Mini #717 - Alpha Centauri Smalltown (Game Over!)

[ortolan]

Hullo friends, will read etc.

[ortolan]

I'm just going to post my unfinished analysis because I think the ultimate post may be too big otherwise. I'm up to ~halfway through Page 13 right now, so I'm not sure of the events after that which led to Gremwell being tied for the lead lynch. I hope you will indulge me and wait for me to finish my analysis before lynching me, if you intend to.

I find charter's last post (504) interesting and rather presumptuous in stating I will definitely be the lynch. His gung-ho-ness also seems to contrast with opinions expressed in Post 78

Every game I've been in with a lynch in 3 or so pages or less for day one has resulted in a town loss... More later.

And posts 219:

ITS NOT SCUMMY BECAUSE HE DOESNT GAIN ANY ADVANTAGE DOING IT AS SCUM THAN AS TOWN. I UNVOTED BECAUSE I DONT WANT A LYNCH ON WHAT, PAGE 5? I ALREADY SAID BOTH OF THESE.

...and 221:

And do you know what we do with players that don't post farside? WE REPLACE THEM!!!!! YAY!! Wanting to lynch the tracker (or anyone actually) when they haven't made a single post, well it just strengthens my point that you don't care who gets lynched.

See the parallel between this and me?

Yet you seem to want to lynch me as soon as I replace in.

Going from the top:

I don't find Occam's speculation about the Bulletproof role is particularly suspicious. I am suspicious, however, of the way Monkeyman doggedly bandwagoned him, continuing into Post 166 which I found *amazingly* scummy:

Also, it should be noted that since Occum voted for Ceph, it is unlikely that they are both scum. That means either they are both town, Occum is scum and Ceph is town, or Ceph is scum and Occum is town. Since they have both exhibited questionable behavior, I think the first scenario is unlikely, I think they are on opposite teams. That means if we lynch one and they are town, then we can lynch the other one day 2(unless better info comes along), and they will likely be scum.

Looks like setting up Occam for the lynch knowing he is town, and then pre-emptively trying to suggest Ceph is the opposite alignment i.e. scum, to implicate him the next day. It’s one of the scummiest posts I’ve ever read.

What if for a second I believed you as town. What happens when you put yourself at L-1 and some scum still hasn't voted. Your vote, your single vote is in terms self lynching at that point. Deal with it.

Self-votes irritate me as much as you but this is a bad argument because if the scum hammers without *good* justification there will be consequences for them.

Plus how is a BP SK not a really really bad thing? wtf...

That’s a pretty standard SK actually.

Only people I ever seen do a quick hammer was scum. Proff. Look at every game and tell me a townie that did it. Anything else you wish to dismiss?

No way. The only times I’ve seen it happen were: scum in LYOL (obviously), Natirasha as townie first day of an open, and Occam (kind of) as a townie first day in an open.

Occam, if you don’t mind, please explain/reiterate exactly what you hoped to achieve by your early-day self-vote.

It was a directive intended to achieve a very simple objective - namely, ending the unfounded, quickly forming wagon on me.

A self-vote shouldn’t accomplish that, it should be due to you actually convincing people you’re not deserving of their votes.

3. I also want you to realize and admit that my self-vote in this game was not anti-town.

I don’t see why she should say that- it’s not clear what your self-vote accomplished for either town or scum at this stage in the game.

Post 234, by Gremwell, whom I replaced is a bit scummy so I shall quote here in full:

Since they dominated the last few pages, and most people seem to have an opinion one way or the other, how many people think that either one of farside or occam is defiantly scum?

the reason I ask is that if we can at least agree on that much then we could lynch one and vig the other, I doubt anyone would disagree with a one for one trade

of course this hinges on one of them being definite scum, not just two townies slugging it out

its just a suggestion, as I can see this conflict clouding the rest of the game.

I personally don’t see anything yet pointing to one or the other of them definitely being scum, so don't agree with this post (which was later revealed as an apparent gambit).

I find Post 236 by farside odd. She seems to be contradicting herself by saying:

They do something scummy and say look at the scum jump at ti.

but then says:

Scum love to jump on opportunity when it comes to voting and lynching someone that is town.

No. You are scum. Once again, you ignore everything important in the game to give us this. You've commented on virtually nothing that's happened in this game. Also, you're clearly trying to gather everyone else's opinion on this matter without giving your own, testing the waters if you will.

This seems an odd thing to say “you are scum" and not even follow it up with more substantive argument for me/Gremwell being scum. Indeed charter then happily changes his attention to farside at this point in the post, as can be seen if you look at the post: http://www.mafiascum.net/forum/viewtopi ... &start=234

Yeah, this last page of Gremwell's posts have been bad.

I don’t like this, he only made two posts that page and one was simply “waiting for others to weigh in". The other, as I have admitted, was somewhat scummy.

Players who you think are scum is all I want. You have been really quiet this game compared to our last it it makes me itch.

FYI, to counter this accusation which will inevitably extend to me, Gremwell was at least as lurky in another game I played with him, Serum & Steel, as he was in this.

Gremwell: The worlds most anti-town plan is mostly why I suspect him.

Even scummier than Monkey’s plan in Post 166?

Ha. Thought it seemed wierd, but I didn't really read it carefully. But yeah, MM is now a solid number two, right after farside, and slightly above gremwell in terms of scumminess. He has done a lot of what gremwell has, with the not commenting on anything. Gremwell even refused to take a stance on his own question to everyone else, after it was pointed out that he needs to.

I feel like I can flip a three sided coin for who I want lynch today. Farside, gremwell, and MM all have their own side. Now off to find one...

Why have I been boosted to number 1 since then?

I agree with Oman in Post 252 in that I am also somewhat suspicious of Monkey's wariness to be linked with Empking in Post 250, and I'm slightly suspicious of the little exchange between Empking and Monkey in Posts 255 and 256.

Post 261 by me/Gremwell:

Ok I was hoping to get more people's thoughts on that but I think a day's long enough, anything more and it will get lost in the shuffle.

obviously I didn't actually want a plan like that to go through, I proposed it to get reactions, mainly on how fariside and Occam would respond in regards to the idea.

What I got is that as far as I could tell neither really that sure the other is scum, Farside criticized my plan and Occam voted me saying that he dosn't think farside is scum at all.

from the others I got a lot of FOS's, which was expected, but not much else.

In conclusion, my personal feelings on farside/Occam is right now two townies, though there is something to be said about the level of how personally they seem to be taking the argument, but that said personal shots and vendettas loose games.

Not a big fan of unverifiable gambits like these myself. I don't see how it can be interpreted as particularly scummy though, especially as he said he concluded both of farside/Occam were actually *town* (i.e. he wasn't trying to throw suspicion around in a scummy fashion through the gambit).

Since Oman's 3 sided coin landed on Gremwell.

Unvote, Vote Gremwell

Even in the guise of a joke actually deferring your vote to dice is real scummy.

I'm not voting for Gremwall because I think Occum is scum. I agree with Farside that selfvoting is scummy and I am also suspicious of him claiming that BP townie is worthless.

I'm afraid I can't reciprocate the lack of suspicion. Even though MM and Gremwell may not have found each other suspicious, I do find MM suspicious. Just pointing that out, and you can take it as you will: as either scum bussing, or as two different players interpreting another player differently from within the same townie role.

Not lynching someone because of their role is dumb. While doctor can be useful, in hands of scum it's way worse. Stop trying to start a lurkerhunt as well and comment on the people that are talking, they've said plenty.

