being attacked, espically for agreeing with past arugments, which basically the second, third, forth, and fith votes have been about. I'm not one to be instantly suspisous of people who think I'm scummy, but I don't see where the basis of an argument is.

It can be a scum tell to jump onto a bandwagon by basically parroting arguments other people have made. Of course, that's only valid if kelly is town.

[Yosarian2]

And the 4 people that jumped onto Yellow's wagon aren't guilty of this same infraction?

Not in the same way, no.

[Yosarian2]

I'm committed to my belief that Kelly is scum.

Ok. Why?

I don't really have a strong feeling one way or the other about Kelly right now. She's done a few things I don't entirley understand.

But you and Yosarian are not far behind her.

You find me suspicious because...why? Because I'm not voting for Kelly at the moment? Because some other people followed my logic on the yellowbounder bandwagon and because I'm not going to attack them for agreeing with me, as I would like to think I'm making sense?

[Yosarian2]

Yos: You are attacking Yellow on the basis of his reasoning not being original enough and parrotting others yet you are ignoring those who did the same thing in regards to the Yellow wagon.

That's not at all why I'm attacking yellow.

There's nothing wrong with agreeing with someone else. If no one did that, then we'd never get anywhere. The scummy thing about yellow's post was how he parroted a bunch of lines he had gotten from other people's posts but never really went anywhere with them, and didn't really make any sense; he presented it as if it was his own reasoning, but it seemed more like an excuse put together in such a way as to sound like what everyone else was saying without actually making any real sense.

If someone said "Ok, you're making sense, vote kelly", or "Oh, I see what you mean, that is hypocritical, vote Yosarian" would you really attack them for that? I highly doubt it.

[Yosarian2]

Quick question yes or no. When the votes on yellowbounder racked up quickly, did the thought enter your mind that possibly this was too quick? I'm interested.

(shrug) Not for the most part; it really dosn't and shouldn't require more then one half-decent scumtell to bandwagon on day one. I was wondering about Kelly's 5th vote, as it seemed a bit OMGUSy and overly agressive (with the way she made a big deal about how it was "LYNCH -2" and all that), and I was thinking that if yellow did turn out to be town I might take a closer look at Kelly tommorow. However, there wasn't anything I was interested in persuing until yellow either got lynched or convinced me he wasn't a good lynch.

[Yosarian2]

Yeah, I agree. Kelly, could you clarify that last post?

[Yosarian2]

In this case, i agree that 128 the wagon starter was reasonable. However, personally i think 146 is overly stretching it. It is like chewing on the end of a tiny piece of straw and trying to make something big out of it. This is completely taking advantage of inexperienced player.

The experence or inexperence of the player is mostly irrelevent. If a player makes a scum tell, on day one, they should get attacked. Yes, inexperenced players make more scum tells then experenced players, sure, but by the same token inexperenced scum tend to make more scum tells then inexperenced town (if not, then it's time to re-evaluate your scum tells).

In mafia, and especally on day 1, I very often try to find someone who looks suspicious to me, and attack them with everything I've got, in order to get reactions from everyone , to find out more about them from their reactions, and hopefully to lynch scum.

So, you agree that my post 128 was reasonable. All post 146 was a point-by-point response to his defense, both in order to ask him further questions, and attacking the weak points in his defense. That's what I do in mafia; I agressivly demand information, point out flaws, and pick fights, with people I find to be suspicious, in order to get information and reactions, and hopefully to get scum lynched. I do it as town because I find it a very effective way of finding scum, and yes, I do it as scum as well, partly becuase I want to keep my playstyle consistant, and partly just because it's fun.

I do that kind of thing all the time. Look at some games I've played. In street racer mafia, for example, I was a cop, and I spent most of day 1 picking a fight with atticus (who turned out to be the doc, unfortunatly.)

The game you're talking about is actually rather unusual for me; in that game, I kind of took the lead as scum and lead the town around for days, but that was mostly because the game was just stalling and the whole town was lurking; if I didn't take the lead, nothing would have happened at all, and I was bored.

As for the accusation that I'm making something big out of something small; well, perhaps. It is day one, though, and that "something small" is still, IMHO, the best scum tell I've seen yet, so yeah, I'll keep going after yellowbounder until he does something to make me think he's less likely to be scum, or until someone else does something that looks even more suspicious.

[Yosarian2]

I then looked back at the thread, and observed that, Kelly is acting beyond normal towards tokiyoh, like they have some sort of running joke, or something along that lines. She has comfirmed that she was both serious and joking about the fake role claims, which are strange enough, and this is adding to the "insider joke impression" I'm getting from Kelly.

Not exactally sure what you're getting at here. She made a joke about "giving him a safe claim", which seemed to be to be obveously a joke because it's an open role game. Why does that make you suspicious of her?

This quote by yellowbounder makes perfect sense to me. In fact, as the person Kelly was speaking/acting to, i felt much the same way. I don't remember having any outside connections with Kelly and therefore her overly "friendly" actions confused me. Many others simply stated "Kelly acted strange" and voted and went unnoticed. Then why does yellow, who actually pointed out what was confusing to him deserve to be attacked here? I think yellow's explanation flows in terms of logic; he just didn't have a "therefore" in the paragraph. This is at most different perspective of seeing things. Yos is making too much out of the missing "therefore" word.

(shrug) I was asking why Kelly making what appeared to be a joke was considered to be a scum tell. I am asking that seriously, because I still don't really see it. It's not a matter of a missing word; I just don't at all understand what he's getting at here. Or what you're getting at, either, for that matter.

She has supported the idea of using a double lynch every single day, which suggests to me, I don't know about anyone else, that she doesn't mind excess townie death.

Why would a double lynch each day cause "excess townie death"? Wouldn't it be just as likely to cause "excess scum death"?

