Mini 535: Pick Your Poison 2 (Game Over!)

[Ether]

So, uh, I made this big post about supporting a roleblocker/encryptor combination and believing that there could easily be a cop. Then I started scumhunting.

vote: encryptor

Not as sure on the second. Willing to be convinced otherwise.

I think it's unlikely that the scum gave us a cop.

Something is wrong with this picture.

This makes me feel better about the encryptor/godfather movement, though I don't feel like hammering quite yet. I want some role speculation on the record before the power roles actually know what they are and can out themselves. (I was personally thinking cop/masonizer/vig, though I was kind of iffy about the first one and think a weakdoc is more likely in light of Bookitty's contradiction.)

[Ether]

@Ether:

I don't really see what's scummy about changing my mind after thinking it over. How useful daytalking is to the scum would depend on the scum in question, I guess. I was looking for further impressions on that.

I realised I was most likely wrong about preferring the roleblocker role to the godfather role, and I said I thought I'd made a mistake. I think that's fair enough. It's difficult enough (at least for me) to try to figure out the roles we've probably been given, and then to try to figure what roles present the least risk and most benefit given the roles we'll have as town? I thought other people understood it better, so I deferred to their better judgment.

I think that's fair.

Eh. I'd have expected you to have contemplated the setup more thoroughly; your underconfidence to the point of not speculating until you could echo other people (and not unvoting the roleblocker, but whatever) feels out-of-character.

I was thinking they likely gave us a Vig, which the GF would be vulnerable to, but that's a long shot,

I'll admit that the choosing an encryptor/godfather over an encryptor/roleblocker while expressing doubt about the encryptor isn't so bad when one factors in that the roleblocker can screw with a vig's "results." But then your train of thought loses me all over again. Vig is unlikely? What?

I asked before--just what power roles

do

you think are here?

I get a weakly bad vibe from Skitzer's 23 efforts to justify the godfather, and in contrast think that his one-shot vig push is probably

too

stupid to mean anything. Sometimes I love my scumdar.

By the way, I approve of the encryptor movement, except that you people are not helping to mercilessly stretch out the length of this game. It is very important that I last the maximum amount of realtime possible here, which means that there should be a lot of realtime involved. See Patrick's signature for details.

[Ether]

Um.

So what's up with the random voting? Complete waste of time. You have discussion material--but no, you're just going to pretend the first 37 posts never happened, aren't you. Somebody please explain this to me.

vote: Bookitty

I could also go for Skitzer, except I don't think the ensuing argument would be as interesting and we're not

that

far ahead yet.

I don't think the chance of a vig and doctor targetting the same person is all that likely due to their opposite kill/protect motivations. (A vig probably wouldn't have been blocked by a roleblocker until it claimed because of the two-shot deal, but that's irrelevant.) If a vig fails its kill--

--hey, let's play some hypovig! If there's only one kill in a night, we all make up the nightkill (or no nightkill) we'd have tried as vig and post it. And then if a real vig dies, if it targetted someone on a night there was no kill, we act from there. There's not much chance of outing the vig needlessly with that--is there?

I think they gave us a Doc, a Weak Doc, and a Vig. I thought I'd said this before, but maybe not. The scum know what they gave us, so I don't think there's any harm in giving my opinion.

This confuses me. On one hand, this is one of the most risky setups in the game for the scum because of the possibility of cyclic protection if the town catches on. But it's still realistic that people would consider it--Patrick had to point the risk out to both Ripley and me when we reviewed the game. And I think three heads would be better than one at catching that.

On the other hand, this is the set-up in which the roleblocker you proposed is at its

most

dangerous. Godfather is the

first

safe role I'd think of there. Not roleblocker. Even without considering cyclic protection, I think godfather would spring to mind first.

Other people need to comment.

Ether gesticulates, to emphasise some ridiculous point about the mod's signature, and manages to knock over her glass, spilling her drink all over herself. She will be uncomfortable now for the rest of the game.

(

And

I'll smell like alcohol...)

[Ether]

before you made your choices, Ether,

...should I be paranoid?

why is it so suspicious that others who had not done so might not see it as clearly as you did?

It's not. It's a point in your favor, actually. I said that.

Admitting that you might be wrong about something is not a scumtell. I'm not sure why you're trying to paint it as one.

That's not what I'm saying. I think that your own roleblocker/encryptor vote clashes illogically with your initial choice. I'm confused by when you believed what, but I think you'd have believed

something

right off the bat. I kind of think doctor/weakdoc/vig would be the initial thought, not something you'd move to upon contemplation. Dunno.

[Ether]

I do not agree with this idea at all, since the vig is guarenteed to be protown (assuming we have one), we have a 100% protown input into the vig kill. If the whole town discusses it, then some of the players in the town, and therefore some of the people deciding the vigkill, are scum, so there is a less than 100% protown input into it.

I did not suggest vig direction. I suggested hypovig. A vig is perfectly autonomous under hypovig. (I definitely think that vig direction has its place, but not right now.)

Bookitty voted for the roleblocker on post 5 and later announced that the most likely setup in her eyes was weakdoc/doctor/vig--the second strongest position in the game for the roleblocker. This is why I am voting her.

She then misrepresented my attack on her, highlighting the part of it that was not in fact an attack on her. (I'm not sure how far to trust this, since

no one

seems to be on my wavelength. But what she defended against wasn't my case and shouldn't be interpretted as such, so there you go.)

I do think the scum would probably realize that doctor/weakdoc/vig is a bad idea, since there would be three of them and all--hence, the "point in your favor" comment. But the realization isn't a guarantee--also, if she were scum, Bookitty wouldn't be under any obligation to tell the truth about her perceived correct strategy for scum. These possibilities aren't unlikely enough for me to drop her contradiction.

I get your confusion,

I find this very difficult to believe.

[Ether]

I should probably start quizzing people on my posts to make sure they're paying attention. This is ridiculous.

I was having some difficulty thinking about the possible combinations that scum would likely give us.

vote: two shot Mafia roleblocker

vote: encryptor

Not as sure on the second.

Willing to be convinced otherwise.

This contrast, along with some general assumptions about your behavior, makes me think that you

would

have been thinking about the scum roles, and had a reasonable degree of certainty on the roleblocker.

Why did you post this:

So, uh, I made this big post about supporting a roleblocker/encryptor combination and believing that there could easily be a cop.

when in fact you never made such a post, and you never argued your case for this combination?