Why is the doctor particularly good at helping scum?

And I will admit having read some of Gremwell's posts I did re-check my role pm to ensure I was indeed isolationist.

^^^ Yes, you can only take that as WIFOM, oh well.

Cephrir, why in Post 281 did you agree with charter that the doctor is far more useful for the scum than the town. Have I missed something about the usefulness of the doctor in this setup? I could protect scumbuddies, but if someone missed their kill that night, they would know who I protected and if I flipped scum this would implicate them also. It really isn't that amazing a scum ability imo.

Monkey, please explain the "witholding opinion" accusation levelled at Gremwell in Post 295? His scummy posts seem to be 234 and 261, and the scumminess lies in pursuing a gambit which involves wagoning two players. So what's the deal with the "withholding opinion" accusation?

I like Drunken Piper for Post 300. And if I didn't slip this in earlier I also find it *somewhat* suspect farside apparently didn't notice the existence of an SK in the game.

Well, if people don't start voting Gremwell soon I'm just going to move on to MM. I still think Gremwell is the scummiest, but MM and farside are right behind.

No matter how blatant you make your opportunism about lynching, it's not going to make it less scummy.

Like I said, I'd be glad to vote for Gremwall if necessary for a lynch, but certainly not as a threat.

Same as above. You should be advocating who you want lynched the most. There's a very good chance at least one of your top 2/3 suspects is in fact not scum, so you shouldn't be happy to go with "whomever".

Occam gets into a meaty attack on me/Gremwell in Post 320:

[74] Here you get the first scent that something's awry. Grem says "I'm not saying we should lynch the BP" which is good. But then he makes sure to say "we should be weary of Occam for the suggestion" - but I never suggested that we lynch the BP. Still though, Grem hasn't done anything overly scummy thus far.

Being wary of you isn't really the same thing as actively finding you suspicious. I think that's a fair enough attitute to take, even though I didn't find your BP role speculation particularly damning.

[184] Here, grem says a couple of incorrect things. First, he says that the scum do "the most night killing" in a setup where there are two other NK roles. Then what the rest of he says once again goes against what he said earlier about the BP role being pretty useless for the town. The worst thing he says is:

He's not going to be a wasted Vig kill

When that's exactly what a Bp scum would be - a wasted vig kill, because he wouldn't be a kill at all. That's part of what makes him dangerous as scum - durp.

I think you are misinterpreting him, he was probably half-humorously referring to the high likelihood of a vig actually killing townies, and stating that in the probable (3/4 or 2/3 chance, depending on number of scum in the game) event that a BP is town, they cannot be mis-vigged like this.

[191] Grem points out that he said a BP SK would be the worst case scenario - which sort of makes sense, I guess, except it's just as bad on a S.C.U.M. as it is on the SK, since they're essentially the same exact thing once there's only one S.C.U.M. left. I just wonder why he'd say this, and it seems like a BP SK is the worst case scenario for scum, but either a BP SK or a BP S.C.U.M. are equally bad for town - so this seems like a scum-driven comment.

Yes, because scum are totally open about their motivations when talking publicly. And what would Gremwell-scum have to gain by making his S.C.U.M.-fear of a BP SK public?

[261] This is Grem's backtrack post, where he says he was just doing it to get reactions, and that he didn't actually want his plan to go through. He then says he thinks both myself and farside are townies. I think this post is straight bullcrap.

What do you think his scum-motivations for a gambit which results in him classifying you both as townies could be?

Biggest suspects right now: Monkey and charter.

[ortolan]

As has already been pointed out, posts 329:

All right then...

Unvote: Occum
Vote: Gremwall

and 338:

All right then...

Unvote: Occum
Vote: Gremwall

Why are you in a rush to finish off this bandwagon?

I'm not in a rush, but there's no point in my vote going to waste and voting after he's lynched. I can't use my politician power until day 2, since I steal votes during the night, so you don't have to worry about that yet.

by MM re: changing his vote to me are scummy and opportunistic.

charter gets a good criticism of him in in Post 340:

I didn't say he was being incosistant. I know he's said he's suspicious of Gremwell. I just think it's interesting that he changes votes after the Gremwagon gains steam and without Gremwell posting. The only thing that's changed is that Gremwell has more votes.

I also note how his vote isn't necessary for a lynch yet. I took his statement to mean 'If Gremwell went to L-1 and no one else was suspicious, I'd vote Gremwell'. I can also point out his statements where he doesn't change his vote around unless the new person is scummier, it's just very hypocritical.

Doesn't really seem to want to further Gremwell's wagon, his vote is just on there because others' are.

More reasons MM is scummy:

289 by charter - Well, Gremwell isn't scumhunting and made up a retarted plan "to get reactions". That can still be paseed out as simply questionable play. MM also isn't scumhunting, tried to string up Occam and Ceph in a similar way, than attacked Gremwell for suggesting a variant of his own plan regarding Occam and Farside, then went overboard at the slightest sign of suspicion because of the apparant failure of his town act, which he keeps trying to reaffirm by stating how everything he did is obviously pro town and such. Also intentionally misinterperted and now ignores Oman's question. Since Gremwell also has a better role, I don't see why you'd rather lynch her actually.

charter has changed his lynch preference from MM to me in Post 353:

A lot of people are just saying 'Gremwell has a better town power, vote MM' or 'Gremwell did one scummy action, MM has done two, vote MM'.
I personally feel that first point is meaningless, and the second is just wrong. For some reason people are buying into both of these, when they are just not true. Also, most of the people voting MM voted him and just left it at that. That seems counterintuitive since MM posts frequently, but everyone voting him is already convinced he's scum and needs to die. I draw this conclusion since the people voting him aren't interacting with him hardly at all any more.

There are a lot of scummy things Grem has done. Never commenting on anything important (instead doing lots of setup speculation), the terrible idea and withholding opinion, his backtracking of this idea, his utter lack of scumhunting, and I feel Occam points out a good point in his post 320 where Grem contradicts himself (post 178 and 184).

Actually, I disagree. I indeed found that Posts 234 and 261 were the only notably scummy posts Gremwell made. They also related to the same gambit. The other apparent inconsistency was put forward by Occam in Post 320:

[80] Grem labels my L-1 vote as an "attempted self-hammer, which is just a distortion of the facts.

[178] Nearly 100 posts later, Grem says:

The self vote is a big red flag to me, if you're town and a wagon like that ran up on you in the first 3 pages and actually went to lynch whoever had the stones to hammer you would be soundly trounced D-2.

as for the BP being more dangerous as scum it's nonsense, aside from the vig and sk who wouldn't likely target him, its worthless for scum aside from the argument that it is such an asset for the town.

Paragraph one - yes, they would, which wouldn't be a bad thing at all.

Paragraph two - is first and foremost flawed, but... earlier, Grem, you said:

I would think that in this setup that scum would have a very easy time working around a BP and killing off more important roles like tracker, jailer, any that could potentially out them

So, what's the point? He is just saying if the BP is town then scum can work around him and kill the more dangerous roles to them. He is not contradicting the idea that the role is not particularly useful for scum. I don't like how charter has deferred to this post as an extra reason for Gremwell being scummy without actually analysing/referring to the argument contained therein, which seems very weak to me.

charter's further points in that post are all extremely general:

There are a lot of scummy things Grem has done. Never commenting on anything important (instead doing lots of setup speculation), the terrible idea and withholding opinion, his backtracking of this idea, his utter lack of scumhunting, and I feel Occam points out a good point in his post 320 where Grem contradicts himself (post 178 and 184).

