Mini 392: Jungle Republic - Game over!

[Yosarian2]

Yup, I'm here, will post once I read.

[Yosarian2]

I'm pretty suspicious of lying brian, and have been since basically his very first post.

I don't like the logic he used in the SL bandwagon at all; he basically made one real point against him, SL countered it pretty completly, and then Lying Brian just kept pushing the bandwagon without any good reasons at all. Just didn't look like a pro-town way to act.

Also, let me explain why Brian's first post bothered me so much.

vote: sprontalic - Post #42 - what is your reasoning behind your vote for Cadre?

FOS: KingPin - Post #23 - if you're suspicious of Shadowlurker, why not vote for him, especially this early in the game?

FOS: Cadre - Post #39 - for saying random voting is stupid, it's a proven, useful tool for getting the game, and more specifically, discussion started...

IGMEOY: Lucresia - Post #43 - sounds like she's playing the part of a townie w/o revealing any thoughts

IGMEOY: ShadowLurker - Post #21, #27 - for trying to start 2 early bandwagons w/ no information or reasoning besides bandwagonning


the above are my basic thoughts about the game so far...

Why would you vote for sprontalic because he voted for Cade (the person I replaced) in post 42, and in the very same post mention that you're suspicious of Cade for something he did in post 39? If Cade did something you considered to be suspicious in post 39, then surely voting for him 3 posts later is hardly a scum tell, right?

The reason for your FOS of Cade was very weak; a lot of people think random voting is overdone, not good for the game, and not a good pro-town tactic. There have been long and detailed discussion on the mafia discussion forum on that subject. But that's not really relevent; you apparently thought it was worth an FOS, and in that same post you attacked someone else for FOSing but not voting; so if spontic also saw something you believed worthy of an FOS, why would voting that way be scummy?

I realize it was early in the game, and normally I wouldn't have any trouble with doing almost anything to start conversation or put pressure that early in the game, but it seems really bizzare for you to vote for spontic, demand that he explain his vote on Cade, and then a few lines later explain why you thought Cade was suspicious. I can't imagine what you could have been trying to accomplish there if you're town, but I could imagine you making a "let me attack everyone in the game at once with craplogic" post like that as scum, either to just try to spread suspicion around and/or to distance yourself from a scum partner without putting them in any real danger.

vote:lying brian

[Yosarian2]

-i'm NOT insisting that ShadowLurker deserved to be lynched... i AM insisting that my vote was correct & justifiable, just like my vote on Thestatusquo...

I hardly think you SL vote was "correct" or even "justifiable".

Most of the things you attacked him with were terrible craplogic.

To paraphrase the discussion, you attacked him by saying "You did this, and it's scummy!"

He responded by saying "No, it's not scummy, because scum have no reason to do it."

And your response was "Ha! Now you're defending yourself with WIFOM, which is scummy!"

That "logic" made me cringe. You said "X is a scum tell". He said "No, X is not a scum tell, because scum wouldn't want to do X". That's a perfectly logical defense. It's not "wifom" at all; on the other hand, your attack of him following that was pure WIFOM logic, and really bad and twisted WIFOM logic at that.

saying that there is no advantage for scum to act a certain way makes the implication that scum doesn't act that way, therefore you must be town... but then the argument could be made that you know that is a town trait, and as scum you purposefully employ it to make yourself look more townish

That's horrible, horrible logic you were using there. You said that what he did was a scumtell, he said it was not, so now logically you would have to show why it was a scumtell. Instead of doing that, you actually tried to attack him for disagreeing with you that what he did was a scumtell, which is just dumb; of COURSE he didn't think what he was doing was a scumtell, and it clearly wasn't as he wasn't scum. He never said that his argument proved he was a good guy; only that your so-called "scum-tell" was not something scum were especally likely to do and therefore wasn't evidence of scumminess, a quite logical and fair argument, which you took and warped to make it sound like he was saying something totally different

I've taken to seeing misuse of the term WIFOM to try and make any argument you don't like just go away as a scum tell in and of itself; it's done way too often by scum, it's just too easy. Add to that the fact that you used some pretty terrible craplogic to push the lynch of a good guy, and the fact that I was getting a scum vibe from you from the moment I saw your first post, and i'm pretty happy with my vote on you now.

[Yosarian2]

That argument is somewhat valid against Thestatusquo, because he actually did something that hurt the town.

It made no sense at all against SL, though, as he didn't actually do anything that hurt the town.

My personal vote was not for the behavior itself, however. I was not suspicious of Shadowlurker for his playstyle, when this argument was brought up. I was suspicious of Shadowlurker (and now Thestatusquo) for resorting to this defense.

So...you weren't suspicious of SL because of what he did, but you were suspicious of him for saying there was nothing suspicious about what he did? That makes absolulty no sense.

[Yosarian2]

First of all,

unvote lying brian

. We know the role is in the game, so if he dosn't get counterclaimed he's a good guy.

Sure, it's possible that LB's a communist throwing himself on his sword to out the cop, but we really need to lynch a bad guy today, or else tommorow the town will only be a minor third faction numerically speaking. The cop can only find communists anyway, so if LB is lying it'd be worth getting the cop to counterclaim in order to nail one of the only two communists.

So...you weren't suspicious of SL because of what he did, but you were suspicious of him for saying there was nothing suspicious about what he did? That makes absolulty no sense.

It makes perfect sense to me. For example, I don't feel that lurking, per se, is a scum tell. But when someone starts yelling, "I can't be scum, because no scum would do that!" I automatically become

more

suspicious.

However, SL

never said that

. He never said that "I'm not scum, because scum would never do that." What he said was "that action is not a scumtell, so it neither shows me to be scum or shows me to be town", which is perfectly valid.

By the way; LB was at lynch -2; he claimed cop, and we KNOW there is exactally one pro-town cop in the game because it's an open role game, and THEN you vote for him? That's an incredibly anti-town act.

fos:germy

If LB dosn't get counterclaimed, you're probably scum.

[Yosarian2]

"that action is not a scumtell, so it neither shows me to be scum or shows me to be town"

Um, no; if LB is the cop, then trying to lynch him definatly is a scum tell. Nice try though.

You don't think it's a good strategy for the real Seer not to counterclaim?

(shrug) I don't think I've ever seen someone people try to fake claim cop on day 2 of an open role game. Even if it worked, I don't think the communists would want to trade one of their only 2 members just to out the cop; that'd only leave 1 commmunist left, and the odds would be greatly in favor of either the town or the islamists, especally as, according to the rules, a 1 scum 1 islamist endgame=an islamist win.

Lying Brian could be trying to pull off a gambit, it's certanly possible, but evem with all the suspicious posts he's made, I'd guess there's at least a 50/50 chance he's telling the truth, and I'm certanly not willing to risk lynching the seer at this point.

I don't think that's true, Yosarian, that he has to be town. I think he's scum, have since I did a read to catch up. I think our cop is being intelligent and letting Brian dig his own grave so that he himself isn't outted. The cop SHOULD be waiting, I think, until he can find the other werewolf. He's more useful to us hidden and searching for our final NK scum.

...unless lying brian is the cop.

[Yosarian2]

By the way, the timing of germy's vote is what is so scummy here. I can see someone who was suspicious of LB before still being after the claim. But germy showed no sign of being suspicious of lying brian before his claim, and in fact semi-defended him, but then voted for him AFTER he claimed cop. That would be a really bizzare thing for a pro-town person to do.

[Yosarian2]

FOS: Yosarian2

1. LB was at lynch -1 at the time he claimed. Zin unvoted right afterwards bringing him to L-2 and then Germy added an additional vote bringing him back to L-1.

Right; my point was that germy voted for LB while he was at -2, after he claimed cop, sorry if I was unclear.

2.

We know the role is in the game, so if he dosn't get counterclaimed he's a good guy.

This is incorrect. See Nai's response: Seer remaining hidden is better than outing him/her.

[/quote]

I disagree. If we don't lynch a bad guy today, we're in very deep trouble; out only real hope would be for a cross-kill, because if we lynch a pro-town person today and another dies tonight, the town would have next to no chance of winning; the town's chances of winning a 3 town, 2 communist, 3 islamist game would be very small. So if a seer counter-claim today would let us know LB is lying scum and get us a right lynch today, it'd defiantly be worth it. And on the other hand, if LB is the seer, then lynching him would be an unmitigated disaster for the town. I'm not willing to take that risk at this point of the game.

[Yosarian2]

Why do you assume so readily that he's a communist? I think there's a high chance of him being an islamist, too.

Claiming seer if you're not the seer in an open role game is suicide, and the only logical reason to do it if if you're willing to give up your life in order to out the cop. An Islamist would have no reason to get himself killed just to out the seer, as the seer can only find communists and is therfore no threat to the Islamists. Therefore, I think that Lying Brian is either telling the truth, or else he's a communist. I'd give it about 50/50 odds of going either way at this point, but if I had to guess, I'd guess he's telling the truth.

Either way, town wins when he's lynched. I can't see a cop playing like LyingBrian has been, very recklessly and such.

Eh...cops often look kind of scummy, in my experence; they tend to be more bold and agressive with less logical reason to be then townies, even without a guilty investigation. Heh..I've gotten myself bandwagoned nearly every time I've been a cop for reasons like that. So no, I'm not willing to rule out the possibility that he might be telling the truth. I'm not 100% convinced, but I'm not willing to risk lynching him without a counterclaim.

I also find it very suspicious that you want the Seer to claim. Run this scenario through your head: Seer claims. LyingBrian dies. Seer dies during the night (as the communists can't let him live in this setup). That leaves town without our trump card. And YOU seem to want the seer to claim, just so you are satisfied that LB is not him.

