Open 54 - Basic 12 Player (over) before 529

[Patrick]

Vote: Glork

Not random.

[Patrick]

So Glork who are we lynching?

Pretty blatantly asking the wrong guy here.

[Patrick]

What in my two posts made you think I'm protown?

[Patrick]

I have a question of Glork, Patrick, and Shanba. Do you think that this is particuarly telling of Elmo's alignment? If so how?

I wondered about possible buddying up, since all his posts have contained comments about my innocence, but having read his reasoning I could see it as genuine (though even from my biased perspective, I don't agree with it).

Not gonna lie, I'm tempted to follow IH's vote. This feels like a pretty typical ass-kissing question.

If you're suspicious of Crub, why cast an apparently non serious vote on IH?

unvote vote Ripley you feel wrong

Want to explain why he feels wrong?

[Patrick]

I didn't think that apple's original vote switch to IH was a big deal, but his reactions since then I don't like. Originally he said his vote for Ripley wasn't really serious, but it seems he was happy to FoS him when he'd got someone on his side. Also, I don't think reading too much into things is scummy this early, unless a vote seems to come at an oppotunistic time or for absolutely terrible reasons. The only other person who seems a little suspicious to me is Andycyca, for the reason IH pointed out already; it seems like his post 42 is only feigning curiosity.

I don't know about this one. I don't think that "reading too much" is reason enough for a FoS, and I think it's strange that apple FoS'es the one he's voting for. To me, it sounds like throwing everything against him hoping for a lynch.

Throwing everything against him? Doesn't really strike me that way.

I'd like to know about Patrick as well.

What do you want to know about me?

@Elmo, my vote for Glork wasn't random. But it didn't have any suspicion behind it either.

Unvote, Vote: appleof88

wank, sikario, got any suspicions?

[Patrick]

Patrick: Why the move to Apple?

I found it better than an arbitary vote on you. I chose between him or Andy. You haven't really done anything suspicious.

FoS: ripley

Calm down there before you make yourself look like overeacting scum. Wait, you already did?

I rarely like this type of accusation. I didn't see any traces of panic in his reaction.

You mean it could be a coincidence? Could be, but I'm more inclined to believe it wasn't.

No, I meant I didn't find it scummy the way he attacked apple over something very minor.

[Patrick]

I didn't see any traces of panic in his reaction. Only in its sheer amount. Otherwise, I would have opted for a vote over finger. I feel more pressure may reveal more?

But I don't see how he overeacted. Surely it's better to post in detail and answer to everything, than post briefly and leave stuff out? If you want to pick apart what he's written that's fine, but accusing him of typing too much seems like an easy way to throw suspicion on him.

Right.


Why Apple?

Not sure what you're looking for. If why I'm suspicious of him, it's like I already said, the timing and reasoning for the FoS I didn't like. If you mean, why him over Andy, then *shrug* I just picked one of them. Close call between two fairly faint suspicions.

[Patrick]

Lastly, I am not going to pick apart ripley...at least not yet. But I am amazed you find his posts typical pat.

Interesting. What's your meta on him that suggests his posts are not typical? As for "so much interest", not really. I just like to comment on all the issues that come up. It's too early for me to have much read on Ripley, but I usually call out dubious logic when I see it, and your "overeacting/overdefensive" attack on him seems weird to me. Maybe it just raises my heckles because usually when I've had it used on me, it was by scum.

[Patrick]

Right. Done the comparison, but I'll let him comment first as you ask.

[Patrick]

Patrick, I got something of a "sliding onto the weak sheep" feel from your switch to him. Apple looks like an easy run-up right now because he's screwing around and Ripley just took a pull at him. I've noted the "fuel for the fire" feeling I got from your post, and your response doesn't really satisfy me. *shrug*

I don't see a problem. Yes, he's playing weakly, that doesn't mean he can't possibly be scum. It's near the start of the game, where you put pressure on people and look at various reactions. It's not like we're going to lynch apple at the end of today for his FoS of Ripley. I have no problem with going after experienced players early, or anytime, but only if I see something suspicious. So far, I haven't. The part that bothered me came after he stopped screwing around.

So wank, I've done the comparison between posts 74 and 78, and his is obviously longer. But since he was attacked and not me, that seems normal. What's your point?

[Patrick]

Andy, who's your top suspect right now, if any?

[Patrick]

I feel like we're plodding along rather slowly here. Two people who haven't contributed anything as far as I can see are JDodge and sikario. JDodge, I know you're not a very verbose player, but surely you've got an opinion on something that's happened so far. Sikario, I don't know what your playstyle is, but you saying you've got nothing to add at the moment is useless. There's been several threads of conversation, pick something out that looks interesting and give an opinion on it. We can't get any read on your alignment if you sit there doing nothing. Please stop being lazy.

Ripley, what do you think of the wagon on Andycyca right now?

The only person I'm getting any protown vibe from at all right now is Elmo, though it's not very tangible, and he might be one of that increasing list of people who always strike me as protown by default. I liked his reasoning for his Andy vote the most out of the current voters (although I think the point about false dichtomy is a bit of a stretch and it seemed like Glork did virtually the same thing). Now I'm thinking about it, Apple also needs to post something, although now it's been laid out I'm starting to think there might be more on Andy. I'd give Andy a higher than 3/11 chance of being scum, but not much.

Crub's play hasn't done much for me so far, but I'll wait and see what he's got out of his pressure vote on Andy.

[Patrick]

This strikes me as being odd.


Would you say you usually find laziness/noncontribution to be a protown sign or a scumbaggo sign?

You find it odd that I'm asking sikario to actually do something.

I'm not sure there is any usually. At this point I don't think it tells me anything about his alignment.

[Patrick]

I find it odd that you seemed to imply that he's protown and just not acting well. It's like you're trying to coach/baby him into contributing, assuming that he's having a hard time as town, rather than thinking he may be lazyscum.

Er, not really. What I said to him applies whether he's town or scum. (If he's scum he's still not contributing, still being lazy, still needs to commit to something etc.) Typically when I kick someone I don't do it from the point of view of them being scum, unless I have a good reason to think they are. Most usually, I throw a few suggestions too.

