Mini 615: The Eclipse- Game!

[icemanE]

vote: Sleepy Panda

WAKE UP!

[icemanE]

I think the hunter should definitely claim if he's about to be lynched - with only 8 it's not worth killing someone we aren't totally sure is either cult or king. Additionally, isn't it game over once it's mathematically impossible that there isn't another townie?

[icemanE]

Not if the hunter hasn't used his shot. If he knows he's in a situation like that, he should stay alive as long as possible and try and blend in as a CR. Obvious the cult will have the advantage of have the CR know who the hunter is, but the cult won't be 100% sure.

I see what you're saying now... this is a much more complicated game than it at first appears to be...

[icemanE]

So is random voting a no-no in this setup as well?

[icemanE]

So is random voting a no-no in this setup as well?

Not at all. Random voting is good for the same reasons its good in normal mafia here as the scum is still the informed minority at the start.

OK. I asked because I noticed that only 2 of the 5 players that have posted so far have voted - it's pretty much S.O.P. to throw out a random vote in your first post.

[icemanE]

I asked because I noticed that only 2 of the 5 players that have posted so far have voted

EBWOP: Only 2 of 5 voted in their first post.

[icemanE]

OK, so to make sure I have the rules straight for this setup:

- The town wins when the demon king is dead, regardless of whether they are outnumbered by cultists, and the town cannot lose until the hunter has shot.
- The Demon King / cultists win when the hunter has shot and there are not enough townies to lynch the DK.

Does that sound right?

[icemanE]

What do you think of Jaguar being replaced and the extended time taken to open the thread?

I think it's an interesting point and enough information to base a day one lynch on.

unvote - vote: Windkirby

[icemanE]

What do the rest of you think about the Jaguar replacement issue, and why was that question only addressed to me, Awesomepants?

[icemanE]

What do the rest of you think about the Jaguar replacement issue, and why was that question only addressed to me, Awesomepants?

I don't. Mods usually do that to ensure that to ensure no one is cleared by replacement timing.

So it's a nulltell from where you're standing.

The only reason I see it as at all significant is that there are only two roles who actually need to take some kind of action before day one can begin. However, he never even picked up his PM, apparently, so it can't mean anything that he was replaced.

[icemanE]

As for me, the phrasing of WK's idea that 'I can see where iceman is coming from; it's a valid point that I would probably take into consideration if it wasn't me. Still, however, I'm pretty sure the period from when I got my role PM and the time when the thread opened up was pretty short.' rings a few bells. He seems almost like he wants to get rid of the idea but doesn't want to do it in an obvious way that'd draw attention to himself.

That's a good point - while the replacement delay scenario itself is a nulltell, the passage you quote is quite wishy-washy and somewhat suspicious.

[icemanE]

I'm willing to lynch based on something fairly baseless rather than random lynching

What the heck?

unvote - vote: Xyzzy

We don't have to do either - we can base a lynch on something that appears scummy, like what you just said.

[icemanE]

Hmm... an OMGUS reaction.

Your response doesn't do much to convince me I should move my vote...

[icemanE]

@ Bogre -

If you agree, why didn't you move your vote?

[icemanE]

OK, I reviewed the game setup. I think X is at best a CR, not the DK. I'm willing to hammer on him if you all think it's worth killing a CR instead of finding the DK on day one, but before I hammer I'd like to hear what the replacement has to say about X first.

[icemanE]

OK, I reviewed the game setup. I think X is at best a CR, not the DK. I'm willing to hammer on him if you all think it's worth killing a CR instead of finding the DK on day one, but before I hammer I'd like to hear what the replacement has to say about X first.

I agree we should wait on the replacement to post, but why do you think Xyzzy is only a recruit?

Two reasons:

1. I doubt the DK would act as scummy as X. I get the feeling he may be trying to draw the hunter's shot for the DK.

2. No one has said anything to defend X, which the DK's recruit would definitely do for the DK. That's why I want to wait for the replacement to pitch in before we kill X.

[icemanE]

1 is semi-valid, but I'm not really sure on it. Seems like an extension of the Too Townie argument.