(shrug) If we lynch a communist today, then the seer actually not all that powerful a role after that; the odds of the seer finding the last communist before the seer dies or the communist gets lynched or the game ends from some other reason is pretty small, I think. However, the seer getting lynched today would almost certanly cause the town to lose the game.

Considering that we lost two townies already, we're almost set even among the three groups. There's a very high chance he's from the scum groups. Again, I am certain he's not town, and DEFINITELY not the Seer. You were convinced, it seemed, that he was scum, but all of a sudden he calls Seer and you're now unwilling to touch him? That's a very suspicious reversal.

I was pretty suspicious of him, yeah. And yeah, I'm unwilling to lynch someone who claims seer in an open role game where we know there's a seer.

[Yosarian2]

...

Well, crap.

Forgot to mention

unvote nai

Is anyone else in favor of leaving them both alive till one shows up dead, then we can be sure the one we're lynching is scum, and it will give disinsentive to kill the real one? I'm seriously considering throwing my vote back to germy.

Not a bad idea, but I think it's pretty obveous that Lying Brian is the scum here. Not only has he been looking more suspicious all game, but I can't imagine Nai doing this if he was scum; he's have no reason to, he'd be better off just killing LB at night if LB really was the seer.

Gunny is still a good suspect; he was defending lying brian pretty hard until LB claimed. However, I think it's pretty clear LB is scum, and we have to lynch scum today.

vote:lying brian

[Yosarian2]

Nice try, commie scum.

vote:germy

[Yosarian2]

germy, even if I AM a communist, you realize that town has to lynch islamist today, right?

No, not really. If we lynch the last communist, then there won't be a night-kill tonight, and we'd go into tommorow with 4 town and 3 islamists. That might actually be the best chance we have at this point.

[Yosarian2]

After LyingBrian claimed, his communist partner would know LB was a dead man that day one way or the other, so he would have made sure to get on his bandwagon.

You defended him against my attacks until he claimed, Germy, and then after he claimed, you suddenly turned around and voted for him. An actual townie would have been expected to act the opposite way; attack him until he claimed, but then get nervous and back off after the claim in order to avoid the risk of lynching the seer. Your actions make me think you were trying to defend him until he was doomed, but then after he claimed and it was clear he was doomed, you got onto his bandwagon. I've never seen a good guy MORE eager to lynch someone AFTER he claimed cop, which is why I don't believe you are a townie, your actions just don't fit.

The only people who would know that he wasn't the seer would be his communist partner and Nai, the actual seer.

And now you're attacking me, germy, when I was the one who started attacking him from my very first post in the game, and I played a major part in putting the pressure on that forced him to claim? Piffle.

[Yosarian2]

We also knew there was no doctor role and outing our cop so early by counterclaiming is just what the scum wanted. I honestly could only see two possibilities and the one being more far fetched than the other was discarded. I find it interesting the people that wanted to out our president by counterclaiming...I'd like an explanation on this from you too yosarian. Why do you think it would be good to out our only cop when everyone knew that claiming seer would be suicide because whether you got killed because you werent beleived or you were killed at night that night..you were dead either way. Lyingbrian's claim was pointless because if he was the seer, why even claim it when he would just die at night anyways?

So if a seer counter-claim today would let us know LB is lying scum and get us a right lynch today, it'd defiantly be worth it. And on the other hand, if LB is the seer, then lynching him would be an unmitigated disaster for the town. I'm not willing to take that risk at this point of the game.

Again if you are going to repeat this answer I will have to ask you more questions. I see this as a pointless answer because whether we were sure he was scum or not, if we lynch lb and he was the seer, we dont have the seer. If we have the counterclaim and the seer gets killed at night, we also still dont have the seer. Also, let's just say that lb claimed cop and actually was the cop a scum could have counterclaimed..and then would you have beleived the scum? then we would have not lynched the communist and would have lynched our seer instead. I see every reason against a counterclaim imaginable. I think there was enough evidence for the town to agree that it would be pointless for the real seer to claim at any point.

Wrong. If we lynched the seer yesterday, and the communists had killed a townie overnight, then today we would be at 2 communists, 3 townies, 3 islamists, which is almost a guarenteed town loss. Getting the counterclaim meant that the worst case scenerio would be where we are today, which is a very winnable situation for the town. Therefore, the course of action I suggested, based on the knowledge I had yesterday, was the safest course for the town to follow.

If we lynched the seer yesterday, we would probably have lost. If we lynched a communist yesterday and the seer died at night, we had (and have) a good chance. I made the mathmatically correct move for the town, and I did it using logic I think I explained pretty thoroughly . If you disagreed with my logic, you should have said so yesterday.

What I would expect an Islamist to do would be to sit back and do nothing until it was completly obveous what the right choice was, rather then either take the risk of lynching someone who might be the seer or take the risk of asking for a counterclaim. And, I notice, that is exactally what YOU were doing; you were just sitting in the background, never saying anything one way or the other about the lying brian stuff until after Nai had counterclaimed and it was completly obveous.

[Yosarian2]

Huh...I hadn't noticed the day was already over when I made that post.

He lynched himself? And he was townie? I hate that crap. Good job, germy, you may have just cost the town the game with that manuver.

[Yosarian2]

Looks like the commie decided to not take the risk.

Since we're at lylo, we should be careful here.

I've had suspicious feelings towards Cadre from the start, though not much from Yosarian2, but since many found him suspicious, it's probably not unreasonable to say he's scum. I'm thinking that he's not commie though, so I'm willing to tip that he's an islamist.

...what? You didn't really find me suspicious, but you think others have have found me suspicious, so therefore I'm islamist? That makes no sense at all. I can't imagine that a townie would be that willing to follow the opinion of others in a game where more then half of the people left are scum. On the other hand, an islamist would love to follow good guys into a bad lynch at this point.

fos:sprontalic

as blindly following the lead of others without giving any reasons of your own in this kind of situation is definatly a scum tell.

[Yosarian2]

No, might as well claim. I am a plain republican, your read is off, but I hardly think it matters. The islamists have won this game.

No, they havn't, not yet. If we lynch an islamist today, we've got a decent chance; we'd go into tonight with 1 commie, 3 townies, and 2 islamists, so even worst case scenerio, townie dies tonight, we wouldn't lose right away, and best case scenerio, which is we lynch an islamist and the commie kills a second islamist tonight, then we're actually in pretty good shape.

By the way, this is one of those wierd situations where the last communist might actually claim if put under pressure today, because we can't afford to lynch the communist today; if we lynch the communist, then we lose on the spot.

[Yosarian2]

I disagree with this. LB's actions were inconsistent with the Seer. Therefore, he was already out. His claim was a last gasp.

I disagree, I don't think there was any part of LB's actions inconsistant with the Seer claim he made. I thought it was reasonably likely LB was telling the truth, because I thought his actions were consistant with his claim; that is, I was attacking him pretty strongly from the moment I started playing, and he never really attacked me back or ever even implied any suspicion of me, which would fit with a cop who had an innocent on me. (shrug)

[Yosarian2]

Sure, Lucresia, I'll explain why I was suspicious of germy and why I voted for him. The biggest thing was the way he defended Lying Brian, and then it made it even worse that he denied defending him later.

This was one post where I attacked Lying Brian:

-i'm NOT insisting that ShadowLurker deserved to be lynched... i AM insisting that my vote was correct & justifiable, just like my vote on Thestatusquo...

I hardly think you SL vote was "correct" or even "justifiable".

Most of the things you attacked him with were terrible craplogic.

To paraphrase the discussion, you attacked him by saying "You did this, and it's scummy!"

He responded by saying "No, it's not scummy, because scum have no reason to do it."

And your response was "Ha! Now you're defending yourself with WIFOM, which is scummy!"

That "logic" made me cringe. You said "X is a scum tell". He said "No, X is not a scum tell, because scum wouldn't want to do X". That's a perfectly logical defense. It's not "wifom" at all; on the other hand, your attack of him following that was pure WIFOM logic, and really bad and twisted WIFOM logic at that.

saying that there is no advantage for scum to act a certain way makes the implication that scum doesn't act that way, therefore you must be town... but then the argument could be made that you know that is a town trait, and as scum you purposefully employ it to make yourself look more townish

That's horrible, horrible logic you were using there. You said that what he did was a scumtell, he said it was not, so now logically you would have to show why it was a scumtell. Instead of doing that, you actually tried to attack him for disagreeing with you that what he did was a scumtell, which is just dumb; of COURSE he didn't think what he was doing was a scumtell, and it clearly wasn't as he wasn't scum. He never said that his argument proved he was a good guy; only that your so-called "scum-tell" was not something scum were especally likely to do and therefore wasn't evidence of scumminess, a quite logical and fair argument, which you took and warped to make it sound like he was saying something totally different

I've taken to seeing misuse of the term WIFOM to try and make any argument you don't like just go away as a scum tell in and of itself; it's done way too often by scum, it's just too easy. Add to that the fact that you used some pretty terrible craplogic to push the lynch of a good guy, and the fact that I was getting a scum vibe from you from the moment I saw your first post, and i'm pretty happy with my vote on you now.

germy then defended Lying Brian by trying to refute my attacks against him in this post, and also tried to suggest that we should have all been attacking Kingpin instead of Lying Brian, while also trying to spread some suspicion onto TSQ at the same time. So, at the time, my impression was germy was doing everything he could to try and stop Lying Brian from being lynched.

