433: Dry, bland, generic mafia: Game Over

[Dasquian]

Vote: kilmenator

Hello!

[Dasquian]

Well, what's (or who's ) the alternative? Shameless and unrepentent bandwagon-jump, for a fourth vote:

Unvote, vote: Southpaw

.

[Dasquian]

Harmless, no, but slow and safe won't advance the game, or give us anything to talk about either. I'd rather shamelessly bandwagon up some action than wait for someone else to.

And he's still a good three votes off a lynch, it's hardly the hammer vote...

[Dasquian]

I'm a relative newbie to this site, not having played many games here recently - what is the "second vote debate" exactly (I know what the seven-player newbie setup is)?

My current feeling is that, actually, with Eletriar getting a little edgy when Southpaw went to two votes, and Dodgy doing similar when he went to four, there might be something in what was essentially a completely random bandwagon. Too early to say with any level of confidence, but worth noting.

[Dasquian]

1. Well, it's only "unsafe" in so far as the mafia could, technically, drop the hammer

if

there are three mafia

and

none of them are already voting

and

they synchronise enough to do it

and

they all think it's worthwhile to get their day 1 lynch in such an obvious fashion. So although technically there's a risk, I don't rate it.

However, you asked if I thought it was harmless, which I don't - 4 votes is something Southpaw would have to respond to, whereas 3 votes might be shrugged off (and, in fact, was being shrugged off). I knew my vote wasn't trivial and would require a slightly more serious response, this was intentional.

2. I didn't think it was insufficient, nor that a fourth vote was "needed". That said, I did think four votes would stoke more discussion than three without being excessively dangerous, mostly due to the reasons in the paragraph above.

[Dasquian]

I'm not liking Dodgy's move to discredit The Fonz's provenance as a mafia player; I have no idea what the level of veterancy of everyone in this game is, but Fonz seems to be making reasoned arguments I can get behind, and calling him out on his inexperience seems to be a cop-out even if it could be backed up.

I have no idea how many sites on the internet run mafia games, but I'm pretty sure the one I've played the bulk of my games on isn't on Dodgy's list of 3 (though I'm certain I've played an order of magnitude fewer games than most scummers) either.


Anyway,

unvote, vote: Dodgy

. It was only mildly questionable when he objected to the L-3 vote, but now he just seems to have become more rattled by Fonz and SS's responses (which have seemed entirely rational and sensible to me) than I'd have expected.

[Dasquian]

Well

that's

rather ominous

Voting you because of scumminess, with usual Day 1 disclaimers of random stabs in the dark.

[Dasquian]

I can empathise with the level of paranoia you're now exhibiting, and I would say that's actually a town-tell if anything, or a conscientious act.

If you're town, calm down, take a step back. The mafia are

not

all going in for the kill, nor would it make much sense for us to do so if you were right about us, unless we were going for one of those "so obvious you have to discount it" mafia plays.

I'm voting you because you're the most scummy

on page 3 of day 1

. There are a lot of players who I've yet to get a read on and I'm not forgetting them!

[Dasquian]

I think Fonz is drawing a small amount of fire here because he's being more prolific than anyone in this game, and responding to every post means he's having about three separate arguments. For the record, I think his declarations of scum-tells are based in solid theory that is applicable to the cases in hand - but just citing Conventional Wisdom without joining enough of the dots diverts the discussion to being about the theory instead of the point being made.

In this case, I pretty much agree with both Fonz and pete d. Explicitly stating you're not scum is so trivial you have to wonder why they bothered, however it probably

was

just incidental as part of Dodgy's rebuff to seeing himself as being branded as mafia.

I do think that Fonz is now putting too much reliance in what he's seen. Particularly:

You'd have to do summat VERY pro-town to change my opinion.

re: Dodgy implied a level of certainty on the Dodgy-wagon I'm not sharing, despite sharing the original reasons for the vote. And so, I have compounded the issue in my very first sentence by continuing the focus on The Fonz


So, I think I'm going to start calling out people who are slipping my radar a bit - it's far too early to be throwing accusations of lurking about, but I think the current discussions are about to go off the boil a bit and it'd be good to hear from the quieter posters.

So, a big shout-out to my homeboys Eletriar, kilmenator, gorckat and thorgot. I know thorgot and kilmenator posted yesterday, but they didn't say much of consequence.

[Dasquian]

Unvote

- not many mafia acts end with said scum

quitting the game

.

FFS though Dodgy, that was a ridiculous overreaction. And you can take your high horse and demands for respect for your help in setting up the site and do something creative with them *annoyed*. Anyway, let's close the book on this one.

Voting forthcoming on one of gorckat and thorgot, probably... whoever posts last, maybe

[Dasquian]

If Dodgy did anything but tell the truth about being the doctor, I would be extremely unimpressed by his metagame shenanigans. Faking a tactical strop is one thing, (ab)using mechanisms external to the game to win is seriously not cool; I am going to assume he wouldn't do that.

thorgot; do you think we should pressure The Fonz now? If not, what are your assorted thoughts on what's happened so far?

[Dasquian]

I agree that the pressure on gorckat doesn't mean much if he isn't here. I'd rather focus on the ones who are here but not adding anything useful.

Just so it didn't get missed in last page's Drama, thorgot - you seem to imply that we should be looking at pressuring The Fonz now, is that correct, and if so, why? Could you share your thoughts on how the game has gone so far?

[Dasquian]

Vote: thorgot

I've posted very clear direct questions to him (109, 129), and he's flat-out ignored them (138). Moreover, what he has posted all game has been of very little substance and I submit that he's lurking like a good'un.

In response to Sweenytodd; I was just noting that an entirely arbitrary bandwagon on Southpaw drew early defensiveness from both Eletriar, then Dodgy. It stuck out as me as worthy of note, so I noted it (as I said at the time: "Too early to say with any level of confidence, but worth noting"). I certainly wouldn't act on it as a link unless one of those guys showed up as scum.

[Dasquian]

OK, next question: who do you find suspicious, and why? A lot's happened, and you haven't said much (and still aren't).

[Dasquian]

I'm not sure this one is worth pushing. Dodgy claimed doc way earlier than he should've done if he were the doc, but he might have been scum doing something wacky, or a non-doc townie doing something wacky. Given the confusion surrounding the whole event, it's very possible that the mafia might make a bad call on him tonight.

If that's the case, we probably don't stand to benefit by trying to dissect the claim-and-retraction unless we think Dodgy/CES could be scum. Currently I'm leaning towards townie who lost the thread.

I'm happy with my vote on thorgot - it seemed a somewhat "minimum effort" contribution with a hint of OMGUS.

[Dasquian]

Because if the real doc understands what you're doing and you don't get lynched first, you can draw mafia fire and buy the townie power roles more time.

I don't think it's a great tactic, but what matters is what Dodgy thought. And as I say, I don't think it's in our interests discussing unless there's a serious motion to lynch CES.

[Dasquian]

Has CES actually lied, though? Or has he simply retracted Dodgy's claim which was made at a point where his motives as a

player

, let alone his role in the game, are dubious?

I agree that if CES is now explicitly claiming not-doc, then either he or Dodgy must have lied and that that needs to be talked about.

[Dasquian]

I think not, for the reasons above. I also don't think CES has lied - I read it as retracting the claim without denying or confirming it.

[Dasquian]

Or: CES replaces into a doctor role whose predecessor outed himself in the middle of a hissy-fit. The best thing for the town is for the doctor

not

to be outed, and, fortunately, Dodgy was being erratic enough for this to be believable - a quiet retraction of the claim leaves a question mark over the original claim.

If Dodgy lied, there's no guarantee he did so because he was anti-town - at that point, he seemed more anti-

Fonz

than anything, and generally annoyed at the world in general. Who knows why he might claim a power role - he was claiming a

lot

of stuff, I reckon he would've claimed to have invented electricity given another page or two. If Dodgy told the truth, however, there are valid pro-town reasons for CES to go back on Dodgy's word and turn the cricumstances of Dodgy's replacement to his, and the town's, advantage.

LynchAllLiars is a good rule of thumb, but it doesn't mean that townies can't manage the truth in beneficial ways. I agree that this does little for CES' credibility, though.

You can correctly assume from the above that I thought Dodgy was genuine when he claimed doc and CES was doing damage control. The fact I could very well be wrong is why I don't want to pry; let's make the mafia make that call, we can always come back to him tomorrow if he is still around.

Today, I reckon we're much better off looking at the lurkers. thorgot tops my list, but I'm also getting slightly scummy vibes from kilmenator and, less so in the last page, Eletriar. We will also need to properly consider gorckat at some point, depending on whether he becomes replaced or reappears, and when.

[Dasquian]

Hmm. I am going to have to

FOS: The Fonz

simply because I don't think he's done good town play re: CES. That said, I think there is a very good chance he

thinks

he has been doing good town play, and overall I would not say I get a major scummy vibe from him - if he is mafia, he's certainly going for lynch kill with no regards for subtlety (usual WIFOM disclaimers).

Because my gut tells me Fonzy is an aggressive townie, mild FOS on the people who voted him. I think he's wrong, not evil, but it's a great excuse to bandwagon him.

And I still want to hear more from thorgot Essentially, my belief on D1 is that with a veritable smorgasbord of potential lynchees, we should pick the ones who don't post as much over the ones who make themselves a target, unless we have some good degree of certainty. It gives us a stronger end-game situation and it's sound in the metagame too.

[Dasquian]

Untrue. If he's town, saving his own skin should take a back seat to giving the town accurate information, so getting lynched ought to be preferable to surviving by lying.

But, he hasn't lied, by your own admission he's not claiming anything. Your original stance was pursuing a contradiction between Dodgy and CES, but you seem to have backed down from that?

You haven't demonstrated that it's in the town's interests for him to claim at this point; sure, it's been a talking point, but we don't benefit from him claiming.