[Patrick]

Patrick: In your opinion, how does your treatment of Sikario differ from your treatement of me D1 in FTF? What are some similarities?

Quite different if I remember. I ignored you for most of day 1 in FTF, because I knew that acting crazy was part of your repetoire, and I wondered what it might lead too. I considered, and still consider, you a better player than me, so I decided you were doing it for some purpose, and that if you were scum hiding behind it, you would be attacked later, and forced to justify your actions and tell us what you'd achieved. I think I FoSed you late day 1 for a clear inconsistency, and pressured you early day 2 until you cleaned your act up. With sikario, having taken a brief look around the site, I consider him to be a newbie, and have seen him acting similarly in other games. Unlike you in FTF, I don't think there's any possible deeper or cunning plan in his play if he's protoown, I just think he's being lazy/spammy. So, obviously, I addressed him differently.

That was fun, but what was the point?

(Above line stolen from Ether, in Farscape Mafia).

[Patrick]

Not much, from this boring town, being controlled by you
You're neutral.
Andy gets town points.
Elmo loses town points.
Shanba is neutral.
Patrick loses town points.
IH gets town points.

What led you to these conclusions?

[Patrick]

Interesting.

The two that I need explaining to me the most there are the two negative ones. What did you find "laughable" about Elmo's response? Your comment on me is blatantly false, and makes me wonder if you're only skimming the game, since in my very next post after your pressure vote on Andy, I commented about Andy (and have continued to do so amongst other things). I also find it strange that you've targetted me for this, when several people actually

have

completely ignored the Andy wagon. Explain?

[Patrick]

Or how about you actually explain why you think I ignored the whole situation when I have made comments directly about Andy and the wagon. I don't see what you're getting at with the "targetted" thing. You're saying I've done something which I clearly haven't, whilst ignoring people who actually did. Why?

[Patrick]

You acknowledged that there was a wagon on Andy, you lended minor support and then proceeded to ignore it that's the way I read it.

Well, to some extent mafia is a game of intepretation, but I can hardly ignore it when your "intepretation" is clearly not in line with the facts. I originally commented on the Andywagon, with minor support as you said. I then asked him one or two questions to get a better feel for what he might be thinking. I've since made a post where I clarified my stance on Andy, and mentioned Elmo's case against him. So to say that I ignored it completely is clearly not true. Nor did I voice minor support and "proceed to ignore it".

Glork asked me what I thought of responses in relation to the andy wagon, I gave my thoughts. If you disagree with my thoughts that's up to you.

Well yeah, I know it's up to me whether I agree with them or not. But I think it's reasonable to pick apart your thought processes to see if they're legit.

As for "targetting", it seems like semantics. I think it's quite clear what I'm getting at. It seems that you think it's scummy to ignore the Andy issue, and you've accused me of doing that. Why have you overlooked a bunch of people who haven't commented on Andy at all? Also, you haven't answered my question about Elmo.

[Patrick]

Ripley, I hope you stay. I can see where you're coming from in the general sense, but eh, I don't think this game has been that bad. A little slow maybe, but nothing worse than that.

Patrick's switch to Apple still feels weird, too. I think the FoS served to indicate that his vote had gone from "not serious" to "serious"... is there anything wrong with that? If Apple had instead said "I guess I'm pretty happy with my vote on Ripley," do you think you would have reacted differently?

(Shrug), I guess it wasn't so much the "fos" symbol itself, as what he said and the timing. It just seemed like the only reason he decided to do it was because he'd got you behind him, whereas previously he said his vote wasn't serious at all. I suppose it doesn't help much that I'm not really seeing the Ripley hate. Not a big issue as I've said, but I felt it was enough to put my vote somewhere.

Which do you generally find scummier: Somebody who is somewhat inflammatory and contributes weakly to discussion, or somebody who posts without adding anything to the discussion?

Inflammatory as in.. annoys people? It's probably scummier to just post without adding anything, at least, it's something I see scum do from time to time. But I'd need context to be sure. JDodge fits the profile of someone posting and saying nothing, but annoyingly my meta tells me it's a null tell. Sikario has posted and added nothing, but again, a brief meta of it tells me it probably doesn't mean too much at this point. I think in general it's scummier later on in the game.

Elmo seems town to me. IH has seemed reasonable to me so far, but not much more. Crub I find more difficult. I think his comments about me are pretty much crap, and I think they ignore at least one other person who actually has done what he's claiming he thinks is scummy. Then again, I'm not sure yet I can see any particular scum motive in him attacking me at this point, and it seems like there'd be easier targets around for him if he's scum. I suppose he could be scum with 2 people who are being bandwagoned right now, but it seems pretty unlikely.

That said, Crub, what do you think of wank's behaviour around the Andy wagon?

[Patrick]

I also feel glork and pat is playing...too much. A lot of exchanges between them and in general.

What does this mean? Why do you find it scummy that we're contributing alot?

[Patrick]

I am getting sick of people putting words in my mouth. Now that is scummy.

At best, you can say I implied you were scummy. But that's at best. I mentioned it in passing. After suggesting ih and sika. To your defense, maybe I should have mentioned it below my last sentence.

You ended the whole paragraph saying, "none of the above warrants enough for a vote..." which suggests you found all the behaviours you described scummy. I can't understand why you're arguing the semantics of it with me, especially when you've just said that you're of the opinion that posting too much is scummy. I'm not especially interested in whether you outright declared it scummy or just threw in a suggestion that it's scummy, I want to know WHY you find it scummy to post alot.

[Patrick]

Where did I say that "posting too much is scummy"?

This should be kept secret but I am of the opinion that those who post too too much is scummy.

How else am I supposed to intepret the second quote? It would be great if you could stop being pedantic and give straight answers so we don't have to keep going back and forth.

[Patrick]

I think you're contributing a lot in terms only useful to you two - I could go and reread Face-to-face, for example, but I hardly have the understanding that you two have of it. I don't find it scummy, but I think that's what he means.

Let's be fair here. We've each made one post on that game.

That's not really what I got the impression wank was saying. If he was, he communicated it badly.