2 I definitely disagree with, but explaining it would not be in the best interest of the town right now.

Yup, it's not a theory I'm going to argue is totally accurate, but it's the impression I get. Somehow I think our chances of nailing the DK on day one are just 1 in 8 - i.e., hopefully I'm wrong about X. Either was he is definitely the scummiest player thus far and therefore deserves the lynch, as soon as Jaguar weighs in.

[icemanE]

Iceman jumping on voting for my replacement without a second thought also screams scum

What I said was I was going to hammer X once you participated, which you have. So I will.

vote: Xyzzy

The only thing I was really looking for from Jag was to see whether or not he would jump in the way of an Xyzzy lynch. He didn't.

I have to say, FoS on both Bogre and Jag for essentially saying "I'm OK with a lynch on Xyzzy" but not hammering. Especially Bogre, who said:

However, I guess there are no real power roles we have to worry about quicklynching, so I suppose hammering now would be okay.

[icemanE]

Now I feel stupid. I don't have two votes.

[icemanE]

So would the DK not do well to pick the scummiest looking people to recruit for the next day then?

Let's try these two situations:

A. Assume X is not the DK, and that we do not lynch X today. The DK would probably choose to recruit DK tonight based on the fact that he appeared scummy today - this means he would be a sitting duck who would potentially absorb the kill on the next day.

B. Assume X is not the DK, and that we DO lynch X today. Would the DK most likely choose to pick the next SCUMMIEST person or the person who appeared most protown the first day?

It's all speculation but it's important in terms of how you play your cards - as Darox said, every townie bar the hunter will lose this game if we don't lynch the DK.

[icemanE]

Wow.

Really do not like that post.
Asking for advice on how to play the DK?

Add that to a desire to kill xyzzy quickly, and I think we may have a winner.

Unvote: xyzzy
Vote: icemanE

Yeah, I was afraid my post would be interpreted that way after I reread it. What I meant by "it's important in knowing how to play your cards" was not "knowing how to play the DK" but "knowing how the town should view lynches". Anyways, any chance you could attempt an answer to my post?

[icemanE]

What is this post even saying?

Essentially, I'm still wondering if we should be lynching based solely on trying to find the DK, or if it's worth it to lynch recruits as well. It will help me make up my mind on whether I think X is the right play today or not.

[icemanE]

As far as I can tell, its asking what the optimal DK strat would be. Hence my vote.

Do you REALLY think I'd ask the town for advice as the DK? Really?

[icemanE]

Sim-posting: We should be trying to lynch scum.
If said scum is DK, this is a bonus, but is not required, unlike normal cult games.

Hence my previous post that we can win through solely lynching cultists.

See, I thought you said all townies would lose if we lynched cultists. If we kill a cultist today, there will be a new one tomorrow - say we kill that one - then theres a new one - etc until the hunter shoots the DK, if that happens, in which case only a few of us win, or the cult wins if the hunter doesn't shoot right. So we can't all win as town if we lynch recruits - you said that yourself. I don't feel like playing to get recruited.

[icemanE]

Arm - are you thinking along the lines that Darox is - i.e., are you suspicious that either myself or X or both myself and X is a recruit and/or the DK?

[icemanE]

You shouldn't BE playing to get recruited, you should be playing to your current win conditions.

Exactly what I'm saying. Which is why I think we (assuming you're a part of the town) should be playing only to lynch the DK. It makes sense to me to help as many people as possible win the game. That's the reason I'm wary of a lynch on X - like I said before I'm not convinced he's the DK. However, on day one, when town still has the vast majority, I'm not overly concerned about it - I just think from D2 on we should be zoned in on nailing the DK only.

[icemanE]

If you play to get recruited you are likely to get lynched, which means your win condition is fixed as town, as well as hurting the town. This all adds up to you being a failure.

Also, I just said I didn't want to play to get recruited, so you're refuting a point that doesn't exist. And personal attacks aren't really my favorite.

[icemanE]

Also, Iceman, just aiming for the DK just bad logics the game to pieces. You get into things like too scummy and what not. Right now I'm just voting for the person who is most deserving of a lynch (Xyzzy), which should eventually get the DK.

Fair enough. I can see how it would be a liability to delay or decide against lynches on scummy people based on the notion that they might not be the DK.

[icemanE]

Right, I was honestly asking for opinions and the opinions I have received have convinced me that it's the right course of action to lynch whoever is most suspicious at any given time. This is a strange setup and I want to make sure to play it as best I can.