I indeed made such a post, but I never actually posted it because I read the game and it proved irrelevant. (I don't have it in its typed-out form anymore, but I can remember the arguments if you'd like.)

I was willing to put my own opinions on the line and post first. Other people disagreed, and I thought their reasoning was better than mine. You didn't put your opinions on the line at all, you just attacked mine, even though my original thoughts were the same as yours. I'd like your reasoning on this.

You never actually

did

post your rationale for the roleblocker, which makes for a blatant contradiction when you accuse

me.

I said what I supported, even though I clearly stated that I didn't want to end the day yet. I even gave opinions on people instead of just roles. How did I not put my opinions on the line?

When the thread opened and I read everyone else's posts, I changed my mind from roleblocker to godfather as a direct result of your own actions. Your own shift in opinion felt off to me, and the fact that you didn't vote the godfather but nodded along with the bandwagon after it appeared made me feel better about the godfather.

And yes, originally I did think they'd given us a cop and thus I was against a godfather. But I realised after reading other people's arguments and thinking it over that my theory was fairly unlikely.

See, you

thought

about it. I wish you'd just spit out what your initial theory

was

, but really, I doubt I'd unvote anyway. I don't like the contradictions you tried to invent in 55.

I'm not at all sure they gave us doc/weak doc/vig, either, but that was my best guess

at the time you asked me.

...eh. I'm inclined to think that doctor/weakdoc/vig is the sort of undeveloped guess someone would lean toward

immediately

, instead of moving to it a few posts in. This is just my intuition speaking; it's possible that you did move to this, but it feels off to me.

[Ether]

I acknowledge the Skitzwagon but am no longer willing to join it. It is blazingly obvious that Bookitty is scum. Forget what I said about stretching the game out--please let's kill her already. Please let's at least

discuss

killing her already.

Also, I demand Bookitty respond to my actual posts instead of throwing paragraph after repetitive paragraph at me. I'm asking

you

questions, too, you realize.

It seems to me that scum would be more likely to do what YOU have done, Ether. They wouldn't voice their own opinions first, they would wait and see what the general consensus was, and then they'd attack the people who weren't in perfect step with that consensus. It would be an easy yet baseless case to make, and scum are all about the easy cases.

I never attacked you for your roleblocker support. I attacked you for your later godfather support, sort of, but even then it was for a leap I perceived in your train of thought. A leap to accomodate to the general consensus.

Your accusation is an obvious straw man fallacy. How are people not

seeing

this?

Additionally, you seem determined to ensure that this is the sole topic of discussion. You don't feel the need for a random vote, you don't want to talk about anything except this, as if you think there's only one scum in the game and you have found it. You're stifling discussion by the rest of the town. Perhaps that's your point.

Uh-huh. I broke the game out of the random voting phase and started it on its search for scum. I'm such a stifler of discussion.

I'm

trying

to get people involved so I can read them. I'm trying to scumhunt, period. The contrast is funny--you don't even have a non-random vote out yet.

I urge the cast to look carefully at these accusations of yours. The two paragraphs I just quoted, beyond any initial reasons I might have had about your shift in opinion--though I'll still be happy to defend those--are why I'm going to kill you.

I still would like an explanation for why, originally, you stated that it felt uncharacteristic for me to be uncertain, when you know this not to be the case, and in fact you yourself nominated me for a title based on precisely the opposite. Because that feels like you were trying to invent a case out of nothing right from the start.

I think you looked kinda certain in your first post. A healthy level of certain. An "I was thinking about my decision" level of certain. You acted more uncertain later, to a degree at which the original certainty felt off.

Hypovig means that the vig claims its result every day after it might have hit a godfather (that is, any day after there's only been one nightkill). But it gets to hide this result amongst everyone else. So it doesn't out itself (though it does give a strong hint to the scum if it aims for the godfather, yes). And then when it dies and comes up "vig," we see if it targetted someone who's still alive.

Towngoers the vig is blending in with should of course usually, but not necessarily, report "no choice," and avoid giving the names of multiple potential godfathers--that would out them as not-vig.

Just to spark some discussion other than Ether vs Bookitty,

There was Ether vs Bookitty discussion?

[Ether]

All right, Ether, can you restate your questions in a clear manner? All I've seen so far are accusations, and most of them don't make sense to me.

I want you to respond directly to the responses I make to your own posts. Use quotes. Answer everything. Do this for posts 61 and 68--after I made them, you just dropped them and looked for brand new craplogic to hurl. There's plenty for you to answer in what I've already said, and your tactics are clearly covering that up.

I'm rushed now. I'm capable of summarizing later, but really, the above is a lot more important.

Additionally, if one person is giving a name, and the other people are usually, but not necessarily, reporting "no choice", I think that pretty well outs the vig, doesn't it?

It's not all that likely that the

vig

will try to target someone and fail, either. It wouldn't be all that difficult to blend.

Since most people will be reporting "no choice" per your instructions, then the only reason to give a name unless you're the vig is to attract the attention of scum for the NK (essentially martyring yourself to distract attention from the vig) or to try to attract the doc protection as scum (which will kill the weak doc, if I recall correctly).

This argument is misinformed--hypovig is reported after the fact. A doctor and vig will have already done their things. Having said that, a towngoer who says that it targetted someone the scum know isn't the godfather

will

strongly imply that it isn't the vig. (Depends on the doctor.) I acknowledge this. This is why I discourage them from giving names.

It is possible (with no regards to my own role, see below) that we do not have a doctor at all. Clear flaw in your argument there.

I think you'd have second-guessed yourself there as town instead of simply trying to discredit my argument. I really, really do.

If we do have one, it is still quite possible that someone reading your argument would carelessly comment, "But we don't know we

have

a doctor!" This person would not be a doctor. The scum would know this.

Either way, nice try.

(Well, except Ether, because I'm getting more and more suspicious of her motives.)

You can vote if you'd like to, you know. I'll laugh at the OMGUS and keep attacking you, but I'm already doing that.

[Ether]

It's possible you're scum. I don't really think so, but your persistent tunnelling is really weird, Ether. If you're town, you're tunnelling to the extent that it's derailing all other discussion.

The derailing is unintentional, but it indeed seems that everyone else is trying to lurk through this argument because they're too lazy to actually read. It's very sad. ._.

At least my tunnel-vision is making me commit to

some

positions. You're trying to discredit me, and yet you still have a random vote out. On the guy Porochaz and Yvonne bandwagoning. Who you haven't actually commented on because I derailed you too much. Ick.