I am 100% townie.

Somone claims to be 100% protown, or 100% vanilla townie, depending on whether you class townie as vanilla.

I am a townie.

Same as the above but with less extreme language.

What was the point of that? Now can I get an answer to what I've been asking?

[Patrick]

Regarding wank, I didn't like the post where he very vaguely threw suspicion on a third of the game, and didn't really agree with any of the reasons he gave. I mainly asked him stuff to see whether he is genuinely scumhunting, albeit in his own strange way, or if he's just throwing up a kind of screen, with posts like 206 and 208 for effect. On the plus side for his alignment, he is doing something which he knows will attract attention, which I've found town more likely to do than scum early on, but it's possible he's refusing to answer simple because there's no substance behind what he's saying. I would like some kind of reasoning from him before the end of the day as to why posting alot is scummy in his book. Preferably sooner rather than later.

I don't understand Crub's vote for Elmo at all.

Elmo, I think you have a habit of taking somethings a little too seriously. However, I did find the assessment of apple as town a little odd too, considering he seems to have done next to nothing.

[Patrick]

I can see myself overestimating others in a newbie game but here? Maybe I should not play anymore. Oh well.

I can see you overestimating yourself actually.

Ripley has accurately pointed out that this game has been rather slow at the time of his posting. That said, glork and pat were rather active during that time hence my comment. Which was falsely intepreted by pat? due to my use of too too much which he somehow chopped down to too much. As logic lovers or so most of you proclaim to be, would one leave off a sum in calculating average? I hope not. So why drop words...unless it serves a scummy (pun intended) purpose? But I am overestimating the play here. In short, feel free to ignore all my posts thus far.

The comparison between your addition of that particular word and calculating an average is stupid. If you calculate an average but leave out one sum, you'll probably get it wrong. The addition of the extra word "too" there didn't really change the meaning. It still conveys the meaning that you think the people posting too much (in your opinion) are scummy. And you still haven't explained why.

So why drop words...unless it serves a scummy (pun intended) purpose?

So what scummy purpose do you think there was to this dropping of one word?

And past performance means little going forward, whoever made that comment with the caveat that the players here may be stagnant enough for it to work.

Past performances are very relevant.

Most of that post you made was fluff. It's more distracting than actually adding anything useful. I have a hard time believing that you actually think the semantics debate is actually worth anything.

[Patrick]

I'm more concerned about Patrick/Elmo over defensiveness, and defensiveness over each other.

I pointed out how your comments about me were false, and wondered why you were giving other people preference who were guilty of what you accused me. You're deluded if you think that's being overdefensive. I really hate that kind of accusation. If you misrep people, they will point it out.

[Patrick]

Apple and JDodge were prodded, Ether editted that note into Glork's post, the one after his longish post.

[Patrick]

I see Patrick's behavior as inconsistent between the two, which further piqued my interest. He replied to my inquiries, and I was satisfied to the point where I wanted a re-read to decide where I was going to place my vote.

How is it inconsistent between the two? Sikario hadn't done what I voted apple for. In fact he hasn't done anything. If I'd voted for apple and said, "He's doing nothing" then yes, it would be inconsistent, because I'd be ignoring several others who have also done nothing. But in the actual case, I don't see the inconsistency.

I think Andy is the player who bothers me the most right now, and his last post seems suprisingly scummy to me. I say suprisingly, since he didn't actually change his vote. But he seems to be copying people alot, and doesn't strike me as really looking for scum. Crub's comment on wank makes me feel slightly better about him (Crub).

Unvote, Vote: Andy

[Patrick]

That's the second time Patrick has done that.

Done what?

[Patrick]

This bit makes me feel very ungood for some reason. I'd say Andy's been getting better as time goes on, and he was hardly that scummy to being with, just a lil' interesting. Just what exactly is wrong with his last post? And who's he copying?

I don't think he has been getting better as time goes on. I don't actually think he's done that much at all, despite posting. As for copying, look at his posts. I think that's about the fourth one where he copied someone almost exactly. In that last case, he copied Glork, and me, and used it to turn his (presumably) random vote, into a non random vote. Wank, if protown, looks like an easy target because he's annoying everyone and making zero sense.

Why're you throwing out that type of vague accusation that scum love so much about someone who's been the popular wagon, but past the point where anyone cares? You weren't much into him when he had four votes on. Or in fact, at all, previously. *squints suspiciously*

Not true. Read my posts. I didn't have a vote on him, but he has been one of my suspects for a while. Not heavily suspicious, but this game hasn't been one of the quickest off the ground anyway. You present it as though my vote came out of nowhere. Apple has only been very minorly suspicious to me, and Crub and wank haven't come off as particularly scummy in our debates. I decided to put my vote on my top suspect. I'm not sure how the fact that he had 4 votes earlier is relevant.

I truly hate lynching 'non-contributors' but I don't see a better lynch at the moment. And we can't just not lynch people because they don't make sense, because the meta will be horrific. So, uh, yeah. Let's hope this produces something interesting.

Non contributor? No, I've contributed more than alot of people. How the hell am I a non contributor when 3 people haven't said or done anything at all? I'm annoyed by this.

I'm going home this weekend, and sadly, the computer is broken. So no internet access this evening, all of saturday, some of/most of sunday. Just a heads up.

[Patrick]

That's the second time Patrick has done that.

Done what?

Jumped on a wagon just as it's taking off.

Not true at all. At the time I voted him, he had one vote on him. Apart from that, there were only a few drabs of suspicion on him, and one or two people had said they were getting protown vibes from him. Definitely not a wagon that was just taking off. Your vote for me is shoddy.

Elmo, I'd also like you to address my defence. Did you read my posts when claiming that I wasn't into Andy at all before, or was that just from memory? Also, I tend to think that there are worse non contributors than either wank or Crub.

Helpful is listing everyone's alignment? I can play that game.

I am of the opinion that everyone is a townie as there is no evidence to suggest the contrary.

Well let's put this a different way. We have a deadline coming up soon. It's not final, since we can extend it by being active enough, but what do you plan on doing over the next few days? You have expressed suspicions and placed a vote in this game, so what do you mean by saying that there is no evidence to the contrary?