I can't respond to them because I don't even know what most of them refer to. Again there's the "witholding opinion" accusation- I still don't know what this means.

2. Agree. I don't think MM even had a case on Grem till someone else brought it up, plus is vote looks more to save his own but then scum hunting

Yes, he spent all his time wagoning Occam before this.

3. Something in my gut say MM scum and Grem isn't but I really want him to reply to that post about scum doing more killing comment.

What's this?

I like MacavityLock's point here:

So anyone who doesn't want to bandwagon Gremwell is automatically scum? My policy is not to change my vote unless I think the new person I'm voting for is more scummy than the person I'm currently voting. My reasons for my vote are sound, weather you agree or not.

is directly contradicted not 20 posts later with:

I'm willing to go with the majority on Gremwell if we need my vote for a lynch, but I don't want to give the impression that I'm letting Occum off the hook.

279 is also clearly contradicted by the actual change of vote.

and here, re: self voting:

Self voting is scummy because the only logical basis for it is to gain town sympathy.

Town sympathy is not the only logical reason for a self-vote, though I don't particularly like them.

If you know you are town you should not be voting for yourself. If you are scum you should not be voting for yourself. In short, any self vote is scummy.

Hee hee.

Good spot, as the fact one has no motivation for self-voting as either scum or town does not therefore make it scummy.

Scumhunting is finding flaws and asking about them, trying to dig deeper into the game.

Well, I suppose some would try to find flaws in every single player, and some would try to concentrate on those they find most guilty. My playing style is the latter.

That's a nice euphemism for tunneling.

Grem: I want to know what made you say that scum has more killing ability in post 184

I don't see him say this in Post 184...

RR's Post 383 is awesome, I suggest you all re-read.

1. The main reason Gremwell is suspected is for trying to line up kills on farside and occam, creating a false dillema stating one of them has to be guilty. In 166, you did the very same thing, only a bit more subtly, with Ceph instead of Farside and a suggested sencond lynching instead of overnight vigging. Since the core of the idea is the same, what exactly in Gremwell's play do you find scummy?

He said he would not give his opinion until others did. Even though I have waited to change my vote to see if other players would be aggreeable to my attack on Occum, I have always been upfront about my opinions. Withholding information, even, maybe even especially your opinions, is definatley a scumtell.

Now I see where the "withholding opinions thing comes from (Post 242 by Gremwell/me). This is a *terrible* criticism, because it is 100% consistent with the idea that Post 234 was indeed a gambit- people always wait to gauge reactions (which is the whole point) when pursuing them. If anything it gives extra credibility to Gremwell's Post 234 being a planned gambit. It certainly can't be treated as an independent criticism from the gambit however, and as such it is scummy that MM and charter have tried to portray it as such.

2.And yet you moved your vote to Gremwell, despite explicitly saying you don't find him scummier than Occam, and even in fact that you'll be "glad to vote him if necassary for a lynch,

but certainly not as a threat

". How is this not a contradiction?

My opinion on Gremwell changed(for the worse), and I decided attacking Occum was no longer productive. I'm entitled to change my opinion, and weigh others opinions when appropriate.

And people are entitled to find you scummy for it.

If you are town, you do not vote for town(yourself). Occum voted for himself, meaning either he is scum or he has some alterior motive, and is just acting scummy. Either way, a scumtell

This contradicts what I quoted above from MacavityLock's Post 374, in which you also acknowledge that scum also have no reason to vote themselves. You've deliberately twisted around your own argument to make it sound more plausible here.

But it's really telling that niether Occum or Gremwell have voted for me, because they both know that if they hammer me and I turn up town, they will(rightfully) be looked on as scummy.

This makes no sense, why would Gremwell-scum not vote you and take the lynch for himself, rather than vote you as town, with the possibility he would look scummy (which he apparently does anyway) tomorrow. The additional explanation of his failure to vote you at this point is that he wasn't even around.

Now, either you think Gremwell is scum, or you think I'm scum.

Methinks the Monkey doth protest too much. When Monkey flips scum, I think there's a good chance that Grem is a buddy.

Even though in that case MM's pretty much spent his whole day bussing me after his case on Occam fell apart?

I would appreciate an answer from Grem if anyone is thinking of hammering I ask that you wait. In fact till I get an answer

unvote

grem please explain you scum nk's comment post 184

I'll need some help in seeing what you're referring to here.

Surprisingly I actually agree with a lost of MM's analysis in Post 424. I think as RR points out in Post 432 he may be classifying the actual towniest players as his "towniest", so that when he flips scum they will be implicated.

By post 441 charter now thinks I've been

way

scummier than MM. Interesting transformation of opinions.

I do think it's worth considering having the cop or mason target the bp tonight, though. If he's scum we lynch him, and if he's town he becomes useful to us.

I think the masonier targeting the BP is an extremely good idea actually, and would be happy to doc-protect the masonier tonight if scum try to NK him to foil the plan. Assuming I don't get lynched today I can at least be of some use before charter vigs me. Obviously it wouldn't clear the masonier, but it would clear the BP.

I point out that with Occum and Gremwell, two people I have pointed out as scummy, having not voted for me yet, and me being at L-2, that they would have enough votes by themselves to hammer me. Then Occum(predictably) votes for me, saying he wants to "see what happens", clearly implying that he wants to see if Gremwell will vote for me or not not. To me, Occum is trying to cover his losses, since he can always say voting at L-2 for a townie is not as scummy as voting for L-1 for a townie. In actuality, however, this seems to be a variation on appeal to probability, and nearly just as scummy as Gremwell's potential hammer(which can't be done now with Farside's unvote). In actuality, it might be MORE scummy, because it relies on two scummy actions, the vote itself, and the appeal to probability.

This is barely coherent.

Scale of 1-10, 1=scum, 10=town
MacavityLock - Foreman Domai, Roleblocker
(7) - Solid scum hunter

I am Monkey's 2nd towniest read. What does it say about Monkey when he says that I'm a "Solid scum hunter" when the only bandwagon I've been on with any conviction is his?

Once Yos2 makes his posts and Grem returns, can we just end this?

MacavityLock points out in Post 445 what RR earlier and now me have observed- MM is genuinely finding the most "townie" players, and one of the best criteria for this seems to be those who've attacked him the most. If he is town how could he find those that have attacked him so much townie also? Again, looks like an attempt to implicate them when he gets lynched and flips scum.

No more discussing vigs….we should be discussing how we are going to claim tomorrow…I think Dicecorn (Popcorn Dice) It is the most random so scum can not manipulate.

Claim? What is there to claim?

I do think it's worth considering having the cop or mason target the bp tonight, though. If he's scum we lynch him, and if he's town he becomes useful to us.

please lets not talk about night actions ANYMORE. The idea is out there. If someone wants to do it they will. But NO PLANS should be formulated today.

Actually in the masonier case there is benefit to discussing it beforehand, especially if the masonier winds up dead. Please now point out flaws in, assuming I don't get lynched, masonier targetting BP and me targetting masonier. The only flaw I can see is if I am scum then I could deliberately not protect and kill the masonier to implicate the BP. But I doubt I will survive the night anyway, and then you will see my alignment and know this is not the case. Either way, the only flaw is if the masonier winds up dead (which is a possibility no matter who he targets), and then you can openly speculate about whether the BP or me is more likely to be scum.