Converting these into question form doesn't feel as natural; often, the question is implied. You should be able to respond to or at least acknowledge accusations regardless of what form they're in. Whatever, I'll humor you.

Keep the original statements in mind, and understand that it's unlikely that I'll unvote regardless of your answers. These weren't really meant to be questions; I'm just drawing attention to how thoroughly you're skipping my posts.

I was having some difficulty thinking about the possible combinations that scum would likely give us.

vote: two shot Mafia roleblocker

vote: encryptor

Not as sure on the second. Willing to be convinced otherwise.

This contrast, along with some general assumptions about your behavior, makes me think that you would have been thinking about the scum roles, and had a reasonable degree of certainty on the roleblocker.

I still would like an explanation for why, originally, you stated that it felt uncharacteristic for me to be uncertain, when you know this not to be the case, and in fact you yourself nominated me for a title based on precisely the opposite. Because that feels like you were trying to invent a case out of nothing right from the start.

I think you looked kinda certain in your first post. A healthy level of certain. An "I was thinking about my decision" level of certain. You acted more uncertain later, to a degree at which the original certainty felt off.

Read: am I wrong in assuming that you'd put some degree of thought into the setup by post 5?

Why did you post this:

So, uh, I made this big post about supporting a roleblocker/encryptor combination and believing that there could easily be a cop.

when in fact you never made such a post, and you never argued your case for this combination?

I indeed made such a post, but I never actually posted it because I read the game and it proved irrelevant. (I don't have it in its typed-out form anymore, but I can remember the arguments if you'd like.)

When the thread opened and I read everyone else's posts, I changed my mind from roleblocker to godfather as a direct result of your own actions. Your own shift in opinion felt off to me, and the fact that you didn't vote the godfather but nodded along with the bandwagon after it appeared made me feel better about the godfather.

Read: are you even reading my posts? How was my answer to that not completely obvious?

I was willing to put my own opinions on the line and post first. Other people disagreed, and I thought their reasoning was better than mine. You didn't put your opinions on the line at all, you just attacked mine, even though my original thoughts were the same as yours. I'd like your reasoning on this.

You never actually did post your rationale for the roleblocker, which makes for a blatant contradiction when you accuse me. I said what I supported, even though I clearly stated that I didn't want to end the day yet. I even gave opinions on people instead of just roles. How did I not put my opinions on the line?

Read: you never actually did post your rationale for the roleblocker, which makes for a blatant contradiction when you accuse me. I said what I supported, even though I clearly stated that I didn't want to end the day yet. I even gave opinions on people instead of just roles.

How did I not put my opinions on the line?

I'm not at all sure they gave us doc/weak doc/vig, either, but that was my best guess at the time you asked me.

...eh. I'm inclined to think that doctor/weakdoc/vig is the sort of undeveloped guess someone would lean toward immediately, instead of moving to it a few posts in. This is just my intuition speaking; it's possible that you did move to this, but it feels off to me.

See, you thought about it. I wish you'd just spit out what your initial theory

was

, but really, I doubt I'd unvote anyway. I don't like the contradictions you tried to invent in 55.

Read: so, uh, what

were

you thinking in 5?

Additionally, you seem determined to ensure that this is the sole topic of discussion. You don't feel the need for a random vote, you don't want to talk about anything except this, as if you think there's only one scum in the game and you have found it. You're stifling discussion by the rest of the town. Perhaps that's your point.

Uh-huh. I broke the game out of the random voting phase and started it on its search for scum. I'm such a stifler of discussion.

Read: how did I try to stifle discussion?

I'm trying to get people involved so I can read them. I'm trying to scumhunt, period. The contrast is funny--you don't even have a non-random vote out yet.

Read: how are you not stifling discussion?

It seems to me that scum would be more likely to do what YOU have done, Ether. They wouldn't voice their own opinions first, they would wait and see what the general consensus was, and then they'd attack the people who weren't in perfect step with that consensus. It would be an easy yet baseless case to make, and scum are all about the easy cases.

I never attacked you for your roleblocker support. I attacked you for your later godfather support, sort of, but even then it was for a leap I perceived in your train of thought. A leap to accomodate to the general consensus.

Your accusation is an obvious straw man fallacy. How are people not

seeing

this?

Read: Bookitty, why are you such a lying hypocrite in this game?

[Ether]

Name call all you like, it doesn't make your case any better. I'm done addressing this with you, since you can't even be civil.

Gah. I'm sorry; I sometimes get like that. I'll try to stay calmer.

It seems to me that bookitty truly has been making an effort to answer ether's questions but ether seems to have been making it difficult to distinguish what she wanted answered, almost as if she was trying to form a bandwagon for bookitty's lynch, which screams scum.

unvote, vote ether

But she

hasn't

been answering them, see below. I think Bookitty has been confusing the issue more than I ever have by forcing me to repeat myself and ignoring or redirecting many of the questions. The things I originally pushed her for, I really

don't

mind all that much anymore--but I'm still suspicious for other aspects of her arguments.

I do wonder why, if they weren't meant to be questions, you objected to my not responding to them in the first place.

Semantics--if you posted an attack against me, I would consider myself obligated to respond to the attack, even if you did not explicitly use any question marks. Also, um, I

did

add some questions in my posts, and you ignored them.

Why did you post this:

So, uh, I made this big post about supporting a roleblocker/encryptor combination and believing that there could easily be a cop.

when in fact you never made such a post, and you never argued your case for this combination?

I indeed made such a post, but I never actually posted it because I read the game and it proved irrelevant. (I don't have it in its typed-out form anymore, but I can remember the arguments if you'd like.)

When the thread opened and I read everyone else's posts, I changed my mind from roleblocker to godfather as a direct result of your own actions. Your own shift in opinion felt off to me, and the fact that you didn't vote the godfather but nodded along with the bandwagon after it appeared made me feel better about the godfather.

Read: are you even reading my posts? How was my answer to that not completely obvious?

How did I not put my opinions on the line?

Read: how are you not stifling discussion?

I can answer your answers, not all of which are bad, more the things on more recent issues and what you

didn't

say. But I again need to hurry to post.

Your vigplan makes the "No target" announcements kind of arbitrary, but I do see how targets can alert the mafia who already know who the godfather is. I wouldn't mind just leaving the vig to act naturally at this point.

I don't like Yvonne or Gorrad, though I worry that this is reflexive.