[Patrick]

I'm not entirely sure what you're asking me. Your stated reasoning struck me as strange because put simply what you said with regards to my behaviour towards Andy wasn't true. The wording of the post where you voted me was somewhat ambiguous too.

Shanba's vote for me bothers me more than your vote for me. Hopefully I'll be able to articulate that when I have more time.

[Patrick]

Elmo, I don't generally state my suspicions with a high degree of certainty (I used to when inexperienced, but now I prefer to avoid looking like an idiot when wrong). On top of that, this game hasn't had that much happening so far. I realise my comments about Andy so far have been fairly lukewarm in tone, and that's mainly as a result of those two things. There simply isn't that much scummy behaviour yet to make me confident in anyone being scum. Currently he's my best guess, and even so I'd give him less than a 50% chance of being scum. At least I'm trying to find something, unlike some people.

Pretty much nothing about andy again until you suddenly go back to him and vote in 247. And I really don't see what prompted that, atm, the given reason is 240, but I don't see anything scummy there. It's basically stating the obvious. wank's an easy lynch, but you can make roughly the same case about Glork, or me, for example, and he needs wagoning (imo).

Your description of his post 240 is right; it's basically just stating the obvious. That's something I've noticed him doing quite alot. You and Glork did vote wank that's true, though in both cases I got more the impression it was for pressure. Maybe I'm not doing a great job of articulating this, but something in the way he copied other people almost exactly there didn't sit quite right with me.

I don't see any good reason why that one post affects your behaviour towards him so much, given you nigh-on ignored the wagon before, not so much as a FoS and only a couple questions.

See, it seems like you have the impression that I had a massive change of heart and switched my vote to him. Up until that point, the only people who I was really suspicious of at all were apple and Andy, despite scrapping with Crub and wank. As the game continued, Andy gradually overtook apple, so I switched to him. That's really all there is to it. Your claim that I nigh-on ignored Andy is wrong, and I don't know how many more people are going to accuse me of that. I don't see how it matters whether I FoSed him or not, what is important is what I said.

I'd also say there's a small contradiction in what you've said, in that 257 talks about Andy copying people for the forth time, and 247 talks specifically about his last post.

I don't see how this would be even a slight contradiction, even if what you said here were true. As it happens though, it's not true, if you look at my post 247, you can clearly see that I said, "But he seems to be copying people alot..." which refers to a general trend, and not just his last post.

It's not the reason for which Patrick voted (or did not vote) somebody. It's the fact that he hopped onto Apple with some momentum against him, but gave Sikario the "newbie player" free pass. I'd have expected Patrick to respond with the same type and amount of pressure to both players. He did not.

I don't get this at all. Setting aside the fact that you don't agree with it for a second, I had an actual reason to suspect apple. I had no reason to suspect sikario. So why would you expect the same type and amount of pressure on both players? This is ridiculous. It's normal to go harder after someone who has done something you find suspicious.

[Patrick]

Well, we need at least 6 to post in this 24 hour period to get the deadline extended by 24, and we've managed that already, so no desperate rush. We should probably keep this going until we hear from apple's replacement.

I agree that JDodge's vote for Andy seems somewhat off, although I still don't really think Andy smells like town. Self preservation can be scummy in some situations, but that post seemed reasonable. I'm starting to think Shanba could be an alternative though; looking back through his posts, I'm not especially impressed, and he feels vaguely like he did in Tapioca Mafia where he was a mafia godfather; some early pseudo activity, followed by quite alot of lurking. He has posted enough to stay off the list of complete lurkers, but still seems to be avoiding several topics. Elmo's vote for me I could see as legit, if misguided, and his posts leave me with more of an aggressive scumhunting feel. Still fairly meh on the idea of a wank lynch right now, since I think the other two would have a better chance of yielding dead scum.

vote Elmo, my hat's in the ring

any comments...?

Reasons behind this vote?

[Patrick]

But wouldn't Shanba benefit more from actively, if discreetly, pushing a bandwagon? Let the town lynch itself?

Not sure I understand. Actively pushing a bandwagon suggests a different thing to me than letting a town lynch itself.

I'll tell you why I voted later, advisement's over

Not good enough when we're deadlined in this way. If you have solid reasoning for thinking Elmo is scum, you need to share it now. I'm becoming a bit sceptical.

Shanba is the only one giving me scummy vibes, like he's trying to make up a distancing scene with anyone jumping on wagons.

Can you elaborate on what you mean here? Do you think Shanba is scum distancing himself from someone?

[Patrick]

Interesting job with the quote tags there IH. I'm going to assume the first quote that you attributed to wank is actually mostly you, since I can't remember anyone else saying those things.

As for people who strike me as town by default, there are loads. Ripley is one, petroleumjelly is another (though I've never been bitten there), Mert is probably another. People who appear to think similarly to me and who make clear posts basically. In the past I've been lazy, and allowed myself to overlook certain people just for those reasons, which can be dangerous. (There are also certain people who naturally come off as scummy to me, and again I have to tune my scumdar to that). As for the chance of Andy being scum thing, I don't often assign numbers. The only reason I pulled out the 3/11 figure is because that's the average chance from my POV of someone being scum, and I felt he was more likely than average. I don't know whether it would be nearer to 4/11 or 5/11.

I dislike Andy's post 166 I think.

Yeah, I pretty much agree with this, although on it's own it isn't much.

Ripley's outburst doesn't seem keeping with his character. Especially after open 20 and how he persevered there.

My interpretation was that Pie E7 has made him more cynical. I think he sounded genuine there but I don't find it an indicator of alignment.

Wank is being significantly more unhelpful than he was when I saw him as town. I am fine with my vote on him.

Interesting. Which game?

When you say you’re becoming a bit sKeptical and say that my reason isn’t good enough – what do you mean? You’re shooting one-liners. What do you think about Shanba, what is your opinion?

The reason I'm becoming a bit sceptical, is that so far you haven't really done anything at all, so I don't like how you think you're in a position to be witholding reasons, especially with a deadline. I don't know if your reason is good enough, because I don't know what it is, or even if you have one.