Really don't like charter's obstinence in Post 452. MM has acted so amazingly scummy all game, and Gremwell's scumminess is reducible to one sole point (and if you actually believe it was a gambit, which is especially plausible in light of the "withholding information" post, then he's really done nothing scummy at all).

MacavityLock in Post 469 gives more credence to the idea that I'm scum with MM, even though I believe he's now spent the majority of the day attacking me.

Oman explains in Post 479 that the popcorn-claiming refers to targets. Good.

Still think Posts like Yos' 487 are tunneling on *one* thing Gremwell did, which is entirely explainable if you buy it was a pre-meditated gambit. I have not seen any evidence there is more to the case against Gremwell than this one point, which covers all his "suspect" posts.

Why does charter change his opinion of farside between posts 485 and 490 even though she doesn't even post between these?

Empking's Post 497 uncritically jumps on the Gremwell/me wagon. I really don't like how so many people are happy to vote Gremwell based on what is reducible to one thing, without applying any critical analysis.

Raging rabbit: Can you explain why you think MM is scum, as opposed to just making newbie mistakes? I mean, reading back at your attacks on him; one point you raised against him was a "anti-town is not the same as scummy" theory debate, and another one was "You said had a policy and then you changed it" thing, and both of those seems more like newbie behavior then scummy behavior to me. Can you explain specifically what he did that makes you think he's scum?

Can you explain why Gremwell/me is more deserving of your vote, for one thing?

Ok I'm up to the present and I will reply to the responses to my first post now. Also, please discuss my doctor/masonier/BP plan. I'm starting to think it's not so good and I should just protect who I want to, but if town thinks it's a good plan I'm happy to go with it.

[ortolan]

See the parallel between this and me?

No, I see two different scenerios and you trying to say they are the same.

The point is that they are not the same. Originally you expressed reluctance to lynch someone so early and without good reason. Now you are happy to lynch me before I even post, which is especially worrisome when I dissected the case against Gremwell and saw how insubstantial it was, and how it mainly relies on reducing the aspects of his gambit into different points, when they are all the same.

This seems an odd thing to say “you are scum" and not even follow it up with more substantive argument for me/Gremwell being scum.

I overstate all the time.

Well, it wasn't useful anyway, because you didn't give any argument for why me/Gremwell were scum, even if your inclination towards us being scum wasn't as strong as you initially implied.

Why have I been boosted to number 1 since then?

Without checking reasons I already posted, some are that people favor MM's wagon over yours for what I think are invalid reasons, and Gremwell's 'gambit' and refusing to take a stance himself, even after it was pointed out he needed to.

You need to be more specific in the criticism of the MM wagon. I personally am very, very surprised anyone would find Gremwell more scummy than MM, especially considering how consistently scummy MM has been and how lurky overall Gremwell has been (again leaving aside the point that the case against him is ultimately very insubstantial). And the "refusing to take a stance himself" point has already been answered, and if anything is a point in his favour.

Why is the doctor particularly good at helping scum?

Kind of explained this already but, town doctor doesn't know who to protect, scum doctor does. The scum doctor will significantly reduce crosskills.

And as I already said, this is risky for the scum doctor because killing roles will know who the doctor protected if their kill does not go through on the player. Thus if I pursue this strategy and get lynched and flip scum I will implicate my buddies.

I question why all your points against me were never brought up before by anyone ort, why do you think this is?

Argument from majority? Because no-one else finds you suspicious, I shouldn't? And wouldn't it be very suspicious if instead of bringing new arguments to the table, I just parroted what everyone else had said anyway? I'm sure you would have readily leveled that argument at me had I done so, also.

I also will wait to point out why other points of yours are wrong until whoever you were asking answers. And since today is probably going to end soon, my top two suspects are ort then farside. MM is being moved way down, because once again, he receives a vote over Grem for a BS reason. Ceph essentially just lynched MM because unless ort is going to try and get me lynched, (I assume at least) he's going to vote MM.

Your persistent defence of MM (who you inexplicably changed your mind on since earlier) is a big reach, and doesn't assist in making me think you're less scummy.

A large part of my suspicion of Grem was his repeated popping in but talking about stuff no one was interested in. I also think Gremwell more likely to be scum because I'm pretty sure everyone has said MM is scummy, but there are a few people who haven't commented on Grem hardly at all which is extremely odd.

Maybe the case against Gremwell was much, much less substantial than you portrayed it as.

As the people voting for Grem really arent' making an effort on pushing him.

Because he hasn't acted sufficiently scummy, and then he disappeared.

I'm not scum, I'm town, so this whole train of thought is pointless.

Thanks for that.

I want opinions on my masonier/BP/doctor plan before I put Gremwell on L-1.

[ortolan]

EBWOP: Gremwell = MM

[ortolan]

Well I'm hardly going to vote for myself, am I

[ortolan]

I can't respond to them because I don't even know what most of them refer to. Again there's the "witholding opinion" accusation- I still don't know what this means.

Gremwell proposed the idea to get other people's opinions on it. He never gave his own. I think I asked him what it was and he still didn't give it.

You need to refer to specific posts here, without doing so it makes it far too easy to get away with the weak case against Gremwell.

Firstly, I assume as I said in my summary post that the "withholding opinions" post is number 242. In which case, this is perfectly consistent with what he said in Post 261, about Post 234 being a gambit. But, unless I am wrong about what the "withholding opinions" point is supposed to refer to, stop attacking this as an independent point, as it is clearly part of the gambit. If you don't believe it was a genuine gambit, that's fine, but then be clear about it, instead of harking on about "withholding opinions".

Now I see where the "withholding opinions thing comes from (Post 242 by Gremwell/me). This is a *terrible* criticism, because it is 100% consistent with the idea that Post 234 was indeed a gambit- people always wait to gauge reactions (which is the whole point) when pursuing them. If anything it gives extra credibility to Gremwell's Post 234 being a planned gambit. It certainly can't be treated as an independent criticism from the gambit however, and as such it is scummy that MM and charter have tried to portray it as such.

I disagree. He could have still done the 'gambit' just the same and gave his opinion in the original post. Withholding his opinion (especially after being told to give it) was scummy because he was just waiting for everyone to weigh in so he could give his opinion after he knew what everyone else thought.
I think this point is further strengthened by him getting Fos'ed by everyone, then saying he didn't advocate it.

As far as I'm aware, he did give his opinions on what you're referring to, in Post 261. These were that both farside and Occam are probably town. Is this what you wanted? If not please be more specific about what he was "withholding opinions" on, and the relevant posts.

Why does charter change his opinion of farside between posts 485 and 490 even though she doesn't even post between these?

I thought farside revoted out of the blue, when her reason for unvoting before was to wait to hear from grem. I didn't see that Oman questioned her about her lack of vote, so it wasn't out of the blue like I thought in 485. (and I corrected myself in 490)

Why does being "baited" into a vote make her no longer accountable for it, in your mind?

And as I already said, this is risky for the scum doctor because killing roles will know who the doctor protected if their kill does not go through on the player. Thus if I pursue this strategy and get lynched and flip scum I will implicate my buddies.

Lots of things will mess with kills. There will be epic WIFOM debates tomorrow.

Fair point, but it equally applies to why a scum doctor might not be particularly additionally useful for scum- because there is a chance their attempts to protect their scumbuddies get redirected also.

Argument from majority? Because no-one else finds you suspicious, I shouldn't? And wouldn't it be very suspicious if instead of bringing new arguments to the table, I just parroted what everyone else had said anyway? I'm sure you would have readily leveled that argument at me had I done so, also.