Again, Yos is accusing yellow only because they have different opinions. There are more pro-town roles than scum. In that case no matter how obvious scum appear to be, statistically it is always more likely to lynch town than scum. That said, yellow's statement of "excess townie death" is nothing but natural to me. While i understand why Yos would agree with Kelly's opinions on double lynch, i think it is too much of a stretch to say that yellow is scummy because he did not share these same opinions.

Actually, no. I'm not attacking yellow because I have a different opinion from him. You could say that I'm attacking yellow because he's attacking Kelly from having a different opinion, I suppose. (which is the same reason you're attacking me here, right?)

But mostly, the thing I was responding to was crap-logic on yellow's part. He's accusing her of "not minding excess townie death", as if that's the only possible result of asking for two lynches a day. By the same logic, anyone who's not voting no-lynch dosn't "mind townie death", because a day 1 lynch is more likely then not to kill a townie, right? More lynches would most likely mean both more town deaths and more scum deaths, so to imply that someone who wants multiple lynches is just trying to kill more townies seems like a clearly unfair and logically flawed attack.

I wouldn't mind if yellow disagreed with kelly, or even if he voted for her partly becuase he thought she was suggesting bad stratagy, but it appeared to me that he was attacking her stratigic advice with bad logic, so I responded to it. Do you really think it's scummy of me to disagree with yellow here?

[Yosarian2]

[i
When you see a "fake claim" statement in an open setup game, "joking" isn't always the first thing that strikes everybody you know. People like me find it confusing and unsure of it's intentions.

...

Since yellow had the same impression from Kelly as i did, i'd expect him to be thinking along similar lines.

= continuation of this post to come later =

I wish you'd stop answering Yellow's questions for him. He hasn't really explained his vote well yet; I'm trying to figure out if he's voting for a reason or with an excuse, so I've been trying to get him to explain better, and when you jump in and try to explain his vote for him, it dosn't help.

Has it never occurred to you that, the reason might be "someone who wants multiple lynches is just could well possibly be trying to kill more townies"? Yellow's posts may be flawed. But can you call the way you repeatedly ignored obvious possibilities/options flawless? I'm hardly speaking of yellow any more. It is your eagerness to jump on the newbie that makes me wonder.

Ok, first of all, that dosn't really make sense; the mafia dosn't want more lynches, because lynches give the town much more information then nightkills, based on who's going after good guys and who's not, and because lynches will sometimes kill scum. Kelly was offering the town good stratigic advice. She may have been doing this because she was town, or because she was scum following Jeep's theory that scum should always offer the town good advice, but either way it hardly makes sense to attack her for it.

Now, just a few posts ago, you said that it was suspicious for someone to attack someone just because they had a difference of opinion with them. THAT'S WHAT YELLOW DID, AND I FOUND THAT SUSPICIOUS. Not only that, Yellow attacked Kelly for that when it seemed to me quite clear that Kelly was right. And he did so without offering any good explination for why he thought Kelly was wrong; I don't consider "more lynches means more townies lynched" to be anything like a solid argument for why anyone suggesting more lynches is scummy, and I'm rather surprised you're trying to defend it as one here.

Besides, none of that was my central point. My origional point, that even you said was reasonable, was that yellow jumped on someone's bandwagon without giving a single good reason why. I was simply pointing out that he has still not given a reason why that made sense to me, and explained why I thought so and why I was still keeping my vote on him, at least at that point in time.

It seemed to me that he had realized his mistake, and tried to create reasons out of thin air to justify his origional vote that got him so much trouble, but none of the reasons quite worked or made sense. If you disagree with me, fine. But I'd much rather hear him defend himself and further try to explain his origional thinking instead of see you supply him with all these answers.

[Yosarian2]

Anyways, the only reason I'm not voting the Bounder is to give him a little breathing room for the claim. Waiting on that.

Making it seem like a claim is the only sensible thing he can do. Since he was a new player he could well have followed you on this, which wouldn't have been necessary so early. Pushing for a claim prematurely is something I consider scummy. His lynch was hardly a foregone conclusion.

He had 4 votes on him out of 6 to lynch, and pie was thinking about putting the 5th vote on. 5 votes out of 6 is certanly enough for a claim, most of the time, always depending on other circumstances of course. I don't see anything wrong with putting on a "phantom vote" to force a claim the way he did, without actually putting a vote on in order to avoid someone randomally hammering without getting a claim first.

Now, I'm not really a big fan of the "force a claim" stratagy in general, but that's a different discussion. I don't see anything wrong with a person saying that they would vote for X, but that they don't want to put him that close to a lynch just yet; however, they do want to see a claim. I'm not sure what part of that you disagree with; do you think it's bad to ask for a claim before you lynch someone?

[Yosarian2]

I think Patrick has a point about the premature push for a claim in his 209. (Well i haven't played with Pei either but still.) And by the way, i believe it's 7 to lynch. Therefore asking for claim at 4 may be a little more questionable than when it's 6 to lynch IMO.

Actually, yes, you are right. I forgot that we started in day, and not in night, so there are still 12 people and still 7 to lynch. My bad.

[Yosarian2]

To clarify that last statement, I think it's bad play because of the two players being attacked, one of them must start out more scummy. If that player's wagon is pursued first, either the wagon is defused and no harm done, or the wagon is followed through and the scum don't gain any extra information to their nightchoices.

Eh...when it comes to attacking people in the day, the key is really getting reactions. If I think the reactions you'll get from focusing on one person would be more informative, I'll do that. If I think it'll move the game better to accuse multiple people at once, especally if no one else is interested in my primary suspect, I'll do that. I don't think it's inherently bad play to accuse two people at once.

[Yosarian2]

Heh...I'm away for 3 days and nothing has happened at all? Sheesh.

