Mini 474 - Bergamo Bump-Off (Game Over!)

[Plessiez]

Vote: Muerrto

For some amusingly bizarre (and yet essentially random) reason I haven't thought of yet.

[Plessiez]

Hope no-one minds me using Green writing

Why are you using green writing?

Oh, no, better question: is it simply coincidence that you are "randomly" voting for somebody who had just voted for you?

[Plessiez]

Anyways has everyone either said something or voted?

I think we're still waiting to hear from Khelvaster.

vote: muerrto

why havn't we lynched him yet?

Give us 2 good reasons, and maybe we will.

Oh, I can field this one.

1) I voted for him - therefore he must be scum (the alternative is that I didn't manage to spot any mafia before I made my first post, and that's unthinkable, obviously).
2) He voted for me - therefore he must be scum (the alternative is that a pro-town player might want to vote for me, and that too is clearly unthinkable).

There you go. Two

utterly dreadful

'good' reasons .

[Plessiez]

vote: muerto

Sorry, I'm confused. Is this supposed to be a genuinely random vote, or are you actually suspicious of muerto?

(I ask because it just seems slightly odd that you'd 'randomly' vote for one of only two people with more than a single vote on them).

[Plessiez]

Hmm. Okay, then, thoughts and questions and all that:

death_sauce

: What makes you say I was "answering for vampyrus"? You meant this post, right? I think it's pretty clear I was just carrying on the random phase tradition of giving awful reasons to vote for somebody (and vampyrus and Muerrto can confirm I'm not in on whatever inside joke was behind vamp's original comment).

Why do you think WLC's confirmation that his vote was random - one minute after his original post - is "strange"? And is it strange in a particularly scummy way (I don't really see how), or simply not something you'd expect a player to do?

Khelvaster

: Okay, colour me sceptical. You just happened to randomly vote for somebody with two votes on him already at a time when almost everybody had only one vote or fewer? Perhaps by "random" you simply mean "not indicative of any real suspicion", but that seems rather peculiar.

As for your suggestion that death_omen and muerrto sounded like "scum talking to each other"... no, not seeing that. And your later implication that death_omen needed "a way out of a really scummy line"?

Certainly

don't agree with that. Oh, and also, if you think that omen said something that was "really scummy", and Muerrto merely gave him a way out, why vote for Muerrto and not omen? Aren't you considering the possiblity that omen is scum and said something scummy (I don't believe he did, but you say you do) but that Muerrto "gave him a way" despite being town? Why not?

Muerrto

: I can see what you're doing in the part of #68 that confused somestrangeflea. You're explaining to death_omen why he shouldn't think you're feeding him lines, yes? This is all well and good, only... death_omen never suggested you were, as far as I can tell. So why did you feel the need to address this point to him?

I mean ... I could tell

you

that the you and me aren't scumbuddies, by the exact some logic (if you're scum, you'd know I'm town; if you're town, you know you're town). Would be kind of odd if I just did it out of nowhere though, right?

Also: is it usually your habit to assume everybody town until you find a reason not to? If not, what have Khev or death_omen done to make you think them town?

somestrangeflea

: I don't believe that Muerrto is trying to present a WIFOM argument here. I'm not quite sure what he

is

doing (see above), but I don't think it's that. His comment was directed at a specific player, after all, to whom it is a perfectly correct (albeit trivial) observation, and not WIFOM.

Oh, and

unvote

. Don't really care for the Muerrto bandwagon that seems to be forming here, to be honest. Haven't seen enough to even guess as to his alignment, but I think he's doing plenty to push the game along, which is all we can really ask for from anybody at this stage. Instead, I'll

vote: Hyphen-ated

, who so far has only one (not particularly interesting) post. Would be nice to see more from him.

[Plessiez]

Ok, what the fuck. I don't want to see any of this. Ever. Making strong comebacks when you are accused of things generally means the accusations aren't strong enough. It doesn't mean you are scum.

QFT.

Adding the fourth vote to somebody because they're

keeping the game alive

and

defending themselves

(from some pretty dodgy accusations, really)? That's an awful, awful reason to vote for anybody.

FoS: death_omen

.

Really don't feel I've been pulling my weight in this game - hopefully tomorrow I'll manage to find something more to talk about.

[Plessiez]

Right, so I've read back over the thread and I have questions for everybody. Aren't you lucky?

Also going to give a quick summary of what I see as the major things everybody has said and my thoughts on them.

death_omen

Really hasn't said all that much: only a couple of posts worth commenting on.

In #42 he votes for WLC, saying that he seems "jumpy". Interestingly, that's really all death_omen says on the subject. DeathSauce later clarifies in #57 when he says that "it does seem strange to come back and clarify that an obviously random vote was indeed random", but death_omen never mentions it again.

Then we have #96, about which people have already commented a fair bit recently. No need to repeat my view on how bad his reasons for voting are: instead, my attention was caught by his final comment: "consider this vote temporary". While it's clear that at this stage of the game most votes will be temporary (as people vote to get a reaction and then decide to go after somebody else for something else), I don't see why you'd want to say

in advance

that your vote is essentially meaningless as you'll be removing it soon.

So, my questions for omen:

1)

What do you think about WLC now?

2)

What sort of response were you expecting when you voted for Muerrto? (What sort of response from Muerrto, in particular, but I'd also like to be told what sort of response you were expecting from everybody else).

DeathSauce

Considers Khel (and by implication vampyrus, who had just done the same thing) "very slightly odd" for placing the third vote when he did. (Well, actually Sauce says "on day 1", but I'm guessing he means "this early on day 1", as obviously

somebody

has to place a third vote on day 1 eventually or the day would never end).

It seems similarly "slightly odd" to me that he unvotes WLC in #57 despite agreeing with omen that his behaviour on page 1 was "strange".

Despite voting for Muertto, DeathSauce is third to join the choir of voices suggesting that death_omen's reasons for voting are suspicious, in #102. (He unvotes Muerrto, but only FoSes, and does not vote, for death_omen).

Questions for DeathSauce:

1)

What are you current thoughts on Khel and vampyrus?

2)

Is it your normal habit to remove any early random votes as soon as you think the game is moving out of "the random stage"?

Hjallti

Hasn't been around since the random stage ended (or at least, hasn't said anything of interest so far). Didn't comment on either of the 'big' issues at the time he left: that is, death_omen's suspicions of WLC or Khel's later accusation of Muerrto/death_omen.

Questions:

1)

What

do

you think of WLC? Was he "jumpy"?

2)

Do you think Khel was right to suggest that Muerrto was feeding death_omen lines?

3)

Assuming you answered either of the above questions, why did you not make your thoughts known at the time?

4)

What are your thoughts on what's happenened in the game over the last week?

Hyphen-ated

Has a grand total of 3 posts in the game so far. One is a random vote, and the other is a clarification of another post. That's ... not a lot of contribution. (Yeah, I know, like I'm one to talk ).