That's just asking me a bunch of questions, it doesn't really answer my question.

But your question was pointless, all it accomplished was implying I was scummy via argument from the majority. By saying:

I question why all your points against me were never brought up before by anyone ort, why do you think this is?

You are implying that as no-one previously brought up my points, they are weak. Are you seriously suggesting this was a legitimate question? There are multiple explanations for why no-one else may have brought them up: I may be a more observant player than others in this game so far, or I may be clutching at straws with bad arguments to take the heat off me, or any number of other explanations may be accurate. However, whether anyone else made my points is entirely irrelevant, you should instead be assessing whether they are of merit. The fact you smugly suggest "hehe well no-one else thinks I'm scummy" isn't going to help the scummy reading I have of you.

I think the masonier targeting the BP is an extremely good idea actually, and would be happy to doc-protect the masonier tonight if scum try to NK him to foil the plan. Assuming I don't get lynched today I can at least be of some use before charter vigs me. Obviously it wouldn't clear the masonier, but it would clear the BP.

Once again, I disagree with planning night actions. What if the BP and masonier are scum? Yay, two confirmed 'townies'. Making scum answer for their night actions will cause them to slip up. It WILL happen.

Good objection, I shan't go through with the plan. As the alternative lynch is me, and as I may very well not survive the night (;)), I'll put my money where my mouth is and

Vote: MonkeyMan576

I hope my lengthy analysis proves useful should I not be with you tomorrow.

[ortolan]

I protected Raging Rabbit last night

I am interested that no-one targeted him in light of the pro-town read I was getting on him and the fact he is the tracker (although it could be put down to nightkill-WIFOM either way)

I would like to hear from charter next.

Btw I would prefer if the last two were MacavityLock and Raging Rabbit, in that order, cause they can potentially contradict people's claims if they're lying (and otherwise the people in question will know in advance to nominate an alternative lie).

[ortolan]

hey posting here due to receiving general prod- I'm here and will post now/soonish

[ortolan]

um we've clearly got the popcorn claim going- charter claimed in response to me but hasn't nominated anyone else so I shall do so on his behalf

Cephrir, claim next please.

[ortolan]

Orto, why did you chose charter to claim after you?

I was curious about his choice of targets. I assumed the mind worms death was the serial killer and didn't put two and two together in regards to the opening post saying only the vig has distinctive kill flavour.

I cant image scum would redirect an invention or mason over something like a kill or block of some sort....They didnt bother with redirecting or blocking (if they had that) the vig which I find very interesting. However, the jailer could have blocked the redirector..that we will not know.

The reason scum might not redirect/block the power roles is that they're obviously accountable for their actions the next day. I don't like the way you're implicitly trying to clear MacavityLock here (not that I've previously found him particularly scummy), by suggesting he can't be scum otherwise he would have roleblocked the vig.

If he were scum there's no good reason why he should block the vig unless he thought he could argue he found charter scummy and thus blocked him; it's still possible he didn't block charter because he's his scumbuddy, or if he's scum and charter is town he didn't block him because he knew there was a high likelihood charter would kill a townie anyway (which in fact he did), plus if he had blocked charter he'd need to explain himself anyway.

[ortolan]

So do you think charter should be held accountable for his actions?

Of course, I am waiting for him to reply to your question in Post 598.

[ortolan]

charter didn't because he vigged farside.

Sorry, where in the rules does it say the vig can't also make the nightkill? I can't find it...

How do you know no one targetted him?

Sorry, I meant targeted him for the mafia/SK night-kill.

About Empking: yes, he looks scummy. I have previously played with him in a game where we were scumbuddies, and he also looked scummy in that. I'm in I believe two ongoing games with him (this and another, there might be one more I can't think of also) and think he looks scummy in both of them. I do also recall someone specifically saying he has a scummy meta. So currently I'm probably neutral on him.

[ortolan]

thanks RR, and point taken about the vig kill

[ortolan]

all I will say at this stage is that I'm extremely interested to hear your idea, ML, if indeed you decide to voice it.

Withholding my other opinions at this stage.

[ortolan]

Oh. That's by no means cause for a lynching, and I see no pro town reason for you to want to know the answer to that.

FOS ML

.

As I said, my plan doesn't end with a liar-lynch, but it could end up in a liar-death.

Fine, I'll just put it out there now. This has more to do with my distrust of charter than of anything about Occam. Given that we could have up to 5 deaths over the course of today/tonight, I don't want charter to get his vig-kill. (Potential for 5 deaths comes from lynching Emp-saint, which I'm not against.) Those deaths could easily end the game with a town loss. So, my plan was to effectively neuter his vigging by directing his kill towards Occam-commuter.

Very simply this comes down to me not trusting charter with his vig, and this plan failing if Occam actually lied about not commuting yesterday, which I could see both scum or town doing. So, if we get Occam's sign-off, does anyone see a major problem with this plan?

It's a terrible plan. If I was commuter-town I would have absolutely no qualms with lying about having commuted. Doing so only makes scum's job harder. This is especially the case when all three kills (mafia, SK, vig) were accounted for last night anyway, so Occam telling the truth about whether or not he commuted couldn't give us any extra info anyhow (whereas it might if for example there was an unaccounted for kill and we wanted to work out whether it was directed @ him or prevented by some other method).

I am thinking charter is town.

I wondered why he targeted farside instead of me, also. However I find the fact he said this indicative of him being town:

Charter, why did you decide to kill farside?

I was about as sure that her and ort were scum. I also figured I'd have a much easier time today getting Ort lynched, so her.

This is something of a scummy thing to admit to i.e. "the reason I didn't vig someone was because I thought I could simply convince the town to lynch them" (i.e. it's the same thought process scum might go through). However because he openly and unashamedly admitted this as his reasoning I'm inclined he's not trying to cover up for his actions as scum would.

@charter: Why? Also, what happened to ortolan? He's still near the top of my list, so what changed?

This reads as both lazy and scummy to me- "why aren't you still bandwagoning who I want you to?" But he doesn't give any reasons for why I am scummy, simply asks charter why he no longer finds me scummy. Surely the onus of proof is on the accuser? I will ask you now Cephrir, what about me is still or newly scummy in light of both old and recent events and discussion?

I can't answer for others' comments but I can say that effectively lynching both Emp and myself today based on connections between us is stupid. Firstly, you can't really label two players as probable scumbuddies until one of them is dead. I think there's a decent chance Emp is town, but if he's not then, since all your evidence that I'm scum with Emp is based on connections from him to me and not vice versa, it's equally possible that he's scum and is trying to make me look like his buddy. Normally I'd say that Emp isn't a good enough player to come up with something like that, but a lot of those posts do look to me like precisely that.

This reads like you're trying to both defend and bus Empking at once. You say he's likely town, but that if he is scum he's deliberately associating himself with you to implicate you if he flips scum, but in fact you doubt he's intelligent enough to try to do this anyway. Seems like you're trying to have your cake and eat it too- you're trying to discourage an Empking lynch but if one does occur you want to be dissociated from him.

Cephrir, do you have anything more to say about Empking?

Empking, do you want to say anything about Cephrir in light of his recent posts?

ML, what do you think of both of them?

[ortolan]

If I was commuter-town I would have absolutely no qualms with lying about having commuted.

This is why I specifically asked for Occam's sign-off on the plan.