- If he's scum, he'll claim doctor anyway and we (presumably) won't lynch him.
- If he is the doctor, the mafia probably knew that as soon as Dodgy claimed.
- If he's not the doctor, the mafia probably assumed he was the doctor as soon as Dodgy claimed.

Why does it help

the town

for CES to clarify which? The only benefit I can see to getting a definite answer is for the scum, who know whether or not to target him, and if he

isn't

the doctor, this discussion is putting stress on the real doctor, once again, making things easier for the scum.

Tomorrow, he'll either be dead and we'll be glad we didn't waste a lynch on him, or he'll be alive and we will be in no different a situation to if CES had not retracted the claim - as soon as anyone claims doctor, the mafia have the opportunity for WIFOM shenanigans, the claim retraction makes no odds to that.


gorckat - good to have you back, I'm happy to accept lack of access as an excuse if you leap headfirst into the discussion

[Dasquian]

I'm not opposing you here to create discussion: I'm opposing you because what you're suggesting is bad for the town.

Ditto

You are asserting that it's good for us to know what Dodgy/CES is, because confusion is bad. Well, confusion for us is confusion for the mafia too. Obviously mafia have the edge on the "mafia" and "not-mafia" front, but when it comes to confusion between "doc" and "not-doc", that's the best confusion we can hope to maintain.

Currently he's a good candidate for being the doctor. He may not be the doctor. This gives the mafia chance to screw up tonight. If CES claims, it will spell out, in nice big letters, what the mafia should do. It will not actually assist the town in any real sense apart from set our curious minds at rest. Answer me this:

- What will you/should we do if he claims doctor?
- What will you/should we do if he claims another power-role?
- What will you/should we do if he claims plain townie?

Now, I'm guessing for at least one of the latter two, you would push for a lynch on the "LynchAllLiars" mantra. If he's town, and tells the truth, this will be a mistake. If he's mafia, why would he claim anything but doctor? So we either end up confirming the doctor for the mafia, or confirming another role for the mafia and considering lynching them, or getting a false doctor claim we wouldn't act on anyway.

[Dasquian]

Right, so you want to:

1. Out the doctor;
2. Out another power-role and have the doctor's night action be spoken for; or
3. Lynch a townie.

This is

not

a great plan.

[Dasquian]

Mod edit:

Southpaw: 1 (thorgot)
The fonz: 3 (CES, string sweenytod.)
thorgot: 1 (dasq)
Sweenytod: 1(thefonz)

For the hudredth bloody time, Dodgy has already outed himself if Doc!

Ordinarily, I would agree. Dodgy is a special case though, since his motives

as a player at that point

are in question. This, with CES' retraction, has put what could have been a doc claim back into question (I know you agree with me on this, because you are questioning it!).

I agree that WIFOM with Dodgy tomorrow is nasty. However, we're already in for that if the mafia so choose it - they simply have to not kill him. What this boils down to is:

a) You think it's better to not risk complicating tomorrow's potential WIFOM with the additional factor of the mafia's confusion.
b) I think it's better to confuse the mafia and potentially give the doctor another day, or even negate a night-kill.

They're both valid stances; however I feel very strongly that (b) is a lot better for the town than (a). CES can be investigated if necessary, another doc can counter-claim later if necessary, and so the WIFOM can be mitigated and doesn't guarantee failure. By that time, we'll also have some dead players, and any dead scum might help clear things up too.

To answer your questions:

a) A pro-town player who is not CES dies tonight -> depends who it is. If it's the doctor, vote CES If not, then yes, we should talk about it; I refuse to make any declarations of exactly how I'd handle it because I don't know until it happens, and it'd give the mafia an angle to direct me.
b) No one at all dies tonight. -> I'd probably feel vindicated. I doubt the mafia would skip their kill, so the lack of kill means either CES isn't the doc but the doc protected him, or CES is the doc but the mafia thought he wasn't and killed who CES protected. Neither of these things will happen if the mafia know if CES is the doc or not, though.

[Dasquian]

I don't like this, but I can't quite put my finger on why.

You know what? Neither do I. It's supposed to have been a trivial bit of flippancy, but I was wrong to assume that dead doctor == scum Dodgy/CES. As I've been saying, Dodgy

could

have been pro-town and lied about being the doctor. So I retract that. However, I would not like to be in CES' shoes tomorrow if someone else dies overnight and is the doctor.

To try to make some headway here- how would you feel about an agreement to push CES into claiming first thing in the morning, provided he survives the night?

I don't want to make any deals based on information we haven't got. By tomorrow, we will have other stuff to go on. Secondly, I don't want to tell the mafia exactly what happens if they do or don't kill CES. That said, it sounds like a reasonable plan.

I don't think I have much more to add on this one - The Fonz and I simply disagree, and I don't think him much scummier for it. Unless there's a move to press CES from several other people, I move that we find a different target. thorgot's my current favourite.

[Dasquian]

I really don't know how much of Dodgy's response to the (fairly minimal) pressure we can actually use. He was clearly overreacting and, as I've touched on already with the claim but extending to everything he said, he could well have been coming from an angle that was neither pro- nor anti-town - just irrational.

As such I'm inclined to base very little on his later posts, however my overall impression is of a townie bowing out rather than a scum doing so. This is mostly because I find the concept of qutting the game as a scum tactic abhorrent as it is nonsensical within the context of the game, and so that's a line I hope not very many people would cross.

[Dasquian]

Sounds fair.

Town (in no particular order):

The Fonz - with the exception of the last couple of pages, nearly everything he's posted I've gotten a good vibe from. Even the last couple of pages, I can see where he's coming from.
Dodgy/CES - As described above.

Lots of people occupy the mid-ground where I get a gut feeling of town, but with no great certainty - superstring, Southpaw, dom:inc, gorckat, pete d.

Suspect (in no particular order):

thorgot - He doesn't feel scummy, because he's lurking far too much to do anything scummy. Honestly, this is minimal effort right here.
Sweenytodd - Odd vibes. Early on he seemed to eager to point the finger at me and Fonz for bandwagonning Dodgy, recently he seemed eager to point the finger at Fonz for trying to get a role-claim. Seemed a little "obvious", but slightly OMGUS-by-proxy on my part since I get town vibes from the Fonz.
Eletriar - Slightly too non-committal about everything for my liking.
kilmenator - A few posts earlier on caught my eye for being wordy without actually putting down a firm opinion.

[Dasquian]

Still here, nothing much to add - I'm happy with my vote on thorgot to encourage a good post when he gets his issues sorted out, for the time being.

[Dasquian]

This game really seems to have slowed down (and yes, I know my last post was on tuesday). Hopefully various prods will rectify that, but I think the CES decision has really bucked the flow - not that it wasn't important and useful - so we need to get our act together and pressure someone.

I'm happy to move over to SweenyTodd or kilmenator's bandwagons to move the game forward if necessary. However, I'd still like to focus on thorgot and extract a role-claim since if we don't, I think he'll just slip back under the waves. His last post was much much better, but I want to see more like it

If anyone else is around and has nothing else to add, why not post a list of thoughts like SweenyTodd and I did on the last page? That would certainly be useful now and to look back on later.

[Dasquian]

Typo:

Hopefully various prods will rectify that, but I think the CES

discussion

has really bucked the flow

[Dasquian]

Er, typo. It doesn't even make sense the other way.

So you took the time to comment on a typo... care to share your suspicions instead?

[Dasquian]

I agree that it is fairly obvious that pete d was using "town" to mean the membership of the game (seeing as we are a town with bad seeds in it) rather than just the pro-town aspects of it. I doubt this was a calculated move by dom:inc, so I'm tempted to just ignore it for now.

Why do you want me to role-claim, Dasquian? Don't you think it is slightly scummy to be fishing around for a claim?

Because in the course of this game, you've made about one decent attempt at sharing your suspicions and thoughts, and even that was under pressure from me for your short, infrequent, mostly contentless visits.

"Fishing around for a claim" can be scummy in the right circumstances, but the town will eventually need to push someone, probably a couple of people, to a claim before lynching someone. I think it is scummier to avoid getting your toes wet, personally.

Your last post just makes me happier with my suspicions - a half-hearted attempt to put suspicion on your voter with undercurrents of "why must you persecute me so".

[Dasquian]

I agree - but I was trying to draw a distinction between thorgot's accusation of "fishing for a claim" (as in, not pressuring someone but trying to get them to volunteer information), and straight-up bandwagonning someone. I think he's scummy and I think he will post as little as he can get away with unless he's right in the spotlight. I want him to claim because that's an inevitable point in his bandwagon when I can reassess my suspicions and either continue to push for a lynch or back down.

As I say, the town will need to lynch someone. Before they do, that person will almost certainly have claimed. That person may well not be the first person pushed to a claim. The fewer bandwagons the better, but that doesn't mean we just sit on our thumbs afraid to push people for claims. The flipside is that we don't want to force a claim from everyone and get a de facto mass-claim.

[Dasquian]

And by "wanting him to claim", I mean, I want the bandwagon against him to be large enough to demand a claim - not for him to just claim on my vote alone. Sorry, this is an important point I may not have been clear enough on.

[Dasquian]

Fair point; it's only now I realise thorgot might have done what Dodgy did and claim under minimal pressure. That wasn't my intention at all, but it's said and done now.

Mentioning claiming was really just a statement of intent to see thorgot become the leading bandwagon. I think he's a much better choice than the now-replaced Sweenytodd and the until-recently active-poster Kilmenator. It does seem that this game is suffering with inertia, hence my repeating myself a fair bit

[Dasquian]

Everything The Fonz just said makes sense. Particularly the bit about Southpaw *laments another absentee*

Jury's still out on inHimshallibe.

[Dasquian]

Technically, it should be pete d since Sweenytodd is now inHimshallibe ;p However, in a game going about as turgid as a milk left out on a summer's day, I'm all for giving anyone who posts even semi-regularly a free pass.

So yes, please, more votes on thorgot

[Dasquian]

Unvote

. I wanted to know why thorgot was posting so little, and now I guess I'll never know. But that's not anything his replacement can help with, so no reason to keep the vote there.