Your suggestion that I'm shooting one liners makes it obvious you haven't read my posts. And I gave an opinion of Shanba only a few posts ago. What's going on here?

[Patrick]

Elmo, any chance you could articulate why Shanba has given you weak town vibes earlier on?

[Patrick]

Hmm. Stuff happened. Welcome to the game Jonny.

I've gotten more suspicious of JDodge these past few pages. I could see him actually having that inconsistency as town, from what experience I have with him, but don't really like where he took it after that. The vote on Elmo seems a bit OMGUSy, and I don't see how Elmo was obsessing over the possible scumtell. With that said, Elmo: You pointed out his inconsistency in Post 323, but didn't vote him. Then when Glork voted him, you followed him. Were you waiting to see what he'd do first?

Both of the IH votes strike me as pretty weak.

@Patrick: You say my statement is not true. I say it is. When you vote for appleof88, Ripley had been grilling him and Elmo had his vote on him. It wasn't a bandwagon yet, but it definitely had the potential to become one. Then, when questioned on it, you just back off, but you don't unvote. You sort of defer to Glork adn say that your vote was weak, but you don't go anywhere with it. Then, on Andy: Andy had had a little wagon against him earlier, but you don't vote him (despite you admitting your apple vote was weak). Then, when there's a slight resurgence, with wank and crub indicating they don't like Andy's last post and then you vote for him. You say that there was only one vote and a few drabs of suspicion on him - yes, that's true, but there had been a wagon against him before and it's not inconceivable that it would pick up again. Basically, I just hate the timing of your two votes. Also, you never mention the apple vote.

I recognise that apple could have become a bandwagon, although I don't think that's a big deal early on. I did not back off from it, I just found myself having to explain it several times. Also, I don't think it was any more likely than usual that a bandwagon was going to form on Andy at the time I voted him. I think your "resurgence" thing is exagerated; wank and Crub only expressed disdain at worst, and didn't FoS or vote him. Weaksauce here.

I can sort of see the point about Glork. He's been noncommital in places, though he did make that large town list. I'm undecided on his alignment right now. I don't get any great protown vibes like I have done in the past, but nothing has really pinged the scumdar either. I think I liked his Post 245, though I'd still like him to explain how I've been inconsistent, if he's still maintaining that.

[Patrick]

Ok, Shanba. I suppose you're at least now not saying things about me which are blatantly false, though I still find the attack ridiculous overall.

Patrick: How are bandwagons started? To be sure, no one was calling for his head. But what if Andy had reacted badly to your vote? The residual suspicion on him was such that it could very eagerly have become a decent wagon. Hrm, how to explain.

I've left out the whole part about the forest. The "what if?" part is silly here. Is there some reason why Andy was likely to react badly to my vote, as opposed to say, anyone else? I didn't particularly get the impression he was freaking out when he had 3-4 votes on him, why would my vote suddenly make him "react badly"? Couldn't you be making this same point about alot of votes in this game?

My vote being the fourth means it's quite difficult for me to be moving onto a bandwagon that's just taking off, I would say. Also, my vote had a clear purpose that Patrick's lacked. Yes, perhaps it was an exaggeration to say that they were wagons that were just taking off. But it wasn't a large one. They both folllowed the mood of the last few posts pretty much exactly, and they were both on players who had been under scrutiny. I don't think what I said is as much of a stretch as you make out.

Actually, I don't think your fourth vote had that clear a purpose. A vote without any stated reason is pretty flexible for you. You can jump off later and claim it was only for pressure, or you can just leave it there and add some reasons later. My vote had the obvious purpose of expressing my suspicion of him. I still think you're overstating the mood or trend against him at the point, but I suppose that's more subjective. (I could accuse you of something similar regarding your vote on me, as Ripley said, Glork clears his throat for a possible vote on me, and you jumped in).

It somewhat bothers me how you seem to be ignoring significant parts of the game, and avoiding taking stances on them, though I suppose if you've been on limited access that excuses it slightly.

Andy, what do you think of JDodge? You've posted after the bandwagon formed on him but not commented on it.

Bleh. JDodge's last post causes me to waver on him slightly. Sikario, I might regret asking, but what was that stuff about testing him? Why would him refusing to vote the biggest rival wagon make you vote for him?

[Patrick]

We've got a bit over 5 hours until deadline hits, unless 3 more people post after me. Doesn't seem like that should be too hard to accomplish.

Also, although you've been going after Elmo, it looks like you're suspicions of Glork and me have just come out nowhere.

[Patrick]

Hardly surprising.

Vote: Patrick

Reason for this?

I don't know if I've ever listed dead peoples suspect lists before ... maybe, I've definitely seen it done by other people before ...

How much weight? Well generally we know that that's what they were genuinely thinking. So when they mostly co-inside with my internal thoughts a fair amount. It just gets added into the mix really.

I don't find it especially helpful to look at nightkills. It's not always WIFOM, but isn't often a useful line of enquiry either (with admittedly a few notable exceptions). Basically what people said already. I would like you to explain your other suspicions of myself and Shanba. I hope your suspicion of me is something better than being overdefensive by using the word targetted, because that outstayed it's welcome yesterday.

Hi Bookitty. I'm kind of meh on the case you have against sikario there. The first quote is self conscious, but maybe almost too much so to really be a tell. I'm not really seeing how the second one is self conscious at the moment, though I am admitedly rushing this post before I go home for the weekend and lose internet access. I'd still like sikario to explain what kind of test he was giving JDodge yesterday, because his logic seemed kind of backwards there.

IH, what did you think of the JDodge lynch yesterday? You were aware it was going down but I don't remember you giving any opinion on it, nor did you find it necessary to post and extend the deadline for another 24 hours.

So yeah, I'm unlikely to have any access at all this weekend. I'll vote next week when I've looked more thoroughly, but I still don't like Shanba.

[Patrick]

Decided I might have been wrong about Andy, as I'm not so sure a noobscumbag would have felt the need to pile onto JDodge at that point, when JDodge was likely going to be lynched by deadline anyway (even if not that immediate one). Not that his tendency to copy has really changed though.