[Ether]

You wrote a long post defending your roleblocker idea, but you didn't share it. I don't understand why, having put the work into that, you didn't feel that your thoughts would be useful to the town. I mean, it was already written, and I know for myself when I write something lengthy, I tend to post it just on the basis that I put a lot of work into it.

In preference to actually sharing your own ideas (and apparently opening yourself up to attack), you chose to attack someone else who had had the same idea, and make a case out of that person changing their mind.

I find it easy to type a post as long as I have an opinion to type it about. I changed my mind

because

you changed your mind. If you had not, I would also have continued to back the roleblocker with arguments (which I can still provide if anyone is actually interested). And I've clearly shared my own ideas--ideas more relevant and controversial than anyone else in Day 0. I have said all of this repeatedly.

You've had to clarify pretty much every point you've made, and that's why I asked you to make your points in question form, so I knew what was rhetorical accusation and what you actually wanted a response to.

I consider everything something to respond to. The confusion point is fair.

most of your posts were filled with accusations about my usual playstyle (false, and I believe you knew them to be false if you'd considered it)

Only the original bit, and the accusation wasn't that your train of thought moved on but that I couldn't see what your train of thought actually

was.

you yourself are ignoring posts like this:

Ether, I have no idea what you're trying to get at. Sorry! :very happy:

which arguably is about as specific as your posts directed at me have been, but apparently didn't merit a response from you.

I

did

respond to that in 54.

Read: how are you not stifling discussion?

I absolutely agree that this argument has derailed useful discussion, cost the town the random vote phase that might have allowed some analysis on other people (though I don't accept responsibility for that part), and has largely monopolised the conversation.

I asked this in comparison with the accusation that I was stifling discussion. I love discussion--I love it so much that I got the ball rolling on my first post in the game, and was dismayed to see that no one wanted anything to do with it, even after they

could

vote people.

I made a discussion and tried to drag people into it. I failed miserably.

On a related theme, if I were sure you were scum, or even moderately convinced of it, I wouldn't care about you calling it OMGUS. I'd just vote you. But with the bandwagon building on you, I'm viewing that as a point in your favour, ironically enough.

...h-heh.

I continued to attack you because of your backhanded, often misrepresentative jabs at me without putting your vote where your mouth was (or anywhere relevant at all). All right--

unvote

.

I don't think Skitzer's scum, though. WIFOM games over his ignorance of the weakdoc (and his naïve 96 in general). I think the scum would have gone over the roles more thoroughly.

I want to know what Yvonne's stances on Skitzer and me actually

are.

Same question to Gorrad.

He seemed to just brush off the accusation.

That's one thing he

didn't

do.

[Ether]

Scumbag Bob: So I'm thinking weakdoc/doctor/vig would screw them over good. No information roles.
Scumbag Lisa: It's more complicated than that. Weakdoc

is

an information role.
Scumbag Pepito: So what about that cop? It's only any good once it knows its sanity, and we can probably WIFOM a godfather in.
Scumbag Lisa: Would a vig be a threat to a godfather?
Scumbag Bob: Probably not.
Scumbag Pepito: ^_^

[healthy discussion about town power roles ensues]

I think ignorance and naïvety do have something to do with it. (My reference was to weakdocs as a role, not as a specific person

with

the role. I'm unsure how it's a hint.)

vote roleblocker and godfather

I think the first one is the best option, the second was chosen due to me not liking the rest... vig, I dont want the mafia to get an extra kill, the encryptor allows all mafia to speak all the time, if that person is alive then it benifits them all rather than the one person, the cop I wrote down initially but then realised what were the chances mafia chose vig for town if they haven't then the NK'ing doesn't really matter, the cop investigations could be a bit of a blow but then were unsure of the cops sanity anyway.

However if you were to ignore that and look at his other posts I dont have to go to far to find something else scummy about him, for instance:

Vote: 1-Shot Vig

The encryptor could be dangerous if we decide to massclaim. The Mafia could freely discuss how they wanted to split the claims between powerroles and town

@Porochaz I chose the one shot Vig because it was better than the other choices to me. I just don't think that an encryptor is a good idea. Roleblocker and rolecop were just plain not good chocies. Because the scum are talking during the day now, they can point out things to each other that they may have forgotten during Night.

But you do know they can talk during the next night as well, Giving scum an extra kill is very stupid,giving scum the encryptor role is not very useful as anything they could say suring the day could be said at night before they kill- no advantage

I agree that Skitzer's 23 sucked, but your defense of the encryptor

specifically

feels weird.

[Ether]

I really don't think Skitzer is scum.

But ignorance and naivety aren't the

issue

; the issue is implied knowledge. Unless I'm misinterpreting what you're saying entirely.

Eh. I don't think it's that strong an implication, and the "I'm trying to figure out why people would be acting oddly" aspect actually feels

town

(if unoptimal) in newbies.

And JDodge's vote is like the best of the lot. "Trying to out power roles?" There's an encryptor, and I am completely unable to view this as a sinister fishing attempt. Seriously. The wagon feels opportunistic and wrong.

How did I do such?

The way you spoke of YvonneSeer possibly being a weak doc implied knowledge, not speculation. There are only 2 possible ways for you to possess this knowledge:

1. You are scum
   
2. You are a weak doc

If 2 was true, you would

not have speculated that Yvonne was a weak doc

. Thus I can only deduce that 1 is true.

Eh I'm not sure how much I believe skitzer. He seemed to just brush off the accusation. Doesn't really warant a vote, nut

FoS:skitzer

. Also,

Unvote:JDodge

. Random voting seems to be coming to a close.

Eh, whatever. skitzer is becoming increasingly suspicious, especially b/c of what jdodge caught. I won't have much time til Wednesday, so I'll hold off my vote. I'll also post my thoughts then.

I especially dislike Perfect's voteless support, and the timing in his further attachment to the wagon.

vote: perfect628

[Ether]

could just have forgotten about Encryptor

Attributing sinister

intent

to Skitzer's posts is a horrible stretch. Damn this wagon sucks.

Also, I'm all for the hypovig idea. That seems like a really good plan.

It's actually not that great. The best plan is probably just "let the vig do whatever it feels like and hope the rest of the town doesn't find other ways to claim not-vig."

[Ether]

Ether, when you say this bandwagon is opportunistic, are you talking about opportunistic scum or opportunistic town? If you're talking about scum, then at least one scum is on the wagon right now, unless you're suggesting that the wagon is only town-filled.