So basically you were trying to get him to reveal whether he in fact *did* commute or no commute last night- obviously if he's happy to let the plan go through it indicates he wasn't lying, if he's not then it suggests he did commute last night, so you just told the mafia they could get him tonight. Either way all your plan and its discussion serves to do is make scum's job easier.

[ortolan]

I'd be happy to vote Cephrir at this stage.

So, can anyone find a reason that having public knowledge that Occam wouldn't be able to commute N3 would be anti-town?

Can you give me any reason why knowledge of whether or not he has commuted/ will commute helps town in any way?

I am awaiting DP's case on charter.

[ortolan]

You serious? Why?

Right now I'm all for making Cephrir place the lynching vote on Empking

[ortolan]

I echo charter's 711. Cephrir, when I first saw you hadn't used your ability I wondered why you would wait a day until using it, surely the likelihood of there being more townies around is greater on day one compared to day two, and we could really use an apparently cleared player on day two rather than day three, especially as by day three you claiming to successfully mason someone is even more likely to be a scum gambit.

I thought the alternative was that you simply didn't intend to use your ability at all this game. If you are town, then on night one you would have had a 40% chance of hitting scum anyway- Monkey was eliminated and flipped town, you can't target yourself and we're assuming for this you're one of the townies which leaves 10 players you could target, 4 of whom were scum (I'm pretty sure you die if you target the SK, also). So it seems maybe it's best if you don't use your ability at all. The risk of dying in the process may not be worth the benefit of clearing someone in your mind (and getting to night-talk to them), especially when town can't be sure you're not lying and clearing a scumbuddy anyway.

But then you tell us

I'll have time for the case at some point, but I think I should point out that it would be kinda dumb to get me killed without allowing me to use my ability as an investigation.

So apparently you still intend to use your mason ability tonight, even though it's got greater chance of hitting scum now. And I wouldn't think "masoning someone who died that night" would be so bad, you don't lose anything out of it, it's just not as good as the optimal outcome of clearing someone who's alive- it's still much, much better than the worst outcome of you dying from targeting scum and us not even knowing who it was, which is a more likely outcome of you using your ability tonight rather than yesterday.

True. But if I live, then it's pretty conclusive, and if I die then you don't have to lynch me.

Not at all. It's still very possibly a scum gambit for you to clear your buddy and endgame us day/night 3.

Speaking of which, why did you not use it last night?

Because DP hadn't instilled a ton of confidence in me as to his protownness,

What's this about DP, was he your second preference or something?

Either way,

Vote: Cephrir

I don't see any point in forcing Cephrir to kill Empking at this point, I will have to re-read but he does have a scummy-meta and we're potentially adding townie casualties. Plus nightkills on him have no adverse effects for their perpetrators

[ortolan]

What is suspicious about the change in charter's thought process?

He was wagoning the hell out of Gremwell when I replaced in, and wanted me lynched. He suspected farside also, therefore I assume he was hypothesising us as a scumteam. He was wrong about farside. Then RR and I claimed our targets, and confirmed each other, which strongly suggests that if I am mafia, so is RR, which charter didn't think was at all likely from his read of RR's play day one. I think him seeing me as substantially less likely scum based on this is quite reasonable.

Please re-iterate your case against me Cephrir. MacavityLock I'm not sure if you're saying you find me scummy or simply find charter's change of tune scummy, but feel welcome to tell me why you find me scummy also, if in fact you do.

[ortolan]

Again, not true. It's entirely possible that ort did protect who he says he did but is still scum.

I honestly think scum would be stupid not to target an obvtown tracker, in which case if I was scum I wouldn't have protected him. It's possible either of us could be the SK and it's also possible that RR is scum and tracked me and told the truth, but assuming you already thought he was town (which charter did, as did I), then you're unlikely to find this plausible either.

It's still the Gremwell case from yesterday. I haven't really looked at you yet.

Come on, it's not really acceptable to be clinging to a case based on Gremwell's actions on Page 10 in Post 234, which he offered an explanation for in Post 261. I already said why I think this is effectively the sole point against Gremwell, and why I thus don't think the case against him is of much substance at all.

[ortolan]

Hmm...I still don't see what motivation scum would have to say something as newb-scummy as in Post 234 and mean it. I've played with Gremwell before and he's a better player than that.

[ortolan]

But if what you said about Oman is true (I don't honestly remember back that far) then there's not much I can say to dispute it, but if you assume scum faced with two townies (myself and Monkey), then I don't think it would be very good play to for both's throats simultaneously

[ortolan]

EBWOP: to go for*

[ortolan]

What about his argument did you suddenly "get" apart from the fact he is now voting for you?

And why doesn't

I honestly think scum would be stupid not to target an obvtown tracker, in which case if I was scum I wouldn't have protected him. It's possible either of us could be the SK and it's also possible that RR is scum and tracked me and told the truth, but assuming you already thought he was town (which charter did, as did I), then you're unlikely to find this plausible either.

Hold in this case?

I'm really keen to see Cephrir's case against me though.

[ortolan]

It's getting to me how Cephrir and MacavityLock are interjecting while admitting they're not even "up to date" with the game. Surely it's not that hard, I replaced in and I still read all of it.

Your flip makes absolutely no sense charter

"oh yes! I didn't in fact consider that scum might still have protected RR! That brings ort back into my scum-list!"

And you still haven't answered my question of why, if RR is town and I am scum (which is what your argument hangs on, as you've said you find RR very townie), and furthermore if RR did act very pro-town day one, that I would have protected him instead of protecting someone, ANYONE (doesn't necessarily have to be my scumbuddy) else and let my scummates kill RR, removing the tracker and an obvtown player from the game, which it would be in my best interests to do.

[ortolan]

errrrr?

the alternative was not protecting him and night-killing him thus leaving no evidence of me not having protected him to begin with.

[ortolan]

Are you deliberately ignoring what I'm saying? It would have been much easier for me to have just killed him if I was scum...

[ortolan]

and also, I'm fairly certain it's good scumplay to send the scummiest looking player to commit the night-kill- I would have been an obvious choice were I scum.

[ortolan]

Yer, sorry, it's more something that was getting to me this game rather than a specific criticism of you/Cephrir.

[ortolan]

RR- as town would I not use any arguments possible to clear my name?

I don't understand how it could possibly be such of a revelation to charter that me having protected you didn't guarantee that I wasn't scum.

and it's not like at the start of day two I started proclaiming "hehe yer I protected RR, I must be town", it was only in response to charter's argument and continued suspicion of me.

I maintain that otherwise the case against Gremwell, carried over to me was very weak.

[ortolan]

EBWOP: by saying this:

and it's not like at the start of day two I started proclaiming "hehe yer I protected RR, I must be town", it was only in response to charter's argument and continued suspicion of me.

I meant that I had I started saying that at the beginning of day two, it would be scummy, but I only used it in a logical reply to charter- I don't see how this is scummy, as we're already in the realms of night action WIFOM.

[ortolan]

You wouldn't be able to explain why you didn't protect the tracker the next day.

this is what led me to say that it would have been much easier just to kill RR in the first place (which it would have, I think this quote above is a nonsensical conclusion). We're going around in circles and for some reason that makes me more scummy (at least according to RR)

And I've already spelled out very clearly and probably multiple times why I think the case against Gremwell was reducible to one, bad point. I can do no more. You are simply wrong in your suspicion of Gremwell, I think my arguments for why his "gambit" can only be interpreted as a genuine gambit were very good, I don't think you have a genuine case against him beyond that.