FOS: CES for doing a contentless vote - even though I encouraged it, I think all votes deserve some kind of explanation.
FOS: inHimshallibe for two things in his last post - conceding suspicion of The Fonz straight after Off the Mark staked his claim in the "aggressive townie" camp (seems like scummy back-peddling), and trying to hustle us towards a final lynch with "I think this Day has ran its course."

Vote: inHimshallibe

actually, though I want to hear what the replacements have to say.

[Dasquian]

Nanook - what in Pie's post elicited your somewhat defensive reply?

[Dasquian]

Jeeze, I posted last friday and didn't have access over the weekend, so sue me for not posting yesterday

I'll admit the large number of replacements have thrown me for six a little - what with the weird start to the game, and the lull while a number of people vanished and got replaced, it almost feels like I'm playing a different game.

I too am a bit confused as to where the Fonz went. He was one of the best contributors and I got a good town reading from him so I'm really hoping he reappears. gorckat recently has also been giving me a town vibe, and Off the Mark has done nothing I would carry over my suspicion of thorgot onto - I am inclined to think that, whatever his alignment, thorgot was simply very detached from the game.

CES really, really needs to get more involved in the game. As Pie pointed out, it makes more sense for him to lie low as scum than town, and in any case, being quiet isn't helpful. That said, I

still

don't think we should press him today and so I was suspicious of Nanook for reopening that debate, and Pie and IH for eagerly following it with a vote. Perhaps this is something the replacements are seeing for the first time as a good, fresh case, but in my view of things, it's been debated and is best left alone for today at least.

It feels like I need to hear more from pete d and superstring, who are dropping off my radar.

Seeing as kilmenator is already at lynch -2, I won't move my vote there but as someone I had vague scum-feelings from early that I never could quite place, and a bunch of people I have town vibes voting for her, I'm happy to see pressure there. She definitely needs to reappear or be replaced, but in either case I think she should acknowledge the fact she

is

two away from a lynch with at least my vote being held off ready to make it lynch -1, and defend herself accordingly.

[Dasquian]

Can only agree with Off the Mark here. It might not have been the world's best scumtrap, but it was certainly presented and acted upon as being one.

[Dasquian]

@InHim: Please put in order of most-least likely to be scum and why:

Me
Pete
OTM
Kilmenator

Eh, maybe if I feel it's justified.

Oh, come

on

. It's nearly always helpful to share suspicions and I can't see why, as a townie, you wouldn't be able and willing to do this. You don't even have to be voting the person you think most likely to be scum, since there are other considerations in placing your vote (how likely you are to get support, how close they are to a lynch, whether there is a particular angle of inquiry that needs pressing, etc).

If this is the case against me, you basically just called CES scum, because I am distancing from him... and you think I am scum... that doesnt make much sense at all...

This is bad logic, and worse, bad logic attributing intent to pete d.

There are reasons for scum distancing themselves from townie lynches too - the most obvious being to keep the pressure on but not be held culpable when the dust settles. And even if he

was

saying you were both scum, you are wrong to say it makes no sense - by keeping yourself distanced, you keep yourself flexible to backpeddle out of the bandwagon without being too obvious about it, if circumstances change.

[Dasquian]

That's missing the point. We're all aware (I hope) of what Dodgy said and what CES hasn't. The point is that CES could claim afresh, and either contradict or confirm Dodgy's claim, or not, and that's something I think is much better left til tomorrow, WIFOM risks included.

I'd also like to say that although I strongly disagree with Kilmenator on this one, and think it somewhat suspicious of her to continue to try to get CES to claim, I haven't been getting continued scummy vibes from her over the last two pages and no longer particularly want to pressure her over anyone else.

[Dasquian]

Wrong. The goal to win is to make things simpler, which is most commonly making it more straightforward.

By your own implication ("commonly"), it sometimes is not. IMO, this is one of those times where clearing up confusion is not in the town's interests.

Your logic leads us to conclude that we should always mass-claim Day 1, because then the town would be more informed! Is this what you believe to be good town play?

You're saying that the mafia hold all the cards and that townies claiming information cannot benefit them and will benefit us. Neither of these are safe assumptions, and in this particular case I would strongly challenge both.

FOS: IH

The Fonz's consistency is why I've got you listed on the bottom, even if I think you're being consistent scum.

Huh? So you think The Fonz is consistent scum and you have him ranked as your fourth most likely suspect? How does

that

make sense?

I really did not like inHim's last post. He's once again trying to pair two people as being scum, and although I appreciate the value in looking for scum pairs, this time he's picked one person I get strong town vibes off of and another who is seeming less scummy with every post.

[Dasquian]

Bwah. I am finding it very hard to reply without reopening the whole debate over again, which can only lend itself to repetition. I still hold that neither of those assumptions are true in this case, and thus that CES claiming

today

helps the mafia.

To reply to the point in question:

That's not what his logic suggests at all. He already said you should withhold information about your role.

He did, but words are cheap; he's still trying to use his "don't withhold information" stance to extract a role-claim.

[Dasquian]

Yep, herein lies the problem. I can't

not

act on that suspicion, but I have accept if people disagree with me on the CES-debate, they may not put any weight on anything I build on it with.

That said, I think IH's responses to OTM's 364 stand on their own merits as some dodgy logic worthy of note.

[Dasquian]

By "that logic", do you mean IH's or mine?

[Dasquian]

Go go action google: http://www.nizkor.org/features/fallacies/

Otherwise just checking in, I have nothing much to add at this point since other people have said it, but I will ask/re-emphasise: inHim, you think OtM replaced into the game as scum and encouraged a bandwagon on scum-buddy Kilmenator as a first move - this seems to be unnecessary and quite dangerous as a scum tactic, why do you think he did it?

[Dasquian]

CES definitely needs to post more / at all. He's posting in other forums but not here. What gives?

[Dasquian]

I am not moving my vote unless inHim claims, and even then, perhaps not. Fact is that inHim got to -1 votes without a claim, and if it seems possible that he might get lynched (it should), he should be claiming. The only circumstances under which he shouldn't claim are:

a) If he genuinely thinks he can diffuse the bandwagon without claiming, instead of tipping it over the edge.
b) If it's worse for the town for him to claim than it is for him to get lynched (and then, presumably, reveal his role as well as losing it). This is very unusual but I guess can happen, with the right setup.

Now, I think he's playing off of (a). The problem is, if anyone could pull this one off by citing the risks of outing town roles then actually everyone could and everyone would and guess what - everyone will refuse to claim Day 1. Magnifico! So there has to be something of a special reason for thinking you can do this - I wouldn't accept anything less than a compelling case that no one would or should put the last vote on. eg, if he can prove that only 6 people will ever vote him, he doesn't need to claim, and he's off the hook (pretty much where CES is). Or, if he can prove that some other issue needs addressing before the hammer vote will be dropped (eg, a compelling case to his innocence), then we should resolve that first.

- I do not think that of his non-voters, none of them will consider voting for him. Thus he should believe a hammer vote might be forthcoming and indeed encouraged before the bandwagon is diffused.
- I do not think there is enough public support to force a CES claim today (we've been through this already), so I think this is a dead-end.
- I don't see any other compelling issues/bandwagons that we should follow up.

As it stands I think inHim is our best lynch today, and I think his gambit smacks of desperation of someone who has no good answers to his bandwagon. Hopefully that's a

scum

with no good answers, but either way, this feels like a smokescreen that's not helpful. Ultimately, if he's town, his sole job now is to not get lynched. If that requires a claim, so be it. If he can do it another way, even better - but unless we all get bored and do something else in the face of uncooperative play (mmm, imagine

that

metagame), his current strategy just isn't going to work.

[Dasquian]

Some bullet-point thoughts:

- MBL's explanation makes sense. It's what I'd have said replacing into the role, which doesn't necessarily make it pro-town, but I do think is logically pretty sound.
- Nanook seems far, far too keen to not let this one go. In particular, I do not like his use of labelling any attempt at justifying play as scummy wifom. At some level, everything is wifom, it's just that some are easier to judge than others.
- I think OtM was right to notice a potential "town but not doc" claim, but that needs some clarification. I'm not sure what I make of it if that is what MBL said, but I'm not sure it was so I'll hold off on that one for now.

I still think the right thing to do is to let Dodgy/CES/MBL see the night through and redress the issue from there. It's unfortunate that CES' complete lurking has basically forced him back into the spotlight, but now we have an active player I don't think much has changed. However, the numbers may well now be different enough now to reopen the issue - but I won't be one of the ones pressuring him today.

I do not want us to forget...

I'm saying that they shouldn't, and if you're attacks on me are so flimsy that the hint of a claim will knock them over, I've got a problem with it.

Nope. I just think you're the most scummy today, and would be happy to lynch you. However it's stupid to lynch someone without hearing out who they are and what they know. It may not save you, but there's no reason not to cooperate (although it looks like you may have a temporary pardon while the focus shifts to MBL). if you

are

town, squirming in the face of a lynch mob wanting a claim doesn't help your case.

[Dasquian]

OK, back from an unexpected lack of internets.

I'm finding this page harder and harder to read because of the point-by-point analysis that's going on, however here are some things that stuck out:

Deadline - we have one. Like The Fonz, I have a number of people I just wouldn't lynch today under any circumstances. MBL is one of them, The Fonz is another. I haven't really thought about the list beyond that, but, eh.

MBL vs Pie - pie's tenacity is admirable but a waste of time. The numbers aren't there, he's not going to get lynched or forced to claim, move on, we have a deadline.

MBL vs Fonz - again, if MBL isn't going to get lynched, do we need to spend our time rehashing this? It'd be easy for me to now jump in with my Opinions again, but you know what they are and where the discussion would go (nowhere).

inHim - I

still

don't like the fact he hasn't claimed. I like the fact he appears to be getting away with it even less. If he's town, and he gets away with not having to claim, more power to him. If he's

scum

, and he gets away with not having to claim, shame on us.