I don't understand what you're asking. I think that supporting a big wagon for bad reasons is inherently scummy, and I think that this wagon is made of bad reasons.

To clarify--I'm not really voting Perfect for not voting. (Having said that, his "I thought he was at -2" excuse is bullshit. There was a recent votecount with Skitzer at -5. There was one vote between this votecount and his post. This isn't too difficult.)

It's more Perfect's support of the Skitzwagon without having the slightest idea what it's actually about. Skitzer most certainly did

not

just brush off the accusations, JDodge had already made the post calling him out, and Skitzer's posts 111 and 118 didn't seem "increasingly suspicious" at all. I'm thinking Perfect was just trying to angle himself into a more comfortable vote.

I think everything's a trap, that's why I'm still alive.

Bad motto, by the way. Smart towngoers get nightkilled.

Especially smart towngoers whose survival doesn't influence Patrick's signature.

[Ether]

JDodge, your initial vote (implied knowledge, yes, I know) broke fewer laws of common sense than the other Skitzvotes, but I still don't think it was all that strong. And your most recent posts give off the same policy lynch vibes as everyone else's did. Please cut it out and vote Perfect. Thank you.

Also, you've had some experience with Ever. Should I take his noncommital, suspicionless shadows of my own posts as a bad sign?

I think Ether has a point about skitzer forgetting however I feel skitzer forgetting one of the towns powerroles when there on the front page is suspicous...

I'm confused.

[Ether]

This is pretty WIFOMy IMO, and also, Yvonne could be poorly playing scum. Poor play =! Town.

Pet peeve here: WIFOM is the game. It is love and science and physics, and it is perfectly relevant. True story.

but I will point out that it looked like Ether was trying to scumhunt to me, even though I knew her to be wrong.

This is definitely not the vibe I got from you at the time. In fact, you have said the exact opposite of this.

Having said that, I'd probably vote Ever over you. Probably.

I'm still happiest with my Perfectvote, though. It's great. Why is he still alive?

[Ether]

but I will point out that it looked like Ether was trying to scumhunt to me, even though I knew her to be wrong.

This is definitely not the vibe I got from you at the time. In fact, you have said the exact opposite of this.

This is another of those implied questions: why the contradiction?

I'm still happiest with my Perfectvote, though. It's great. Why is he still alive?

And this is a serious question to everyone.

[Ether]

I'm undecided on the Seerwagon. It's an improvement from Skitzer, and I guess she could be scum...but Mizzy actually

is

scum. So the wagon is silly. (I don't, for the record, see her comment on Perfect as an associative tell--at least she

made

it.)

Ether, when you say this bandwagon is opportunistic, are you talking about opportunistic scum or opportunistic town? If you're talking about scum, then at least one scum is on the wagon right now, unless you're suggesting that the wagon is only town-filled.

I don't understand what you're asking. I think that supporting a big wagon for bad reasons is inherently scummy, and I think that this wagon is made of bad reasons.

Say something, though.

I don't really think you can complain when you come in accusing someone of being scum with counterintuitive reasoning, and they think your case is crap and wonder if you're scum as a result. I think that's a normal reaction.

That has nothing to do with the contradiction I actually quoted. Do you or do you not think my behavior toward you was

scumhunting?

Your quotes, which are mistimed, actually further that contradiction (scumhunting effort, remember). I'm confused by what your read on me actually

is

and where you're getting it.

That said, do you really want to derail the discussion back to this again?

I wasn't aiming to derail; I was pointing out a contradiction on your part as an aside. This time, the contradiction wasn't really something I was expecting to blow out. I pointed it out, and I expected you to clarify. You ignored it, and when I reminded you, you went on a tangent that doesn't seem to have anything to do with current events at all.

At this rate, when

can

I attack you?

It's absolutely ridiculous considering the small case you have against her that you're suggesting we should consider lynching her for it.

Please read the post (68) in which I make the "blazingly obvious" comment. I wasn't thrilled with her change of heart over the roleblocker, but that's not why I made it, as seems to be your impression. I said it based off of her OMGUSy responses. I was scummy because I got to the thread late and decided to find someone suspicious? I expected Bookitty to be an easy lynch?

Grr.

Hmm, this is an interesting point, and one that I agree with Skitz. But why didn't you vote for Ether because of this? I'd say it was worthy of a vote.

Um. I didn't vote Bookitty for random voting.

9 pages isn't really a long enough Day 1, and so far this game has got plenty of potential for discussion before we bring it to a close, I think it'd be a very bad idea to lynch someone at the moment, as we're getting plenty of useful discussion right now.

That isn't why I asked the question.

There's a pretty fair case against Perfect, but this depends on Skitzer being scum for a possible perfect-lynch to start looking realistic IMO.

Huh?

Because lynching pro-town folk is a really stupid idea...unless of course, you're scum. Calm the heck down and stop zerging folks, before your opinion means nothing to anyone because everyone thinks you're coocoo. If you are pro-town, then you must know that one of the best things a townie can do is play it easy and make themselves heard in a sensible, logical manner. The LAST thing the town needs is a townie doing all the work for the scum.

IGMEOY: Ether

You are

so

scum.

[Ether]

Right now, Ether makes me somewhat suspicious due to his spontaneous suspicion of Mizzy.

Right, because one post informational post gives you all the knowledge about me in the world. Good job at being wrong, again! *Claps*

Uh. I've been voting you since Perfect's opportunistic bullshit and you've only secured my beliefs. (And, to Skitzer: I am not a "his.")

But let's spell out that paragraph of yours.

Because lynching pro-town folk is a really stupid idea...unless of course, you're scum. Calm the heck down and stop zerging folks, before your opinion means nothing to anyone because everyone thinks you're coocoo. If you are pro-town, then you must know that one of the best things a townie can do is play it easy and make themselves heard in a sensible, logical manner. The LAST thing the town needs is a townie doing all the work for the scum.

IGMEOY: Ether

I'm town, beeyotch. You're either scum or stupid because you're trying to lynch me. It would benefit you as town to change your playstyle to one that people will listen to you in. Your lack of charisma is not town, and your attack on me is soooooo unhelpful.

I think you're scum.

That wasn't a perfect recreation, actually. Your own post gives off the vibe of me being stupid suboptimal stuttery town--except for the IGMEOY and that little aside at the beginning, which makes an ugly dichotomy. You do not actually provide a reason to believe that you are town; you just go on about how awful it would be for the town to lynch you.