Furthermore now RR is tarring me with the scummy brush because my argument took a natural turn against charter's assertion that "you couldn't have not protected RR because then he'd call you scummy" with me making the obvious point "well it would have much easier to simply kill him..."

Tunneling kills townies.

[ortolan]

This is what gets me. You keep ignoring the fact that nightkilling me clearly tells the town that you didn't protect me. You then use that false assumption to come to the conclusion that killing me was 100% your best move as scum, and thus since you protected me that makes you obvtown. This is a contrived argument. I don't find the case on Gremwell that convincing, but the above is scummy in and of itself.

What the hell? No it isn't. I don't remember if I said I found you townie during day one but don't think I did. If I didn't, I could have simply said I didn't think you were town and worth protecting. If I had said you were townie I could have put it down to night-kill WIFOM. So no, it's not scummy at all, and I don't know why you would think it is.

[ortolan]

night-kill WIFOM = "I didn't protect the person whom I said was towniest because it was obvious I was going to protect them". Saying me validly speculating about what I would have done as scum is scummy is an even worse argument than the pre-existing one against Gremwell.

[ortolan]

ignore a key fact to arrive to the conclusion that you're obvtown, and that the speculation therefore looks contrived.

key fact? What is this key fact? If you are referring to the fact that if I didn't protect you I would have looked scummy, then I've already said why that simply isn't true- I could have simply claimed I didn't find you town, or alternatively just had the mafia target you for a kill.

[ortolan]

and how did I "miss" it? I am actively arguing with you over it...

[ortolan]

And why are you voting me exactly?

[ortolan]

normally I expect you to give accompanying reasons for a vote, because otherwise, you know, scum can just vote for whoever they like with no consequences.

[ortolan]

I think ML's case for charter being the SK is rather weak. I'm not saying charter couldn't be the SK, but I think those things ML put forward are null-tells rather than SK-tells

[ortolan]

Wednesday shouldn't be a problem at this rate.

I am waiting for RR's action

[ortolan]

protected RR.

[ortolan]

Anyone can claim if they got targetted- Bulletproof has no action and it would be anti-town to ask if Occam commuted.

[ortolan]

I had been thinking that he was actually the SK trying to get me lynched by that because (this is how I see it) it's unlikely I'm mafia after yesterday.

I was actually contemplating the same thing, lol. The SK might have pre-empted the "look for SK tells" to get the heat off himself.

I have to say that as there's 1 mafia and 1 SK, if RR was either I don't see him having much motivation to clear charter who firstly, is the vig and could potentially cause havoc for him (and by clearing him he's guaranteeing he's not lynched and so is free to kill another night), and secondly because of the possibility that he could be the opposing scum faction (who he also doesn't want cleared because they can cross-kill him, or because RR might get lynched in charter's place because charter has been cleared). Instead if RR was scum he could have simply said he watched ML and he targetted Empking, or he watched Empking and he targetted no-one.

While writing this post though I noticed:

Popcorn again?
Did no action and wasn't targetted.

I can't find the rules on finding out whether we're targetted but I'm assuming if you're targetted by a role-blocker and don't do anything you don't find out?

Mod: if one is targetted by the role-blocker and takes no night action does one find out?

My opinions on charter/ RR are pending an answer to this question

[ortolan]

well I will just go ahead pending the answer to that question, I assume RR wouldn't be stupid enough to lie about something that was readily contradicted by the rules.

I'm calling DP/Claus as SK and Occam as last mafia.

But yes, again assuming mod validation re: role-blocker, I would ask you to kindly take a look at Cephrir wagoning the fuck out of me yesterday, before he could have had any motivation to bus me

See e.g.

@charter: Why? Also, what happened to ortolan? He's still near the top of my list, so what changed?

He also gave no case against me and latched onto the similar stuff charter had against Gremwell.

It's time to hear your theories about what type of scum I am- SK or mafia cause I don't think the case for me being mafia is good and am yet to see one for me being SK.

[ortolan]

actually I'm not even gonna waste time with argument

I'm assuming RR/charter are town, otherwise town is screwed anyway.

There is only one mafia or one SK player left, if I am either then if I die today/tonight I fail to fulfill my win condition.

lynch either of Occam/Claus today, and if they flip town, charter vigs me tonight.

That way if I am SK/mafia I am guaranteeing the loss of my win condition by offering this. If I was scum all I could possibly achieve out of this was handing the game to the other scum faction, which I have no reason to do (unless I wanted to spite the town, perhaps).

I can go over their posts to show why they are scummy too, you can see Cephrir fake-arguing with both Oman and Occam early day one before he actually plants a full-blooded vote. DP/Claus from what I recall has been useless for scum-catching all game, despite being bulletproof. He also doesn't have obvious links to anybody which leads me to believe serial-killer (and Occam as last mafia).

[ortolan]

Crap. I just reread win conditions. I was thinking of some scenarios where the worst case would be everyone dying (desired by no one), but I think a lot of them still wind up with a town loss because mafia or SK still win if they go to night with themself and a townie alive. I was thinking I could vig them if we lynched wrong, but that will still result in a loss, sooooo...
I think we have to lynch right today.

Oh, we do have to lynch right today, that's not in dispute. And the only chance of that happening is an Occam/Claus lynch. It is of course slightly possible RR is scum but as I said I don't see his motivation at all for clearing you if he is. Plus it's not like anyone would vote for him over me anyway. Thus I am assuming you both are town.

And yes, if I'm scum then if you lynch Claus/Occam then town will lose, either because everyone dies, scum/mafia is left with the last townie tomorrow or because the townie is left in a king-maker decision between lynching the SK and lynching the mafia tomorrow.

What I am saying is if I am scum I have no motivation to ask you to vig me tonight if Occam/Charter flips town, because that would automatically make my win condition impossible. And town is screwed if they don't lynch Claus/Occam anyway (because I am town).

[ortolan]

well, feel more than free to vig me if he flips town charter

ortolan's suggestion made him look very good at first glance, but then I figured he's the obvious vig target for charter anyways if he decides to vig after a mislynch, so it can also be an attempt at the "he's too willing to die to be scum, so I won't kill him" WIFOM game. So it doesn't tell me much, really.

This is besides the point. It's obvious at this point that if I'm scum I'm going to lose. I will either get lynched today or vigged tonight if I am scum. I have absolutely nothing to gain by offering myself up for a vig- as I said, all it accomplishes if I am scum is causing town to lose, but I also lose in the process.

The problem is, when Claus-SK gets lynched today, I can still foresee you throwing away the game for town by lynching me instead of Occam tomorrow.

I reread Gremwell and ort's early posting, Gremwell I find odd but not the least bit scummy (I think unlike MM, he seemed totally aware that the "let's kill 'em both" plan will attract bad attention and can't see how that's a good thing for him as scum to pull off), and ort feels town but it's sorta a mafia tell that he says very little about Oman and Cephrir in his big catch-up posts.
I remember having slight SK vibes from both DP and Occam, will reread them both and take another look at ort when I'll have the time.

This is quite unfair. Most of my posts have been to get the heat off Gremwell, as a huge number of people suspected him when I replaced in. My posts were in response to people like charter wagoning the fuck out of me. So if you thought Gremwell was town then finding me scummy is rather unfair because my posts were in response to others perceiving him as scummy. I don't think I've done anything properly scummy the whole game.