[LyingBrian] said that what [Shadowlurker] did was a scumtell, he said it was not.

Actually, this didn't happen. LyingBrian FOSed Shadowlurker for not being helpful, but that was it. KingPin pointed out "scumminess" first, and not specifically as a "scumtell":

The problem starts when I don’t trust that you are pro-town. With nothing really happening on D-1 and your antics drawing attention to them, your play could be construed, IMO, as an attempt to play the "What advantage does a scum have in doing this" card. True, that scum would be silly for employing this tactic; however, this is easily defended, as you just noted, by implying that scum surely wouldn't act in a way to draw attention to themselves.

Shadowlurker then responded with:

you still have not pointed out ANY advantage scum would have for doing that meaning that what you have said, can't be a scumtell and can't be a case against me.
...
I would like to see your reasoning over why scum is more likely than a town player to employ that behavior Day 1, until I see that, I cannot see any case against me.

That

is how it started. It seems like the reasons people are voting for LyingBrian means that they should be voting for KingPin...

Anyway, now that we're all on the same page...

My opinion

I will answer Shadowlurker's direct question, albeit late.

I would like to see your reasoning over why scum is more likely than a town player to employ that behavior Day 1

where "that behavior" refers to Shadowlurker's profanity, quick voting, and general unhelpfulness, I assume.

Scum

might

be more likely than a town player to employ that behavior on Day 1 simply

to seem more town and "obviously not mafia."

My personal vote was not for the behavior itself, however. I was not suspicious of Shadowlurker for his playstyle, when this argument was brought up. I was suspicious of Shadowlurker (and now Thestatusquo) for

resorting to this defense

.

Along with that, there was also the other point I mentioned yesterday, which was that germy defended lying brian until he claimed seer, and then voted for him, which is exactally how I would have expected LB's scum partner to act and not at all how I would expect a good guy to act. I was pretty shocked when I found out that germy was not LB's partner.

[Yosarian2]

If Germy was the most obveous choise for the last communist, (and we all seem to be agreed that he was), then the bandwagon on him probably dosn't give much information; all townies would want the last communist lynched, the Islamists wouldn't mind him being lynched either, and neither group has any information the other doesn't about the idenity of the last communist. Now, if someone was using crap logic to get someone lynched, that would increase their odds of being some kind of scum, but I don't see that anyone really did, as far as I can tell.

[Yosarian2]

If Germy was the most obveous choise for the last communist, (and we all seem to be agreed that he was)

Part of my point that started the whole spront-Zin thing was that we weren't all agreed germy was. Four people voted for him in their first post, but that's not everyone, and not a majority. (Coincidentally, it's exactly how many scum there are left, but I think there might've been one or two misled town among the germy-voters) I know I wasn't sold on germy, and I don't see anything that says KP and Lucresia (The other two not voting him) were approaching sold either. I'm growing more and more convinced that the Islamists are trying to get away with the germy lynch by pushing the "Of course he was an idiot" thing.

Well, you might not have been "sold" on him, but you didn't say anything against the bandwagon either before the day ended yesterday.

Now, granted, it would have been much more informative if everyone else had commented on the bandwagon before it went to a lynch, and I'm quite annoyed at germy hammering himself before that happened. However, there was no really disagreeing, except Kingpen who was arguing that he thought TSQ was the last communist instead. Lucreatia agreed with some of the arguments against germy but was undecided when the day ended, and you never said anything about it at all.

So, I guess the question is, would an islamist be more likely to push a bandwagon like that, or more likely to sit on the sidelines and fly under the radar, remembering that the islamist didn't know if germy was the last communist or not and remembering that either way the lynch would not cause an immideate win for them? I don't think that's an easy question to answer, it depends on the psycology and philosaphy of the people involved, and odds are there are probably some islamists on the wagon and some not on the wagon. So I don't think looking at who was on the wagon and who wasn't is likely to tell us who the islamists are.

[Yosarian2]

Just by the numbers, I know there's at least one Islamist and two scum on the germy bandwagon. (Since there are only three townies and the Communist, and I know I'm a townie) If there were two or three Islamists, which I'd be inclined to think was the case, lynching randomly from the germy bandwagon is better than lynching randomly from the entire town. And since the Islamists were just two lynches away from winning, if they could force the lynch on germy easily and write it off the next day by treating it like it was an obvious choice.

I would think the primary goal of any islamist yesterday would be to not be noticed. If the last communist was lynched yesterday, the town would then have another chance to lynch an islamist. If the last communist was not lynched, then either the last communist would have to try and kill an islamist in order to not lose, or the last communist would have not kill, in which case the town'd have another chance. If it looked like germy was going to be lynched yesterday no matter what, and with no one but Kingpin really disagreeing with it I think it did, then I would expect at least some of the islamists to stay off the bandwagon. Odds are good that there is probably at least one Islamist on the bandwagon, and there might be two on there, but unless they're complete newbs I doubt that any scum group would pile onto a bandwagon as #2, #3, and #4 unless it'd win them the game on the spot, so I don't think there are three on there. So, from my point of view, there are between zero and two islamists on the bandwagon, with the most likely number of islamists on the wagon being 1, and so I don't think "lynching randomally from the wagon" is a good stratagy.

In fact, what I would expect an islamist to do would be to sit back and let the town lynch germy without commenting on the bandwagon, and then try to get the town to randomally lynch one of the people on the wagon, which is what you are doing right now.

[Yosarian2]

Day 2, Y2 went straight for LB when he replaced in, mostly for his participation in the SL bandwagon, but was for a Seer counterclaim when LB claimed. I'm not sure how those two fit together except to help one scum group or the other. Since then, he's also taken the route that the Islamists would be passive, including some particular me-tooing of Zind in his last post. Second most likely Communist, I think, but also a good chance of Islamist.

Or, there's always the obveous explination; I am a townie with fairly good instints thought Lying Brian was acting scummy, and I was right, but I was not so sure about it that I was willing to lynch him dispite a cop claim. I don't get what's so wierd about that; I would expect most townies to be very hesitant about lynching a claimed cop in an open role game.

In retrospect, sure it would have been better to lynch Lying Brian without Nai claiming. But if we had done that, and we had been wrong, the town would be in much worse shape then it is now. It just wasn't worth the risk, and I didn't and don't understand why more people didn't understand that at the time.

[Yosarian2]

List, Yos.

Every post I see from you that doesn't include the list is bringing you closer to a vote.

No, Zind, I'm not going to make a list. I'd think you'd have figured that out by now.

I really don't think it's a good idea for me to make a list right now. If I list 3 people I think are scum, and I'm wrong about one or two of them of them, then that makes it much easier for the scum trick the town into voting for the wrong guy and causing a mislynch, and a game loss. I'm especally not going to make a list when there are several people who have yet to make much of a contrabution today, because then they'd be able to just jump on and say "Yeah, I was thinking X all along, good work Yosarian!" So, no, I'm not going to make a list of every single person in the game and what I think of them, at least not before we've heard some real content from the semi-lurkers.

Now, I'd hope you'd be smart enough not to put a vote on someone in a lynch or lose situation just because they're not going to go along with your plan, but whatever, do what ya gotta do.

[Yosarian2]

Reread the argument between LyingBrian and me about this.

I think you're scum. Ergo, this is only good for the town.

What a worthless argument. Because, you see, I know I'm not scum, so I don't think it's for the good of the town. Duh.

And since when do you "think I'm scum"? You have not attacked me all game, and the only reason you've given suspect me is because I'm not willing to go along with your plan. So that line feels looks to me to be very much like it a random attack designed to increase suspicion on some random person who's not you.

If someone jumps on another's opinions, he's going to look scummy (which would again be a victory for the lists).

Not really. Especally not if they're currently lurking and haven't said anything at all yet today, there's no way to tell if they're following my list or if they already thought that. Especally if they're making vauge comments like this

I'm just watching the sparks fly, and watching my reads get firmer for now, zin.

without actually saying what any of those "reads" are. If we all make lists, then if TSQ is scum, he can then decide who to go after based on what everyone's list is, and it'd be hard to attack him for it, as he's not said much today so he'd not be in any real risk of contradicting himself.

So I'm not going to post a full list of what I think about everyone until the people who haven't said much today post some real content; odds are very high that at least some of them are lurkerscum, and I don't want to make it easy for them.

[Yosarian2]

But as not doing it is a scumtell, you get to look a lot scummier. Your opinions are very unclear at the moment, and I want them to become clearer.

Not doing it is clearly not a scumtell unless you can refute my argument that not doing it is the correct move for me to make as a pro-town player.

The only other guy ever to have refused to make a list for me is Brian, in this game. He was scum.

Most people have not made a list for you today, zind. I'm just the only person who gave a reason why.

Not really. Especally not if they're currently lurking and haven't said anything at all yet today, there's no way to tell if they're following my list or if they already thought that. Especally if they're making vauge comments like this.

Look at it like a mass claim. The scummiest go first, then the less scummy.

Well then, we need the lurkers to go first. Which is what I just said.

And again, you're calling me scummy without giving any reason for it except that I'm not going along with your plan. So I'm scummy because I'm not going to post a list first, and I should post a list first because I'm scummy? That's a completly circular argument.

[Yosarian2]

But as not doing it is a scumtell, you get to look a lot scummier. Your opinions are very unclear at the moment, and I want them to become clearer.

Not doing it is clearly not a scumtell unless you can refute my argument that not doing it is the correct move for me to make as a pro-town player.

The only other guy ever to have refused to make a list for me is Brian, in this game. He was scum.

Most people have not made a list for you today, zind. I'm just the only person who gave a reason why.