[Yosarian2]

The slow pace of this game is getting absurd.

Where is yellowbounder? I hate it when a person gets attacked and then lurks, and in this case he's only posted once all month, back on the 5'th of augest.

[Yosarian2]

Hmmm...interesting theory, ibaesha. I had forgotten there was a devil.

I'm not sure why a devil would act that way, though. Why would a devil try to hint about her existance on day 1? I would think the devil would try to stay hidden until he or she had found a couple of power roles, or until the devil could form a voting block with the scum.

I do still agree that the way Kelly was pushing the Toki bandwagon without being on it is somewhat suspicious, especally as I'm not seeing Toki as being more likely pro-town then not right now; in fact, I think I was the one who pointed that "pushing the wagon without being on it" thing out in the first place. However, my attention is still focused on Yellow at this point, and it'll stay there untill I get some better answers from either him or from a replacement of his.

[Yosarian2]

Edit by way of post:

I confused myself with this sentance.

especally as I'm not seeing Toki as being more likely pro-town then not right now;.

I originally typed "I am not seeing Toki as being more likely scum then not", then tried to change it to "I am seeing Toki as being more likely pro-town then not" becuse that seemed a more clear way to put it, but I screwed up and forgot to get rid of that extra "not". In other words, I meant to say that Toki looks somewhat pro-town to me at the moment which makes Kelly look bad, although I accidently said the exact opposite.

[Yosarian2]

I don't know. I didn't really think of what the proper play for a Devil would be. However, with a Devil in the game and Kelly saying things like 'Your secret is safe with me.' and 'I'll provide safeclaims or whatever' - is freakin' suspicious (I don't care for the joke/trap defense, obv) and seems to me something that could hint at that role.

Theories aside, the thing about Kelly for me is this: when I ask myself if her play makes sense as town, the answer is no, it doesn't.

Alright. Well, I see what you're getting at with the possible devil hints, although I can't really see why a devil would act like that. The joke/trap thing actually did make sense to me, though; my impression of Kelly's play there would be like if I said "Hey, Ibaesha, are you mith's scum partner again?" on the first page of day 1 of some game; clearly a joke, but also something that might possibly get some kind of interesting reaction from you if you were foolish enough to take it seriously. A comment can be both a joke and a trap, especally early in the game on day 1, and that was actually how I read Kelly's comment even before she tried to explain it.

There are other thing about her behavior that still bother me, though, and she is still on my list of suspects.

On another subject, now that I think about it, the existance of the devil could really be a huge threat to the town; depending on how things go, we could actually be effectivly at "lynch wrong and lose" as early as with 9 people left, because if there were 7 people, and that included 3 scum, 3 town, and 1 devil, that seems like an automatic scum win to me, or close to it.

[Yosarian2]

Yes I had already noticed that, but I think pointing it out is really not a pro town thing to do. There's always the outside chance the devil hadn't figured that out yet.

Well, I do think pointing out "if X happens, we'll be at lynch or lose" when it's not completly obveous (at least, it wasn't completly obveous to me until I thought about the implications of a devil) is a pro-town thing to do. Don't you think it's important for the town to know how many lynches we have before we risk losing? I definatly think that townie stratagy at lynch or lose or at close to lynch or loseis very different then townie stratagy when it's not lynch or lose, so it's important to think about how far we are from that point well in advance, and I think it will certanly effect things like if and when the bishop chooses to use one of his abilities.

[Yosarian2]

About Yosarian: I am not so sure what to make of him. Almost every time I've been in a game with him, I've found his thoughts and contributions incredibly insightful. I don't know how many times I kick myself because he says what I'm thinking but does it so much better. I'm not seeing it as much in this game and find myself suspicious of him because of it. I really didn't like the way the Yellow wagon went, but now I find myself second-guessing that because after he was run up, then defended, and his wagon diffused, he disappeared. Not a good sign.

Yeah, I let this one go the first time someone said it, but I'm going to have to respond to it now. This is a rather bizzare accusation to try to respond to. Thanks for saying I'm usually very insightful. This game, I've commented on every single major issue, explained my suspicious, and posted often. I've picked apart points, responded to all kinds of differnet things that didn't seem to make sense to me, and attacked Yellow for what looked to me to be a scum tell. I think I've contributed a great deal of content to this game, and I've shared my thoughts and whatever "insight" I've had whenever I can. I would say I have had more origional thoughts and comments on this game then many people have, including you.

And what do you mean you "didn't like the way the Yellow wagon went"? You certantly didn't express any doubts about it at the time. In fact, you said this:

FoS: Yellowbounder

Seriously, Yosarian read my mind. I was going to write up a big, awesome, content-ful post and then the wagon came.

Saying "Especially after agreeing with other people" is mad scummy. Having the fact that you posted no new content and then busting it out when people wagon you is... not going to work.

Anyways, I think the Kelly wagon was dumb, and most people jumping on were just shooting at the easy targets.

Clarification on that: People act weird all the time in the early game, and so using "acting weird" as grounds for suspicion is dumb in the early game. People don't act weird so much in the late game, so acting weird in the late game is scummy.

Anyways, the only reason I'm not voting the Bounder is to give him a little breathing room for the claim. Waiting on that.

Back then you certanly seemed to think I was being "insightfull", and you certanly seemed to agree with me about Yellow. So why are you saying now that you "didn't like the way the Yellow wagon went" when at the time the Yellow wagon had just very quickly raced up to 4 votes, you appeared to support the bandwagon wholehartedly?

[Yosarian2]

Hehe...yeah, I knew he wasn't the first to accuse me of that, I knew he was saying the same thing you already had said about me, but somehow I didn't notice the entire thing was a direct quote. That's kind of amusing, actually, but as I mess up quote tags all the time I can't hold it against him.

Pie, if you could re-post that post with the quote tags so it means like you intended it to, I think it'd be very helpful.