[icemanE]

So you claim to want as much of the town to win as possible, then state you are reluctant to lynch xyzzy (Despite trying unsucessfully to hammer him just one page ago), then state you're not worried about the first day, and are fine about letting another townie turn cult. Do you not care about the person who will be recruited N2? Are they not part of your group of townies who should win the game?

Explain this, thanks.

I do want as much of the town to win as possible. I've been going back and forth on the issue of whether or not it makes sense to kill potential recruits pretty much all game. However, I realized that lynching the scummiest person is the only sensible course of action.

Your last two sentences are silly. You're trying to make my idea that as many people as possible should win sound stupid. Whether X is cult or town, someone is getting recruited tonight, so that's beside the point. If he is DK then town wins, of course, so with my new strategy in hand I feel confident in lynching him now.

[icemanE]

However, I realized that lynching the scummiest person is the only sensible course of action.

Since when? Your posts say otherwise.

Since post 114. Check it out.

[icemanE]

So, care to explain why you were willing to (and indeed tried to) contradict your strategy by lynching xyzzy despite not believing he was the DK?

Well, I didn't have a set strategy at the time.

Like I said, I've been back and forth on the issue since I started to think about it early on. Here's what I had to say a few posts before I tried to hammer X:

OK, I reviewed the game setup. I think X is at best a CR, not the DK. I'm willing to hammer on him if you all think it's worth killing a CR instead of finding the DK on day one, but before I hammer I'd like to hear what the replacement has to say about X first.

So clearly, until quite recently, I've been unsure of whether or not lynching a cult is worth the day or not. At the time I thought it was - then, after I realized my hammer didn't go through, I started to rethink it.

[icemanE]

So its ok to lynch him regardless of alignment because the DK will recruit someone else?

Of course not. You've taken that post out of context. What I'm saying there is that when we lynch someone today, unless it's the DK, no matter who it is, cult or town, there WILL be another conversion tonight and therefore it's necessary to accept the fact that at least one more person will not win with the town. It was part of my response to your question, not an independent idea.

[icemanE]

This is apparently a game where you come under fire for asking questions and making comments about the setup...

[icemanE]

That's a pretty opportune turn around.

Tbh, I think you and Darox's play since my question post has been infinitely more opportunistic than anything I've said. Not only have you established a 'ducks-in-a-row' scenario, you're also employing Argument from Repetition by saying "X is the right choice today" and subtly established a false dilemma, all because one player mentioned he was unsure of how to proceed in the game.

It isn't limited to a choice between myself and X today - there are 6 other options as well. In light of recent activity:

unvote - vote:armlx

[icemanE]

Aditionally, armlx has hinted a couple of times that he has some kind of knowledge that the rest of us don't. Here's an example:

2 I definitely disagree with, but explaining it would not be in the best interest of the town right now.

This is something scum does to preserve themselves, and hint at possibly being a power role. However, in this game, we only have one protown power role, and even if we kill that power role it's power will transfer to another player. So in this case he is not even hinting that he is a power role with extra info - he's simply witholding information and stalling to make it seem as if he knows something we don't, which is an attempt to make it seem like we need to keep him around to get that info.

Additionally, as I noted, what Xyzzy said was the scummiest thing said so far in the game at the time that he said it, which is why I voted for him. However, after I voiced that I had a feeling Xyzzy might not be the DK, armlx said:

I legitimately think xyzzy could be the DK here.

This is a very strong conclusion to make from interpreting two posts, which, in my mind, were not strong enough to warrant such a conclusion.

[icemanE]

I notice a contradiction between this and your attempted hammer.

That doesn't negate what the post I made says. That attempts to dismiss it without actually confronting anything else I said.

Heh, OMGUS much?

If it were OMGUS it would have come a long time before, and would be on Darox, not you. You play a more active role in the activity I mentioned, which is why my vote is on you.

I strongly dislike Bogre's vote. He declined to hammer, but once the option is open for him to vote without actually placing the hammer, he jumps right in on the b/w.

[icemanE]

Hmm... in looking back at the posts X has made so far this game I actually don't find them too scummy at all. I think I (and maybe the others voting for him) misread his posts. Here's the first:

I'm willing to lynch based on something fairly baseless rather than random lynching, simply because random lynching in AITP is a fairly solid strategy.