What worries me about inHim is that it is a bandwagon that has gone to -1 under a deadline, and it feels like we've simply been distracted away from it. Really, inHim should be the talking point and we should either lynch him for not claiming, lynch him for a crap claim, or accept a claim and move on. In addition, I don't see a good alternative lynch at this point - OtM said some odd things recently but for the most part stood out as making good logical contributions. Kilmenator or superstring I could be persuaded to, but the point stands - why are we backing off of inHim?

[Dasquian]

True, but they're logical contributions that I agreed with Yes, that's a form of reverse-OMGUS, which I'm well aware of, but it still means I don't see him as particularly scummy right now when he's mostly saying sensible stuff I agree with.

At what point will you consider claiming? If we don't lynch you, we will still need time to properly pressure someone else, so dragging it out longer than necessary would be anti-town.

[Dasquian]

Any debate with MBL is, obviously, for the benefit of the observers - I'm not going to convince MBL that he's scum. If observers (read: you) are just going to ignore it all, frankly, you're the one wasting our time.

But, we've

had

that debate. We've had it several times over many, many pages, and it's become clear that there is insufficient support to get a claim out of him today. You are wasting my time and everyone else's by attempting to convince me to join a bandwagon I've already written off today.

I really don't want to claim at all Today. I haven't thought about claiming in later Days. If this happens again Tomorrow, I'll probably claim so the Town can just get this issue out of their way; I'm sticking with my mission for Today, at least.

No one wants to claim until they're ready, that's a given. Unfortunately you still have 5/7 votes, we still have a deadline, and we're still short of a reason

not

to lynch you. Yeah, it sucks for you, and maybe retrospectively I'll rue the decision to press you, but you've got to understand it's not good enough for me to back off.

[Dasquian]

OK, I see a few possibilities here:

1) You're a unremarkable pro-town role who is for some reason refusing to cooperate. This would just be poor play.
2) You can't claim for a pro-town reason.
3) You won't claim for a pro-town reason (it's even worse than getting lynched for not claiming).
4) You can't claim for a non-pro-town reason (you're a survivor, or some weird killer role).
5) You're scum hoping to confuse us and avoid a lynch by doing something that rarely makes sense.

Now, I don't know your playstyle very well but I am fairly happy discounting (1). (4) and (5) obviously mean we should hold the course and lynch you. So the question I have is whether you are in possession of an unusual role that means that you're pro-town and this is actually good pro-town play. You're playing it as though you are, but it just always come back to being more likely that this is your agenda as (5).

inHim, is there

any

way in which you can help us out here without claiming? If not, sorry, but I have to press for the lynch.

[Dasquian]

and if somehow someone else does something very scummy between now and the deadline and he ends up not getting lynched

Do you think this will happen - honestly? I'm not going to say it couldn't, but realistically, I think that seems somewhat unlikely at this point.

Can someone explain deadline rules to me please, or point me towards where they are?

So it makes sense for him to not claim as townie, and also as doc. So by not claiming, he leaves the scum in the dark as to whether he's powerrole.

Only if he doesn't get lynched - which is your core assumption, that he might yet get out of it. Everyone knows who he is if he does get lynched, unless he's something beyond a plain townie or doc anyway.

The antitown reasons you've suggested amount, basically, to 'too townie.'

You're going to have to explain this for me. I thought he was scummy so I voted him. Other people agreed with him and he got to lynch -1. Then he's refusing to claim, and dragging it out limiting our options as the deadline draws closer. How is this "too townie"?

I'm entertaining the possibility that I'm wrong (shocking, eh?) and he's pro-town with a good reason for being tight-lipped, but I don't see how I can act on it as it seems much less likely than the obvious conclusion: he's scum (or otherwise anti-town) and he's bluffing.

Here's another question: who

should

claim at lynch -1? Your logic suggests that everyone should hold on to that chance of surviving without a claim and fight to the bitter end. If you ask me, that sounds like a great way to get shit Day 1's where Every. Single. Person. refuses to play ball because, hey, they might get away without getting lynched, and then the town has to make blind lynches if they want a lynch at all.

[Dasquian]

Oh, and to clarify as I think The Fonz misunderstood, by "unremarkable pro-town role", I don't mean vanilla townie. I mean any of the core roles that don't confer any particular reason to withhold a claim. Townie, cop, doc, vig, blocker, etc.

An example for (2) would be a role with a posting restriction preventing claiming.
An example for (3) would be a role where getting lynched unlocks a power-role ability, or something equally contrived.

[Dasquian]

OK, I hadn't realised inHim's refusal to claim Day 1 was a meta tactic. I agree that means his refusal to claim alone is not a tell.

That said, it's also not helpful to the town so why should we tolerate it? Anti-town play is anti-town play. I wouldn't expect anyone to put up with me if I had a meta play of sticking a fat, immoveable OMGUS vote on the first person to look my way, and if we're going meta, I don't think the game would be fun if everyone employed inHim's tactic, because...

Well, no, the town doesn't have to make blind lynches. You lynch the scummiest person, same as you always would.

So what if the scummiest person is the cop, but is refusing to claim even though it's clear they're going down? Surely if they can claim and redirect the mob, they should - they have a responsiblity to as a town power-role; as ANY town role!

This meta just doesn't work - getting a claim out of someone is a great way to evaluate whether you want to continue to risk lynching someone, and gives the town more to go on in retrospect because scum are forced to react to all the true claims and be held accountable for whether they chicken out or seem over-eager when someone claims super-cop-doc, etc, or how keen they are to buy their since-deceased scum-buddy's poor fake claim.

[Dasquian]

I want inHim to claim so that if he claims something important, we have time to consider finding another lynch. At this point it's pretty academic, though. I don't think there's enough time left.

Also your 'getting a claim out of someone is a great way to blah blah blah...' is just untrue, and no reason at all to claim.

You're misrepresenting me here. I do not think that an individual should claim to directly flush out scum. I think that, as a site, the town benefits from forcing claims at lynch -1 and discussing them while the scum benefits from not opening up that avenue of discussion.

One very obvious application of this: if everyone claims, a mafia forced to claim on Day 1 will have to either claim VT or a fake power-role, which drastically increases the chances of them getting caught out there and then, or later in the game.

[Dasquian]

Not exactly a meta: I'm asserting that inHim's policy is poor town play because if everyone adopted it the town would make less-informed lynches with less useful discussion to look back on.

I can definitely see instances when a pro-town player shouldn't claim; however they are definitely not very numerous if getting lynched looks to be an otherwise certainty. You didn't answer my earlier question - what do you think the likelihood of us not lynching inHim at this point is?

[Dasquian]

We'll be worse off because we'll have nobody's reactions to him claiming vanilla townie - who was overly keen to lynch him anyway? Who backed off suspiciously readily? Who came across as being pro-town? Nobody, because we wouldn't have been put in that situation.

[Dasquian]

Ta, that's what I thought - just wanted to be sure.

[Dasquian]

Sure, but we're still denied the ones where you claim your role and scum get a chance to slip up when faking a townie-like reaction. Granted, it's created a completely different kind of discussion in which at least a few of us have been talking, which is a good thing, but they're much more about differing game philsophies than "who is prepared to lynch a claimed <x>".

[Dasquian]

4 town roles down by Day 2 is not a happy place to be. Unless we have two vigs (unlikely), I agree we probably have a SK.

Gunsmith, in my experience, is a cop variant which detects "owns gun" or "doesn't own gun", the former giving "false positives" on vigilantes and other unlucky gunsmith-specific-millers.

I need a reread in light of the death scene, but I'm tending to suspect Nanook, pie and others who really pushed hard for getting MBL to claim - the mafia knew that he wasn't one of them and, as I said at the time, probably really wanted to know for sure if he was the doc or not before killing him. In fact, as the pressure to get him to claim later turned to a push to just get him lynched, I suspect they had guessed and were trying to get the town to save them a night kill.

[Dasquian]

What's a "watcher", btw?

[Dasquian]

I think that towards the end of the day, two things happened:

1) The movement to get MBL to claim was intensified.
2) The movement to get MBL to claim morphed into a movement to just lynch him as the best chance of being scum.

This was someone who originally claimed doc! I thought he was pretty obviously off-limits for a

lynch

until the doc thing was resolved... so it seemed to me that the people going for a lynch were playing on the pressure of a deadline to press forward with what would have been a big mistake. I wouldn't have expected townies to take that risk so readily, while for a mafia who strongly suspected Dodgy was telling the truth in the first place, it made good sense.

Doubtless there were several misguided townies on the wagon, hence my need for a reread, but I refuse to believe there wasn't at least one or two scum hoping to get the town to lynch the doc in a panic. That's who I'm looking for. I disagreed with everyone who wanted to pressure MBL yesterday, today when we know he was the doc, I'm looking for something more.

That all said; if any one of the people prepared to lynch MBL on the spot were vig's, I can believe they would have offed him - I still would think that MBL was a prime target for mafia/SK, though, since getting the doc N1 is about as good a setup for the rest of the game as you can hope for.

[Dasquian]

OffTheMark - it's a roleclaim, not an alignment claim.

I think he means, won't scum just claim vanilla townie, and where does that leave us?

I'm not averse to the idea of a mass role-claim - though it may not be our "last chance" to get a lynch right (depending on who gets NKed tonight), a bad lynch today followed by some more townie deaths is a convincing game over.

[Dasquian]

I don't mind claiming early on, but I'd like to see Nanook or pie claim first. If we continue down this line though, and everyone names their top "first claim" choices, we're sacrificing the ability to get claims out while scum don't know how much pressure they're under.

Since we both put our cards down before pie suggested we just get the claim out first, I'm not too fussed about whether we do pick an order randomly, or pick it based on general town suspicion, but we ought to think about it before everyone just blurts out who they'd like to see claim first. I think the latter is a generally good idea, though.

[Dasquian]

I'd like to hear from superstring before we get too far into the claiming, if only to get a full roster of players

[Dasquian]

Um... *raises hand*

Where do I fit in?