Not really. Especally not if they're currently lurking and haven't said anything at all yet today, there's no way to tell if they're following my list or if they already thought that. Especally if they're making vauge comments like this.

Look at it like a mass claim. The scummiest go first, then the less scummy.

Well then, we need the lurkers to go first. Which is what I just said.

And again, you're calling me scummy without giving any reason for it except that I'm not going along with your plan. So I'm scummy because I'm not going to post a list first, and I should post a list first because I'm scummy? That's a completly circular argument.

[Yosarian2]

But as not doing it is a scumtell, you get to look a lot scummier. Your opinions are very unclear at the moment, and I want them to become clearer.

Not doing it is clearly not a scumtell unless you can refute my argument that not doing it is the correct move for me to make as a pro-town player.

The only other guy ever to have refused to make a list for me is Brian, in this game. He was scum.

Most people have not made a list for you today, zind. I'm just the only person who gave a reason why.

Not really. Especally not if they're currently lurking and haven't said anything at all yet today, there's no way to tell if they're following my list or if they already thought that. Especally if they're making vauge comments like this.

Look at it like a mass claim. The scummiest go first, then the less scummy.

Well then, we need the lurkers to go first. Which is what I just said.

And again, you're calling me scummy without giving any reason for it except that I'm not going along with your plan. So I'm scummy because I'm not going to post a list first, and I should post a list first because I'm scummy? That's a completly circular argument.

[Yosarian2]

I think you're scummy because I'm getting the idea you may be following me on Norinel to either make you look better when he comes up Islamist, or to finish off the game. Because Norinel, LyingBrian and germy are the only ones you've posted anything rock-solid on.

Or you could also say that since the moment I replaced into the game, I have always made absolutly clear who I was most suspicious of, explained why in great detail, and made clear statements of opinion on major points in the game. And I'm going to do that today; I might not make the full list you're looking for, but I will make my suspicions clear.

[Yosarian2]

You see, this is exactally why I didn't want to make a list. Zind attacks me just with a very stupid reason. He said " His opinions are very unclear, and so far this game, he's only pushed for one guy to be lynched ", which is completly untrue, as I pushed very strongly for two guys to be lynched so far this game and have had very clear and strong opinions every single day.

So anyway, he makes this list, attacking at least one person who is pro-town (me) and quickly spontiac and kingpin both pile on. Spontiac seems to still have a problem based on some stupid bandwagoning Carde did day 1. Yes, that whole SL bandwagon was stupid, but I don't see why he's attacking me for it when Cadre at least had some fairly ratioanl reasons for attacking SL, as opposed to basically everyone else on the bandwagon. Not especally strong reasons, perhaps, but more then strong enough for a vote that early on day 1. And kingpin then piles on for no reason at all.

All the scum have to do is get one townie to vote for one other townie and then pile on, and they win, which is why lists are so dangerous. We'd be much better off if pro-town people just shared their top suspicion or two, and we focused on that, rather then everyone listing 3 people they think are scum; much harder for the scum to directly manipulate us into voting for each other that way.

So

fos:kingpin

. I'd expect the scum to try to "pile on" to any misplaced suspicion they can find, and if either Zind or spontic is non-Islamist, I'd expect an islamist to try to start pushing the town in that direction, which he seems to be trying to do now.

[Yosarian2]

Yos,
If I understand your argument correctly, you are FOS'ing me because I think you are probably scum. I think the whole tone of your post is defensive. Call me silly, but if I had stated only my top two or three scum choices, and you were included, would I still be getting FOS'ed by you?

I am FOSing me because of the timing of your attack on me, yes. What I would expect a scum to do right now would be to wait until some townie was suspecting some other townie, and then hop on the bandwagon, because that's all it'd take for them to win, and it looks to me like that's what you just did. Especally as you didn't give any reason for your attack other then "gut", the timing looks incredibly suspicious to me.

Did you also note that my so called "attacks" on you simply stated it was a gut reaction to reading your posts.

That's what you claim. I'm suspect other motives on your part, and "gut" is a pretty easy excuse for you to use.

And whats more than that, If I would have posted before Spron, would that have made me less worthy of an FOS?

Yeah, if you had been the first to attack me, it wouldn't have been as suspicious.

[Yosarian2]

Yes, it's very easy to be right in retrospect, but I was unaware that Nai really was the president at the time of reading. He made a number of posts, which clearly suggested he was the president. I know I would've known in that situation and I don't believe it slipped by you and Yosarian2.

I've got to say that on some level I kind of did believe lying brian when he claimed cop, especally as, like I mentioned before, his claim that he had an innocent on me seemed to fit with the way he had treated me that day.

Yes, it had occured to me that it was possible someone who was still pushing hard for his lynch after he claimed could be the actual cop. But at that point, I was unwilling to take the risk without a counterclaim.

I understand and to an extent agree with the germy-lynch. He was looking scummy. But I don't like how it went. You're not the only two to blame, but it is part of why I'm suspicious of the two of you.

Eh? If you agree that germy looked scummy, why are you attacking me for putting the first vote on him?

It is pointless, because we both know that how the Islamists are going to play is going to be dictated by that player's play style. I seriously doubt that the fact that they're Islamists rather than Commies or something is going to have a noticeable effect on their play. In essence, you're making generalizations that needlessly limit our pool of lynch targets.

Actually, that was exactally the point I was trying to make, which was just that Norinel's argument that (to paraphrase) "most/all the islamists would have been on the germy wagon, so we should lynch someone who was on that wagon" was a questionable, and perhaps scummy, attempt to narrow the list of possible suspects.

Anyway, CES, if you are going to vote, I would request you keep a close eye on the game and be prepared to unvote if it looks like the scum are trying a speedlynch.

[Yosarian2]

You didn't see Nai as President then?

Well, I thought it was possible, sure. He did seem way too sure for a townie, which made me think Nai was most likely either the president or the communist.

The lynch went too easy. I'm not specifically blaming you, but it makes me suspicious of everyone on the wagon.

Well, the day before even there were already several people who were arguing that germy and LB were communist scum together. Still, the wagon did go rather fast, sure.

Um, dude, Yosarian2, you are totally misrepresenting him(unless you thought he was actually advocating randomly lynching from the bandwagon). He was refuting your argument that the germy-wagon was useless in terms of information, a refutation I agree with.

He was trying to argue that there were "two or three" islamists on the wagon, and not basing it on anything. There's no way there could have been three islamists on the wagon; even if they were newbs going for a speedlynch, they would have been votes 3, 4, and 5, not 2, 3, and 4 when it's 5 to lynch. Two islamists on the bandwagon is possible, sure, but there's no reason to assume it.

[Yosarian2]

Or the communist? That's a strange remark. Please elaborate.

Well, the only people in the game who knew for sure if LB was telling the truth or if he was lying were the president and the communist or communists. (I've already explained why I was convinced at the time that LB was either the president or a communist). If Lying Brian was a lying communist, I'd expect the president to be trying as hard as he could to get him lynched without wanting to get a counterclaim first. If Lying Brian was the president, I'd expect the communists to be trying as hard as they could to get him lynched without wanting to get a counterclaim first. So at the time, yeah, I thought Nai was quite possibly either the president or a communist.

I personally wouldn't rule out three Islamists, just like that. It can definitely happen, if their play styles allow it.

Well, I suppose it's possible, but it would be a pretty huge mistake, and I don't think I've ever seen an entire scum group do that, all pile on to a bandwagon in row like that in a way that wouldn't even cause a speedlying.

Anyhow, I think I should bring up what Norinel said, because you are misrepresenting him. It should speak for itself.

Just by the numbers, I know there's at least one Islamist and two scum on the germy bandwagon. (Since there are only three townies and the Communist, and I know I'm a townie) If there were two or three Islamists, which I'd be inclined to think was the case, lynching randomly from the germy bandwagon is better than lynching randomly from the entire town. And since the Islamists were just two lynches away from winning, if they could force the lynch on germy easily and write it off the next day by treating it like it was an obvious choice.

Right. But germy WAS the obveous choice.

And the other part that bothers me was, as I said, the way he says he's "inclined to think" are two or there islamists on the wagon. I don't really see any reason to think that would be the case.

However, after re-skimming the way the day went, I will say that if there was one or more islamists on the wagon, the most obveous choice would be Zindaras and/or spontiac. I could see islamists adding pressure to the wagon after they saw it get going, so that would be where I would expect them to be on the bandwagon; not the hammer, and not people actually driving the attacks against germy (me and TSQ), but in between.

[Yosarian2]

I have no problem with this, but you originally said "or

the

communist"(italics mine). I may be stretching here, but the original statement seems to suggest that you knew quite well LyingBrian was scum and you thought Nai was the President or the other Communist, who would've also known him to be scum, it seemed to suggest that you had already narrowed down to the number of communists to one.

And just how would I "know" that LB was a communist? Are you accusing me of being a communist now?

[Yosarian2]

Right. But germy WAS the obveous choice.

That's exactly what I've been saying the Islamists should be saying right now.

(shrug) Any islamist who was on the bandwagon probably would be saying that right now, sure. Any townie who was on the bandwagon probably would also be saying that right now. Either way, it's true.