This says he DOES NOT want to random lynch. Clearly. His wording is poor but it appears to me that he actually has the same strategy that Darox, armlx, and the others currently on X's bandwagon are currently employing - that is, he seems to be saying that he is willing to base a lynch on fairly minimal evidence RATHER than random lynching. Yet the responses to his post are clear misinterpretations of that:

The only reason to lynch randomly in this game is to promote a cult win.

Note: X said he DID NOT want to random lynch. In other words, this post ^ did not correctly interpret and address the post it responds to. Additionally:

One of the reasons you quickly and randomly lynch people in AITP is because you don't want to give away the king and throw the game to scum.

This is not an issue for the town in this game.

Another misinterpretation.

X's second post reads:

today, we have the benefit that the recruitees do't know that they're going to be scum yet - a good strategy might be to have each player decide on an order of scumminess today - since the scum has one recruit, there'll be almost nothing to go on today, but tomorrow and beyond we can use the information about who no longer supports what to our advantage much more than in regular games.

Maybe I'm missing something, but how is this not a valid point? X suggests that each player decide who they think is scummiest today - which isn't a scummy thing to say, as it's something that every player does automatically - you vote for the scummiest person, AKA the person on top of the list of who you think is scummy. Then he says that townies do not know that they'll be recruited yet, so it's worthwhile to note any changes in behavior from day 2 onwards.

What's wrong with that post? Nothing.

Yet here is how Darox and armlx respond to it:

Suggesting we should throw away the D1 lynch and let the cult grow bigger makes me happy with my vote.

Darox refutes the suggestion he implies is X's point - AKA, a strawman attack.

Lol, so much wrong here. Just give the cult leader full info, make lynches set up ahead of time, etc.

Another strawman. You can't summarize someone else's argument in your own words and refute THAT point - you have to directly refute the point the post itself provides, or at least gain confirmation that that was the intent of the post, to make a refutation valid.

The number of logical fallacies armlx and darox have accumulated thus far strengthens the resolve of my vote.

[icemanE]

Hammering early is typically bad town play, hence why he was reluctant to do so.

And yet he states in a post that he would be OK with hammering. It's saying you agree with doing something and then NOT doing it that's scummy about Bogre so far.

[icemanE]

One more thing to note - they've essentially done and said everything as a team.

[icemanE]

Fairly baseless = random.

No. Fairly baseless means it has a base, but not a strong one. Random means it's out of thin air.

Nice try to attempt to use stereotypical logical fallicies to drive an attack.

Nice try USING those sterotypical logical fallacies yourself - I didn't use them, I pointed them out - you used them, and the fact that they're commonly used enough to be pointed out on the wiki does nothing to detract from the fact that they exist in your play.

[icemanE]

You are the one mislabeling people's behavior here.

If you could go through the arguments I've pinned the logical fallacies onto and explain how they don't apply to them, then you might be able to back this up. But I believe they're accurate.

[icemanE]

From the wiki:

A "Straw man" argument (also called "setting up a straw man") involves mischracterizing your opponent's position in order to present a weaker argument than they have actually given, thereby allowing you to defeat it. It usually involves subtle changes to the given facts of the matter, or minor changes to wording that lead to semantic differences in what is said.

The first sentence is what applies to this situation. You mischaracterize his position.

[icemanE]

Because the way your response post reads makes it seems as if X were saying those things - it doesn't say "here's why the logic is bad", it says "Lol, so much wrong here. Just give the cult leader full info, make lynches set up ahead of time, etc. " which makes it sound as if that's what X is trying to say. Your post is a strawman because you characterize his argument as "we should give the cult leader full info and set up our lynches ahead of time".

[icemanE]

But that was what he was basically suggesting we do.....

He says we should form lists of who we think is scummy. He doesn't say we should post them or share them, so he doesn't suggest giving the cult leader info. He also doesn't suggest setting up lynches ahead of time - he says we should take behavioral notes and note changes in days to come.

[icemanE]

Xyzzy's entire plan revolves around sharing those scum lists. Its based on the idea that if someone gets recruited their suspicions will be greatly different from their previous scumlists.