[Yosarian2]

Yeah, something like a third of the town is lurking right now. The two most severe lurkers at this point are Yellow (who seems to have sucessfully lurked his way out of a bandwagon, having not posted for a month) and mikeanoff (Way to many of his few posts have either been excuses for lurking or promises to post in the future). That's really killing the game.

I don't trust the way that many people got onto the Kelly bandwagon and then just started lurking, either.

[Yosarian2]

Alright, the quote tags seem to have cleared everything up.

Only other thing I feel the need to comment on is that this --

However, I don't think that Ibby, if she was a sinner, would GO AFTER Kelly if she thought Kelly was dropping Devil hints, especially since no one else seemed to have thought of that possibility either.

-- seems a bit WIFOMish.

Not really. There's no real reason for the scum to try to lynch a devil, as being on the bandwagon of the devil when the scum dosn't even know who the devil is won't really make you look any more pro-town, any more then lynching a SK proves you're not mafia in a normal game.

While lynching the devil today would help the town numerically and buy us more time to find the rest of the scum, who is and isn't on the bandwagon wouldn't be a good measure of who the scum is, so I can't imagine a scum trying to intentionally lynch the devil, or trying to vote for the devil to distance themselves from the devil, or anything like that. Ibby may or may not be scum, but the argument that "perhaps she's voting Kelly because she figured out Kelly was the devil" dosn't make any sense at all.

[Yosarian2]

Not really. There's no real reason for the scum to try to lynch a devil, as being on the bandwagon of the devil when the scum dosn't even know who the devil is won't really make you look any more pro-town, any more then lynching a SK proves you're not mafia in a normal game.

Your post is defeats its own purpose. The very fact that you think anyone who attacks the devil out of nowhere is most likely protown is reason enough for the scum to attack the devil out of nowhere.

No, the purpose of my post was to say that there is likely to absolutly no relation between alighment and attacking a person who turns out to be the devil, because the scum don't know who the devil is.

Lynching the devil proves absolutly nothing about your alignment. Scum might do it without knowing, or a townie might do it based on anything or on nothing. If on day 4 someone says "No, I'm not scum; look, back on day 1 I lynched the devil!" we would just laugh at them, as that proves nothing.

So if trying to say "Person X is town becuase she lynched the devil" would be a completly absurd and useless argument, trying to say "Person X is scum who's trying to lynch the devil so that he can make the arguiment that she's town becase he lynched the devil" makes even less sense.

And no, I don't think anyone who lynches the devil is obveously pro-town. I just think it's a completly null tell, that tells nothing about their alignment at all in either direction.

[Yosarian2]

The yellowbounder wagon was not origionally because of lurking, it was because yellow appeared to jump onto the Kelly bandwagon for what appeared at the time to be craplogic.

I think this was the post that started the yellow wagon, if you wanted to respond to it in any way ubertimmy.

(huh...what happened to my other post? I typed up a long post about this last night, but it's gone)

Anyway, first of all,

unvote:nonny

now that she's stopped lurking. Hopefully she'll continue positng.

Now, looking back, this post by yellowbounder just seemed off to me.

I personally think that the strange things about Kelly is her acting towards tokiyoh, I still don't understand about the fake role claims, she actually supported the idea of using a double lynch ability, every single day, and she justifies her behavior by claiming she wants to have fun during the easy going day 1.

In the light of this:

Unvote: Bacde
Vote: Kelly Chen

THe whole post seems odd. He's just taking lines other people have typed, and piling them together without really explaining any of it, saying anything new, or really saying why he's voting for Kelly.

The "strange thing is her acting towards tokiyoh" and because she "wants to have fun". Why does that make her suspicious? He "dosn't understand about false role claims". She "supports the use of double lynch". So? Why do you disagree with that?

The post seems like just a string of excuses to join the biggest bandwagon in the game, without ever actually giving a reason WHY he thinks Kelly is scum.

vote:yellowbounder

[Yosarian2]

All things being equal I think there are several lynches that would be less harmful than mine.

Interesting choice of words, Kelly. Why are there several lynches that would be "less harmful" then yours?

[Yosarian2]

Heh...two mikes in the game now, huh? Boy, this is going to get confusing.

[Yosarian2]

Well, this game has rather stalled, hasn't it?

This is basically where it stands right now:

1. Nonny was being bandwagoned for lurking, but has been replaced and so long as mikeburnfire is more active then nonny was there's no reason to continue that. (Note that I am expecting MBF to finish re-reading the thread and post some thoughts soon).

2. Kelly has been bandwagoned for doing some odd things that may or may not be scummy. Earlier in the game, I didn't really see her as scum, but now I'm not as certain. I especally don't like the random "some people are less valuable then me" line, which although she denied it and just explained she thought she was more valuable then a lurker, it felt to me like she was trying to hint at having a power role to scare off people who might want to vote her. I don't really buy the "Kelly was hinting at being a devil" theory, it dosn't make sense, but that dosn't mean she's not scum. I'm not sure she's a good lynch today, but I'm not at all confident about her alignment.

3. Ubertimmy still has some votes on him from when Yellow attacked Kelly with what seemed at the time to be craplogic, and then kind of lurked for a while. Of course, that tell is only valid is Kelly turns out to be town, which I'm not as sure about as I was at the time; and even if Kelly does turn out to be down, that kind of craplogic attack isn't proof of anything, especally from a relitive newbie. I still think "slightly more likely to be scum then not", but that's about as strong as my feelings currently are on that subject.