Okay, at this point, I'm getting the distinct impression that Ether is just picking out targets based on preconceived ideas.

Huh?

However, I do find it interesting that she is doing something in this game I haven't seen from her before. She's picking quotes of mine out of context and repeatedly demanding an explanation for each and every one of them, which I think is an attempt to keep me busy defending myself against her accusations so that I am distracted from the rest of the game. Her posts are unfocussed and unclear, not just to me, I think. Her insistence that every "aside" comment that she makes about me must be answered, when she's not making equal demands on other people, seems pretty odd to me as well.

I don't aim to distract you, but I think you've

used

my jabs as an excuse to be distracted. I'm not sure what the last sentence refers to.

By her own standards, that's an unexplained change of heart.

I know. I'd realized that and I wasn't voting you by then--but if I had been, it wouldn't have been for changing your mind.

I don't like this comment to Gorrad: "Bad motto, by the way. Smart towngoers get nightkilled." The wording sounds threatening in an odd way, and is she arguing that towngoers should behave stupidly? Because that's the alternative.

Gorrad said that his habit of attributing everything to sinister intent was the rational thing to do, and "why [he was] still alive." But it looked idiotic to me, an excuse to not think about what real people would

actually

do. (The undertone was actually slightly insulting: "No, that's not why you're still alive." Sorry, but, yeah.) This point is a stretch.

The Perfect/Mizzy case seems odd, as well. It nearly looks like bussing to me. Ether's pushing a case on Perfect, who seemed pretty disconnected from the game, and Mizzy votes for... YvonneSeer, and says it might be OMGUS? If you're going to own up to OMGUS, why not put your vote on the person who most actively pushed your case?

Do you find Setael scummy?

[Ether]

This is circular logic.

[Ether]

How did I do such?

The way you spoke of YvonneSeer possibly being a weak doc implied knowledge, not speculation. There are only 2 possible ways for you to possess this knowledge:

1. You are scum
   
2. You are a weak doc

If 2 was true, you would

not have speculated that Yvonne was a weak doc

. Thus I can only deduce that 1 is true.

Eh I'm not sure how much I believe skitzer. He seemed to just brush off the accusation. Doesn't really warant a vote, nut

FoS:skitzer

. Also,

Unvote:JDodge

. Random voting seems to be coming to a close.

Eh, whatever. skitzer is becoming increasingly suspicious, especially b/c of what jdodge caught. I won't have much time til Wednesday, so I'll hold off my vote. I'll also post my thoughts then.

I especially dislike Perfect's voteless support, and the timing in his further attachment to the wagon.

vote: perfect628

To clarify--I'm not really voting Perfect for not voting. (Having said that, his "I thought he was at -2" excuse is bullshit. There was a recent votecount with Skitzer at -5. There was one vote between this votecount and his post. This isn't too difficult.)

It's more Perfect's support of the Skitzwagon without having the slightest idea what it's actually about. Skitzer most certainly did

not

just brush off the accusations, JDodge had already made the post calling him out, and Skitzer's posts 111 and 118 didn't seem "increasingly suspicious" at all. I'm thinking Perfect was just trying to angle himself into a more comfortable vote.

I'm still happiest with my Perfectvote, though. It's great. Why is he still alive?

Eh I'm not sure how much I believe skitzer. He seemed to just brush off the accusation. Doesn't really warant a vote, nut FoS:skitzer. Also, Unvote:JDodge. Random voting seems to be coming to a close.

Eh, whatever. skitzer is becoming increasingly suspicious, especially b/c of what jdodge caught. I won't have much time til Wednesday, so I'll hold off my vote. I'll also post my thoughts then.

So Perfect says he doesn't believe skitzer and that he seems to be brushing off the accusation, but then just FOSes. Then a couple real days later, Perfect says skitzer is getting "increasingly suspicious". Not only is it odd that he still doesn't vote, but nothing really changed between these 2 posts so how is anything increasing? JDodge had already made his point about the assumption before the first post, and skitzer only posted a couple of short practically content-less posts between Perfect's 2 posts. Perfect seems to want to support the wagon without having to contribute a vote, or actually read the case on skitzer at all. In fact, Perfect has only posted a whopping THREE times since his random vote. His first 2 I've already quoted. Here's his third:

Ok, I suppose I understand the vote on me. I think I may have thought it was already L-2 and didn't want to make it L-1. I know that sounds lame, but i'm pretty sure that's what happened. Simple case of lack of attention. I'll try and reread by tomorrow, at the latest Tuesday, got a lot of studying to do!

He has done no scum hunting, has pretty much lurked and avoided being in the spotlight all game, and has not provided suspicions other than following those who were suspicious of skitzer. This. This is a good wagon.

No, I do not find Setael scummy. She made a well thought out, decently argued case against someone, and then shifted her vote to a bandwagon that she also agreed with. I thought ckillor was mildly lurkery, and she inherited that, but that's about all I have against her.

The Perfect/Mizzy case seems odd, as well. It nearly looks like bussing to me. Ether's pushing a case on Perfect, who seemed pretty disconnected from the game, and Mizzy votes for... YvonneSeer, and says it might be OMGUS? If you're going to own up to OMGUS, why not put your vote on the person who most actively pushed your case?

"Bussing." What's the difference?

I want you to respond to my defenses in 201 and either admit that they're valid or tell me why they're not. There are some points in there you need to clear up.

I don't see that it is. What it is, though, is me expressing my opinions in a clear manner so that everyone (not just you) can see them.

"You are only targetting townies, like me. Therefore, your accuracy sucks. Therefore, Bookitty is town." You throw in a "you're scummy for attacking me" clause, too, to be fair--but judging by your Seervote after Setael's vote on you, that should hardly be a problem for you.

[Ether]

I don't think it's contradictory, just lazy. I'm unsure if she's referring to "at least one" scum or "exactly one" scum--if it's the former,

duh.

I don't really have anything against the Evervote.

One was that you were trying to force conflict to derive information for the town, and the second was that you were scum trying to throw me off my game. I went back and forth on which I thought it was. I'm still not certain.

I was definitely aiming for conflict, but I did mean it. None of it was fake at the time, and while I've dropped some of it, I still hate most of your counteraccusations. And that bit where I was bussing Mizzy. Ick.