[Dasquian]

Vanilla townie here too.

Being the last to go, I was expecting to get to do the first comment on the claimed line up, which is:

Kilm- one shot vig
Nanook - vanilla townie
Off the Mark- vanilla townie
superstring - vanilla townie
pete d- vanilla townie
pie - vanilla townie
Dasq - vanilla townie

I was expecting more twists and turns and a possible counter-claim, but apparently not First off, with kilm having claimed to have killed MBL, and no one disputing it or claiming vig, I am inclined to just take that claim at full face value and write her off the list of potential suspects - if she's lying, she'd presumably be a third anti-town killing group, which sounds a little far-fetched to me.

The presence of a gunsmith in the town line-up strongly suggests to me that there is at least one false positive, once again supporting the idea that Kilm is telling the truth. The gunsmith was probably also the closest thing we had to a cop

So I'm back to finding suspicion in people who were keen to get MBL lynched. In retrospect he

was

the doctor and the mafia would've known he wasn't one of them (and therefore, probably the doctor when Dodgy originally claimed it in a fit of rage), so I'm still mostly suspecting Nanook and pie.

I can see why OTM might think that this is part of a ploy to capitalise fully on MBL's death, but may I remind him - if Kilm is to be believed (which already I've outlined why I think she should be), the mafia

did not

kill MBL and therefore were I part of the mafia capitalising on MBL's death, it could not have been planned in advance. In any case, my motives are much more straightforward - to look for the people trying to take advantage of the confusion and get the doctor lynched on the basis at least one of them would be scum.

[Dasquian]

Ah crap, sorry - and after complaining when Kilm left me out, too

Kilm - one shot vig
Nanook - vanilla townie
Off the Mark- vanilla townie
superstring - vanilla townie
pete d - vanilla townie
gorckat - vanilla townie
pie - vanilla townie
Dasq - vanilla townie

[Dasquian]

Wouldn't a cop lying in mass-claim be making a huge mistake? I would've thought that the benefit of (maybe) staying alive another night are outweighed by the risk of getting lynched when they do claim. Particularly hot on the heels of the "is Dodgy actually the doc" debacle - how could we trust that a cop claim from this point onwards isn't a mafia trying to pull a fast one?

If a cop

has

lied in mass-claim, I think their best play from here on in is to try and play out as best they can without ever claiming, even if they have/get a guilty result. I don't see how a cop could claim now, even (or

especially

) with a guilty result, and not risk the entire thing going down the pan.


What's LYLO btw?

[Dasquian]

Ta for explaining LYLO.

Doesn't LYLO work against the possibility of a cop holding out for tomorrow? Since tomorrow very well may be LYLO too, I still think it's too risky to have the potential of a real cop coming forward with game-winning information if that also means we have the potential of a mafia coming forward as a cop with game-losing "information" - hence my conclusion that, at this point, a real cop has backed themselves into a corner and should probably just play as a townie, passing off any useful investigation results they get as sharp intuition.

Honestly, though, I think the gunsmith was our cop. A gunsmith still effectively gets guilty/not-guilty, but with a false positive for vigs.

[Dasquian]

Gut feelings:

Unsure: Nanook, pie, superstring, pete d
Leaning town: OTM, gorckat
Town: Me, Kilm

I didn't really feel like I could put anyone as "scummy" without disclaimers (though by definition the ones at the top are scummy to me, because

someone

has to be).

Nanook and pie I have on my list for pushing MBL. superstring and pete d are up there for flying under my radar more than they are for saying anything that caught my eye. gorckat I get pro-town vibes from, OTM has said a few things that jar but seems mostly pro-town to me (probably some OMGUS in there too). If I had to order the top three, I'd go:

#1 Nanook (I was suspicious of Eletriar early on too)
#2 superstring (It feels like we've gone longer stretches without his input than anyone else, and it feels like he hasn't committed too strongly to any discussion)
#3 pie (Again the MBL thing, though it felt slightly more town-motivated than Nanook)

pete d escapes the list because his posts just ring townish to me. The only reason he'd be a #4 is because I've got that jangling "radar blur" of not really remembering him for anything in particular that's so often the hallmark of scum - which is exactly why superstring is #2.

I need to do a proper reread on superstring and pete d in particular, but I'm pretty happy with that ordering.

[Dasquian]

Any other thoughts on my post 663, besides Gorckat? I am thinking Pete D might be a better lynch, but I am unsure.

I think it's a good point - though as everyone agrees it doesn't clear him, I do agree that it's a weird direction for scum to be coming from but a more natural one for a townie to adopt.

I've been holding off a vote until I can properly reread the thread, but I'd rather pressure superstring over pete d if a reread makes me less happy about a Nanook or pie vote. In particular I want to properly chart how everyone individually reacted to Dodgy/CES/MBL, who almost certainly caused the most telling reactions.

[Dasquian]

Still here, working my way up to that reread (sorry). Also want to hear what superstring has to say.

Reaction to the PBPA: I hate PBPAs Generally I don't find them very useful, and in my experience tend to rehash someone's postings while saying "look, he could have said this as MAFIA!" Also, a PBPA war where the accused responds with a PBP-rebuttal is the most horrible thing in the world to read.

With that said, I think conclusions at the end are good - superstring has indeed been eager to press lurkers, the most glaring example being Dodgy/CES/MBL where he makes a reasoned post as to why we shouldn't lynch CES then comes back a few posts later saying we should, based only off of his lurking. It's possible he does have a major lurker hate, which I do think is good meta and good play in the absence of a better lead, but I'd have hoped for a little acknowledgement for his change of heart.

I also agree that a lot of his postings look a little forced; like pie says, these are somewhat circumstantial observations, which is a danger of PBPAs - finding the evidence you want to find. Does anyone who knows superstring's style think they stand out as particularly scummy

for him

?

[Dasquian]

I'm still here, I just suck. I've been putting off doing the analysis of the treatment of Dodgy/CES/MBL on Day 1 since I knew it'd be a major undertaking, and kept putting it off as the game was rolling along slowly. Sorry guys, I should have been posting instead On the upside, I've now done it, and here's what I came up with:

Basic timeline

Apr 29, Dodgy melts down and claims doctor
Apr 30, CES replaces Dodgy
May 30, CES' last post in the game
Jun 18, MBL replaces CES
Jun 22, two-week deadline imposed
Jul 5, Day 1 ends

This is the timeframe I've been looking at. There's a bit of a flashpoint at about Jun 18 where CES' long-term absence comes to a head and he accumulates several votes, which dissipate when MBL replaces in.

gorckat

Gorckat put his stake down very early on with reasons as to why we should leave CES alone until Day 2, letting the mafia kill him. He doesn't change these thoughts for the entirety of Day 1, but he does temporarily vote CES on May 15 for lurking. The only other thing of note is that he flits his votes a

lot

between thorgot/OTM, inHimshallibe and Kilmenator, but is at least consistent in naming them as his top three suspects. In a game with an assumed three+ bad guys, that's not totally unfair.

I don't think he did anything particularly scummy during that time-frame (though copped a lot of flak from a number of other people) and basically have him down as being town.

thorgot/Off The Mark

thorgot really didn't do anything of note (he posted one pertinent comment on May 8, that we should leave CES alone for now), so I'll brush onto his replacement by OTM on May 30, just as CES was about to go absent for a long time.

OTM's initial stance was to just leave CES alone til Day 2 to force a claim, and he supported the move to pressure inHim quite actively. The break to this is on Jun 17-18 when he switches to voting CES due to long-term absence, until going back to inHim on Jun 20. Generally I get town vibes from him, but there's a case for being opportunistic in his voting. That said, CES

was

lurking a good 'un and enough people pressed him around Jun 18 for at least some of them doing so genuinely.

pete d

Pete d really didn't say a lot about Dodgy's claim, most of his posts not even mentioning it except via his reasons to vote Kilmenator, who he found suspicious for wanting CES to claim but not wanting to lynch him. He too voted CES on Jun 18, and unvoted very shortly after as MBL replaced in.

Generally he was consistent with his suspicion on Kilmenator, later (Jun 25) adding OTM and superstring as additional suspects. He was very quiet though, and I thought it was odd how little he even acknowledged the "should CES/MBL claim?" debate.

Kilmenator

Wow, this was the easiest one to make a call on, even without taking into account her role-claim. Right from the offset, she wanted a claim from CES to avoid a potential WIFOM horror story on Day 2, but not necessarily a lynch (something she got flak for from pete d). She didn't waver from this stance until the deadline, when she accepted that it wasn't helping bring the day to a close and joined the inHim bandwagon.

This seems like out-and-out town play to me. It is also totally consistent with her already-mostly-confirmed claim and the choice she made - if she thought we were going to be screwed by a WIFOM decision today, and that MBL was a quality BS'er who could well deceive us as mafia, it totally made sense to kill him. It's not even clear that she made the wrong decision, since unless we have

four

killing groups, the mafia did indeed intend to leave MBL alive.

Southpaw/Pie_is_good

Southpaw did virtually nothing before going absent for a month, except put his initial view down as "let CES survive til Day 2 then deal with him".

pie came in guns-a-blazing at the start of June basically calling out Dodgy's meltdown as scummy, and CES' lurking as scummy. His stance throughout June was that we really, really should force a claim out of CES before doing anything else (in particular, that we shouldn't be asking for a claim from inHim before getting one out of CES). He totally did not waver from this til the deadline-lynch, only adding gorckat and OTM as other suspects at the end of June.

This surprised me, and has forced me to reconsider the OMGUS-by-proxy case that he was scum trying to get the doctor lynched. He held on to the belief that CES should be lynched before it was "in vogue", and so can't be accused of trying to drive a bandwagon to the finish-line opportunistically - he'd already been on it for two weeks!

superstring91

A reread of superstring's posts brings one thing out quite clearly - he's very keen to press the "let's lynch the inactives" argument over a lot of anything else. His first reaction after Dodgy's meltdown is to just chase down gorckat and other "inactives", although he does say he doesn't want to lynch CES, he wants a claim (May 6).