It's slightly curious (to me) that Hypen shows up just after I vote for him for inactivty, and that - when he does so - he just echoes other people's complaints that Muerrto is making a WIFOM argument.

Questions:

1)

You describe Muerrto's argument as "goofy", but you don't tell us what you think of him - do you find him scummy?

2)

Who would you say are your top three suspects right now?

3)

Are you always this quiet?

Khelvaster

So far, I'd say that Khel (along with Muerrto) has been one of the top people responsible for keeping the game moving. This is a good thing. Haven't really agreed with everything he's said though ...

Rather than repeat my views on Khel prior to my #73, I'll just link back to what I said then. The realisation that Khel never responded to my questions then fills me with profound sadness, naturally, but also makes me extra curious as to what his answer would be.

But I like his push on omen after omen's vote for Muerrto - I completely agree with him that strong responses to accusations isn't a scum tell, even if I'm not convinced that suggesting otherwise makes omen scum.

Questions for Khel:

1)

Seriously, if you think that omen said something that was "really scummy", and Muerrto merely gave him a way out, why vote for Muerrto and not omen?

2)

Are you still sticking with an omen/Muerrto scum link, or has death_omen's behaviour made you reconsider the possibility he's connected to Muerrto?

3)

Don't you think it's a little early in the day to try to get somebody to lynch -2?

Malchonn

Seems to have fewer posts than Hypen-ated. That's not right.

Questions:

1)

You say in #60 that both Khel and omen look suspicious. Could you expand on that? Which of the two do you currently think more likely to be scum?

2)

When you said that strangeflea was "talking sense", which of his posts did you have in mind?

Muerrto

Definitely one of the main people keeping the game active right now. Again, check out #73 for my earlier thoughts on him; they haven't really changed much.

But I certainly like his appeals to people to slow down (in terms of voting, not posting), and agree with his suggestion that a short day is only going to help scum by making it hard for us to spot connections later.

Questions:

1)

I'd be interested to see how you rank the people who voted for you in terms of suspicions (obviously you suspect omen most, but I'm not sure how you feel about Khel compared to Flea or Sauce and so on). Mind doing so?

2)

If you had to pick three people right now to 'attack relentlessly for a few pages', who would they be and why?

somestrangeflea

First voted for death_omen in #43, accusing him of "trying to get a real reason to vote someone, when there really isn't one".

Then FOSes Khel in #52, calling his actions "pointless, senseless and quite suspicious".

He also has a bit of sustained interaction with Muerrto about the WIFOM stuff. Not really sure how productive that exchange was, to be honest, but asking for clarification and voting when you don't like what you hear is sound enough.

However, I don't really like his claimed reason of voting for death_omen because he "appears to be the play ATM anyway". Unnecessarily passive, really, and odd, as flea had already voiced suspicions of omen in the past.

Few questions for flea:

1)

You say in your latest post that you 'agree with Khev'. Does this mean you find him less suspicious than you did earlier, or are you still worried by his earlier actions?

2)

Are you voting for omen to get him to defend himself, or because you think he's a good choice for lynching today? (Or both, of course).

3)

I'm puzzled by your claim in #90 that "Khelv dragged me out of the random voting stage". Did you mean omen here?

VampanezeHunter

Seemed to be a lot more active in the thread during the random stage than he is now.

In #49 he suggests that "the most scummy, in my eyes, is Khelvaster". A few posts later he FOSes Khel for the same reasons he gives in that post. And that's really it, as far as contribution goes, except for a couple of posts complaining that the game is slowing down.

Questions:

1)

Are you still as suspicious of Khel as you were in #49? What do you think of his vote on death_omen now?

2)

If you had to speculate, who do you think Khel might be partnered with if he's scum?

3)

Conversely, if Khel is

not

scum, who would your top suspect be?

vampyrusddg

Not a hugely active player right now, but he's contributing a little. Seems to contradict himself a little though: in #85 he says "Khel is catching my eye a bit because he seems to have pulled us out of the random stage far too quickly, but nothing I'd vote him for yet, but definitly IGMEOY".

But then he goes back on this later, in #105, when he says that he "never said it was a bad thing" (to pull out of the random stage).

This is slightly worrying, though he does clarify that he "just always keep my eye on anyone who pulls out of [the random stage] while I'm still having fun". But if I were being paranoid, I'd wonder about the fact that vamp was attacking Khev a bit when others were doing so, and is laughing that off now that people's attention has shifted to omen.

Still, questions.

1)

You voted Malchonn earlier because he wasn't contributing, right? Now that you've unvoted, should we assume you're happier with his level of contribution?

2)

You play on another site with Muerrto, yes? Would you agree with the description of his style of play that he gives in #75?

3)

If death_omen is scum, who do you think his partners might be?

4)

Who's more suspicious to you right now: Muerrto or Khel?

WeyounsLastClone

Another low poster. He's randomly voted, and apologised for having lost computer access, and that's about it.

Perhaps some questions will help him clear up his thoughts:

1)

What do you think of death_omen? Scummy, or not scummy? Would you vote for him? Why?

2)

What do you think of Muerrto? Did you follow his explanations of his comment to omen earlier, or like flea did you find them confusing? Scummy or not? Why?

3)

What do you think of Khelvaster? Do you agree with his suspicions about a Muerrto/omen scum pairing? Why?

...

Ok. Hopefully I'll be able to comment on things more from this point (I've been a bit quieter than I'd have liked so far). I can also try answering any questions people might have for me, too. Nothing huge stands out from the rereads though: and I'm not really happy switching my vote to omen just yet, as I'm not convinced that putting him in danger of a lynch to get a reaction is our best move here (he can defend himself without having lots of votes on him, surely?). Still got my eye on him though, and I'd suggest that Sauce might be worth looking at too as a possible partner (thinking of the fact that Sauce did more to justify omen's suspicions of WLC than omen did himself). And I'm a bit worried about vampryus, too, for the reasons I give above.

But really, I think it's most important at this stage that we get more people talking and discussing. I'd like to hear more from Hjallti, Hyphen, Malchonn and WLC in particular.

[Plessiez]

]3) I'm puzzled by your claim in #90 that "Khelv dragged me out of the random voting stage". Did you mean omen here?

I was making my post in the context of the post I was replying to, rather than the game itself.

Could you clarify this? You replied to a post made by vampryus, who said:

Khel is catching my eye a bit because he seems to have pulled us out of the random stage far too quickly, but nothing I'd vote him for yet, but definitly IGMEOY. Death sauce and SSF have also been jumping on things early

How exactly did this 'context' influence your reply? It was death_omen you voted for (in #43) for voting for a "real" reason instead of a random one, not Khel (so I don't see why you single out Khel as having 'dragged you' out of the random stage) and it wasn't Khel that Vamp accused you of jumping on ...