So, that about sums it up. Aside from a few other luker-votes, those are really the main issues we've discussed today; I can't think of anything else that's gotten much attention. At this point, I might almost consider a Kelly lynch just because I feel that might give the most information, as almost everyone has at least commented on her and several have either attacked her quite aggressivly or defended her, but I'd rather we find something better to go on. I guess I'll do a re-read when I have a chance and see if there is anything else I can pick up on. I'd rather we discussed some more people today, but mostly I feel like the game is stalling and that we need to start to move in SOME direction before we hit a deadline.

[Yosarian2]

That's not what I said though. I said "All things being equal I think there are several lynches that would be less harmful than mine." If that was supposed to be a hint, I think I would have responded to you differently when you asked what I meant. If I were scum, why should I take back a hint just because someone asked about it?

Because you were hoping people would back off you if you hinted your lynch would be "more harmful then several others", but weren't interested in actually fabricating a claim at that point in time, especally in an open role game, so you were forced to back down when I questioned you about it? I don't know; it was just an odd wording, and it caught my attention, as it just dosn't seem like something a good guy; if you were a townie, you would know there are at least 4 lynches "less harmful" then yours, the 4 bad guys, right?

You later said you were trying to imply that lynching a lurker would be "less harmful" then lynching you. Well, that's probably true if you are town (if the lurker is not a power-role, anyway), and it's clearly false if you're scum. Like I said, the whole thing just seemed...well, to use the word everyone else is using, it seemed wierd.

[Yosarian2]

But I don't know who those four people are. That's why I said "all things being equal," i.e., if we all had the same role.

Well, sure. But who do you :think: the scum are? Who looks suspicious to you right now? If you had to blindly lynch someone right now, who would it be? Because, if you don't think we should lynch ubertimmy today, and you don't want us to lynch you today, then we're going to need some more suspects, and like I said a few posts ago the game seems to be stalling a bit at the moment.

[Yosarian2]

Also, Pie, why shouldn't I be given a chance? Although I may still be yellowbounder, I don't think I should be doomed because of how scummy he acted.

I don't know if you're quite "doomed", and I'm not quite as sure you're scum as I was earlier However, if your predecessor acted scummy, that means that from our point of view you're more likely scum then a random lynch would be. That's what "ascting scummy" means.

[Yosarian2]

So, 2 days until deadline, and most votes >4 at deadline is lynch, so as of right now we're drifting towards a lynch of Kelly.

If anyone wants to say anything, has any suggestions, or if you want to claim Kelly or do anything else, now is the time.

[Yosarian2]

Agreed that Kelly should claim. I'll admit i'm not thrilled about lynching her but it may be the best lynch available and either way will be quite informative. I don't like the mass lurking around a deadline and this may even be a point in Kelly's favour because if she is town, the scum can happily just sit back and watch us drift into a deadline lynch of Kelly.

Well, notice I never actually said I thought Kelly should claim; I never really felt like she was the lynch for today (as you can tell by the fact I'm not voting for her) and it's her choice if she wants to claim or to try to not get lynched without claiming. I'm just saying that if she is going to claim, she should do so now; I hate it when someone claims 5 minutes before the deadline, and their bandwagon gets derailed with no time left to lynch someone else.

[Yosarian2]

General question. Before I was the only player to have much of a problem with Bacde and his play. It was hardly commented on apart from Kelly saying Bacde gave her a good feeling. And now when Bacde has been replaced by Kaebamf some ppl want to deadline lynch him. Do ppl think that the reason Kaebamf hasn't posted in about 5 days is:
1. He's scum lurking around a deadline.
2. He's a flaky newbie who is losing interest.

Well, it is possible he's a flaky newbie scum who is losing interest, you know.

(shrug) Neither Bacde or kay have given me any reason to think they're town. I wish we had something better to go on, but at this point I think I'd rather lynch a lurker then lynch Kelly. I would still rather lynch ubertimmy, but that's starting to look unlikely.

The deadline's tommorow evening. Unless something better comes along, or some other people switch back to UT, I might switch my vote to kay before then.

[Yosarian2]

It could be contested but I would say flaking for a newb is a very weak town tell. Just taking myself as an example, I know when I first signed up here I was itching to be mafia because I thought it would be more fun and very easy to stay hidden So I find it slightly less likely that a newbie would flake if they had a scum role. Encouragingly though it may be true that a powerole would be less likely to flake too. It seems the momentum is moving more in the direction of lynching him than Kelly.

I've got to disagree with this. A lot of people, especally newbies, just seem to hate playing as scum and having everyone against you, and lurk, or vanish, or just sort of fade away when scum. I've been in the unpleasent situation of replacing them quite a few times. Of course, towneis do it as well, but I don't think a scum is less likely to just "flake out" like that then a townie.

[Yosarian2]

Yeah...I did see the first post he made right after the lynch, and it looks like his first post was deleated by the mod because he quoted his role PM. The mod posted a warning about quoting role PM's, and then he did it again.

(shakes head) He's almost certanly a good guy, and he's almost certanly going to get modkilled if the bishop does save him.

[Yosarian2]

vote:ubertimmy

I think that it's clear that either Kae is town, or the scum got "safe claims" or at least some kind of idea from the mod of how the townie PM was laid out. I wouldn't call him cleared, but I think he's more likely a GG then not, and I'm glad the bishop stopped the lynch last night.

Anyway, along with the reasons I was suspicious of him yesterday, the fact that ubertimmy dosn't seem to know what the townie PM looks like makes me even more sure that he's scum.

[Yosarian2]

Heh...funny typo there.

[Yosarian2]

On another note, do we think the cop should come out now if they have a guilty? I think so because we're not in lylo so it's unlikely they will be countered.

No sense trying to tell the cop/angel when to come out, Patrick. I'm sure he or she can figure out what to do and when to do it based on what information they have. All this kind of post does is semi-imply that you're not the cop, and giving that kind of hint to the scum is bad.

[Yosarian2]

An ubertimmy lynch looks comparably good to a Patrick lynch to me presently. The thing, though, is that our power roles could also happen to not know what the PM looks like.