You seem very eager for a Perfect/Mizzy lynch, and you seem to want it right away. Perfect gave us nearly nothing to work with in terms of interactions and arguments. Mizzy is more talkative, and willing to engage in the give and take of discussion. Why would you want to have her lynched right away, given that fact? Why cut off the flow of information, rather than ask Mizzy questions, and derive connections from her comments on others? If you think she's scum, she's talkative scum, and why are you in such a rush to kill someone anyway? (I refer here to your "Why is he still alive?" post.)

To some degree, I'd argue that I'd rather get people's reactions to Mizzy than her reactions to people. In this specific case, "Why is he still alive" was a statement that was meant to draw attention to Perfect. I don't actually value realtime speed as much as I claim to, but I would very much like to see Mizzy dead before the next night phase.

@Ether: Your arguments come off as OMGUS backed by strawmanning and attempting to shift the wagon in a new and opportunistic direction. Can you supply some direct evidence as to why you think I am scum without using the "Too Townie" argument which is far too WIFOM to be worth anything?

I was attacking you before you were attacking me, so it's not OMGUS. I haven't strawmanned. I think it's hilarious that you're calling me opportunistic, as I was the first to vote you and am not particularly interested in joining the game's real wagons.

Also, you do not appear to understand the definition of "Too Townie," which is a fallacy in which people are attacked for behaving in a pro-town manner. Your defenses, despite being clearly made with the intent of driving me off, have been completely unsubstantiated, and you now appear to be trying to paint your lack of an

actual

defense as a WIFOM game. It isn't. Please die.

Now, uh...this one's weird. I'm all for Bookitty's vote, but I don't get her specific reason. I thought it was transparent from the start that Perfect was replacing out due to pressure--he's still officially in Mini 530, and he signed up for a new mininorm on Thursday, and in general that was just too much coincidence--but I don't actually regard that sort of thing in particular as a tell.

(The timing does, however, imply that Setael's town if Mizzy's scum.)

[Ether]

211. Big list of previous cases which you also ignored. You are very annoying.

[Ether]

You and Perfect have the same alignment, so a case on him is a case on you.

It is

not

related to his lack of time (and with his timing in requesting replacement, it's ludicrous to think that's all there was to it, anyway). Perfect supported a stupid wagon for reasons that were even more smoke and mirrors than the reasons other people used: "Skitzer is becoming increasingly suspicious" is a throwaway line, especially when Skitzer hadn't actually

done anything

since Perfect's last post. JDodge had already made the catch since then, too, so it wasn't that. It wasn't anything. It was just a mindless excuse to wagon.

If it comforts you, though, your own hypocrisy (OMGUS/bandwagoning/strawmanning) and misuse of the too townie fallacy aren't helping.

[Ether]

especially b/c of what jdodge caught.

I used his wording. I don't agree that it was any good.

[Ether]

I don't want a deadline, personally.

Please note that it seems they are also looking for a replacement for him in Mini #530 because the last time he posted THERE was December 20th.

Oh. Eh. I still think the timing of his request can't be explained any other way.

All I can tell you about Perfect's actions is that I agree with you that they were bullshit, but I would not have done the same thing in his shoes. I don't like the way he played, and I can't change it. But I also don't think you have enough info on him/me to assess whether or not his actions were just stupid or genuinely scummy.

I don't care what you would have done in his shoes, because what

he

did in his shoes was scummy.

I highly doubt you're

going

to explain yourself, regardless of my tone. Your defense of Perfect is "you can't prove it," and you don't even seem to care what "it" is. Hell--you aren't even bothering to defend yourself against the attacks I've leveled against

you

.

In other news, Lulubelle is also scum. I hate her distraction comment just now: Yvonne's barely

posted

since she replaced in.

(I'm not enamored with Yvonne's lurking, but this is a shady wagon. I'm not touching it.)

[Ether]

(Let me explain something: I am trying a new playstyle out here where I do not vote on day 1. I probably should have mentioned this earlier. This is the first game I am trying this in, so take that as what you will...)

It's stupid when Kore does it and it's stupid on you. At the very least, give a List.

Should the town HAVE to pressure supposedly pro-town players to provide content? Why or why not?

Um...I'm unsure what you're asking. Where does "supposedly pro-town" enter into it? What do "should" and "HAVE to" mean in this case?

I didn't really see Lulubelle's statement as having been made to get attention, but, eh, I think that was null. I don't like how she blamed

Yvonne

for her (Lulubelle's) failure to post content, and implied that she should be lynched for this.

The whole perfect case is WIFOM and doesn't help the town. Dropping it.

Yeah? Your face is WIFOM. Perfect did something scummy and you're shouting "WIFOM!" over and over again as a shield.

I'm not going to bother attempting to answer your "attacks" because I saw what happened to Kitty. Her answers were never enough and never good enough for you, though they were for everyone else. You just kept going until another target popped up. It's a huge distraction and I'd rather spend my energy elsewhere.

I dropped Bookitty. I left my vote blank for a few posts, then moved to Perfect. I poked at Bookitty again and she exploded.

There's a case against you. Address it. Seriously.

Prove it, other than, "She said something I don't like, so she must be scum."

Oh, so now you're reading my posts?

I already gave my rationale. Lulubelle accused the girl (Yvonne) who'd made like four posts since she (Lulubelle) replaced in (three pages, a week and a half ago) of distracting her from scumhunting. She herself (Lulubelle) had made only three posts in this span of time, the first of which lightly said that Yvonne's wagonhop was forgiveable and voted someone else (Porochaz). The second attacked Yvonne for a null tell and did nothing else. The third was the distraction post, and also did nothing else.

It's weak excuses for joining a wagon that, while of fairly low quality, nonetheless has more nuances than the person angling to place a vote ever appears to understand. Kinda familiar, really.

[Ether]

Ever. List. Now.

As for the childish behavior, can you stop, please?

I meant it to draw attention to your own behavior, and I'd do it again. Stop shouting WIFOM as a defense--that isn't the term.

(Ever's insinuations that self-defensive WIFOM is anything but null is also ridiculous, for different reasons.)

You dropped the case on her after pressure from other players, in my opinion.

Eh, sort of. Bookitty actually did wear me down on certain points ("I secondguessed myself")--and I developed a wagon, which she didn't hop on, when she could have. There's probably some psychological weakness in that, but not one that applies this time around.

Lulu said that she feels YS is a distraction to the entire game, and not just herself. Lulu hasn't been terribly helpful, no, but I think the same can be said for most of us. I don't think that her actions can be construed, just yet, as being scum.

This is an odd defense.