[Plessiez]

flea:

Wait, what? You're saying that vampryus posted something

you didn't think was true

(namely the claim that Khel, not omen, pulled us out of the random stage), and rather than challenging it you simply echoed him? Why?

1: Because there was a small, yet defined, probability that Muerrto could have been trying to link himself and omen, so that if he got lynched as scum omen would be the next lynch. This is assuming Muerrto is scum (not an assumption I will make atm, considering death omen's recent lack of mental capacities.)

Eh. As I suggested before, I think it rather more likely that omen would be scum and Muerrto town than the opposite. A pro-town player unwittingly doing something (in this case, asking a leading question) that ties them to scum seems far more plausible than scum

drawing attention to themselves

by linking themselves to a pro-town player who had done something "really scummy". Just not worth it for the scum that I can see.

There is no possible way persecuting someone for defending themselves well is pro-town.

Wait, are you saying that you think omen is definitely scum? Or simply that you think his actions were not helpful for the town? Because I'd definitely agree with the latter, but I'm still

far

from convinced as to the former. And more generally, I don't like the fact people seem determined to end today early.

That's

certainly not going to help the town either.

In fact, reading your #104 again... it really doesn't make much sense. If we think omen is scum, we shouldn't just vote for him up to lynch -3 or lynch -2 ... we should simply lynch him. And if we're simply interested in hearing his defence, and haven't decided if he's scum yet, then there's obviously no need to add so many "pressure" votes - it's not as if he's lurking or refusing to defend himself, he just hasn't posted on the thread since the post he's been suspected for.

But anyway, for the record you're saying that you think death_omen was bussing Muerrto when he voted for him, and that you still think your initial theory of an omen/Muerrto connection is correct? You're ... still awfully sure of yourself, in other words.

[Plessiez]

Okay, one post to reply to Muerrto's questions, then a second post to address people's answers to my original questions (otherwise I'd be left with a super-long post nobody would bother to read, rather than the two fairly long posts I naively assume you'll all be poring over ).

First off, bout time someone posted some content. I wanted to ask you earlier but didn't wanna be seen as buddying up. You're the oldest player here by join date alone so good to finally hear from you.

Heh. Actually, my join date is pretty misleading. I signed up and played a couple of newbie games, but then I went back to playing on another site. Only started playing here again in the last couple of months.

1. You didn't like my WIFOM but obviously not enough to vote or even FoS me. Saying people who use WIFOM are scum is in itself WIFOM and therefore pointless. I'm assuming that's why you don't freak when people use it. What is your opinion of me however? What I've gotten so far is that you do have some suspiscions or at least are watching me but that since I'm posting content and helping the game you're not concerned at the moment.

My question is what is your straight opinion of me igoring my content? If I was barely posting and thorwing around votes, would you see how I've acted as suspiscious or would you have the same opinion? You seem to be swayed slightly by my participation and since I've never liked that lurkers=scum I'm just curious.

Hmm. Hard to answer this sort of question - if you were barely posting or throwing around votes, your actions in the game would obviously be different from what they have been, and so naturally I'd have a different opinion of you. But if, say, you'd posted everything you did up to #44 but then gone quiet after Khel started accusing you of 'feeding lines' to death_omen, only popping up to cast a quick vote on omen when that bandwagon seemed to pick up steam ...? Yeah, I probably would suspect you more then. Not massively more (I'm really not sure if you're pro-town or not, though I don't think you've given much reason for me to suspect you).

I definitely have a slight bias towards favouring people who contribute to those who lurk. It's not that I think lurking is inherently a scumtell (there are lots of reasons people might lurk, after all), but I do feel that lurking is an activity that hurts the town. If people are posting and sharing their thoughts, I can try to work out if they're scum based on what they're saying and what they're suggesting we do. It's just easier for me to form opinions on them, really. But if somebody's lurking, I can't really hope to do much but guess at their alignment. So, at this stage of the game especially, I like to see that people get pressured equally, and don't just draw negative attention because they're making themselves heard in the game. After the first couple of days, lurking is less of a problem as I tend to have some sort of opinion on everybody already, though I still prefer to see activity and contribution just to keep the game moving.

2. How 'jumpy' do you think Khev, Omen, and Flea have been so far(and to a lesser extent Sauce)? Is throwing around lots of votes dangerous if they're just 2-3 votes on each person? Even though Khev called for a dangerous level on Omen no one's actually followed through so is their being jumpy a problem or a conversation starter?

Well, 'jumpy' really isn't the word I'd use to describe Khev - 'fixated' might be closer to the mark. I'm a bit surprised by how keen he seems on his Muerrto/omen theory still, to be honest. This sort of tunnel vision can be a problem for the town, if the person suffering from it is wrong in their suspicions. It can also be a pretty good way for scum to appear to be contributing and pro-town without having to actually do much work - just deciding at the start of the day that you'll be going after X and Y as scum is certainly easier than actually pretending that you're genuinely unsure of who the scum might be and are looking around everywhere for clues and scumtells.

So, yeah, I'd say that Khel's behaviour suggests that either...

1) Khel's scum, and thus not actually interested in forming new theories or opinions;

2) Khel's naturally just exceptionally brilliant at mafia, capable of spotting connections between scum as soon as the game begins while we mere mortals can only gaze on in awe;

3) Khel's town, and just gets too easily stuck on theories about scum that may or may not turn out to be true.

My money's on (1) or (3) right now, but Khel's free to sig (2) out of context, if he likes .

Omen and Flea have been jumpier, I'd say. I don't like how ... agreeable Flea seems to get sometimes: agreeing with vamprysus that Khel took the game out of the random stage, then backtracking on that when I suggested that it was omen who actually did that; and then adding a vote to death_omen simply because he 'agreed' with Khel and thought that the tide was turning that way in any event. Again, this sort of passive attitude is a possible way for scum to avoid attracting attention.

And of course, I'm not impressed with the way omen jumped onto your wagon. That certainly is something I'd like to see him explain some more.

It's true that throwing around lots of votes early on isn't dangerous, (as long as we manage to avoid an accidental speed-lynch...), but I'm not convinced it's all that helpful. If you know you're only getting a couple of votes, and that they'll be removed soon, where's the pressure? And it makes going back to look at voting histories rather difficult; if everybody ends up voting for five or six different people today, it'll be tough to spot any patterns later.

3. What's your opinion on lurkers? We seem to have quite a few, barely stepping in for some comment but with no contribution whatsoever. Is this something you'd see as lynch worthy? Does it scream scum to you or is it more a job for the mod to prod people?

Lurking is annoying, I'd say, and unhelpful to the town, but it's not lynch-worthy in and of itself. I'd imagine that scum are

slightly

more likely to lurk than town, but I'm not sure there's any significant correlation.