The rest of Day 1 is (ironically) punctuated by some large absences, but he threatens suspicion on CES on May 15 for being absent, again on May 31, and votes him Jun 12 for lurking big-time (which he was). He only posts once more on Day 1, after MBL replaces in, saying that he is going to reread thoroughly and reassess his vote, but he never does.

Far and away the scummiest reading of anyone still alive. He just seems to consistently take the easy road of lurking-chasing, as well as posting very infrequently and staying well below the radar.

Eletriar/Nanookthewolf

Eletriar didn't post much in May, and then got replaced at the start of Jun. She did say that that she was in favour of reviewing it on Day 2, again.

Nanook played very similarly to pie, as a replacement at a very similar time he came in and slammed a vote on CES to reopen the discussion (which he removed before pie placed his vote as the sole voter). There was then a lot of voting - first supporting the inHim bandwagon on Jun 17 as it was more likely to come to something, then rejoining the CES bandwagon when everyone else joined it, then unvoting MBL as he replaces in, and revoting him a day later on Jun 19 after some thought, which he then holds til the end of the day.

I can't really say he did a lot different to pie, though, like OTM I could argue that he was somewhat opportunistic with his vote-switching around the time of the CES bandwagon and MBL replacement. One man's opportunism is another man's pragmatism though, so that bears more thought. On another note, though, Eletriar did give me scummy vibes (she had that relaxed, "taking this all very professionally like a good townie" vibe to her that always seems a bit forced).

Overall summary

I wanted to make sure I had my facts right about the Jun 18 flashpoint, as I think this was most likely to yield the greatest clues about who was being opportunistic and who wasn't:

Jun 17, post 442, CES has three votes (Pie, Nanook, superstring) and inHim has 5 (me, IH, Fonz, gorckat, Kilm). Pie voted for CES in post [318], superstring in post [408], Nanook in post [411].

[443] Nanook unvotes CES (->2) and votes inHim (->6)
[447] OTM votes CES (->3)
[448] Pete d votes CES (->4)
[449] Nanook switches back to CES (->5) from inhim (->5)
[451] MBL replaces CES
[453] Nanook unvotes MBL (->4)
[455] Pete d unvotes MBL (->3)
[461] Nanook votes MBL (->4)
[477] OTM unvotes MBL (->3) and votes inHim (->6)


Kilmenator and gorckat really don't look very scummy to me. superstring looks absolutely dreadful ;p There's more of a question mark over pete d and OTM than there was before, pie looks a fair bit better than before this analysis. Nanook looks to be somewhat opportunistic, especially with his votes generally being timed such that they're most likely to stoke a MBL bandwagon. Right now, my order would be:

superstring, pete d, Nanook, OTM, pie, gorckat, Kilmenator

With superstring standing way above everyone else, and gorckat and Kilmenator much further off my scumdar than the middle four. This is where I would almost certainly vote superstring, but I have no idea how many votes he's on because I didn't check and I now want to go to bed. Also, I want to properly read and respond to the last page or so of posts. Expect regular service again!

[Dasquian]

OK, had a brief reread of the last page or so. Man, it seems like every time OTM opens his mouth it's to pick a new target. It looks really scummy on the surface, but seems more likely to me to be the actions of a frustrated townie wanting the game to move onwards. Moving on.

Only problem is, due to Pete D's recent reaction to my votes, I can't see Pete D and superstring both as scum.

Can you explain this? I don't see anything that really makes me think "man, pete d and superstring really wouldn't make sense as scum together".

Basically superstring and Nanook both need to post something. superstring particularly. If I've counted right, no one had any votes at the top of this page (post 700) so now superstring has one (Pete d) and gorckat has one (pie). With that in mind,

vote superstring91

.

[Dasquian]

Oh, and I

really

don't like this:

So we have to get it right between the 2 at the top of your scummy list.

I don't like the implication that we

will

be choosing between the top two people on

my

list. It railroads the town while getting me to carry the can if it goes wrong.

[Dasquian]

Yes. inHim was lynched Day 1. IH, MBL and The Fonz were all killed Night 1. Kilmenator has taken responsibility for the MBL kill as a one-shot vig. (Hope that doesn't count as a personal synopsis, since it's all undisuputed fact)

Welcome to the game!

[Dasquian]

My read-through of most of Day 1 also reaffirmed that superstring was scummy as anything even before the start of Day 2. I feel bad for flea because although he's done us a favour by replacing in, I'm still not inclined to remove that vote unless he starts posting something that makes me think I was wrong about superstring.

Til then, he's still my top suspect.

pj - surely the worst case is that we have 3 scum and a SK, and we lynch a townie today, the mafia kill the SK, and the SK kills a townie. That leaves us with two townies and three scum, which is a scum win. Hoping that the scum make it easy to cross-kill each other by obviously quick-lynching a townie seems more than a little optimistic to me.

[Dasquian]

Still here, and still happy to pressure flea. I'd also like to note that he's on lynch -2, for whatever that's worth.

On kilm's no lynch - sorry, I agree with OTM, I don't think this is a good idea, we really need to nail scum (or at least give the various killing groups enough information to kill each other). Going no lynch won't help with that.

On gorckat - throughout this game people have pointed the finger at gorckat for being scummy, enough people that it can't just be a few wayward OMGUSes or attempts to get a townie lynched. I've not really understood this case and still don't, so I am, genuinely, missing something - I'll have a reread and rethink but my gut still says he's town.

[Dasquian]

But how am I meant to defend myself against what SS did?

It's a time-old conundrum, and an entirely reasonable thing to complain about. You are, unfortunately, lumbered with a predecessor's actions you can't explain or justify.

However, MBL gave it a good go and, in my opinion at least, made himself look more town because of it. If you're town, you can undo some of the damage superstring did by convincing us he really was just a town lurker by virtue of you being a non-scummy non-lurker. I think the objection presented that you've replaced in and appear to have rolled over isn't unfair. Moreover, if you're town we cannot afford for you to do this, for obvious reasons.

Or in other words, what OTM just said.

[Dasquian]

I didn't expect that you would. My hypothesis is that you and Gorck are scum together. Your pattern of how you've responded to my votes fits that theory too perfectly.

I don't like it either, fwiw. A few posts ago you were following an entirely reasonable line of enquiry against SSF and the way he worded his post. Without him responding to it, you've apparently decided that that is old hat and it's time to "try something out". At the very least, it's somewhat risky play for the current situation. Added to that, I just don't think it's a very good trap.

Back to SSF, I'm disappointed we're not seeing more from him. We may well be lynching a townie and I see the argument that if he were scum, it wouldn't have gotten to -1 so quickly. He's *still* the scummiest person in the game though, so what are we supposed to do? If he's going to actively lurk his way out of it (which is a tactic OtM seems more than happy to facilitate), I propose that we

must

lynch him.

[Dasquian]

pie has already pointed out that the biggest risk to scum are other scum/SK. If it looks like ss/ssf is going down, the last thing you'd want to do is be nicely tied to him so that you get popped off in the night, rather than having a chance to talk your way out of the noose on day 3.

It wouldn't surprise me at all if a scum would bus ssf. In fact, like pie suggests is good for the town (and what I just think is too optimistic to hope for), I think it'd be less likely for scum to quicklynch a townie, and again risk getting popped off at night.

Which still implies gorckat and/or pete d might be scum, of course It's also possible that the scum are ssf, pj and pie, and actually the ssf bandwagon picked up speed due to its merits as a correct bandwagon... a scum looking scummy and getting bandwagonned for it has got to happen some of the time, right?

Conclusion: ssf is still the technically "best" bandwagon, IMO. I don't think it's too obvious to be wrong, and so I'm loathe to second-guess it in favour of assuming he's a townie and wondering who is pulling the strings.

[Dasquian]

So... wouldn't it follow then that ssf is MORE likely to be scum, since this bandwagon is moving along (well, compared to the in-general glacial pace of this game, it is moving) and we ARE fairly close to lylo?

It concerns me that scum are willing to bus SSF, (unless there are only 2 scum, and Pie is the other one) this makes me think we may be on the wrong track here.

I didn't expect that you would. My hypothesis is that you and Gorck are scum together. Your pattern of how you've responded to my votes fits that theory too perfectly.

I know ssf is being completely scummy and unhelpful.

Maybe Dasq is the 3rd scum... PJ, Pie, and Kilm (and myself of course) all seem a lot more townish to me right now than Dasq, Pete, and Gorck. SSF I have no idea, but we also have an SK role still out there too.

(Slightly OMGUS)

FOS: OtM.

You're all over the place.

[Dasquian]

In what way? Those posts were

all from the same page

. At the top of the page - 2 days ago - you rip into flea with:

I can't see a lurker replacing into a game who is TOWN but is under major suspicion and then just ignoring it. Seems like he should be fighting tooth and nail to stay alive. But he just pretty much said, "yeah, superstring looked scummy, I'll try to help you." and then disappeared. That seems like scum behavior to me who is disgusted with being put into a no-win situation. I'm happy with this vote.

Then,

without anyone moving any votes

, a day later, you decide that the bandwagon is on the wrong track and move your vote to gorckat. Am I wrong in thinking that this is a little odd? I can't also help but wonder if pie's post 787 was perhaps a contributing factor - did you maybe think that with pie saying gorckat's previous games weren't in his favour, there was an opening to swing the attention to him?

Please explain why you had a change of heart. gorckat and pete d were already voting ssf when you joined them. I still think the pressure should stay on ssf for now, but I would love to hear what you're thinking on this one.

And as you may have gathered, I was less than impressed that the simple act of agreeing with pete d that your actions were dodgy suddenly puts me as being a possible third scum (though granted, that in itself seems to be more of a naive town tell). I freely admit the OMGUS bias here, but I think it's worth bringing up.