IH needs to post something real. Sikario, and Crub, please answer the questions I asked you. Bookitty, got any thoughts on players other than sikario?

Vote: Shanba

[Patrick]

In 409 I asked you to elaborate on how you were testing JDodge, and why his response that he wouldn't vote for wank made you want to revote him.

[Patrick]

Bah. I lost the post I made earlier to an internet failure. Remembering it now.

I'd like Glork at some point to explain his projected scumgroup (which apparently didn't feel quite right before, but now he's

still

really sure of). Or, explain why sikario and wank (or heck, IH) are probably protown. I don't agree with the attack on Ripley's list; whilst that one wasn't especially useful, it's not out of character in my experience. I've pretty often seen him post thoughts without drawing a conclusion one way or the other.

I'm still happy with my vote on Shanba, as his play is still closer to the scum meta I described before than how I've seen him play as town. I'm also wary of how he appeared during his VLA time (which I think is over now), and posted in pretty much every other game except this one, and I still don't think his attacks on me look like genuine scumhunting.

IH needs to decide right now whether he's /in or /out. I'm getting a feeling of deja vu.

ok I'm going to vote:Patrick

@bookitty :

At least give me some craplogic to shoot down yo. Preferably not the same as yesterday's.

I should try and get some more thoughts down on other players tomorrow, once very last piece of work is finished this term. There's several people who are just on the meh pile who might need seperating.

[Patrick]

Shanba, I remember a day when I saw you come online and post in a bunch of other games and distinctly avoid this one. A quick look at your recent posts suggests that date was the 9th of December. I'm not really sure how you can deny spending more time in other games, up until post 490 you hadn't posted at all today despite the fact that the day has been going nearly 2 weeks.

It's really the fact that I've seen you, Shanba, and Ripley each do things that pinged my scumdar, and I've seen something happen re: literally every other player that pinged my "towndar" if you will.

Right. So why are sikario and wank probably protown? They're probably the two I'm having most trouble with at the moment.

[Patrick]

Bookitty seems pretty genuine for now. Although maybe the fact that she called me protown is swaying me a bit there.

First, this post:

What in my two posts made you think I'm protown?

doesn't seem like something scum would say. In my experience, scum tends to be so happy other people think they're town, they don't question why.

This post is more of the same thing:

I wondered about possible buddying up, since all his posts have contained comments about my innocence, but having read his reasoning I could see it as genuine (though even from my biased perspective, I don't agree with it).

I like the principle. It might be a bit premature to apply here though, as I might well have said that as scum too. But ok, I can believe you are sincere in saying this.

And later:

What does this mean? Why do you find it scummy that we're contributing alot?

Even though this comes later, and is odd in itself:

Non contributor? No, I've contributed more than alot of people. How the hell am I a non contributor when 3 people haven't said or done anything at all? I'm annoyed by this.

So Patrick is scummy for contributing a lot, AND not contributing? Um... how does that work?

Not sure what point you're making here, but what happened was wank apparently thought people contributing alot are scummy, then Elmo worded something awkwardly that made it look like he thought I was non contributor (but in fact he didn't).

The argument between Glork and Ripley looks more like playstyle difference than scumminess to me. I can easily believe Ripley is genuine in his last post. I don't really agree with Glork's protown vibes from wank and sikario that he cited there, but it seems fairly consistent with protown Glork, and if he's scum he's fairly boldly cutting out alot of options (or at least, making it difficult to move onto those players without good reasons). I have read both the games linked too a while ago, especially since I was in one of them.

Oh but I don't want to vote ripley And your vote on Patrick was one of the reasons I'm voting him

Why would Glork voting me be a reason to vote for me? Also, what are the other reasons for voting me? .

Mod

: please have a chat with IH.

[Patrick]

Tsh. I am going to be feel really stupid if Ripley is scum in this game. But I can't supress a bad feeling about this. The main reason I'm not seeing the scumminess others seem to be is that I think in general Ripley is fairly intolerant of people playing weirdly. I'm not sure I can think of an example right this second, but it comes from stuff I've seen him say to Simenon and IH on several occasions, and it's my meta on him. I don't like the way the "wagon" is moving forward. It's not actually a wagon of course, but it seems to have potential to be one, and people who I think are a good deal scummier are being ignored. The fact that Shanba has angled himself to get on there if necessary hardly makes me feel better about it.

Crub is rising on my suspicion list too, by refusing to answer any of my questions and because I think his attitude towards Glork is getting a bit icky. I will say that's more indicative of Crubscum Glorktown, and that I don't think Glork and Crub are scum together. Probably the only point in his favour is that he hasn't joined the Ripley hate that currently has me feeling uncomfortable.

I really hate this vote. Given the way the deadline rules work, Jdodge's lynch was not guaranteed, and Andy's vote changed nothing if a deadline hit. But if people had started being active, then it might have been more significant.

See my intepretation was a bit different. I wonder to myself what Andy had to gain if he's scum by doing this, and at the moment I'm not sure. That's the main thing that's made me waver on him.

The last votecount showed a bunch of spread out votes, which means we haven't got much consensus. I think those who haven't need to weigh in on some of the recent topics of conversation and take some stances, and give us an idea who they'd be willing to vote.

[Patrick]

That seems kind of inconsistent, given that you've never expressed suspicion of him all game, and you've barely attempted to lay out any kind of case against me that might persuade people to vote for me. Why give up so easily?

[Patrick]

Feel free to let Crub answer a question addressed to him. I'm sure he's capable.

[Patrick]

Unvote, Vote: Crub

mainly because deadline is fast approaching and I prefer a Crub lynch to a Ripley lynch. We've got about 50 hours left, unless 6 people post in the last day of it, which I'm not especially confident we're going to manage.

[Patrick]

I'm not the cop.

[Patrick]

I should probably let people know that I'm on very limited access this weekend; chess tournament and guest staying round. When I get on, it's usually just to do routine stuff. I'll attend to this game on monday.

[Patrick]

Mmm. Some weird stuff has been posted this weekend.