However, if a half dozen people are posting frequently and I'm getting pro-town vibes from all of them, I'd be happy enough to lynch one of the lurkers (especially if they're the sort of lurker who often ends up getting prodded or asked to contribute more, but always just manages to avoid being replaced).

4. And finally, what is your MO? Everyone's got one. So far it seems very logic oriented, watching how people respond, questioning it, getting them to clarify each line. Good approach and it seemed to get some interesting answers from Flea. The problem is(and I know because I do the same thing) that nervous townies, new players, jumpy people, etc will slip up and look scummy under scrutiny even thought they're not. So when do you back off, and how much weight do you put on what you get out of the people you're questioning?

Yeah, I apparently have a reputation for being a logical player who approaches the game the way you say. Actually, I'd say my natural inclination is to play the game the way you say you do: focusing on a few people and putting lots of pressure on them early. Having seen a fair number of games where better players than me end up getting fixed on the wrong people because of things that happened on day 1, and missing far more scummy behaviour later on as a result, I've been consciously trying to make sure I keep an eye on everybody and don't rush to form opinions too early. I've also been told that I have a bad habit of favouring theories because I think they're 'clever' or because they're the sorts of things I like to think I might do as scum, rather than sticking to what is most probable, so that's something I'll be trying to work on this game.

But yes, getting flustered under pressure is something that seems to happen to everyone, scum or town, so I'd hesistate to form any firm conclusions as a result of that sort of probing. More interesting to focus on the context of what people say, rather than their tone or attitude, I suspect.

4b. As a side to that. Flea seems to come out of his interaction with you worse than he went in(in your eyes it seems). Do you see him as possible scum at this time or just fumbling for answers to your question? Did he misunderstand what you were asking or did he skirt it?

Well, it's certainly true that I'm not entirely happy with Flea's responses: I don't believe agreeing with people in the interest of avoiding arguments is a good pro-town attitude (ignoring things that are not worth arguing over, sure, but actually

accepting

them is a little much). Then again, I like his more recent post quite a bit more, so ... while I certainly see him as

possible

scum, I guess that I wouldn't say I think he's any more likely to be scum than the rest of you at this stage.

[Plessiez]

Okay, as it turns out I only really feel the need to respond to a handful of people's answers right now. In general people who have simply said who they suspect won't get any reply: just wanted to see what you were thinking.

Still, I do have a few responses for some people

death_omen

1.WLC has been lurking reading the topic actively but not commenting at all, he loses access for a few days then comments nothing at all about the game he just simply says sorry

Yes, you've summarised WLC's behaviour quite well here. Now perhaps you can say what you

think

of WLC - would you stick with your original suggestion that he was "jumpy" (and thus, you implied, scummy?) Or have you reconsidered?

You seem to give two

completely

different answers to (2), by the way. Compare:

I expected him to put up a big arguement why he wasn't scum

and thats exactly what he did.

... with:

I was expecting him saying how scummy i looked instead of him defending himself

, which I must say is exactly what he did.

I am puzzled. Please clarify this answer.

You've also not actually responded to the point of my question, that I can see (though to be fair it was only implicit). Why did you tell us your vote was 'temporary' when you cast it? How did doing so help the town, in your view?

DeathSauce

I think Khelvaster is probably town, say 70%, but I disagree with his belief that someone defending their self is not a scumtell. The way someone defends themselves can definitely give you insight into their approach to the game.

Vampy, I have no solid read on him. He has a sort of "jokey" air that I have seen a few times from scum, but he might just be a really happy guy. If I had to put a percentage on him, I'd say 51% scum.

First off, all these percentages seem a little absurd - more attempts at spurious quantification than helpful answers. What does it mean to say there's a 51% chance than somebody is scum? Is it any different to say that there's a 52% chance, or 53%? If you just mean "I'm not sure what to think about vampryus, but if I had to guess I'd probably say scum", or something like that, why not just say so? (Not really pointing this out as scummy behaviour - just a private peeve, really).

Anyway, Khel addresses this a bit later, I see, but I'd suggest you are either misunderstanding or misinterpreting what he's said. Simply defending yourself is certainly not a scumtell. The manner in which you defend yourself can give the town things to work with, of course, but there's no contradiction there at all. (One could also say that posting in the thread isn't scummy, but the things you post might be, or that voting for people isn't scummy, but the reasons you give for doing so might be).

Hypen-ated

2. Muerrto. I don't really have two more [suspects].

... so you don't find omen scummy then? Not at all? Why not?

Oh, and to quickly comment on the latest couple of debates:

Yes, WIFOM arguments are pretty meaningless, and thus unlikely to help the town. But that doesn't automatically mean the people making them are scummy, any more than people are scum for lurking or making any other sort of bad argument. And in Muerrto's case, the WIFOM was originally a fairly minor comment, and only ended up getting blown up into something bigger by flea's requests for clarification; it's not as if Muerrto was really relying on it as a defence.

And Sauce, I think there's a slight contradiction in your latest post. If having two or three votes on you isn't dangerous, as it's very unlikely to lead to a lynch, why are you so sure that voting will get us information? I definitely believe that

discussion

, and not simply voting, is the best way of getting discussion at this stage of the game. A vote history isn't very useful if we can't see why people were casting the votes and how other people felt about them.

[Plessiez]

You guys seem to be trying to lynch me out so bad somestrangeflea and Khelvaster, do you guys even notice the lurkers in this game? Hjallti, Hyphen, Malchonn and WLC. They have contributed so little with such little relevance the town should be keeping a closer eye on them, esspecially WLC.

And BAM! Death Omen delivers the second-to-last scumthrash of the day. I'm just waiting for him to OMGUS me and try and convince you all I am scum. Rather than looking at active players, he suggests we go lurker hunting. Yeah, maybe we would if nobody active had been scummy.

Unless we're

trying

to play badly, we can and should do both: continue to pressure death_omen and other active players who have done things we find scummy

and

work to get the lurkers to contribute. It certainly isn't an all-or-nothing proposition: nobody with the town's interests in mind should propose either focusing exclusively on the lurkers or giving them a free pass.

In particular, I'd like Khel to say what he thinks about the fact Hypen claims to have no feel for death_omen. Does this not strike you as strange?

[Plessiez]

I thought lurking was not playing the game, I am just absent this week

Now that you're back, I'd appreciate answers to the questions I asked you in #107.

[Plessiez]

death_omen: I asked you some questions in #131. I'd appreciate answers.

Who agrees with me that Death Omen is today's lynch, hands-down?

I certainly don't. He's the most suspicious player right now, yes. But to be honest, I find your obsession with him (you've been suggesting he's "really scummy" since at least #63) rather irritating, and certainly not helpful to the town. As soon as we say "death_omen is definitely today's lynch", as you want us to say, we lose all ability to pressure other people and to gain information. If you're calling for players to be replaced, you should want their replacements to be able to speak up

before

we go to night, surely? And if you're truly convinced death_omen is scum, you should be trying to find his partners: and putting pressure on people

today

is going to find any partners faster than waiting until tomorrow to look (with the added bonus that if death_omen is in fact not scum, you might still unearth some real scum today while looking for his non-existent 'partners').