[Dasquian]

I'm FOSing you because you are behaving erratically and have been all day. I have two theories:

1) You are a townie who can't sit still.
2) You are scum who can't sit still.

In favour of (1) is the fact that you drop your theories as quickly as you pick them up. For example, just regarding myself, you were pointing the finger at the start of the day, congratulating me on a wonderful analysis and my townie nature a few pages ago, and are pointing the finger again the moment I agree with your current target of suspicion that you're behaving oddly.

In favour of (2) is the theory that you are bussing a scum. After all, you're the one going to lengths to make it clear that scum couldn't possibly bus each other, which would fit that strategy. You've also always had gorckat on the backburner, and perhaps with pie hinting that he's ready to put his chips in with gorckat, you've decided it's time to be "the one to build a case against him", too. Or perhaps ssf is a townie, and you're getting off the bandwagon in the hope it'd drive to completion without your fingers on it.


I've had troubles with sizing you up since my analysis - honestly, I think it's probably (1). You're not acting like someone who's trying to avoid attention, you much more fit the profile of someone who wants

something

to happen, and who would rather comment on anything in the most recent set of posts than wait a few days for everyone else to give their opinions. Nevertheless, you're giving off a jittery impression and are saying too many weird/impulsive things for me not to keep a healthy level of suspicion, hence a FOS. I don't feel inclined to turn it into a vote at this point, but I'm not going to rule it out either.

As I say, I think the focus needs to stay on ssf, at least til he posts something of substance.

[Dasquian]

It'd be good to hear stuff from other people. With OTM posting after every single post we're in danger of this day becoming all about him, which I don't think is in our interests.

ssf - where are you? I've seen you online, but no posts. What gives?
Everyone else - thoughts? It's never a bad time to sum up your overall position.

[Dasquian]

Yeah, I know exactly where you're coming from - I've been in other games where the only conversation seems to be the one I'm pushing, and only with the people I'm directly addressing. The usual outcome is that the bastard town has been subjected to my scrutiny and attempts at building cases enough that they're all happy to lynch me

It's the main reason I have you flagged as more likely to be town than not.

[Dasquian]

So um... is that it, flea? Anything else to add?

[Dasquian]

What if Pie and

petroleumjelly

are the other two scum? In any case, I already said how scum might well bus ssf - they may well not want to bank on having a good night, and so must play defensively to ensure they get neither lynched nor NKed.

At this point, ssf is posting elsewhere and hasn't put in nearly the kind of effort I'd have hoped for to save his skin. I don't know whether this is out-of-game laziness or a deliberate choice, but either way it's not making me a happy Dasquian

[Dasquian]

...only as a response to OTM's conviction that the way the voting's gone means you can't be scum. If I wanted to build a case against pj, it wouldn't be as naive as "didn't vote for scummy ssf", although that might well feature. It certainly wouldn't be a premature "isn't voting for ssf who I think is scummy".

[Dasquian]

Your case is far from made, in my eyes at least. I'd like it if you could explain those reasons - your "I'm right and that's all there is to it" attitude isn't going to be enough to get my support, at least.

In any case, right now, I want to know why the pressure isn't still entirely focussed on ssf. superstring was by far and away the best lynch candidate before he got replaced, and ssf

really

hasn't done anything to change that. There may be merit in cases against pete d and gorckat, but I'm not sure why they're worth drawing attention away from ssf who is lurking and apparently getting away with it.

Also, I liked pj's last post, fwiw.

[Dasquian]

Just look at the voting pattern, and you'll see what I see. I don't expect to convince you Dasq, as you are still the most likely 3rd scum in my book. Superstring/ssf is the perfect easy target for today's mislynch, from a scum perspective.

Yeah, you see, I know you're wrong about me being scum which in turn completely undermines your credibility for your vote. A mild OMGUS, if you like, but with a serious point - I'm sitting here thinking, if I can get labelled as "most likely 3rd scum" simply for vocally disagreeing with you, why shouldn't I think your 1st and 2nd are just also townies who said something you didn't like at some point?

I don't think your voting patterns are convincing on their own. I don't think your hypocrisy helps your case. I don't know why I should think gorckat is scummy when you're being pulled up on inconsistencies and double-standards and refusing to answer for them.

Added to all of that, ssf's accusation that I was setting pj up for a scum pairing is totally off-base anyway (which, I note, you were happy to support - apparently he's back on your town list, now?). If I'm going to point out potential pairings, I'd say you and ssf look pretty good right now.

[Dasquian]

Seconding that question, and fast running out of patience.

Why are we not lynching this guy?

[Dasquian]

Added to this, ssf is in a position where a townie *should* be panicking about the fact he's on the chopping block and we're in potential LyLo. He's either not understood the situation, is too apathetic to get to a point where he might understand, or doesn't have the same threat of LyLo and so is more relaxed about it all.

OTM - gorckat succinctly made the point I was too wordy to get across. We agree about some things. He might be scum, but he's not scum with me. No doubt he reserves the same level of skepticism about me, but you've got to remember that the game isn't just about stating who you find suspicious and disagree with, it's also about stating who you find townie and agree with. These are both useful forms of expression that help the town.

[Dasquian]

Current thoughts:

kilm is still as townie as she was a few weeks ago, but she should be posting.

ssf, as I've recently said, replaced scummy ss (sorry pie, but ss

was

in my eyes at least easily the scummiest and lurkiest player in the game). Since then he has been on mafiascum a

lot

, has been posting in other forums, but somehow still hasn't made any time for this game. I know I sound patronising, but this just isn't good enough. It's certainly not good enough to make me think he should be any

less

suspicious than he was when he replaced ss.

pete d is being quiet, or at least giving me that impression. Would like to hear more.

PJ gives me town vibes. So does gorckat.

I continue to disagree with almost everything pie says without getting particularly scummy vibes from him. That said, the previous post seemed "off" to me, and makes me consider the possibility of an ssf/OTM/pie mafia.

OTM I just cannot agree with. It seems that he's become fixated on a gorckat/pete d pairing beyond any shred of doubt. I don't see how he can be that sure, I don't really buy it anyway, and he's lost support from me because he's popped me into that grouping when I started disagreeing vocally. I appreciate the irony of now finding him suspicious because of this Overall the behaviour "feels" much more like a townie who is convinced he "got it spot on" than scum. Working from the premise "I'm right" is an easy thing to do, and if he has been everything he's done has been rational.


So summary: right now, I think ssf is still the best lynch. If he turns up scum, I would be inclined to suspect pie from the last post alone and find gorckat more innocent for the same reason (as the presented alternative). If he turns up innocent, I'd be a bit more flummoxed (and would get a bit hot under the collar, to boot). Assuming myself, kilmenator and gorckat all to be town (or at least, non-mafia), and OTM and PJ to be most likely townies from the rest of the group, my suspected mafia is by logical conclusion ssf, pete d and pie. I'm happy with that.

[Dasquian]

Not today - it would be a very reluctant second choice, rather than an "I'm happy with any of these three" thing, and I would be uncomfortable agreeing to his lynch when I find ssf a better choice in almost every respect.

[Dasquian]

Seconded. I'm not about to get myself replaced but some movement would be good. Honestly I think at this point we should just lynch ssf and move on. He is clearly not interested in addressing his own bandwagon and that

must

be punishable by death.

[Dasquian]

Really? You

really

think he's put in the effort required of a replacement? He's given no indication that he's even read the thread, let alone thoroughly to come up with some valid opinions. He's proffered the briefest responses only to things which have happened in the time he's been reading, and even he's admitted that he's not been pulling his weight. That post you referenced had him admitting to being, and I quote, "too apathetic to get to a point where he might understand" [the current situation of the game].

Basically he's dicked us around for the best part of a month while we've waited to hear what he was going to add, with a "roll over and die then pretend not to hear" attitude. Even if it's not a stalling tactic that's working remarkably well, by ignoring him we're giving scum the all-clear to try it themselves. There are lots of reasons this game is slow. Let's not make this town being abnormally reluctant to push a good bandwagon one of them.

[Dasquian]

Re: gorckat. Unsurprisingly, I agree with your second grouping more than the first. However, I don't think the first is unreasonable (though, of course, wrong!) based on the lines that have been drawn in this game and which side people have come down on them.

Paranoid disclaimer: you might be scum deliberately presenting two alternatives each containing some scum-buddies for various nefarious outcomes.

Re: OTM. He

has

given up. Let's look back to post 729:

Reread blah blah post later etc... You know the drill.

That was Aug 10, one day shy of a month ago, and I'm still waiting for any kind of "I'm here, I know what I'm doing now, and here's what I think of everything" post. You're right, it doesn't make him scum, but it doesn't make him town either and superstring was already well on his way to the noose when flea replaced him. The only reason the pressure let up was to give him breathing room to join the game, which he's willfully chosen not to use.

[Dasquian]

To address accusations of misrepresentation:

Hooray for misrepresentation!
Uh, you said that. I said that I was apathetic, yes, but I understand the situation perfectly.

Yes, I did say that. You responded with:

Apathetic FTW.
TBH, I've been playing this game rather

a

pathetically...

Hence I drew the conclusion that you admitted to apathy, and did not draw the conclusion that you "understood the situation perfectly". In fact, I drew quite the reverse conclusion as you responded in the affirmative to me when I said you were, and I quote again, "too apathetic to get to a point where he might understand".

I don't think I am misrepresenting you here. I think my position is entirely defensible.

Misrepresentation FTW!
Normally, giving up is a public affair, normally accompanied by the phrase "I give up", or words to that effect. I don't think you're in a position to tell me what my own mindset is, thank you.

I'm not going to get into a semantic argument about what "giving up" means and whether it's a technical term or not. My point was that you had, until now, pretty much opted out on playing this game with any significant level of involvement, to the intense frustration of myself and I am fairly sure a number of others. Again, I'm pretty happy with this accusation, but I'm happier that you're finally pulling your finger out now. It shouldn't have taken this long.