[Yosarian2]

7 -

Shadowlurker

(friday-13th, Cadre, Lucresia, KingPin,

LyingBrian

,

germy

, Thestatusquo)
2 - Kingpin (

Nai, Shadowlurker

)
2 -

LyingBrian

(

chamber

, sprontalic)

not voting: Rastapopolous

Now, we add the assumptions as I listed them:

7 -

Shadowlurker

(friday-13th, Cadre, Lucresia, KingPin,

LyingBrian

,

germy

,

Thestatusquo

)
2 - Kingpin (

Nai, Shadowlurker

)
2 -

LyingBrian

(

chamber, sprontalic

)

not voting:

Rastapopolous

Greening myself stands to reason, I think sprontie's town, and TSQ's everyone's best bet as last Commie. This leaves the three Islamists in the first four votes.
...

I'm not saying Day Three should be disregarded. I'm saying that the Day One lynch shouldn't be disregarded. I feel that there were two scumbags on the germywagon, namely Yoslamist and thestatusquommunist.

You're jumping to all kinds of conclusions here. There were seven people on the bandwagon. Cadre was an early vote on the bandwagon and gave a reason that's perfectly rational for day 1. Lying brian pushed the wagon with craplogic, and I helped lynch him because of it. So why is Cadre any more scummy then the other 5 people on the bandwagon?

And I don't like how several people are now just flatly assuming that TSQ is a commie, following KingPin's lead. Yeah, he's not a bad suspect for it, but the evidence against him is still pretty thin, consisting mostly of the fact that he agreed with me that we shouldn't lynch a claimed president without a counterclaim. The way you're all just taking it for granted now really makes me wonder if one or more of you is an islamist trying to lead us on a false trail here.

CES's whole plan that we can somehow make the communist feel comfertable and by doing so manipulate him into killing islamists has several obveous problems with it, and even if it didn't it dosn't match the way CES has actually acted today.

[Yosarian2]

I'm not saying I find Cadre's timing on the wagon any more suspicious than I find any other's of the first four voters. I just find you, over the whole game, to be suspicious.

And why would that be?

Though you do have a point that TSQ could be Islamist as well. However, this doesn't necessarily change anything regarding the numbers.

He could be an islamist,and the other islamists are trying to plant the idea in our heads he's a commie so he dosn't get lynched today. Or he could be an innocent townie, and the actual communist and/or islamists could be trying to plant false ideas in our heads now to take advantage of at some point in the future, when we really do want to lynch the communist. Either way, I don't trust how sure both you and CES seem to be about his alignment.

Frankly, if you think someone might be a communist, the best thing to do might be to bandwagon them today and make them claim communist to avoid getting lynched; if we can pin down the identity of the communist today it should help the odds of an eventual town victory.

[Yosarian2]

The Communist can only win through getting the Islamists killed before the final day and then getting a Townie lynched.

That's actually not true; if we can get the communist to claim today, it helps the town's odds, but the communist could still win. I'm not going to say any more, because I'm not going to suggest stratagy to the communist.

[Yosarian2]

Oh, crap. Yeah, that was me who edited that post; I must have hit the edit button instead of the quote button by mistake. Sorry about that.

[Yosarian2]

@Yossarian2: I think Cadre was very suspicious. Ok lets just say that gut feeling is a perfectly legitimate reason for the start of day 1, the fact was I "asked" him about his gut feeling and even pointed out why there absolutely nothing to support his feeling, even trying to point otherwise...he continued to ignore it and go with "his gut" all the way through to the lynch.

That

is highly suspicious because you

don't

lynch anyone out of pure gut feeling even on day 1.

That's a complely unfair accusation here. He voted for SL early on based on a gut feeling, which is fine, and then long before it went to a lynch he expanded on why he was suspicious of SL and gave several good reasons why he was keeping his vote there.

Fine heres some proof to support my gut feeling, which after a dozen mafia games has only lead me to make two false accusations. It's got a rather good track record and I think I should trust it...

vote:Thestatusquo

I trust friday's scum hunting abilities here.

Vote TSQ

BANDWAGON LOL!

TEEHEE

Unvote Vote Kingpin

Interesting there is a "bandwagon" started on page two.

Cadre is definitely scum for not random voting and only mentioning one person in his first post.

From what I've seen so far, Shadow is most likely scum. I know it's only been two pages but I've got a gut feeling he's gonna end up with an anti-town role. I'm not gonna vote yet though, I'd like to confirm that feeling first...

I don't random vote, it's stupid. And I only mentioned you because at the moment you are the only one I don't like...

Vote: ShadowLurker

Thanks for confirming my gut feeling...

wow u r so good at this game and cool i wish i could be like u, plz teach me ur secrets

Things didn't get blatant until his 4th post, where he claims I must be scum for not voting and only mentioning him. While he has been vote hopping and offering no explanation as to why he is. And hasn't mentioned more than one person in any of his posts, and little more than their names. The rest of his posts are just spam, posts for the sake of posting. No helpful information, no reason, no use at all...

This is why I think he's scum, and this is why I'm gonna keep thinking he's scum until an after death role reveal proves otherwise...

He pointed out that SL attacked Cadre for not random voting while moving his own vote all over the place. Now, I personally now that kind of irrational votehopping early on is a fairly normal playstyle for SL, but I can perfectly understand why a newbie like Cadre would think that was scummy. I thought it was scummy myself first time I played a game with SL. He further pointed out that all of those votes SL made were almost completly unsupported, and that most of SL's posts were basically just spam without anything helpful in them.

I think those are perfectly rational reasons for someone to vote for someone else early on day 1. Again, I probably would not have done so, becuase I know SL's playstyle, but I can certanly understand why Cadre thought SL was acting scummy.

Your dishonest misrepresentation of Cadre is noted. And it's quite suspicious that you're actually voting for me in a lynch or lose situation based on nothing but a blatent misrepresentation of the reasons for an early day 1 vote my predecessor made. And in any case there's nothing scummy with voting on day one based on nothing but "gut" anyway, as that's usally most of what you have to go by. If anything, his reasons for being on that bandwagon were significantly better the the reasons the other 6 people on the bandwagon gave, and there's no logical reason for you to be voting for me instead of for one of the other people on the bandwagon.

Zinderas and CES both expressed some suspicion of me, so now you've decided to try and use crap logic and misrepresentations to try and get me lynched. I can not imagine a pro-town person putting down a vote in a lynch or lose situation based on so little, but I can certanly imagine an islamist trying to think of a good reason to vote for me.

vote:sprontalic

.

Sprontialic has got to be scum partners with either Zinderas or CES, so he's decided to stay out of that fight rather then tie himself to his scum partner directly, and is instead looking for an easy lynch target.

[Yosarian2]

Yosarian, a vote for spront is not productive. We don't have the luxury to go around voting for who we think are scum willynilly Today. But a Vote for Zindaras is a Vote for Victory!

Thing is, I think that one of the two of you is probably scum, or else scum would have started to join in the fight between you two by now, but I'm not sure which one of the two of you is scum. OTOH, I'm pretty sure spontalic is scum.

[Yosarian2]

I said it wasn't scummy that he originally voted SL, but what was scummy was that he continued to do so without explaining himself. Also I had already shot down Cadre's "support" with a single word...sarcasm (this is my first time playing with Sl too, and I saw through his sarcasm easily). Yet he never unvoted until the end even after I later said "explain your gut feeling" which he said he would but never did.

He did explain why. In some detail, in fact. I just quoted the post where he explained why, and I think his reasons were more then good enough for a day 1 vote. In any case, there's no logical reason for you to be attacking me for this

now

based on a fairly rational day 1 vote, except that you are probably under the impression that you can get me lynched and win the game for your scumgroup.

And in any case there's nothing scummy with voting on day one based on nothing but "gut" anyway, as that's usally most of what you have to go by. If anything, his reasons for being on that bandwagon were significantly better the the reasons the other 6 people on the bandwagon gave, and there's no logical reason for you to be voting for me instead of for one of the other people on the bandwagon.

Actually Cadre had no reason going into the lynch. I already said it's not scummy to vote based on gut, but to carry that vote to a lynch is extremely careless, and antitown. He had no other reason supporting the vote besides what you posted, and later is was agreed upoin that SL was being sarcastic, yet Cadre never rescinded his vote. Hence scummy.

"it was agreed" that he was "sarcastic"? You may have thought that some of SL's votes were supposed to be sarcastic, but Cadre certanly never "agreed" to that. And in any case, Cadre thought SL's early vote hopping, and SL attack Cadre for not random voting of all things, was scummy. As it turns out, he was wrong. A person who is voting for logical reasons on day 1, but turned out to be wrong, is hardly scummy, and is certanly not anywhere close to enough justifaction for you to vote for me in a lynch or lose situation.

Zinderas and CES both expressed some suspicion of me, so now you've decided to try and use crap logic and misrepresentations to try and get me lynched. I can not imagine a pro-town person putting down a vote in a lynch or lose situation based on so little, but I can certanly imagine an islamist trying to think of a good reason to vote for me.

In terms of individually, I think you, Norinel and CES as just as scummy as each other. However regarded together I find it highly likely you three are the islamists, especially after today's discussions. But since deadline is almost here I'm going to go for the easiest one to get lynched, that is you since to me it makes absolutely no different which three of you is lynched today.

Also I'd mentioned the Cadre thing ages ago, why vote me now based on that now as opposed to before?

It's one thing to "mention the cadre thing". It's quite another to actually vote in a lynch or lose situation for such a weak reason.

[Yosarian2]

Oh please. Jathans just playing around.

Cadre, as I already suggested, did you not think that maybe Shadowlurker was being sarcastic and making fun of you in his 'you must be scum' post? I took it as sarcasm the instant I saw it, making un of your playstyle. I think you're taking this a bit too seriously, basing a 'I think he's scum and I'm not going to think otherwise until he's dead' feeling on, what, five posts? Most of which, as you admitted, are spam?