[Plessiez]

death_omen

Again, I would like a response to the questions I asked in #131 . Even if you have nothing to say, a simple "I don't feel like answering those questions" would be better than nothing. As it is, I'm getting a feeling you're not even bothering to read my posts (which is, if nothing else, a crushing blow to my ego).

Furthermore, if you

are

pro-town, giving up and refusing to defend yourself or present any actual case against people beyond "OMG, Khel wants me lynched even though I'm pro-town! He must be scumm!!1!" is not helpful. You have all of four votes on you right now; despite what Khel might say, your lynch is certainly not inevitable. But it's your job to find somebody better to lynch today, whether by explaining your actions better or by pointing to suspicious behaviour and explaining why you think it's scummy.

Khel

:

Muerrto and flea already did a decent job responding to your post #151. To avoid repeating things they said, I'll just focus on one or two of your comments

Since I see Death Omen as definitely being todays lynch, barring a flat-out scumclaim from someone else, the replacement could speak up tomorrow without any problems.

Oh, so you know for sure that the replacement won't be killed tonight? Interesting...

It saves time to lynch Death Omen now, and look for partners tomorrow. That way, if he is town, we can immediately jump on some other leads.

Please explain what these “other leads” are. Since you don't want the day to continue, you must already have some potential leads in mind, yes? So I'd like to know who you'd suggest we look at if death_omen comes up town. A list of two or three 'leads' would be nice, I think.

(Looking at the NK and using

that

alone to get leads is, I shouldn't have to tell you,

pure

WIFOM. The scum get to decide who dies, so any information we get from the NK is information that

scum wanted us to have

. Information we get ourselves -- by discussion, voting, or whatever -- is certainly prefer to 'information' of such dubious origin).

Also ... I'm not sure how much I believe this myself yet (see my comment about wanting to spot 'clever' play by the scum over more likely scumtells in #129), but I feel like pointing out that I'm a bit worried about the possibility of a Khel-omen pairing. Definitely see a few things that could point in that direction:

1) Khel goes after Muerrto, and not death_omen, in #45 ... why?

I first pointed this out in #73, but it's worth a quick recap. In short, Khel states that death_omen has said something “really scummy”. And yet he places his vote not on death_omen, who uttered the “really scummy line”, but on Muerrto, who simply gave him a way out of it (by suggesting it might have been a joke). Leaving aside the fact that I don't feel the line in question

was

particularly scummy, I really don't understand why you'd want to vote for somebody who you suspect of

defending

somebody you think has said something scummy over somebody who

actually said

something you think is really scummy.

(I should note, to be fair, that Khel addresses this in #111. Suffice to say I'm not convinced by his explanaition.)

Of course,

if

Khel is scum and partnered with death_omen, and Muerrto is town, it's certainly in Khel's interest to get Muerrto lynched today, thus 'clearing' his partner omen.

2) Khel jumps on death_omen as soon as he sees #96 ... or does he?

In fact, Khel firsts posted something completely unrelated, in #99, and only after twenty minutes or so did he realise he'd missed death_omen's vote and accuse him because of it. Or so Khel says, anyway. I'd suggest it's also possible that Khel saw the vote, and needed that time to decide whether or not he could safely ignore it. If he thought there was a significant chance that other people would jump on death_omen for that (I'd argue that there was indeed such a chance – it's a extremely bad reason to vote for somebody, and we didn't need Khel to point this out), then he could well have decided that death_omen was doomed whatever he did, and that by being the first on the wagon he'd win himself some credibility for the rest of the game.

I accept this is the weakest part of my theory, of course. I don't know Khel well enough to know if he's the sort of player would abandon a partner like that on day 1 (certainly I know some players who wouldn't hesitate to do so, but then I know a few who'd never even consider it). But I'd suggest it seems to fit with what we've seen of Khel's playstyle in this game – whether he's a pro-town player who jumps on the smallest of comments and sticks to theories he formed early in day 1 despite their unpopularity, or scum who cuts loose a partner to make himself seem more pro-town ... he's clearly that sort of decisive and self-confident player.

3) Khel seems convinced that death_omen is scum ... what does he know that we don't?

This, I think, doesn't need much in the way of clarification. The only way that

anybody

can know on day 1 that anybody else is scum is if they are partners.

4) Khel is determined to end the day without discussion... why?

Discussion, as has been said already, is good for the town. What would happen if we speed-lynched omen today and he came up scum?

Well, we'd have one less scum to worry about, certainly. But we'd have no leads to go on to find his partners (Khel's on record as saying that he'd go after Muerrto because of the 'link' he spotted on page 2, but frankly this seems rather absurd. Day 2 lynches should not be decided on the basis of posts made one the second page of the game). And come day 2, we'd be down one pro-town player. Really, if you take death_omen's lynch as inevitable (and certainly, Khel seems to think it is), this is the

ideal

way for things to go from the point of view of scum.

5) (See above) Khel seems sure that if WLC (or any other lurker) is replaced today, his replacement won't be killed ... why?

If Khel is town, he's just making assumptions without thinking things through properly, which is certainly possible. But if Khel's scum, this could either be a genuine slip – that is, Khel might already know that he'll be killing somebody else, so he knows the replacement will survive the night – or an attempt at misdirection - that is, Khel knows he

will

kill the replacement, to stop us even trying to “analyse the NK” (I don't think there's much benefit in doing so anyway, personally, but clearly Khel feels differently).

6) death_omen is making a big deal of having us go after Khel tomorrow ... why would scum do that?

If omen comes up scum, we certainly won't be lynching Khel tomorrow ... but then, if omen is partnered with Khel, that would be precisely the point.

... well, yeah, as I said, I'm not sure how likely this is yet. By themselves, none of thes points mean very much – it's only in combination that they start to seem suspicious. But I'm definitely not convinced that it

isn't

true, and I think the possibility is something worth bearing in mind in future.

Malchonn:

I did indeed describe Khel's obsession as 'rather irritating' – I've also said why I find it so. Briefly, I feel that his behaviour is hurting the town

whether or not death_omen is scum

. By stifling discussion of anybody but omen, he's either preventing us from having

any

further lead on scum (assuming omen comes up as pro-town), or preventing us from having any leads on omen's partners (assuming omen comes up scum). I really can't see why he wants to do this (though obviously I have a few ideas...).

However, none of that is likely to prevent me from voting for omen today. I'd certainly prefer we discussed things more today, and that the quieter players (or their replacements) were given time to speak up, but barring anybody doing something more scummy than omen's #96 and subsequent behaviour, I think we should probably end the day by lynching him. That's not set in stone though, and I naturally reserve the right to vote for somebody else if something they say when I question them makes me think they're a better prospect for being scum.