And gee golly whiz, I'm sorry all the

interesting

players died Day 1, but that's a dreadful excuse for not posting - it sounds like a grade A cop-out to me - to get you off the hook for commenting on who

didn't

die. Finally...

Why are scum any more likely to not read the thread than town? Not reading the thread thoroughly would jeopardise both alignments fairly equally, TBH.

Well, any player should do their homework on replacing into a game, even if it's just a cursory glance. However, townies have more to gain from a reread as they are the ones who need to root out scum. Scum already know who they are. So that's one reason.

Another reason is that scum don't have to be telling the truth about not having read the thread, as a obstruction tactic akin to lurking to avoid them contributing to the game in a way that gets them in trouble - or, in other words, it makes sense as scum to claim you haven't read the thread if you can get away with it. We only have your word for it that you haven't cynically chosen to play the way you have. So I would expect some proportion of replacers claiming not to have read the thread to be scum trying it on, alongside some townies and scum alike who genuinely haven't read the thread.

[Dasquian]

OK, let's look at this a more pragmatic way. I think we should be lynching ssf today. So far, myself, gorckat and pete d are voting for him, meaning we need two more votes. Assuming he won't vote for himself, and taking OTM's last post as a "don't want to vote him", that leaves kilm, PJ and pie as potential bandwagon-finishers.

What are you three's opinions on voting ssf?

On a similar vein, gorck has two votes (pie and OTM) and hence needs three more from the same crowd + ssf and - gorckat himself. Speaking for myself, I am not keen on lynching him today. That leaves kilm, PJ, ssf and pete d as potential bandwagon-finishers.

What are your four's opinions on voting gorckat?

It's worrying to note that in both cases, without kilmenator being here and voting, we need a near unanimous agreement which basically depends on scum bussing each other Though, that said, that gives us something to read into (which in turn, should encourage the scum to bus each other ).

[Dasquian]

Yes, I was also confused by that - OTM is right. Although it didn't seem so much like an "offer" me as OTM pushing his agenda, but hey.

If you turn up scum, then we know Dasq has a high likelihood of also being scum, and then who cares if he's smart? Smart scum can't hurt the town at all if we know he's scum.

Um, not liking this so much. I accept that if gorckat should show up to be scum the town would be justified in taking a closer look at me; I've defended him and repeatedly said I find him to be townie. I do not like you lining me up as a non-participant in my own lynch should that eventually occur, however.

[Dasquian]

I did see it, and I wasn't expecting an immediate response. I just had the overall impression of quietness, as a gut feeling. So if pete d isn't willing to vote gorckat today, then that requires all three of ssf, PJ and kilmenator to finish the lynch. Are you [the gorckat voters] sure you wouldn't rather help us finish the ssf bandwagon?

[Dasquian]

*rolls eyes*

Seriously, I want to see if we are at an impasse or not. We can complain all we want about the day taking a long time but if it is to ever end, we need to make it end.

Really, kilmenator needs to post. Or be replaced. I don't care which at this point.

[Dasquian]

You get points for dramatic urgency, but lose some for lack of subtlety with a hamfisted attempt to push your agenda

[Dasquian]

I find it telling that you didn't refute my assertion that the SSF wagon is scum-driven.

Of course I didn't - it's one of those "so taken as granted that explicitly stating it is pointless and slightly scummy" things, like claiming to be pro-town. And besides that, you seem to have regressed to high school level where you're now picking apart

literally everything

gorckat or I say to "prove" your case. Your credibility has hit rock bottom, my friend.

The most generous interpretation of your actions is that, as gorckat says, you are "married to your suspicions" and now are looking for anything and everything to assemble into your patchwork-quilt-like case. The less generous (and increasingly more likely-looking) explanation is that you are scum with ssf who jumped off the bandwagon when he thought he might not have to bus him and is getting increasingly more frustrated that the gorckat wagon didn't - and in fact currently

can't

- take off.

I refer us back to posts 785/789 when you do a complete U-turn from pressing ssf hard to, apparently on a whim, changing to an "experiment" vote on gorckat which has become immoveable. Either

that

is you being flighty and non-committal, or was your attempt to do a last minute save. Either way we shouldn't put any stock in your arguments.

[Dasquian]

Your arguments are based on faulty assumptions:

1) "Scum cannot bus each other" - you repeatedly argue/assume that if X is scum, then anyone voting X cannot be scum and so the scum voters must be easily identifiable from who's left.
2) "Scum always go for gold" - you seem to assume that when a townie is being bandwagonned, all the scum would be on the bandwagon.
3) "Scum always defend each other" - you are basing a lot off of who has stuck up for who in this game, and tracing a scum group out from one suspect to the "nearest" others.

These are all (well, the first two at least) frankly insane things to base arguments off of as it basically assumes scum are always totally obvious. In nearly every game I've seen, at least one, sometimes

all

, the bandwagons in the game have the scum split. Some defend the townie, some attack them. Some defend fellow scum, some bus them.

In the above case, you ask why, if gorckat is townie, he's not being jumped on by the scum. Well, pie (I think) already answered that earlier today. He pointed out that the best thing for the town would be for the bad guys to attempt to quicklynch a townie, so that the SK had an easy ride killing them. He's right - if scum all piled on gorckat, what are the chances one of them is going to get NKed? Pretty high, right? So that's your answer to that one - scum can't blunder into a lynch, they have to be sneaky as always, possibly more so.

You also ask why they wouldn't jump on gorckat to help scumbuddy ssf - well, first of all, it's the same answer - but even worse! If piling onto a townie is like painting a bullseye on your chest, then it's not looking good for the long-term if you're also easily traceable to sticking up for a scum buddy. For this reason, I also think scum would be

more

eager to bus each other than usual.

Although even if you reject my above arguments and think scum

would

pick gorckat over scumbuddy ssf, that makes you and pie prime candidates for exactly that behaviour.

Anyway, old ground. This day is not going to be ended by myself, OTM or gorckat, nor anyone else who has stated a firm opinion. It's hard to resist continuing the back-and-forth (as indeed I have failed to do here), but the people who will define this day are the ones who haven't come down on either side of the line or have been AWOL.

That means

they

need to post, not us.

[Dasquian]

Round in circles we go, but a direct question is a direct question:

I am not sure that gorckat is not scum. But, standard uncertainty aside, he seems townie to me and ssf doesn't.

[Dasquian]

Interesting point about SSF - though it follows that as a townie he would also be screwing over people other than himself. Admittedly, as in that situation he wouldn't know who they are, he might be more inclined to feel detached.

[Dasquian]

And I just noticed Day Two has lasted over three months – we seriously need to get a move on.

QFT.

creampuffeater, welcome to the game. You're happy to vote either gorckat or ssf, and by voting ssf you could end the day. There's been a

lot

of discussion today and if there's more to be had, we should have it, but if not, I think everyone will be happy to move on. Yes, I want to see ssf lynched here so I am nowhere close to impartial, nor pretending to be, but that's also in line with wanting to see the game progress.

[Dasquian]

Yes, but you stopped accepting the possibility of ever making a mistake the moment you did a u-turn on ssf and voted gorckat

creampuffeater: I can understand you don't want to hammer right off the bat, but if you're waiting for more discussion to unfold, I think everyone's said everything they're going to say. Me and OTM can start another big pissing match if that would help, but I doubt it would.

[Dasquian]

Of course, there's no chance that if ssf is mafia, he's still lying, is there? [/sarcasm] Anyway, not much to say now that isn't just a "I hope we got it right" truism. We get to find out soon enough anyway

[Dasquian]

This is pretty retarded. No doubt I'm providing yet more ammo for OTM to convince himself that I'm gorckat's scum-partner, but...

What the hell? If gorckat is a townie, then when ssf's alignment is revealed he'll either go "yay" or "doh", and readjust his suspicions. Then he'll readjust them again when more stiffs show up at daybreak, and

then

and only then will he have a chance to talk about what he's thinking, if he's even still alive. Same as the rest of us.

Talking about what you might be thinking overnight before the other deaths are revealed only help the mafia/SK understand what members of the town are thinking, and hence how to best target their kills for maximum manipulation the following day. I see that you are trying to get gorckat to slip up and say something suspicious, but, goddamn, save it for tomorrow. You're like the world's angriest small-yappy-type dog; you never stop barking.

Roll on day 3; even twilights drag in this game

[Dasquian]

Good game! Thanks TSQ, I enjoyed it (although I did get stressed out on D2).

I killed Fonz N1 because he was asking awkward questions and looked like he was about to lay into me D2, but by the end of D1 hadn't actually done so yet so I took the opportunity to off him. I also thought he was a good scum/cop candidate.

I killed pete d N2 because he was a much better candidate for scum than gorckat who I genuinely believed to be town. My choice would've been very different if ssf had turned up as scum, which I really expected to see!

I was genuinely scum-hunting for the majority of this game; I wanted to get to an end-game where I was in control (I had a one-shot night protection too, but

someone

forgot to apply it *stares* ). OTM really got me riled on D2, and I'm sure that contributed to me standing out as a potential SK... I was on the verge of claiming just to rub it in his face that he was wrong. This is meant as a compliment; as SK scum my job was to remain cool and not a mafia target.

It's a shame this game had so many replacements/flakes/etc. It made it very difficult to follow. Is this a common theme of games on this site? I like the volume and variety of games here and the experience of people playing them, but it seems like no game gets through to even day 2 without about three people bailing out.

[Dasquian]

I think my days would've been numbered anyway, the mafia would know who I was and either kill me the next night or contribute to getting me lynched

It's hard to say who I would've NKed next. As soon as pete d showed up scum, I guessed (assuming a three-person scum party) that gorckat and OTM were the remaining scum. I would almost certainly have been eating humble pie and helping lynch gorckat, and then I would probably have thought OTM was the villain of the piece and NKed him.

The irony is that earlier on, from even a few pages in, I had Eletriar pegged as probable scum, and thought Nanook looked hella scummy too when he replaced in - I should've trusted my gut more.