And here is my post saying why SL was being sarcastic and why votes on him are not only stupid, but are opportunistic.

Wow 2 more pages since my last post...this game's going fast and I like!!!

I have absolutely no problem with Shadowlurker's play style at this stage. His first vote was a second vote yes, but I don't think theres much problem with that at the random voting stage. Being the second vote it doesn't increase the chances of a lynch dramatically and it also helps get us out of the random voting stage (which as someone before said is crap and spams up the game).

For those who are saying sarcasm is hard to read...obviously you guys don't read forums enough. SL is clearly trolling in this game...we can see that in post 24.

SL also jumped wagons on page 2...but I think that's more to ridicule Kingpin's prior comment about bandwagoning TSQ.

Post 37 I believe is also an attempt to ridicule Cadre...his wording in that post clearly implies that he's being sarcastic. Notice how he didn't follow it up with a vote?

That's why I believe those that are saying SL is scummy are being opportunistic, hence:

FOS: Friday 13th

Also the vote on Cadre is for the same thing, except that he pushed the notion much more aggressively. Also his gut feeling is clearly full of crap. Also post 52 kinda confirms it...it seems like a clear attempt at covering for being opportunistic.

Also

FOS: Lucresia

for looking at lurkers on page 3.

Now, proof that Cadre had in fact acknowledged what I posted but failed to act upon it, even though he agreed.

No scum vibes from it, but you make good points. I'll be more specific later, I'm running on 4 hours of sleep and can't think straight.

Then he does this without further reasoning as the lynch is about to occur.

Lots of stuff happened today, but I'm still comfortable with my vote for SL. Sorry I don't have anything else to say though...

Hence following the sequence of events, Cadre was scummy as hell.

To be honest, it looks to me like Cadre was trying at one point to participate, but that after his one big post where he gave reasons for his vote, he never had time to really play; he had a few posts after that, but they were one line mostly meaningless posts, and he eventually had to be replaced.

There were three seperate things Cadre was attacking SL for, and you only try to respond to one of them here.

1. Attacking Cadre for a bad reason

2. Vote hopping without any reasons

3. A large % of SL's posts being meaningless

Now, he said (and I think it's pretty clear he was mostly just skimming by this point, I would guess because he didn't really have enough time to play mafia anymore), that you had "some good point", and he might have agreed with you eventaully abotu #1, SL's attack on him, but to say "he didn't have any reasons for keeping a vote there" based on that one line is quite a strech.

In any case, it's almost certanly not true that SL's post was just "sarcasm". It wasn't a strong attack, of course, and he didn't attach a vote to it, but you don't call someone scum without at least trying to poke at him.

Although I'll admit that you haven't done anything particularly scummy, but that's because you joined us in day 2, when the game had pretty much taken a course that was almost impossible to divert from. In day 2 Lyingbrian was the obvious play, which you followed, then day 3 germy was the obvious play which you also followed.

I was hardly a "follower" in either case. As soon as I re-read the game, I thought lying brian looked scummy from his very first post, which i laid out in great detail from the moment I started playing,; at the point I voted for lying brian, post 222, there were only two other votes for him. You did not join that bandwagon until post 234. I was also the first person to vote for germy on day 3.

So there wasn't really much I could read on you (or in fact anyone else) during those 2 days. As for today, I don't think I've seen you do anything scummy or anything protown. But to reaffirm that I'm going to reread...

So, you don't think the way I was agressivly hunting scum during those two days means anything, huh?

Start of day 4, you fosed, pretty much for the same reason you've voting me now. Then 2 posts later (which only involve discussion of strategy) you post why you voted for germy (which I'll consider as a post made in defence). Then the next 10 posts is either discussion of strategy, or defence. Then you make another fos followed by 1 post of rebuttal. Next is more defence and discussion until I voted for you, in which case all of a sudden you go and aggressively attack me.

(shrug) I attacked you partly because I've had a bad feeling about you for some time now, but mostly because I don't imagine a pro-town person acting the way you've acted today.

As for being defensive? Sure I have. I always defend myself against any attack, no matter how irrelevent, which is something every good guy shouls always do in my opinion. Along with that, every good guy should be trying quite hard to both find scum and not get lynched today.

My question is...why

have

you done to try and find scum? All you've done is throw a couple of fos'es then follow it up with a post or 2. After that you leave is and just start pointing out other people's ideas and thowing in a bit of your own. I have no problem with strategy discussions, but fact is that's all you're doing (besides defending yourself). You've hardly made any effort to finding scum. Also you completely ignored and hence distanced yourself from the argument between Zindaras and I. Although you've been doing things in day 2+3, you've basically been sitting in the sidelines occasionally throwing in ideas here and there and then coming in to defend yourself when someone names you. The biggest proof of this is, my argument against you is exactly the same as the one I used in the beginning of today. Why did you choose to attack me back for it just now but not back then? The only difference between the circumstances is that I voted you this time instead of fosed you.

I already answered this question. The really scummy part of your behavior is that you actually voted for me based on that junk logic in a lynch or lose situation, and the fact that you waited until other people had expressed suspicion on me before you did so. Why didn't you vote for me based on this stuff earlier today? Or back on day 3 for that matter? If you've thought all along that I was scummy since day 1, why did you follow me onto both the lying brian and the germy bandwagon? No, I think you've been trying to plant suspicion about as many people including me as you possibly could during this game, and especally today, and you decided to vote for me now only because you think you can get me lynched. Which is the exact same thing you did with the lying brian and germy bandwagons; you expressed suspicion on them early, but then waited and joined the bandwagon once it looked like it was going to a lynch. Classic scum behavior.

[Yosarian2]

Clearly his reasons were sarcastic and not meant to be taken seriously. It'd be the same as me saying you're scummy because you have a crap avatar. You can't expect to take that seriously. Besides he didn't even support it with a vote, which further shows that he was just playing around.

No, saying "I think your suspicious because you didn't random vote" is NOT the same as saying "I think you're suspicious because I don't like your avatar". Random voting is an actual in-game action, and I have seen people seriously attack each other for random voting, or not random voting, before. So no, I'm not entirely sure how seriously SL intended his attack, but I think anytime anyone says "I think you're scummy because you did X", you've got to take it seriously.

2. Vote hopping without any reasons

Nothing else was happening at the moment. I'll admit that this is a good reason to vote in the beginning, but it's not a good enough reason to lynch someone with.

I don't know about you, but if I make a day 1 vote for a good, logical reason, I'm not going to unvote just because other people agree with me that that person was scummy. If you agree that his vote was for a good reason, then you can't expect him to remove his vote later just because other people agreed with him that SL looked suspicious; especally on day 1, when there's never all that much to go on.

3. A large % of SL's posts being meaningless

Again, it was the beginning of the game. How can you create content where there is none to be found?

(shrug) I would agree with you that it's not an especally strong reason at that point in the game. Nonetheless, it shows evidence of pro-town thought on cadre's part, as that is the kind of thing I look for.

Now, he said (and I think it's pretty clear he was mostly just skimming by this point, I would guess because he didn't really have enough time to play mafia anymore), that you had "some good point", and he might have agreed with you eventaully abotu #1, SL's attack on him, but to say "he didn't have any reasons for keeping a vote there" based on that one line is quite a strech.

Well I'm not posting cause I don't have anything useful to say. Next time I have something worth saying I'll say it, until then I'm just gonna bite my tongue...

This post alone shows that he had ample time to rethink his ideas and to rebut against him if he was so sure.

Actually, that's the kind of post that I usually see after someone has started basically skimming the game and trying to post briefly because that's all he has time to do at the moment, or because he's lost interest in the game, or for whatever reason that led to him eventually being replaced.

But then he just chose to ignore it until I asked him a second time. Even then he failed to rebut/add ideas. And no I don't buy the excuse that he had no time not only because he had 3 days between his last 2 posts, and also his last posts clearly shows that he had nothing else to add.

Right. I'm sure he could have found somthing more useful to say at that point, if he was still following the game in any real way, but it dosn't look like he really was by that point.

As I pointed out these are bad reasons to lynch someone for so that act alone is scummy. It's not enough to say that SL is worthy of a vote at that stage, the question is whether he's worthy of a lynch or not, and by the reasons Cadre provided, no he's not worthy of a lynch. Yet he didn't retract his vote which shows that he clearly was after SL's head, and IMO for bad reasons too.

I don't agree. If you've got good enough reason for a day 1 vote, then you keep your vote there until something happens to change your mind or until something better shows up. What, you expect someone else to just spontaniously claim scum? Day 1 votes are usually based on the best hunch you've got, and it's clear he had good, rational reasons for his.

Oh comeon look at the context. He was being stupid and erratic from the word go. You can't expect anyone to take him seriously after his random vote hopping (which I might add were clearly done as a bit of fun).

And you haven't seen pro-town people take that kind of erratic behavior to be scummy before? Again, I've played with SL before so I wouldn't have voted for him based on his erratic behavior, but many pro-town people would.

You haven't done a lot in finding scum.

Well, I found one, which is pleanty for today.

So you're saying I've been fabricating evidence throughout the game and also during today. Prove it to me. Show me where I've misintepreted, misquoted, taken things out of context etc if you're saying that I've been planting suspicion. If my accusations have been true, surely i can't be planting suspicion without the person being suspicious to begin with.

I didn't say you were "fabricating evidence". I said you were throwing suspiciouns around at large numbers of people, just hoping that one of them stuck so you could take advantage of them later or hoping to undermine someone's position to make them easier to lynch later. Over the course of the game, you've FOS'd quite a few people, more then half of the people in the game in fact by my count, and then you sat back and waited to see where the lynch was going before you joined on.