[Plessiez]

#147

1) I am not as supicious of Khev now as he has pointed out some very interesting points on people which has opened my eyes!

#189

2) [Khel] has't, in my eyes, really done anything in the towns interest!

Hmm

. Care to explain the sudden change there?

It's understandable than a pro-town player can switch opinions on people quickly on day 1, and in fact you suspected Khel more earlier (which was why I asked the question that prompted your #147. I do find it a little odd that you go from praising Khel for raising "very interesting points on people" to claiming that he hasn't "really done anything in the town's interest".

FoS: VampaneseHunter

.

Oh, and while I'm at it,

unvote

,

FoS: Khelvaster

, (confirm)

Fos: death_omen

.

[Plessiez]

Khel, I'd appreciate your thoughts on the people who are FOSing you right now: in particular Vampaneze, DeathSauce and somestrangeflea.

I'd also be interested to know how you'd rank the three of them as suspects in relation to each other.

[Plessiez]

One quick question

for Plessiez

...

Pless Wrote #200

Khel, I'd appreciate your thoughts on the people who are FOSing you right now: in particular Vampaneze, DeathSauce and somestrangeflea.

Just wondering why you left out Vampddg and Hjalllti, they both FoS'd Khelv recently too. Lurkers/AFKers are people too.

I don't really have any feel for Vampryus or Hjallti yet, so while I wouldn't mind hearing what Khel has to say about them, it would interest me more to hear about the other three, as I've spent a bit more time looking at them.

[Plessiez]

Oh, honestly.

#189

Anyway although

D_O looks scummy

I think Khel is more scummy.

#212

although D_O has made a few horrible posts

I just think that D_O is a townie

Death_Omen looks scummy in #189 but you think he's a townie by #212? Is that right?

as you know

your role

and if you're scum you know my role

This is only true if Muerto is scum, as scum don't know who is town and who is neutral

Um I know you said your english isn't great but read that again. I said YOU know YOUR role. As in HE knows HIS role. How's that make me scum? I think you misread that.

Nah, I think you (and Vampanese, apparently) are misreading Hjallti's post .

He's saying that if death_omen is scum and if you aren't, he couldn't actually know if you're a pro-town role, or if you were a neutral role (SK, Jester, whatever). This is obviously correct, though I don't think it really changes anything you were saying (pro-town or neutral, he'd know you weren't his scumbuddy).

[Plessiez]

Yea just to clear things up...I think that D_O(lol) is town collapsing under immense pressure from Khelv. Which is fair enough, but now I think that Khelv is also town.

I'm afraid this doesn't clear anything up at all.

Please explain why you think either player is town - in particular, I want to see links to posts than you think are signs of pro-townness, rather than just vague mentions of having looked at the game from a neutral point of view.

And if you think both are town, who would you say are you current top three guesses for scum? (If you have any, that is).

[Plessiez]

Hmm. Been neglecting this game a bit, I think. I'll try to post more later, but for now I'll just say that I'm really not impressed with Khel (who seems to be looking for reasons to support his pre-existing theories, rather than looking for new evidence, and reacted extremely badly to Nelly's vote). He's not commented on lots of things that have happened in the game, which is always irritating. I'd still like answers to the questions I asked in #200.

I really feel Vampaneze should be getting more attention as well. He's been caught out changing his story on a number of occasions, and yet most people seem to be ignoring him in favour of death_omen/Khel/Muerrto.

And on that note, I'd really like to see some sort of proper case on Muerrto, because I've not yet seen any reason to vote for him beyond "oh, well, he did a good job defending himself against all his accusers, but there are so many people accusing him he surelly

must

be scum". I'd rank the three of them (in order of scumminess) as death_omen, Khel, Muerrto, with Khel and omen definitely nearer the top than Muerrto. I suppose a Muerrto-omen pairing is

possible

, but I've not seen much in favour of it (and no Khel,

TALKING LIKE THIS

doesn't make your case any more convincing ). I'd say an omen-Khel pairing is more plausible at this point, but I'm not convinced that

any

of the three are scum. omen is the only one of them I'd be happy to see lynched at this point.

Still have some misgivings about DeathSauce, which I'm going to try to think about while I reread the thread.

[Plessiez]

Plessiez: Vampaneze, DeathSauce and somestrangeflea--none of these people look scummy at all to me. Process of elimination dictates that as neither of these are Muerrto, Nellie, or D_O, there is a very, very low chance they are scum.

... o

kay

then.

I'm going to go out on a limb here and say that you decided that they weren't scummy without troubling to actually read anything they said. You looked and saw they weren't Muerrto or Death_Omen, and they weren't being so crass as to actually vote for you, and that was good enough.

I can't comprehend how anybody can say that VH doens't look at all scummy. That just doesn't make sense to me at all.

I'll repeat: you seem to be playing this game to "prove" you were right about Muerrto and Omen being linked. You're ignoring lots of genuinely odd and suspicious behaviour while trying to find all sorts of weak reasons to support the scum pairing you more or less randomly picked on

on page 2

. This isn't helping the town. Don't you get that?

It seems the town has caught up to you Khelvaster, I thought you were scum every since you randomly changed your mind and attacked me from post subject: 100 onwards.

Um. No, let's not revise history, please. He didn't "randomly" go after you - he pointed out that your reasons for voting Muertto were

really really bad

. His vote for you is one of the few things Khel's done that I'd agree was correct.

[Plessiez]

EBWOP:

Hypocrisy is such an

ugly

word, isn't it? However, I read this:

Refusing to fight a vote or

not defending youself is very bad

.

And I remember #168, where you said...

Im done trying to convince you guys

. You are unpersuadable

... and I think ...

hmm

. Is it bad to refuse to defend yourself if you're Khel, but okay to refuse to defend yourself if you're death_omen?

[Plessiez]

Well, if we're ending the day (and it looks as if we are), I'd rather

vote: death_omen

than lynch Khel. (Actually, I'd much rather lynch Vampaneze, but apparently people don't care about the fact he keeps mixing up who he suspects and what he thinks of them or that he contradicts himself from post to post )

I know I promised a reread on DeathSauce, too. That should - hopefully - come later today (would be nice if we didn't lynch anybody before then, too).

[Plessiez]

Finished the reread. As I've said before, I think DeathSauce is a possible partner for death_omen, and should the latter turn up scum I'd like to see some pressure put on him.

Only a few little hints of a partnership right now, but taken together they might mean something:

* I remember pointing this out before, but DeathSauce actually does more to explain death_omen's vote than omen himself ever did (in #57). And the way he does this, saying that he "thought death_omen's reasoning on WLC was shaky at first, but..." seems the sort of way scum might try to help out a partner without being obvious about doing so.