(shrug) Well, we'll give him a chance to claim before we lynch him, obv, although I think he's much more likely to be scum.

The only think I'm worried about is that he might claim doc or something just to try and out our doc, as he has nothing to lose at this point and won't be able to claim townie.

[Yosarian2]

uhhh Yos way to assume i dont know what the townie pm looks like

Well, that's how it looks, when you start off the day saying the bishop made a mistake and you don't even mention kae's claim at all.

[Yosarian2]

Another comment would be on

No sense trying to tell the cop/angel when to come out, Patrick. I'm sure he or she can figure out what to do and when to do it based on what information they have. All this kind of post does is semi-imply that you're not the cop, and giving that kind of hint to the scum is bad.

I would agree up until before the last sentence. It is always possible that it's reverse psychology; personally i'd rather not work on these kind of tells.

That's why I said semi-imply. To be clear, at this point, I don't have any need or desire to know what Patrick's role is; I just wanted to point out that if you want to keep the identity of the power roles a secret there are certain kinds of things you probably shouldn't say, because they can give away more then you intend.

[Yosarian2]

Well, it's not an irrational point ubertimmy is making here about the lack of modkilling. However, I would expect a townie's natural reaction was to look at the claim, to say "ok, that looks a lot like mine, he's probably telling the truth" and then to wonder if he was going to get modkilled. This was not ubertimmy's reaction. The fact he jumped right to the "modkill" thing without seeming to notice anything else about the PM or wonder how Kae knew what the vanillia townie PM looks like is what makes me think ubertimmy did not know what a vanillia townie PM looks like.

[Yosarian2]

You don't know if UT wondered about anything at all. This reminds me of yesterday's MoS/Ibby case, where Ibby said she started thinking about the Devil theory at a certain point and MoS pointed out that it really doesn't prove anything. Similarly here, UT's post appeared after a night's time. If i'm not mistaken, UT's post in question is his first one today? Not everyone would necessarily reaction in the "most natural/general" way but that's left for UT to comment on. Just that, accusing "UT did not react the most natural way" does not seem to make any more sense than UT's accuse of Kae did.

(shrug) My point was just that, if person X knows what the generic townie PM looked like and was a good guy, and person Y showed that he also knows what the generic townie PM looked like, I would expect person X to be very hesitant in voting for person Y. That's not so much a matter of "acting in the most natural way"; more a matter of "good guys don't vote for people they have reason to believe to be good guys.

[Yosarian2]

Mikanoff is giving me kind of a bad feeling right now. It almost feels like he's frustrated scum who's annoyed that a townie is "cheating". I've seen townies do that kind of thing before too, but mike just moved up quite a few spots in my list of suspicion.

[Yosarian2]

At this point, the kill is a complete WIFOM question. Some scum will kill a person who suspects them, in order to manipulate the next day's conversation, and in the hopes that people will dismiss it as a WIFOM question. Some scum will kill someone who suspect someone else, in order to "frame" them, and some scum will never kill a person who suspects them.

Generally, I don't find the whole "who did the scum kill" question to be very useful for finding scum, for that reason. That being said, I would tend to put a little more weight on Ibby's arguments yesterday now that I know she was town. Still, I'm not really seeing Kelly as likely scum, or as being especally likely to be the devil.

Still happy with a timmy lynch.

[Yosarian2]

I support a kelly lynch, an alko lynch, and a kae lynch.

Interesting. You've made attacks against the other two, but is there any specific reason you're supporting an alko lynch?

[Yosarian2]

I really don't see any good reasons to suspect Al at the moment.

Mike does kind of seem to be all over the place with his votes and suspicions.

[Yosarian2]

Mike's play seems so random I'm kind of wifoming myself into believing he is town because I can't see him being so sloppy as scum. Maybe that is overthinking it. But I know he is meant to be very good as scum.

He is very good as scum. I should know, I've been his scum partner in at least two games. That being said, that dosn't mean you shouldn't look for scumtells; even the very best scum still do give scumtells, just not as often.

[Yosarian2]

MBF, I think you're being incredibly defensive and freaking out.

Defensive? I've seen some scum tells from him, but "incredibly defensive" is not one of them. Where was that?

[Yosarian2]

Other than that I don't think there's a huge amount of evidence against alko. His general style of play this game has been one of blending in, avoiding major controversies and arguments, being fairly noncommital etc. That is the gut part. It's not something alko can really defend against.
If Kelly is shown to be town I would be less suspicious of alko though not totally at ease. If Kelly is shown to be scum I would look heavily at alko.

Well, as for his playing style, based on what I've seen of Al in other games, he generally seems to have kind of a "look at and visably consider all points of view" playing style; his playing style this game seems about typical of him, based on what I've seen.

And I don't really see any good reasons to think Kelly is a sinner at this point; there was a bit of an argument yesterday about Kelly being a possible devil, but then your logic wouldn't hold together anyway, as a sinner wouldn't even know who the devil was at the point where you were talking about distancing.

[Yosarian2]

Well, as for his playing style, based on what I've seen of Al in other games, he generally seems to have kind of a "look at and visably consider all points of view" playing style; his playing style this game seems about typical of him, based on what I've seen.

I've also looked at some of his other games, and I disagree.

Really? Care to share any examples of that? I don't want to go into any details about ongoing games, but it really feels to me like he's plaing like this in all the games I'm with him at the moment.

[Yosarian2]

I would think that the second detailed townie claim would be easier then the first. After Kae claimed, I don't think it'd be especally hard for someone else to fake a townie claim.

[Yosarian2]

I said kaebamf's was not inventable, and UT's is even more so.

I hope you find more to say about my comments, Yosarian. I find UT's behavior very hard to understand.