[Yosarian2]

Ok bad example, the point stands though.

I'm going to just give up with the argument about Cadre now. We're going around in circles with it. Theres no way that I'm willing to accept that assumption that he's interest or is busy. Nor do I think his reasons were rational. Clearly you disagree with me in both counts so no point arguing this any longer.

You already did agree that his reasons for voting were rational. The only debating ground you've got left to stand on is some kind of artifical division you're trying to create between "good enough to vote for" and "good enough to not unvote as the bandwagon looks like it might head towards a lynch", which is a rather flimsy distintion to try to make on day 1.

As for the idea that he must have been either losing interest or was busy or something like that; well, something like that must have happened, as he needed to be replaced. That seems obveous.

You've voted and lynched 2 people and fos'ed 2 others in 3 days. Today you've made about 3-4 posts which directly concern finding scum by way of pointing the finger. If you would like me to do a pbpa of every one of your posts to prove it, I will.

That is true; I didn't feel like i had a good idea of who the islamists were at the start of this day, and I wasn't going to go tearing off half-cocked in some random direction a lynch or lose. In this kind of situation, the scum usually give themselves away by acting differently then town would in a lynch or lose, and that's what I was waiting for before I made my move.

I didn't say you were "fabricating evidence". I said you were throwing suspiciouns around at large numbers of people, just hoping that one of them stuck so you could take advantage of them later or hoping to undermine someone's position to make them easier to lynch later. Over the course of the game, you've FOS'd quite a few people, more then half of the people in the game in fact by my count, and then you sat back and waited to see where the lynch was going before you joined on.

If someone does something suspicious then I'm going to point it out. Also I fail to see how this cluster bomb method would help me. No matter what role I am there exists a set number of people I can't lynch. You're saying that I'm scummy because it looks like I'm just trying to get anyone lynched when in fact I can't regardless of my role.

Well, I'm sure that some of the FOS's you made were attempts to distance yourself from your scum partners; usually when a scum atttacks large numbers of people like that they're not all good guys. However, I suspect that the majority of your attacks were attempts to spread suspicion as widely as possible.

The islamists can only win by lynching towines, as they don't have any kind of nightkill or anything, which means that from the very beginning they needed to start manipulating the town into becoming more suspicious of each other; if at any point it got to a point where the three least suspicious looking people in the game were townies, or townies and communists, then that means the islamists lose. So I think you were trying to plant real suspicion on as many people as possible that weren't in your scum group, and probably throwing in an occasioanl FOS of one of your scum partners for distancing purposes.

Also to prove you wrong I was completely against SL's lynch. If my plan was to do what you're saying, then wouldn't it have been easier for me to just jump onto the wagon instead of going against the majority?

(shrug) Scum often defend townies to try to look more townie-ish, and to "make a friend". You defending one person who was townie, while attacking everyone else in the town, does not prove anything.

Then in day 2 although I did vote Lyingbrian at one stage, I wasn't part of his lynch (although I did express support for it). Then in day 3 my first post was a vote on germy...so tell me, how have I just sat in the background waiting for a wagon to start before joining in?

In both cases, you had attacked the person early and spread suspicion about them, but didn't join the bandwagon until it was clear that they were going to be lynched.

[Yosarian2]

This is not moving anywhere. Will we take our chances by night, or by day? I am strongly in favor of the lynch rather than relying on the night kill. So we better get somewhere, even if it is a guess.

Agreed; either way it could go badly for us, but at least if it does work a sucessful lynch should help us find the other islamists tommorow. So, then, who do you suggest we lynch?

[Yosarian2]

I think I'd be up for a Yosarian2-lynch.

Big argument.

I'm not really seeing the relevance of it.

Vote: Yossyboy

Die, Yoslamist!

I want Apeiron to state hir opinions, too (gender unspecified as it's unknown).

Either of you have any actual reason for that?

Bah. One of the people who's attacking me has got to be town, no way all the islamists would stick their necks out like this without at least one townie having shown a willingness to join in in order to give them the 4 votes on me the islamists need to win, but I'll be damned if I can figure out which one of you is town.

[Yosarian2]

Either of you have any actual reason for that?

Yes. My original reasons and the fact that you're pretending Cadre wasn't scummy.

Zind's vote is however making me reconsider as I'd still rather lynch Zind.

Well, as I know Cadre wasn't scum, perhaps I have a different perspective, but I don't think he was especally scummy. He had completly rational reasons for his early day 1 vote, as even Spontiac admitted. After that, he basically stopped posting content; he had a few brief posts that said very little, followed by complete inactivity and having to be replaced. Lurking can be a scum tell, sure, but when someone just basically stops playing it's usually more of a sign that real life things are interfering.

[Yosarian2]

I do believe I've outlined my reasons for finding you scummy before. Sprontie recapped it pretty well, in my opinion:

My question is...why have you done to try and find scum? All you've done is throw a couple of fos'es then follow it up with a post or 2. After that you leave is and just start pointing out other people's ideas and thowing in a bit of your own. I have no problem with strategy discussions, but fact is that's all you're doing (besides defending yourself). You've hardly made any effort to finding scum.

(shrug) If I think I've found scum, I usually try to keep the focus on that person to the exclusion of all else, which is what I did on day 2 and day 3. And I'm absolutly convinced I've found another scum today in Spontiac. Just forget everything I've said and go back and read through his posts, and I'm sure you'll see why, if you're not actually his scum partner.

[Yosarian2]

Dude, Yos, Cadre made up some crap about gut and then rode it to SL's lynch, even though his early vote was mostly based on his own inability to recognize sarcasm.

...

There's so many things wrong with that, I don't even know where to begin. Did you read ANY of my posts?

[Yosarian2]

Yeah, yeah, it's an oversimplification and he also had some semi-rational reasons, but it's basically true.

He had rational reasons, certanly as rational as one would expect during that part of day 1, and I don't know why you insist on calling SL's origional comment "sarcasm".

SL never said that it was just "sarcasm", and while he was probably partly joking, it was also one of those "hey, let's poke at this player with a quasi-attack and see if he reacts in order to get the game going" type of posts. It's a somewhat subtle tactic, and I wouldn't really expect a newbie like Cadre to be able to tell the difference between that an and actual attack, especally as no one, not even SL, ever bothered to explain it to him.

[Yosarian2]

Nai said it was sarcasm, so it was explained to him.

Um, but it wasn't sarcasm, and some third person jumping in to try to explain the comments of SL for him wouldn't make me less suspicious of him anyway.

Those reasons were decent enough for that time of Day, but not much more than that and he stuck to his guns and to his "gut" and rode it to a lynch.

So, again; his vote was fine, but you think I'm scum simply because a semi-lurking newbie didn't unvote when you think he should have during a day 1 bandwagon? And that's the best thing you guys have to go on on day 4?

Other people who were on the SL bandwagon:

Thestatusquo: scummy pointless hammer drop
friday-13th (now Norinel): Never gave a real reason at all
Lucresia (now you, CES):Never gave a good reason for his SL vote other then "erratic behavior" and bad language.
Kingpin: Voted mostly because of his "flippant play" and his "errant antics"

So out of everyone who was on the wagon who is still alive, I think Cadre's reasons were better then any one else's reasons; at least they were directly game-related and were actual scumtells. So, really, why am I the one getting run up for this crap?

[Yosarian2]

There is a clear distinction between good enough to vote and good enough to lynch. Good enough to vote = voting someone then pressure them for further evidence. Good enough to lynch = good enough to say they are scum. Just because it's day one doesn't mean you should do a half-assed job and lynch someone whose done something the slightest bit scummy. What SL did was worthy of a beginning day 1 vote because it was something where there was nothing. But that wagon generated lots of discussion, hence by the end of it it was no longer a valid reason to vote or even lynch him with. By sticking to a half-assed reason (which was that he placed a second vote and made one suspicious post) and carrying it through to the lynch shows that he throw his vote into the pot, then sat around and waited till the lynch happened without doing anything to try and stop it. This is lurking at it's worst.

Like I said, at worst he was guilty of lurking. Which is why he was eventually replaced. I think he was the least scummy person ON the bandwagon, and it's just stupid to go after me, now, because of that.

So you're going to catch scum by lurking? What a useful strategy!

BS. When have I ever lurked?

Theres no need to vote for someone to try and catch scum. Look at what CES has been doing, look at what Zindaras has been doing, look at what I've been doing. We've been rereading past post, looking for links and questioning people over past actions.

That

is scum hunting, not sitting around and waiting for something to happen.

Yes, I am looking at what you, CES, and Zinderas are doing. I am also convinced that 2 out of the 3 of you are islamist scum, so that dosn't prove much.

Well, I'm sure that some of the FOS's you made were attempts to distance yourself from your scum partners; usually when a scum atttacks large numbers of people like that they're not all good guys. However, I suspect that the majority of your attacks were attempts to spread suspicion as widely as possible. etc

So you're speculating. Well you continue doing that because I can't exactly defend against dellusion.

Heh. I'm taking a look at your behavior, and yes, I'm speculating on your motives based on that. Your behavior now, in a lynch or lose situation, is a hell of a lot more useful to me in figuring out scum then trying to read the mind of a newbie who got replaced way back on day 1.

I'm not trying to say that it proves my innocence. I'm using it to prove that I'm not "planting suspicion, then jumping on when the wagon has gained momentum".

Um, but that's exactally what you have been doing. Defending one townie on day 1 dosn't undue any of that.