* Before death_omen's ill-justified vote in #96, Sauce was voting for Muerrto. After Khel and myself pointed out how bad this vote was, Sauce unvoted but, slightly oddly, did not vote. The reason I find this a little odd is that Sauce hadn't shown any reluctance to poking people for a reaction by voting for them before this.

* After that post, DeathSauce

does not comment on death_omen

again until #172. And when he does, it's to (subtly) defend him again: he describes omen's reaction to being under pressure as "bizarre, but I've seen it from townies as well as scum".

* And in his next post (#196) DeathSauce again defends omen - giving a few things he finds "troubling" about him, but concluding that "I don't know, I'm probably making a mountain out of a molehill.". And in this post he announces that his top suspect is Khel.

* He ... never mentions omen after that, as far as I can see. Which ... I dunno, it's slightly weird.

To reapt: if omen is scum, I think DeathSauce is a good place to look for a partner. He's not really spent much time looking at him or putting him under any pressure, and he seems to have been subtly defending him on a number of occasions. If omen

isn't

scum, I don't think DeathSauce has done all that much suspicious, however, though he's not done much to make me think of him as pro-town either.

Questions for DeathSauce

:

1) Right now, you have your vote on Muerrto because "the accumulation of oddities is just too much". Would you mind listing the oddities that bother you most of all? This isn't really very clear from your posts.

2) If you had to choose between lynching death_omen and Khel today, which would you pick? Why?

3) Sticking with Khel, could you explain the thought process that led you from considering he was "70% pro-town" (in #115) to having him be your top supsect (see #196) just a few days later?

4) You've not really said what you think about Vampaneze since the random phase ended, though it's clear from #201 that - unlike some people, I fear - you've not been ignoring his posts. Could you tell us what your impression of him is at this point?

Question for Khel

:

1) DeathSauce: what do you think about him? Yes, I know he isn't one of the three people you seem to have convinced yourself is scum, but if you weren't quite so obsessed and actually read his posts, how likely would you say it is that he's scum?

2) If we lynch omen today and he comes up town, who would your top three suspects be?

[Plessiez]

*sigh*

Muerrto, I'm

really

not happy about you voting for somebody you think is town. If you think omen is scummier, why not switch your vote? Either you'll help lynch scum (which is good), or you'll be able to show Khel his theory of an omen-Muerrto-Nelly scum team is wrong (also good, no?). I think that - if town - Khel has the potential to be more useful than omen, really (at least Khel goes after people he thinks are scum, and sometimes has better reasons to think that than "OMG, he voted for me!!").

[Plessiez]

Questions for DeathSauce:

3) Sticking with Khel, could you explain the thought process that led you from considering he was "70% pro-town" (in #115) to having him be your top supsect (see #196) just a few days later?

Actually, I won't explain that. Sorry.

That was the wrong answer.

unvote, vote: DeathSauce

Try again?

[Plessiez]

I don't remember agreeing to answer every question asked of me in this game, and I'm pretty sure it's nowhere in the rules that I have to.

Oh, come on . I'm asking you to explain why you (relatively) quickly switched your suspicions of somebody. This isn't an at all unreasonable question to ask, in my view.

And yet, you aren't doing so. This is, certainly, suspicious. I cannot see why a pro-town player - with honest, pro-town reasons for changing suspects - would refuse to answer such a simple question.

My vote stays on until you talk ... at

least

until you talk.

[Plessiez]

DeathSauce and Malchonn: What do you think about Nellie's loaded questioning of me?

For the record, I don't think either of the questions you refer to are particularly bad, and they aren't questions I'd have any trouble answering myself.

(Holding off doing so for now in case there was any special reason you focused on DeathSauce and Malchonn).

[Plessiez]

Anyway, I'd really like the real cop to come out d2 and investigate D_O n1.

Wait, what? Am I missing something here?

If there's a "real cop" out there, don't they ... already have a pretty good idea that death_omen is scum? Why waste the investigation on him?

The real cop - if there is one - should probably claim tomorrow though, I suppose. I don't see much reason to believe death_omen, but like others I'm not voting for a claimed cop with no counter claim.

I'm going to

vote: VampanezeHunter

. Given my reasons for suspecting him before. Would be interesting to see how he reacts to a little pressure.

[Plessiez]

Also, as Khel is so keen on pointing out contradictions in Muerrto's posts (some of which have more weight than others - I'll get back to that in a minute), I think it's only worth pointing out:

#311

Death_Omen, I am prepared to revote you unless you explain "that little hint of yours" in the following post:

#316

I'm pretty sure it's a really scummy thing to want to lynch an uncounterclaimed cop, and for good reason.

Care to explain?

[Plessiez]

And btw, i investigated Malchonn n1 and it came back with a fail.. Either i have sanity issues or some idiot rb'ed me.

Well ...

that's

plausible .

If omen is scum, today would be a good day for the real cop to claim, I think, if there is one. Think I'll wait to see if that happens before I go back and reread (not sure I want to have to reread twice).

And by the way? I'm really not happy with the way day 1 ended. I mean,

really

not happy. Think I'm going to

FOS: Malchonn, Nelly

for their roles in that little mess. Why either of you thought hammering Khel or putting him at lynch -1 without a chance to role claim or answer any of the outstanding questions people had asked of him, I really don't know.

[Plessiez]

I wished we would have heard from him, after my vote I did say vote was at "6", in hopes we could've heard a little bit more from Khel, but it may have not made a differnce.

If you wanted to hear more from him, why

put

him at lynch -1 in the first place? What possible reason could you have for doing that?

[Plessiez]

Sorry guys; feel like I've been neglecting this game a bit recently. I'll try to catch up and reread properly soon, but just to make sure this isn't one of those irritating "I'm here but I've got nothing to say yet" posts, I'll take a quick look at Muerrto's questions.

I'd like to hear everyone's seperate opinion of the cop RC, the block claim, the hammer, and the hammer explanation. These are the 4 worst points in the game so far IMO and they're being brushed off so I'd like everyone to re-examine them and let me know what they say to you specifically and how much you think is true and how much a lie.

The cop claim ... I didn't and don't really like? Simple probability suggests we're more likely to stumble on scum on day 1 (who'd definitely consider fake claiming to avoid the lynch) than we are to almost lynch an actual cop. So I'd definitely say I'm sceptical of the claim right now, and that the burden is on death_omen to convince us. However, at the same time, it now seems clear we're not going to be getting a counter-claim today; whether that's because omen is the real cop, or because there is no real cop or because the real cop has simply decided not to claim yet we can't know, of course. But as long as omen isn't taking charge of the direction the town goes in (as he'd do if he actually claimed to have results), I'm fine with letting the question of what to do about death_omen wait until tomorrow. I'd rather we made up our mind on him then, however.