Attacking someone for misrepresenting someones argument while you don't have a clear idea of what the argument is, is a logical fallacy.

I think we need clarification from X himself on this issue before we can solidify who is right and wrong in this situation.

I see what you're saying and it's a possibility. However, the way I read his post was that he thought we should decide who we think is scummy and if opinions change greatly as days go by, it's notable and potentially a scumtell.

As I said, I think X needs a chance to clarify and defend his position.

[icemanE]

@ Darox about Bogre:

This is a direct quote of Bogre's post about hammering. This is the full post, for context.

@ Bogre -

If you agree, why didn't you move your vote?

He's -1, I don't want to hammer him quite yet as the day's only a few pages in, but I am planning on doing so.

However, I guess there are no real power roles we have to worry about quicklynching, so I suppose hammering now would be okay.

He says he doesn't want to hammer him but is planning on it. Then he says it would be OK to hammer. But he doesn't. I didn't take anything out of context.

[icemanE]

As I said, I think X needs a chance to clarify and defend his position.

Again, coming from the guy who attempted a hammer.

Yup, and the fact that the hammer didn't go through has given me time to rethink my original position - I'm lucky, for that. I've also explained it before, and you're taking that piece of the quote totally out of context - standing alone next to your comment it looks like I'm saying I want to give him a chance to clarify because I think he's suspicious - within the full post is clearly means there is an open argument which can't be resolved without X's participation. Strawmanning -

It usually involves subtle changes to the given facts of the matter, or minor changes to wording that lead to semantic differences in what is said.

Please stop doing that.

[icemanE]

He didn't change any facts.

He stated you tried to hammer, which you did.

Whether it succeeded or not does not change the fact you tried to hammer.

I guess you didn't read my post in full.

Anyways, I don't see a huge turnover happening today resulting in an armlx lynch, so I think it's worth the 1 in 8 to try X. If what Darox says is true, I suppose it was a scummy plan.

unvote - vote: Xyzzy

[icemanE]

Personally I sort of hope he's not the DK - this was a pretty boring game if he is.

[icemanE]

@ Darox about Bogre again - I guess you didn't read either my post or Bogre's post in full AGAIN.

[icemanE]

I notice you took the easy path again.

Agree. Unfortunately, this makes me suspect Xyzzy was a townie.

Why?

[icemanE]

Your waffling the whole time he was on L-1 makes me feel you are scum debating whether they can get away with a hammer.

I guess we'll have to see what he flips. It could go either way - whether town or scum, we won't be doing any harm, that's what I figured and that's why I hammered. We'll have a smaller pool and a better chance of hitting scum tomorrow, if X isn't the DK. So we'll have to see what happens.

[icemanE]

What do you have to say for yourself here?

What do you have to say for yourself? Your vote was on X too, the 5 of us were wrong. X was the scummiest player yesterday and as a result was lynched. Luckily, he didn't use his shot, so we have another hunter out there.

We now have a 3 in 7 chance of getting a cultist or the DK. However, the sketchy thing is that if this were a normal game, we'd be in lylo. We need to nail a bad guy this go around if we want any chance at the hunter hitting the right target. I'm gonna do a full reread of this short game, and I think no one should vote until everyone has participated a fair amount. It only take 4 votes, so with 1 vote on the wrong person, the three scum can pile on quickly, and then we're screwed. Even putting one vote on someone is risking their lynch at this stage in the game.

[icemanE]

Umm, way to not respond to 90% of the reasons everyone thought you were scummy yesterday? Your hammer on xyzzy was only the last of a long series of arguments.

I guess I'll have to look back at yesterday. I thought I answered everything. Whether or not the answers satisfied you is another issue, and I'm not going to go out of my way to appease you, as I think your whole case on me yesterday was built on opportunism, and is obviously unfounded. Obviously I expected votes from you and Darox today, and my suspicion of the two of you carries into today as well. However:

I don't like this much:

I'm starting to become suspicious of how much Darox disregards the town's capability of lynching the DK.

FoS: Darox

and

vote: IcemanE

. Even though if Darox is scum, there's a fair chance IcemanE isn't, (as they've been enemies throughout the game,) I still feel as though putting IcemanE one vote away from getting lynched may reveal something interesting.