[ortolan]

Yeah I really don't like the way ort is putting himself up as a vig target. If you were town you'd want to live through a night that could potentially equal a town loss if we mislynch today - so you clearly aren't too concerned about the town winning.

That's obv crap logic. I clearly said I am willing to assume RR and charter are town because town is screwed if they are not- thus lynching me is as bad as lynching either of them.

I know that you and Claus will flip scum so it does me no harm to ask to be vigged if you don't- the offer was just for their perspective because it amounts to throwing the game if I was scum.

And notice if I am SK or mafia then the other scum faction obviously doesn't find me scummy otherwise they no doubt would have killed me last night to ensure they were the only ones left in the end-game v.s. town (again WIFOM, but still).

[ortolan]

First of all, I was just talking in general terms- if I'm scum then the other scum, if they thought I was scum would optimally have killed me last night to be in the end-game against town all by themselves.

This I believe suggests that at least one scum (regardless of whether I'm the other scum or not) doesn't find me scummy.

But although this isn't what you said that argument wasn't too good-not for the reasons you stated but because Empking did look extremely scummy (and they thus would want to remove him), so I may have still been their second preference.

But the fact Empking was supersaint alone doesn't make him an "obvious target" at all, it assumes the town was competent enough to have their second suspect after him be scum- in which case if they kill Empking then this person becomes their number suspect anyway.

Tell me if this isn't clear, but basically, yer I've realised that argument doesn't do too much to clear me.

[ortolan]

more than happy to cooperate with any questions or plans to test my alignment

[ortolan]

Occam is just trying to insure himself in case I am the other scum instead of Claus.

He thinks he could get me lynched over himself and doesn't want to be left in the end-game alone with charter and RR, who both know he's scum

[ortolan]

both know = both would know

[ortolan]

Occam, if we do lynch Claus today and he flips scum, what would be your feelings on the other 3 of us individiually?

How about if he flips town?

[ortolan]

um ya that is what I've been telling you to do for like 2 days???????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????

Occam's not town, and the town loss will be on your head if you think so, especially in light of Post 876 which makes literally no sense as townie

84- This also makes me think that Occam isn't scum. Oman prefers Ceph over Occam. Since Oman was distancing/bussing, I don't see why he'd go ahead and go after Ceph if he wanted to bus when Occam would be just fine.

lol, that's retarded. Only moronic scum would just deliberately bus their teammates out of the blue

206: So wait, a post where Cephrir attacks Occam's opinions but shows no intention of continuing to wagon him means he is town? If anything it's a minor scumtell because scum want to look disassociated from their buddies while not actually getting them lynched.

And the posts you've selected and your conclusion are completely disparate- half the posts don't even concern Occam but Claus, and half the posts about Occam you acknowledge are scummy- the other half are bad reasons for not suspecting him.

Why don't I get a read through myself? You wagoned the fuck out of Gremwell based on one thing, please do the same thing you've done for Occam for me and tell me just how many scummy posts of mine there are.

And if all you've concluded is that Occam isn't the SK, then I agree, he is mafia. Claus is obviously the SK.

[ortolan]

Only moronic scum would just deliberately bus their teammates out of the blue

bus = bus to the point of a lynch, not merely attacking them, which as I've said if anything is a minor scumtell if they show no intention of taking it to a lynch.

[ortolan]

I will break down 876 for you so you don't even need to do any work to realise that Occam is scum:

I'm still trying to figure out if there's a foolproof method of using out night actions in order to win the game. The problem I've having is that no matter how I figure it, there's still a chance that RR is scum, which is a big problem, even if we decide to take it for granted that charter is cleared. If we lynch claus today, and he flips scum, the probability of ort being scum is much higher than the chance of RR being scum based on night action claims.

I don't think there should be a vig kill tonight if claus doesn't flip scum

Ok so if Claus doesn't flip scum that means we enter night with 2 townies, a mafia and an SK.

The mafia and the SK each get one night-kill, and they each have 3 people to choose to kill.

Probabilistically, there is a 1/3 * 1/3 = 1/9 (11%) chance of them hitting each other, resulting in a town win

There is a 1/3 * 2/3 = 1/3 * 2/3 = 44% chance of one hitting the other and the other hitting a townie, resulting in a...................................win for one of the scum

There is a 1/3 * 1/3 + 1/3 * 1/3 = 22% chance of them each hitting one of the townies, resulting in an...................................................SK win

There is a 1/3 * 1/3 + 1/3 * 1/3 = 22% chance of them both targetting the same townie, resulting in.........................................the last townie being left in a kingmaker situation to decide which of the two scum to lynch and hand the other the victory (i.e. another scum win)

So Occam advocates a course of action with an 88% / 8/9 chance of town losing. How the fuck can you still think he is town?????????????????????????????????

[ortolan]

Yes, it means vigging is the best strategy, which means............................Occam is not town for somehow thinking that we shouldn't vig.

I guess you're right about prisoner's dilemma, I assumed from previous games that these situations usually end by a lynch happening that day chosen by the townie though, otherwise in this game for example they would need to wait 3 weeks for the day to end, because I don't see the scum willingly converting a kingmaker situation into a prisoner's dilemma. And if I was scum in this situation I would probably nuke the townie in the PD anyway, because town deserve to lose for not lynching Claus / Occam

Assuming one doesn't have knowledge of my alignment, then vigging me (or anyone else whose alignment is not known) is far more likely to result in a town win than no-vigging. This is a moot point for me because I know Claus will flip scum (if he's town town was screwed anyway from the start of today), but Occam's position is indefensible.

[ortolan]

Oh I know how the PD comes about, it's just from looking at past game(s) I don't think that's how it usually works in practice- depends whether the townie is happy to wait 3 weeks for a rather small chance at a win or whether scum are prepared to (I believe) lower their odds of winning which I think they would be stupid to do seeing as town really hasn't earned a win.

[ortolan]

lower their odds of winning = voting no lynch (I believe)

[ortolan]

the kingmaker situation being referred to here isn't the same as the "kingmaker" game type in mafia, it's basically in a game or tournament with 3+ players or teams- in the endgame one of these players cannot possibly win but is left to choose which of the other two or more will win.

i.e. assuming there is a lynch, if there is a townie, an SK and a mafia then the townie has to choose whether to lynch the SK or the mafia and hand the victory to the other player, even though the townie themselves cannot possibly win.

They can potentially occur in any tournaments with group stages which use points won, also.

Yeah, the reason I advocated a no vig tonight is because it would establish the PD situation. However, that's not really a reliable way of dispensing of scum.

That is a horrible situation. The game is still easily winnable by town, with 3 townies vs a mafia and an SK. A prisoner's dilemma greatly, greatly reduces our chances of winning and is a shite and boring situation to be in anyway.

[ortolan]

Unless Claus posts soon it looks like we're going to need to decide whether to just lynch him or wait for a replacement.

I'm in favour of just lynching him right now (yer that's obvscum of me etc.)

[ortolan]

Vote: Claus

[ortolan]

meh, so I was wrong about RR- I didn't see why he'd want to clear charter like that if he were scum.

I don't think that gambit at the end was a bad idea by me, everyone still thought me/Gremwell looked scummy so I thought the alternative was me being lynched and handing the game to scum anyway.

I didn't protect anyone on the last night because even though I knew to like 99% certainty charter was town, if I protected him and he vigged me it'd only be one townie vs one scum, or two scum, thus town would automatically lose anyway. So I failed to protect in the hopes the scum would cross-kill and somehow leave charter alive anyway.

[ortolan]

Well done to Occam also