The block claim is .... weird. Not totally convinced by vampryus' theory that it points to omen being town, though I suppose I can see the argument. Basically, there seem to be three options:

1) death_omen is scum, and for whatever reason thought claiming to have no result was safer than claiming to have found an innocent result. Now, I can definitely see why scum fake claiming might do this (claiming a pro-town player as innocent would make it more likely we lynched scum, if we believed omen, and claiming a fellow scum as innocent could backfire - obviously lying about a guilty result wouldn't work today). So I definitely consider this a possibility.

2) death_omen is the real cop, and the scum have a roleblocker. Definitely the worst case scenario: makes omen basically useless to us unless we get lucky and manage to lynch the roleblocker. No reason to rule this option out.

3) death_omen is the real cop, but was blocked by a town-aligned roleblocker. Possible, I suppose, but I'd have expected the roleblocker to claim in this case, as he'd now know that omen was in fact telling the truth.

So I guess (1) or (2) are the most likely options. (3) is still possible, but I don't think it's what's happening.

I've already made my feelings on the hammer known, I think. I didn't like it. Either bad town play or scummy - not sure which. Same goes for Nelly's reasoning, I guess. (I'm also unhappy with Malchonn for putting Khel at lynch -1 so soon after the RC in the first place, and I don't think we should forget that, either).

Anyway. More and more detailed thoughts to follow in a day or so, with luck.

[Plessiez]

I don't think d_o is suspicious and one of the main reasons why is that we haven't had a counterclaim, nor have we had anyone heavily building up a case against d_o (i.e. if they were cop but didn't want to claim but knew d_o was lying).

Um. I really don't like the fact that you say this after having said (in #350):

I would still like to solve this without a real cop rc'ing (if there is one that isn't d_o)..I think we can do it. I dunno. I always prefer to get as far as we can without investigative r.c.ing

So ... you first tell any real cop you'd rather they didn't counter omen's claim, but then when nobody does counter you use that to try to support omen's claim? That is, you discourage any hypothetical "real cop" from claiming, then try to use the lack of any such claim to argue no such real cop exists. More than slightly scummy, in my view.

And it would be

very

unwise for the real cop (if omen is lying and there is one) to start heavily building up a case against death_omen without claiming. Either they should claim today, which apparently they aren't going to do, or they should sit quietly until tomorrow, and try to get another investigation result before they counter. (But if they exist, they should definitely counter tomorrow).

Meanwhile, I'm still working on that reread, but it looks like it might not get finished until tomorrow now. Sorry about that.

[Plessiez]

You can make a case against someone without straight claiming. If someone claimed cop now they should be stoned. We already lost DO(if he's a cop), losing another power role either to a block or a kill would be a waste.

Well, first off, if anybody counter-claimed omen, we'd know omen isn't a cop. So losing two power roles obviously isn't an option. (At least ... I don't think that there's any real chance of there being two cops in a mini. If anybody can point to a game where there has been, obviously I'm wrong and you can ignore the rest of this post ).

As for the rest ... maybe this is just a difference in styles (on the site I normally play, any real cop would definitely have counter-claimed by now ... here, that seems not be the case). However.

Suppose that omen is scum and there is a real cop somewhere (not a cop-like role - I agree that such a player shouldn't counter-claim, as both might be telling the truth - but an actual cop). That real cop can either claim today, make a big case against omen today, or make no case and claim tomorrow.

Now .. if he claims today, we end up lynching one or the other. If we lynch right, we get scum, but maybe (and maybe not) the cop is killed tonight (it's unlikely he'd be blocked, since if omen is lying there's no evidence at all for an evil roleblocker, and that seems a pretty rare role in a mini). If we lynch wrong, we're down to lynch or lose tomorrow

but

we know that the other must be scum. We also know who the other cop investigated.

Compare that with what would happen if the real cop just made a case against omen. I feel it highly

unlikely

that any such case would result in omen being lynched - too many people have said they don't suspect him now (indeed, SeraphicMirth has said that simply discussing his suspiciousness is scummy!). But ... okay, maybe, best case, omen gets lynched. More likely, somebody else is lynched. In either case, both you (Muerrto) and SM seem pretty sure that such a case would most likely be made by the real cop. So guess who dies tonight?

Without

any chance to reveal their investigation results? Of course: the real cop.

So...

Claim today

Best case ...

* lynch scum
* real cop might be killed
* we have investigation results

Worst case ...

* real cop lynched
* lynch or lose tomorrow (but we know who to lynch to get scum)

Just make a case

Best case ...

* Lynch scum
* Real cop might be killed

Worst case ...

* Lynch or lose tomorrow (we

don't

know who to lynch to get scum)

I don't see how the latter plan is

any better

for the town than the former. At all.

[Plessiez]

Ugh. I'm

really

sorry about my continued inactivity. I started a (very slow, sadly) reread of the game from day 2, but it's going to be a while before I finish it (especially as I'm trying to keep at least reasonably up to speed with current events in the game as well).

On that note -

please

don't vote for yourself Nelly. If you're town, you're hurting your own team by doing so. If the game is getting to you (and based on both my reread and your latest posts, it seems it is), just try taking a break from it for a bit. Emotional outbursts aren't going to help you.

*sigh*

Anyway. I'll try to get the reread finished properly tomorrow, but I'm not sure I can promise anything. So, a general question to everybody: would you rather I posted thoughts/questions as I went, or waited until I was up to speed? My own preference is to do the latter, but on the other hand I suppose asking questions that might already have been answered is more productive than posting nothing at all .

[Plessiez]

HERE IS YOU STUPID ROLECLAIM....
Vanilla Townie

MY VOTE STILL STANDS....

So ... you're claiming to be voting for somebody you know is townie. Explain how that helps, again?

My read on you at the moment is actually leaning towards frustrated (pro-town) newbie rather than scum (that's based on a read up to post #400 or so), but the angry outbursts are getting to be extremely annoying. If you're really "done dealing with 'certain people'", and if it really upsets you this much that people are suspicious of you, I really have to question why you're playing mafia at all.

Either play the game you signed up to play or ask to be replaced.

[Plessiez]

I am playing this game

Well, no, see. You're not. You're whining about being suspected, acting as if the fact people think you might be scum is a problem on their part rather than yours, being generally rude and abrasive and making the game unpleasant for everybody else involved. You're

in

the game, but you aren't playing it.

Yes, people have the gall to suspect you, to pore over your posts looking for inconsistencies or distortions, to question your motives and to refuse to accept your claim of being townie no matter how often you shout or insult them. That's the game. Deal with it, or don't play. Simple as that.

If you're town, by voting for yourself you are

deliberately sabotaging the chances of your own team

. This is ... irritating. You claim in #401 to be an adult - start acting like one, please.

You think we should be going after the low contributors? Then vote for one of them, at least. Make at least a token effort to hunt scum.