Actually, that was a dumb move. unvote, vote: Darox I'd rather speculate on the IcemanE wagon until it's lynch time.

That indecision, in combination with this:

All the same, I can see where iceman is coming from; it's a valid point that I would probably take into consideration if it wasn't me.

...is enough for a

vote: windkirby

I'm comfortable voting now that my three biggest suspects have already placed votes.

[icemanE]

Your level of OMGUS is about a 9 now Iceman.

It looks like OMGUS because I'm more or less the center of attention right now, and I'm not going to not vote for someone solely to avoid looking OMGUS. If someone acted as strangely as wind just did I'd be suspicious of them regardless of their target.

[icemanE]

Your points dont really stand as he still notes suspicion of darox.

How does that change anything? You're nitpicking. You simply can't see a response of mine stand unchallenged and so you have to come up with stuff like that.

[icemanE]

My point is his posts aren't a complete 180 like you are saying.

I'm not saying they're a complete 180. I'm saying he's unsure of his vote and as such is moving it around, which to me looks scummy - it seems like he's trying to avoid looking like he's bandwagoning.

Even if they were, thats more indicative of a recruit then the DK.

Can you explain what this means? When did I say I thought he was the DK?

Are you the DK arm? Is he your recruit? I don't understand.

[icemanE]

Hunter claims are bad as recruiting > NK.

Also, why are recruits better than NKs? I think the opposite. One more dead is one less suspect - and therefore one less person for the hunter to have to choose from when its time to shoot.

[icemanE]

VOTE: IcemanE

You are something scum.

Lol.

So we have 3 scum today and I have 4 suspects. The hunter is going to be screwed tomorrow If you lynch me. Especially if you let players like Bogre slide under the radar. I've explained why I was suspicious of his yesterday, and this lurkvote makes me even more so.

Okay, well when you put it like that, I see what you're saying. It seemed to me like you could be the DK or a cultist very confident that the DK wouldn't get lynched. But seeing the DK lynch as a bonus makes sense. unvote

We had this discussion yesterday. And what really doesn't make sense about this post is that you say:

It seemed to me like you could be the DK or a cultist

and then you unvote him. and the only reason you give for unvoting him is that it would be a bonus to lynch the DK. What the hell is that? I'm confident in my vote now.

[icemanE]

Hey, how about we don't splice apart my sentences so that they're not misrepresented?

OK.

It seemed to me like you could be the DK or a cultist very confident that the DK wouldn't get lynched.

There's the full sentence. It still means the exact same thing. The second part of it was uneccesary as it only served to elaborate on WHY you thought he might be a cultist.

I figured a townie would figure that the DK could be caught, whereas if Darox was part of the scum group, a confidence in no one suspecting him yet could give him the mindset that the DK wouldn't be caught.

I still have no idea what this means. How did his explanation that killing scum, whether cult or DK, is worth it, erase your suspicion of him? Why were you suspicious of him in the first place - your explanation is that you were suspicious of him for doubting that we could lynch the DK - why is that suspicious? This is what made me initially suspicious of you - that's a crappy reason to vote someone, and it seems like the only reason you unvoted me and voted him was to appear as if you weren't just bandwagoning me, and you came up with a bizarre and weak reason to transfer your vote in order to do that, and I think you're distancing from Darox at the same time, since you removed your vote from him so quickly and easily.

[icemanE]

As far as where we had that discussion yesterday, myself, armlx, and Darox talked about it for like a full page.

[icemanE]

So the lack of hammering tells us either all 3 of me, Darox, and Bogre are cult, or Iceman is the DK

OK, there it is. Which of you is the DK? That's who I'd like to lynch.

unvote

[icemanE]

You are. Thats the point.

That's the point you were implying, I realize that. But the funny thing is that you admitted the truth in the first part of your statement.

Anyways, I think Bogre was the recruit from last night, which leaves you and Darox as potential DKs. It's a tough choice. I'll go back to my thinking from yesterday.

vote: armlx

[icemanE]

Hmm... the scary thing about what armlx just said is that it makes the hunter's choice even more difficult. I think arm and Darox are definite scum, but I'm sort of on the fence between WK and bogre as last night's recruit. The hunter will be forced to look at Darox and Bogre tomorrow if we lynch arm today because arm said the three of them are cult - Bogre might not be a cultist, which is a bummer for the hunter, because he'll be a suspect tomorrow. If you lynch me today it'll be even harder for the hunter tomorrow because arm spread suspicion.