Um, ok. I'm not really sure what your last post was trying to say, though.

Why did you say that you "liked UT claim better" then kae's claim, then?

And I'm not sure what you were trying to say about the claims. I certanly agree that we've had too many townie claims. I don't understand why you and MBF unvoted UT after his claim; if we end a bandwagon every time someone claims townie, we'll end up outing the town's power roles for sure.

[Yosarian2]

Someone want to make an actual argument for the Al lynch here? Becuase all i see are the two players in the game I'm most suspicious of voting for him without reason, which does not really fill me with confidence.

[Yosarian2]

Dammit Yosarian, we've been scum together in two games and you still can't figure out when I'm pro town?

O-- Or maybe you do know and you are trying to get me lynched anyway!

Heh...let me re-arrange your own words to answer your question.

Dammit, Mike, we've been scum together in two games and you still can't figure out when I'm pro-town?

[Yosarian2]

To me, this is his way of looking better in the town's eyes after alko is lynched and revealed to be town, and setting me up for lynch tomorrow.

...after Alko is lynched? He was never anywhere close to being lynched. He had two votes, and never even had an actual argument made against him.

I've got to say, mike, that voting Alko for no good reason but then jumping off of it as soon as people started asking you about it does not make you look any better.

At this point, I'm suspicious of mikeburnfire, MOS, and ubertimmy. I don't like any of their behavior today, especally thier behavior as it relates to Alko.

[Yosarian2]

bleah. I'm not going to worry about picking between the two of you at this point in time.

I'm inclined to agree with MOS more, but I also suspect him more.

Agreed. MOS does have a good point, and I don't like the way MBF has reacted to the accusations, but he also looks suspicious based on some of his other actions.

I'd still be happy lynching Ubertimmy. He is still quite suspicious, his lack of posting lately dosn't help, and I also think that finding out timmy's alignment might give me a better idea of where I stand on the MOS/Mike issue.

[Yosarian2]

bleah. I'm not going to worry about picking between the two of you at this point in time.

I'm inclined to agree with MOS more, but I also suspect him more.

Agreed. MOS does have a good point, and I don't like the way MBF has reacted to the accusations, but he also looks suspicious based on some of his other actions.

I'd still be happy lynching Ubertimmy. He is still quite suspicious, his lack of posting lately dosn't help, and I also think that finding out timmy's alignment might give me a better idea of where I stand on the MOS/Mike issue.

Clarifiaction: first sentance "he" was "MOS", as in "MOS looks suspicious based on some of his other actions".

[Yosarian2]

I'm still pretty happy with either a ubertimmy lynch or a Mikeburnfire lynch. Either one would be fine with me.

[Yosarian2]

Mike's whole attitude and actions towards ubertimmy, voting for him while saying he's more suspicious of others, has been suspicious. I also don't like the attack against Alko, and I don't like the way he's responded to attacks against him.

[Yosarian2]

Kain, your scumdar is obviously flawed, as I am innocent and MoS is being very scummy. Conceive a vote based on logic instead.

...

Have you voted for anyone based on logic yet this game?

[Yosarian2]

Woohoo, site's back!

Mod, what was the current state of the game before it got wiped?

[Yosarian2]

Ok...if no one counterclaims MBF's angel claim, then he's cleared.

Mike: I don't think you should name any confirmed innocents, but could you let us know how many living confirmed innocents you have? Usually, half of the town as confirmed innocents means a guarenteed town win.

I don't think we should have the doc claim today, but if we have 3 alive confirmed innocents, and get a 4th one tommorow, then a doc claim tommorow should win us the game.

On the other hand, worst case scenerio, it's possible that everyone Mike's investigated is dead, in which case a mass claim would be the worst possible thing for the town at this point.

[Yosarian2]

Oh, that's right. Forgot we started in day.

vote:MOS

In any case, if we've only got one investigated innocent, then a mass claim now would probably not be good.

[Yosarian2]

Kelly, as it's been pointed out, the sinners do know the townie win condition. Everyone does, as it was in the second mod post of the game.

The setup is as follows: three {3}

Sinners

, one {1}

Devil

, one {1}

Bishop

, one {1}

Angel

, one {1}

Archangel

, and five {5}

Vanilla Townies

. The game-related portions of their role PMs are as follows:

You are a vanilla townie. You may talk in-thread during the day and vote, but may not talk to anyone or take any actions at night. You win when all SINNERS are dead.

So "he knows the townie win condition" is not a strong enough reason to assume anyone is a good guy.

Meanwhile, it's starting to feel like you are trying too hard to convince the rest of us that you know what's in the townie role PM.

[Yosarian2]

That's why I said "win condition

flavor

." I have no reason to believe that scum were given an example of town win condition flavor.

I am Konrad Breur, Vanilla Townie
I am the town brewer that just wants the trouble to stop so i can return to my normal life.
I win when all the SINNERS are dead.

As soon as he claimed, I believed he was town based on the role flavor. But there is no "win condition flavor". The win condition is the last line, "I win when all the sinners are dead", which is the same line as is in the mod's post.

We've already been through all of this, multiple times. Which is why it seems to me that you're just trying over and over again to give the impression that you have inside knowledge about the townie PM without actually revealing any information that hasn't already been revealed by other claimed townies.

[Yosarian2]

I am Konrad Breur, Vanilla Townie
I am the town brewer that just wants the trouble to stop so i can return to my normal life.
I win when all the SINNERS are dead.

There IS information here that is neither in the mod's post, nor would be part of a sinner's role PM.

Based on Yosarian's first reaction to kaebamf's claim, I believed he was quite aware of this.

Agreed; the only reason I was quibbiling was because of the phrase "win condition" in your other post. I do think kae is a probable good guy, and probably not the best place to waste an investigation on.