[quote="sprontalic"
Ummm no. I never voted for LB hence technically I never "joined" the wagon.[/quote]

Umm yes, you did vote for lying brian. You voted for him after I did. You later left the bandwagon, perhaps knowing it would go to a lynch and not wanting to be on it when that happened? I'm not sure your motives, but you DID vote for lying brian, you DID join that bandwagon, and you are now lying about it.

As for germy notice how I finished day 2 with a vote on him. Technically I was on the wagon before day 3 even started, hence one of the first. And I'm sorry that I didn't wake up at 3am in the morning just so I can be the first to vote germy.

Right; you started going after germy on day 2, based on his links to lying brian. Which again dosn't make a lot of sense; if you think person A is scum, and you think person B is linked to person A, you lynch person A first. Unless you are trying to plant suspicion and set up lynches in advance.

I made a brief explanation of why I saw it as sarcasm (post 78 or something). If Cadre didn't agree he should've said something. He had posted 4 contentless posts between then and the lynch, two of which were posts saying "I'm here but I have nothing to say". This is not what you say when you're losing interest/busy hence I don't buy these two excuses.

Well, whatever. He was a lurking newbie. If you can really get the town to lynch me because I replaced a lurking newbie three days ago, then I suppose the town probably deserves to lose.

As I've said, I believe 5/7 on the SL wagon were scum. Friday, Lucresia and Cadre for being the first 3 to hop onto the wagon in quick succession. TSQ for his hammer, and LB. Then we have the two misled townies germy and Kingpin.

Everyone who was on that wagon had bad reasoning to join it, hence I believe a pattern is the more reliable thing to look for here, leading me to believe that the first three are the islamists.

So...why not vote for one of the more suspicious people on the bandwagon? Perhaps you're some kind of psychic who knows with certainty exactly who are scum and who are not scum, but most normal townies would actually go after the person who is MOST suspicious first. I think your attacks on me, as opposed to one of the other, more scummy looking people on the bandwagon, or one of the other people you've FOS'd, are pure scummy opportunism; you're attacking me because you think you can get me lynched, no more and no less.

[Yosarian2]

Why didn't you provide your input before?

Because I hadn't realized what you were doing until you voted in a lynch or lose situation for an easy target with a really bad reason. How many times do I have to say that

Yes I voted for him once...in fact I voted for him twice throughout the course of the game. But the point is I wasn't on the wagon when he was lynched. Also the only people I really attacked prior to day 3 was Lyingbrian, TSQ and germy. Your theory doesn't even fit in with that time frame.

You were prepared, from the very start of the game, to lynch multiple people. You laid the groundwork for the lying brian lynch and for the germy lynch. Then you went after kingpin. After that, you went after Zinderas. After that, you went after me, and said you were willing to lynch either, CES, Norinel, or me.

Whenever you went after a bad lynch, like the germy lynch or the vote against me, your defense afterwords was "Well, i had been going after that person for days!" You've been going after almost everyone for days, probably to set you up so you could go after anyone today.


At the start of the day today, this was your feeling towards me.

I've had suspicious feelings towards Cadre from the start, though not much from Yosarian2, but since many found him suspicious, it's probably not unreasonable to say he's scum. I'm thinking that he's not commie though, so I'm willing to tip that he's an islamist.

...

I'm tip that Kingpin and Zindaras are townies. I'm getting townie vibes from both of them so based on hunch I'm going to go with Norinel and Lucresia as the other two islamists.

You had "suspicious feelings towards cadre", and "some other people" found me suspicious, so you thought it was "not unreasonable" to say I was scum. And you had "hunches" about Norniel and Lucresia.

And yet, you're willing to go from that to being willing to lynch any of the three of us in a lynch or lose situation? You're attacking Cadre for voting based on "gut', but I've got to say that his reasons for his day 1 vote were much stronger then the logic behind all of your suspicions today.

TSQ is the next most suspicious person, but I think he's a commie so lynching him would be a mistake. So it's between you, friday (Norinel) and Lucresia (CES). As far as I'm concerned Friday and Lucresia were both terrible lurkers that didn't do much. Cadre also lurked later in the game so they're all just as scummy on the account. However It's Cadre's poor reasoning that is making me go for you as opposed to anyone. But as I said multiple times today, I don't care which one of you gets lynch, as long as one of you is lynched today I'm happy. So yes I am going for you because it'd be easier for you to be lynched. As for as I'm concerned though, the outcome will be the same.

I'm sure the outcome would be the same "as far as you're concerned".

[Yosarian2]

Crap, crap, crap. That's 3 votes, right?

Fine. You caught me.

I'M THE COMMUNIST

.

As soon as I joined the game, I decided that I was going to have to bus Lying Brian, as he was clearly going to be lynched anyway, but I made sure that the cop was outed first before we lynched him.

Now, can we get those votes off me and lynch an islamist today? I did a no-kill last night because I really thought we'd have a good chance at lynching an islamist today, and because the numbers worked out better that way for me. But if we lynch a non-islamist today (me), we all lose. If one of the three people voting for me is not an islamist, could you PLEASE get your vote off of me before the third islamist logs on?

[Yosarian2]

Unvote

Explain to me how you can still win.

Simple. The town lynches an islamist today. Tonight, I try to kill a townie. If I manage to do that, then tommorow, there will be 5 people; me, 2 townies, and 2 islamists. The town again is forced to lynch an islamist in order to not lose. I attempt to kill another townie that night, and if I manage to do that, that puts in in an endgame with me (the communist), 1 islamist, and 1 townie. At which point, if I manage to do all that, the last townie is basically the kingmaker; he can lynch me and let the islamist win, lynch the communist and let me win, or no lynch and then I win if I kill the islamist or lose if I kill the townie.

That's how I could still win. That's why I didn't kill last night, to try keep the town in a numerical situation where they would be forced to lynch an islamist every single day. Of course, it only works if I manage to figure out who all the islamists are; if I kill an islamist at night by mistake, the town lynches me the next day and probably wins; or if we lynch a townie (or me) during the day then the islamists win.

In any case, though, if we don't lynch an islamist today then both me and the town lose on the spot. If we do, then everyone is still in the game.

[Yosarian2]

(shrug) If there's not a lynch today, then I won't kill anyone tonight. Won't change anything, we'll still be in the same situation tommorow. If I did kill someone tonight, then you could lynch me tommorow, which of course I can't allow.

[Yosarian2]

(shrug) If this is what it'll take to convince you, fine. We can lynch Sprontalic the Islamist tommorow instead.

unvote:sprontalic

vote:no lynch

[Yosarian2]

Alright, now that we've delt with that, can we go back to lynching islamists?

[Yosarian2]

Where did that come from?

I challenge you to a duel!

By the way, where's everyone else? We simply can't lynch correctly today without all 4 non-islamist votes, so we really need to get the lurkers posting here.

[Yosarian2]

Fact is if a commie claims, there is no way he can win anymore regardless of what he does. If ever a day comes when an islamist lynch isn't necessary he'd die which means he loses. Otherwise all days will have equal number of townies as islamists...I believe if day reaches the point where it's one from each faction it's an automatic islamist win (the first post doesn't provide this senario, but from the wording of the islamists role, I think this is the case). In other words if Y2 is a commie, a claim would definately mean a loss no matter what he does.

Ok, that's just not true. Did you read the first couple of mod posts?

Your mission will be accomplished once (at any point) Islamists make up half of the remaining committee members, no matter who makes up the other half.

If there's 1 islamist, 1 communist, and 1 townie, then the islamists do NOT make up half of the remaining committe memebers, so they do not win automatically.

Now, about TSQ, I really don't think he's an especally strong suspect for being an islamist. By the way that bascially everyone was agreeing that he was a commie for basically no good reason, it's clear that at least some of the islamists were trying to push the idea. As he was in no real danger of being lynched when they were doing that, my best guess is that they wanted to the town to think he was a communist because they were setting him up as a possible lynch for some point in the future. The islamists might have even thought he WAS the communist, for that matter; they had no way of knowing. But I don't think they would have pushed him foward like that as a suspect if he was one of their own.

[Yosarian2]

vote:Cogito Ergo Sum

[Yosarian2]

Woah, so sprontalic was Commie.

That's surprising. Really surprising.

Anyway, woo, win!

Agreed. I thought it wasn't TSQ, but i wouldn't have guessed sprontalic.

[Yosarian2]

The Islamists did indeed autowin in a day phase starting with a x1 situation. This was under "special rules" as well as in the Islamist role PM.

I know.

[Yosarian2]

Actually, we had a plan for that.

(From a PM I sent my scum buddies)

Good claim. I had wanted to suggest it to you two when KingPin got replaced, but I forgot.

There's two options right now:

-TSQ (who everyone thinks is a Commie) kills Yos. We go for TSQ tomorrow. Norinel after that, he linked himself to Yossy a bit by not voting No Lynch.

-TSQ doesn't kill Yos. Yos looks like confirmed Islamist. Who should be our target tomorrow if we're still at full strength?

Ok. If I get killed tonight, then yeah, tommorow the town's going to go after the communist, and are probably going to lynch TSQ. I'm not sure if he is the communist or not, but the town thinks he is and that's what matters.

The day after that; I've set it up so that if I end up dead and Islamist, Spontiac will have a huge amount of credibility and self-confindence, and he'll probably go after either CES or Nornial with everything he's got. The two of you just have to follow him, and you win.

I think we were in pretty good shape either way.

[Yosarian2]

Also, Yostownie does not lie to the town. I'm sure of that.

Oh, and by the way, I do lie as town. I've just never been caught lying as town.