OK, I've reread the game. It occured to me to look to see who could have posted but didn't at the deadlines. The first deadline, the only uncleared/living players who posted were Patrick and Andy. It's certainly possible that if no one else was posting, the scum might not try to avoid the thread and instead try and draw points for being active. Because I like Andy/Patrick as a scumpair right now, especially re-reading this:

I'm not too sure what to say about this. I assume that you're not actually saying that posting for the day 1 deadline makes someone more likely to be scum, so it seems like you're saying it because it fits the picture you're trying to create.

Anyway, on to the day 2 deadline:
Three people posted, Glork wank and Boo. Sikario gets replaced overnight, and indeed had gone generally inactive by that point. IH is pro-town. That leaves Patrick, Andy and Crub. Hrm. It stretches the imagination that all three scum were deliberately avoiding, but eh, that is a remarkably nice fit. Patrick posted a votecount elsewhere that day, Crub also posted elsewhere and Andy posted too (though to be fair, they all only posted once elsewhere. Hrm.)

I couldn't get online for most of that day due to internet problems. I did indeed manage to get a votecount in somewhere else, but the local area conection was trashed. That said, I'd made my stance clear and had my vote where I wanted it, which brings me to you Shanba. Your vote wasn't anywhere at deadline. I know you posted in the vacation thread stating you'd be away for a week, and the deadline was known to hit during that week. Yet you didn't feel the need to do anything with your vote, or make a last post before leaving. That's a mindset I'd expect more from scum than town. I think you'd be more likely to care as town about having your vote somewhere useful. Your hypocrisy here is delightful.

Andy's stance on Crub looks very shifty to me, and the vague attempt to connect me to Crub is odd. I'd disagree with his characterisation of my "poking Crub", I did want the guy lynched yesterday instead of Ripley.

Re, Crub's vote for Ripley in the name of progress, I think Glork's defence of it ignores some of the information. On a day 1 I could dig voting someone to bandwagon for progress or reactions, but this was a day 2 where a mislynch would put us in lylo, and Crub had been kind of defending Ripley all game. Crub claims to be a protown player who thought I was scum, but didn't actually try and convince people of it with any real case, or even ackowledge any defences. If he'd at least tried and failed it would make more sense to me, but as it is, he just opted out. Glork defended him with "Because you're [Patrick] getting lynched tomorrow" which doesn't make sense as an explanation for Crub, because he apparently didn't suspect Ripley, so he didn't suspect a Ripley/Patrick scumpair as Glork did. Also, if Crub wanted to wagon someone to two votes, I don't get why he didn't do it to Shanba (who he had expressed suspicion of) instead of Ripley who he had no problems with. That makes me wonder about Crub and Shanba as scumbuddies.

I could dig a Crub/Shanba/Andy scumgroup, although I think IH is overstating the connections a bit. Andy's vote for Crub closely after mine yesterday leaves me torn. Could be a nervous attempt to bus. Sikario/TSQ is kind of a wild card since I struggled to get anything much out of sikario and TSQ hasn't read the game yet. Looking forward to his reread and Bookitty's. For now, I'd like Bookitty to explain what tipped her to vote Ripley yesterday over Crub.

I prodded Patrick and he took my top of the page.

[Patrick]

I'm having trouble seperating Crub and Shanba as my first and second suspect, though I think there's a good chance that's a false dilemna and that they're both scum. Andy is a close third, TSQ is fourth but really needs to say something, Bookitty is fifth. If I had one chance to call out the scumgroup now, it would be Crub/Shanba/Andy.

I can see the logic of Patrick/Andycyca quite easily. If Crub hadn't suggested that link himself I would likely believe a Patrick/Andycyca/Crub scumteam.

Well, Crub basically made the same point against me that I did against him. I think Andy has been trying to stay on the right side of me most of the game, and the vague way he tries to connect me to Crub may be a way of trying to throw suspicion on me later if Crub is lynched as scum. He draws that connection based on nothing substantial that I can see, but dilutes it alot, as though he doesn't want me to really antagonise me.

As for possibilities including other people. Sikario/TSQ could reasonably be with Andy. Andy doesn't mention him much, which is reasonable for scumbuddies, but also reasonable for town because of the way sikario played. It feels like TSQ is a bit high on his list today, or rather, that there's not much prescedent to him being that high on Andy's list, so that could be a little thing to look out for. I could also see sikario as compatible with Shanba though there's no special connection there, only a slight defence of Shanba by sikario on day 1, and not much from Shanba's end. Crub/sikario is possible, though nothing especially stands out. I don't see Bookitty/sikario as very likely based on a bit of meta of Bookitty. Am unsure on Crub/Bookitty being scum together; I think Bookitty doesn't like busing her partners when she's scum, which makes her Crub vote in 485 weird if they're partners, on the other hand she did help save him later, and he is someone I think is likely to be scum. I think Bookitty if scum is more likely scum with Shanba than Andy because I find her assessment of Shanba a bit lenient today, and she's nudged us slightly towards Andy in her last when she didn't particularly have to. Of course it's possible for her to be with both of them, though I'm still leaning town for her, and I think her analysis today shows more curiosity than the other suspects.

[Patrick]

I can hardly think straight now, and was mostly going to just say that I'm without any access at all from tomorrow until the 17th.

This recent stuff is interesting though. Crub posted his reasoning for voting Andy like 28 hours after Glork's 2nd vote. If Andy was town, I'd have been amazed to see the scumgroup pull off the lynch that quickly so Crub's reasoning there was obviously bunk.

Why do you think I'm voting Patrick?

Eh, well my instant reaction is that you voted me because Glork just told you to (at least, he told you to convince him to lynch me or Shanba).

I'll probably have more to say in the morning before I go, for now at least, nobody is in any sort of danger. I'd also be happy to see Crub present his cases, particular the one against me, mostly because I don't think he has one.

[Patrick]

Ok, so next to no time now as well. If I had to vote now it'd be Crub, as it is I'm not going to leave my vote out there whilst away for 3 days without access. I was going to call for TSQ to post something, but a look at a newbie game he's modding tells me he's having some kind of computer troubles.