[Yosarian2]

I think Mike is implying that he got a guilty on MOS, I was suspicious of MOS earlier anyway, and it sounds like there's no chance of an insane cop, so I think that one's in the bag. Next, I'm going to have to do a detailed re-read looking specifically for connections between MOS and others; once I have a chance to do that, I'll probably have a better idea of who his scum partners might be.

[Yosarian2]

I'm Father Dietrich Krieg, Emergency Pastor of the Jesuit Church (Father Albright's replacement)
I pray to God each night, asking for a sign of innocence to clear the members of the town from any wrongdoing.

So Yos, any thoughts on who the scum are?

I had just been doing a re-read, after we found out MOS was scum, before the second crash.

I'm pretty sure Kae is town, and of course if MOS turns up scum Mikeburnfire's looking pretty good. After a re-read, I now doubt that MOS and Kelly could be scum together, there's been too much tension between them for too long.

My top suspects right now for MOS's two scum partners are mikeanoff and tokiyoh. Both appear to have been trying to stay under the radar for quite some time now. I was suspicious of mikanoff yesterday, because I was really getting the feeling from him that he was annoyed that Kae was "getting away with" claiming an unfair amount of flavor; the whole tone of those posts really struck me as whiny scum. And as for tokiyoh, he appeared to be taking MOS's side in a halfharted kind of way in the MOS vs Ibby argument earlier.

[Yosarian2]

I did give a reason for finding MOS suspicious, Patrick. It wasn't a very strong reason, so I didn't persue it as much as I did other leads.

At this point, I'm suspicious of mikeburnfire, MOS, and ubertimmy. I don't like any of their behavior today, especally thier behavior as it relates to Alko

I didn't like the attacks on Alko from any of the three of them. Turns out I was wrong about MBF and about Ubertimmy, but it looks like I was right about MOS going after Alko for bad reasons; my best guess now is that he thought Alko was some kind of power role and was trying to pressure him yesterday, and then killed him last night.

And yeah, I also thought Mike was acting really wierd yesterday. It's looking like he was acting wierd because he was the cop.

[Yosarian2]

Yos, if I was trying so hard to pressure Alko, why did I go after MBF 10 times harder?

I don't know. Because you thought that one or the other of them was the cop, and wanted to pressure both of them, perhaps?

Which is what it sounds to me like when you post something like this:

I was hoping not to have to expose myself today, but it seems that MBF has figured me out. Now that they know Alko isn't the cop (way to pwn yourselves, scum), MBF probably picked up on the importance of my attacks on him from yesterday, since I had a guilty result on him. I tried not to be obvious about it, but it doesn't take a genius to figure it out, I guess.

[Yosarian2]

(shrug) Sure, I'll explain that a little more. Like I said, I was re-reading the game looking to see who might be linked to MOS, and this post jumped out at me.

Reading the last page, i have to admit that i think MoS has a better accusation than the way Ibby's defending it. Not that i think Ibby is sinner just because of it, but MoS does have a valid point about the credibility of evidence in this particular case. However, what i'm not so comfortable with MoS is the two flat statements before this. Post #254 is the most recent of these, the other outstanding one is when he stated in one line that he didn't find Kelly's behavior strange at all. It is not his opinion that matters, it's the fact that he did not back them up. If MoS could follow up with his attack on Ibby, why didn't he try to put some work into explaining, especially the when a number of other people disagreed?

Ibby's Kelly-is-Devil theory does sound very interesting. If i was the Devil i'd try to hint it early because i can't win on my own. In other words, i would rather risk being lynched than just trying to stay alive and end up watching all the Sinners die and lose with them. This is only my personal opinion of course. As for if Kelly's plays did mean the Devil, that i cannot come to a conclusion now. On the other hand, the counter-theory seems to be OMGUS-ish but it actually does make sense in a way. But for the moment being, i'm still in the process of trying to look at this on-going Ibby-Kelly conflict from different perspectives.

Other than this i'd second (or is it third or fourth or fifth already? **LOL) the prod requests.

This whole post was extremly wishy washy. He basically said (to paraphrase) "I like MOS's argument and I think it's better then ibby's argument, but that dosn't mean ibby was scum, but MOS's point is valid, but some of MOS's other posts make me uncomfortable. I'm going to keep trying to look at this from different perspectives." The way I read the post, it looked like he was trying to support MOS in the important issue at the moment (the MOS-Ibby debate) while trying to create a distance from him on other points, and while making sure he never actually committed himself to anything.

And he never really did end up committing to a stand on the issue; in his next post, he said MOS had a good point, while at any point committing to anything, or even voting for anyone at all.

[Yosarian2]

I'm still here, still want to play, and am still pretty sure MOS is scum.

[Yosarian2]

I don't really care much, either way. I haven't been posing because there's really nothing else more to say at this point until after we lynch MOS. If the game keeps going, I'll keep playing. If not, that's all right. (shrug)

[Yosarian2]

Yeah, I was scum.

I've got to say that the game was made basically unwinnable by how much flavor the mod let the townies claim. There should have been at least two modkills there.

[Yosarian2]

Ya, the flavor made roleclaims way too confirmable. I don't think there should be any difference between vanilla roles (given a few exceptions), and giving each player claimable flavor essentially provided players with a real role they could claim that simply didn't do anything.

Not only did the roleclaims let several townies get unfairly confirmed, it also put the scum in the impossible situation of having to try and react to the claims the way a townie would, without knowing what the townie PM looked like. I managed to BS my way through the Kae claim and come out looking like a townie, but then apparently there was something else in ubertimmy's claim that was even more like what was in the PM then in Kae's claim? No possible way I could have know that, whatever it was. By putting that much info into role PM's, not letting scum know it, and then letting multiple people get away with basically quoting their PM's, the game was totally broken.

Although you guys are wrong about pie, so at least that's something.