[icemanE]

Hi, I'm an appeal to emotion that assumes I'm not cult.

How is it an appeal to emotion. I'm stating a fact, not saying "PWEEZ DON'T WYNCH ME!" And of course my posts are going to assume I'm not cult.

[icemanE]

That's still not an appeal to emotion. I'm explaining why your "either the three of us are cult or iceman is the DK" statement is scummy and hurts the town's chances of picking the DK. Even if you don't see it as scummy it's certainly not protown.

Plus that's a false dilemma. Those are not the only two possibilities. At all.

[icemanE]

You only are saying this because the prominent possibility I proposed is you are scum.

Do you deny that what you've said is scummy or not? You don't contest it - what you said is bad for the town, and scum are against the town.

[icemanE]

How is it bad for the town to explain that the only alternative to you being the DK is a specific set of 3 players being cult? If you can explain this to me, I will admit my post did not help the town.

Because first of all, that statement is completely unfounded. Those are not the only two possibilities - there are any number of possible combinations, and the only way I can imagine you actually believing that those are the only two possibilities is if you, darox, and bogre actually are the three scum. Otherwise, there's no possible way you could know that those are the only two possibilities.

The way it hurts the town is that, no matter who we lynch out of me, darox, and yourself (armlx), bogre is immediately going to be high on the list of suspects tomorrow because of what you said. That is, even if he isn't a recruit or the DK, the hunter is automatically going to have to group him in with suspects, which means that if he isn't scum today, the cult probably won't recruit him tonight, but he'll still be a suspect because you grouped him in with yourself and darox.

Here:

If we lynch me today, when you realize I'm town it will leave armlx, darox, and bogre alive - all three suspects that armlx groups in as being one of only two possible scenarios (which is a false dilemma).

If we lynch arm or darox today and they turn up scum, that will automatically incriminate bogre and either darox or armlx, depending on which one we lynch.

So you've harmed the town by creating a false dilemma that, no matter what, makes things more difficult for the town by forcing the hunter to look at two people (bogre and darox, if we lynch you and you're scum) who may or may not be actually tied in with you - it's a good tactic for scum to create dummies that will draw attention off of others like you have.

[icemanE]

Because first of all, that statement is completely unfounded. Those are not the only two possibilities - there are any number of possible combinations, and the only way I can imagine you actually believing that those are the only two possibilities is if you, darox, and bogre actually are the three scum. Otherwise, there's no possible way you could know that those are the only two possibilities.

Again, if there was a scum off the wagon they would have hammered by now if you were not known scum to them, so I guess there is a 3rd possibility of the DK being off the wagon, you being a recruit, and them not wanting to bus.

So you're saying that either:

A. I'm scum. And you speculate that three townies have all placed votes on me, and not a one of the other scum want to bus me.

or

B. You, Darox, and Bogre are scum.

Given that your explanation of the possibility that I'm scum is based in WIFOM, and that the other possibility you provide is something you could actually KNOW FOR SURE, B is clearly the more probable of the two.

But here's the thing - did you take into account that me, you, and Darox are far and away the most active players in this game? Ever heard of lurking? We've been at each other's throats since day 1 - you're doing the scum's work for them, if they're hiding in the cracks. But if you're seriously convinced that the only two possibilities are A and B, then I have no choice but to believe you're scum - given the knowledge that I have of my role, stacked against your own explanation of the two possibilities, it narrows it down to B automatically - which is why I'm positive that, of the three, at least you (armlx) are scum.

[icemanE]

I tried.

[icemanE]

Heh, phew, logically you had to be town.

I wish the town had realized that.

[icemanE]

I don't understand what it going on!!!

...I've been lynched. We're just waiting on a death scene...

[icemanE]

Heh, phew, logically you had to be town.

Or DK. Which is what I said.

Still trying to appear town, even after he's succeeded in getting me lynched. You know who the DK is bud.

[icemanE]

You played so scummily either way.

Lol. I'll save my answer to that for after the game. I'm dead now, now more posting for me. Good luck hunter.

[icemanE]

Damn.