Don't kill anyone while I'm away. I hope everyone will have weighed in on this by the 17th.

[Patrick]

Ok, I'm back, and alot has been posted while I was away. Bookitty, I find it unreasonable that you're accusing me of being too quiet, given that I posted pretty much everywhere that I'd be without access for 3 days. And no, it wasn't much fun.

Shanba's early vote and then unvote of Andy "Reasonably happy with Andy's response." Might be distancing. But then the argument with Andy in which Andy accused Shanba of pretending to distance from Patrick...Andy said this: "Also, I never said you and patrick are distancing, I commented that you might be trying to frame him on a "distancing" scene." Which seems to indicate an assumption that Patrick is town (or at least trying to give the appearance thereof). So Shanba and Andy might be scumbuddies, but Patrick and Andy are far more likely.

The first part makes sense to me, but I don't see how Andy possibly assuming that I'm town makes us more likely to be scumbuddies. It seems like the opposite conclusion to the one you've drawn here makes sense. How did you work this out?

I don't think Crub's phrasing when referring to the [scene to be added later] means anything, particularly. When he used the word "failed" I got the impression he was referring to the deadline rather than any result of a possible lynch.

I think that Crub's third vote for Andy makes them less likely scumbuddies than before, though I'm not as comfortable about it as some appear to be. I could see a shoddy bus attempt given the pressure Andy was under at the time (two confirmed town voting him, with most other players having him in their top 3 or higher). Not interested in lynching Andy today though after that.

This constant CPU error is really starting to piss me off.

The whole DWA debate... meh. I've heard the DWA thing brought up before, and have even read that game in which Seol used it, but I've never believed in it as a tell. I know I tend to jump heavily on weak points against me regardless of alignment. I mean, I'm prepared to believe TSQ believes in the DWA argument, but I simply can't agree with him here. I don't him particularly scummy as a result either though. I'm far more convinced in Crub/Shanba being scum and I think both of their lethargic attitudes are more indicative of being scum than town. I'm close to voting but I want to see the results of TSQ's read first.

[Patrick]

Shea, what's tthe status of the reread?

[Patrick]

Waves hi.

TSQ, you going to post anything at all?

[Patrick]

@Patrick:

A "reread" implies that TSQ has read the thread in the first place. As of two days ago, he stated he had not read the thread the first time. As in, at all. Which is a significant part of my reasons for voting him. This lack of curiosity and helpfulness during LYLO seems scummier to me even than what Crub has done. I was not aware that he had agreed to read the thread, but I might have missed that.

I meant read instead of reread, used the wrong word. The bit where TSQ said he'd read the game was In this post. I've been curious to know what he thinks of Crub especially, though just some general commentary of everyone wouldn't be bad.

If Crub is town then we're pretty much screwed at this point because a scumbag will be able to hammer him, but I think the chances of that are very slim. If it is happening though, don't keep us in suspense.

[Patrick]

Ugh. Now I'm tempted to hammer now just to find out straight away whether Crub's scum or not.

Shanba's vote is different to his expressed views, not only from the start of today, but also from directly after I made my 3rd vote on Andy.

It doesn't seem that inconsistent, since he said he believes the scumgroup is probably Crub/Patrick/TSQ.

That said Shanba, I hate it when people use rhetoric against me

[Patrick]

Meh. If Crub is town he's going to be hammered by scum soon because there's at least two protown players on him. Might as well find out now.

Vote: Crub

I know you're still there, so please just tell me what your role was.

[Patrick]

Sorry, forgot this.

When a player has the majority of the votes at a single point, it is dead and the game goes to twilight. No one may post in twilight.

[Patrick]

Hmm. Yay!

I felt incredibly nervous early on in this game. First time as scum in a while, and up against some good players for the for the first time (as scum). My bad apple vote was just nerves, I think, and I was lucky more people didn't find it scummy. The wank then JDodge distractions were very welcome. On night 1, Shanba was away so me and Andy were choosing the kill. We wanted to kill Glork but chickened out of it because we thought he was too likely a candidate for doc protection. I think Elmo wasn't a bad choice though.

Day 2 I thought Glork might have a guilty on me when he voted me out of the gates, so I lurked until I could figure out whether it was true or not. I thought one of myself or Shanba almost had to go down, but again a welcome distraction appeared. I just lurked around deadline to avoid having to save Ripley from the lynch. We killed wank basically because we thought he was a decent bet for a powerole and wouldn't be doc protected.

On day 3 I honestly, genuinely thought we'd be screwed despite lylo. Cop + hidden doc is very very powerful, and Glork and Crub seemed to have much of the scumgroup figured out. Crub was the most obvious vulnerable townie, but it didn't seem like we could get him lynched until his weird third vote on Andy. I expected to have to bus Andy and then IH would investigate Crub innocent, and things would have been tricky for us. But yeah, another oppotunity came along right when we needed it. Me and Shanba sweated a bit (well alot actually) over the night 3 kill, but it could only really have failed if Glork was the doc, who we'd marked down as unlikely.

Overall, we didn't play that well but somehow kept stumbling through. Thanks to everyone for the game, thanks to my scumbuddies for really making me feel like part of a team, and thanks to Ether for modding and listening to my rantings all game, some of which I've posted here.

[Patrick]

It's Ether's fault. I never asked for this role.

._.

[Patrick]

Crub, what is a Crub? Nobody seems to be able to tell me. What inspired the name?

[Patrick]

It's not mandatory, but I'd appreciate some feedback on my play specially bad points that I could improve on.

Yeah, your main mistake was the one I told you about on AIM; the accusation that Shanba might be fake distancing from me, which seemed like a really convoluted theory that no townie would think of. I asked you to clarify it to try and give you a way back, but it didn't help so I dropped it. Then Shanba started using it against both of us...

Maybe there were a few other small things, like near the end of day 2 I felt uncomfortable with how quickly you seemed to follow me onto the Crub vote, but on the whole you made fewer mistakes than both your more experienced partners. You seemed to be lurking at all the right times as well, although I guess that would have stood out more with an active town. I think at several points on day 2 I felt like you'd be our only hope of winning it.