@Ether: If you're going to jump on perfect (and therefor, me) for having wagoned poorly, why are you not giving the same scrutiny to this above by Porochaz?

...okay, yeah, Porochaz's vote also sucked. But Lulubelle's progression of thoughts on Yvonne, from "bad play" to some stupid null tell to a game-derailing distraction, with

nothing else at all in between

, was what stood out to me. I fail to see the double standard; your decision to read into

this

feels contrived.

(Not in such a way that makes Porochaz more endearing, though, no.)

[Ether]

Points made against Mizzy directly:

Because lynching pro-town folk is a really stupid idea...unless of course, you're scum. Calm the heck down and stop zerging folks, before your opinion means nothing to anyone because everyone thinks you're coocoo. If you are pro-town, then you must know that one of the best things a townie can do is play it easy and make themselves heard in a sensible, logical manner. The LAST thing the town needs is a townie doing all the work for the scum.

IGMEOY: Ether

I'm town, beeyotch. You're either scum or stupid because you're trying to lynch me. It would benefit you as town to change your playstyle to one that people will listen to you in. Your lack of charisma is not town, and your attack on me is soooooo unhelpful.

I think you're scum.

That wasn't a perfect recreation, actually. Your own post gives off the vibe of me being stupid suboptimal stuttery town--except for the IGMEOY and that little aside at the beginning, which makes an ugly dichotomy. You do not actually provide a reason to believe that you are town; you just go on about how awful it would be for the town to lynch you.

No response to this at all.

No, not just ME, to lynch anyone who IS town. I meant that your scumhunting techniques seem to me, at least, to be only targeting townies...which yes, makes you scummy. Which yes, means I find Kitty to be townie thus far.

"You are only targetting townies, like me. Therefore, your accuracy sucks. Therefore, Bookitty is town." You throw in a "you're scummy for attacking me" clause, too, to be fair--but judging by your Seervote after Setael's vote on you, that should hardly be a problem for you.

Your targeting would be perfectly fine if your logic actually worked out. What I find scummy isn't that you're attacking me, it's that you look like you are moving from target to target, zerging, and then moving on when people tell you to switch to decaf.

I don't think I responded to this. It's still off, because it assumes that I'm inaccurate due to being scum, instead of going for the cases themselves. Yet at the same time, you've shown next to no curiosity about my alignment up until the Porochaz thing, which feels fake.

@

Ether:

Your arguments come off as OMGUS backed by strawmanning and attempting to shift the wagon in a new and opportunistic direction. Can you supply some direct evidence as to why you think I am scum without using the "Too Townie" argument which is far too WIFOM to be worth anything?

I was attacking you before you were attacking me, so it's not OMGUS. I haven't strawmanned. I think it's hilarious that you're calling me opportunistic, as I was the first to vote you and am not particularly interested in joining the game's real wagons.

Also, you do not appear to understand the definition of "Too Townie," which is a fallacy in which people are attacked for behaving in a pro-town manner. Your defenses, despite being clearly made with the intent of driving me off, have been completely unsubstantiated, and you now appear to be trying to paint your lack of an actual defense as a WIFOM game. It isn't. Please die.

@

Ether:

I didn't see any actual proof in that entire post that shows me as scum. Do you not have any?

That wasn't a defense. Then you went back to railing against my Perfecthate. (To be fair, I linked back to it--but I did so because I had

just given you

further points against yourself directly.)

[Ether]

...

So how many PYP2 players does it take to change a lightbulb?

Also,

vote: Gorrad

.

[Ether]

I'd like for you to elaborate on exactly who you're calling dim on this comment; I would find it useful.

Eh. I was venting at everyone, and "dim" wasn't the only implication.

I haven't decided on a punchline yet.

[Ether]

Why do you think I'm voting you?

[Ether]

Ether, do you think Mizzy and Gorrad are likely scumbuddies?

(sigh) No, I don't. With the encryptor in play, Mizzyscum could have handed Gorradscum her material and let him hammer without posting and drawing attention to her lack of unvote, making the hammer smoother on both of them.

Nice catch, Mizzy. Skitzer, will you clarify this please? I don't like it at all, but I'm willing to give you a shot at defending yourself.

I didn't vote when I did because I thought others would unvote, I did so because every single sign was pointing towards him being scum, and I vote people when that happens. It doesn't matter if it's the fist vote, the third vote, the last vote, whatever! When I find someone scummy, I vote them.

Note that Gorrad initially held off--he voted

only after Skitzer claimed.

Now...generally, when someone claims a power role that I don't have, I consider that a damn good reason to keep that claimed power role

alive

for a bit. Or at least a bit of realtime. Suspicion doesn't enter into it.

This is odd, considering you wanted a Bookitty lynch Page 3, and you were wondering why perfect was still alive on Page 7, I got the feeling you were a fan of shorter days, so the fact you didn't want a deadline when offered so is interesting.

All short days are not created equal; I would not support a fast lynch on someone whom I do not actually believe to be scum. (Also, I've already said that my timeframe preference is mostly a façade to draw attention to the people I want lynched. Also also, using a deadline to get my way feels too underhanded for my liking, anyway.)

How does one comment make someone scum?

I'm not sure what you're asking; I gave my rationale.

(I will admit that Ever's reaction doesn't impress me, either.)

Mizzy, you are defending Lulubelle and Yvonne like theres no tomorrow. I, for one am not being tunnelvisioned, however I do feel Yvonne is scummy, there is a difference. However this weird dynamic between the three of you is coming from you mainly defending the other 2 so

vote Mizzy

Y'know...there are many, many things that can be said against Mizzy which would be valid.

This isn't one of them.

[Ether]

(sigh)

Mizzy...Porochaz is obvscum; you didn't have to bend to

his

will. And you didn't need to out me; I can get more out of staying hidden (though I suppose I was fairly obvious anyway) and I'm pretty good at taking care of myself anyway. (At least this frees my motives up to

unvote; vote: Porochaz

--Gorrad was a second place I was using as an excuse for having any change of heart at all.)

Anyway, confirmed.

Setael seems likely town,

Wait, what? Knowing Mizzy's alignment, she's done like nothing.

scot seems to be giving off his usual town tells,

Thank you.

I don't think Yvonne is scum; there were some earlier wagons on her which felt shady. (I have not reread them with my current knowledge, no.)

[Ether]

Hrmmm... I think due to the lack of kill last night, it's safe to say we have a (weak) doc out there as opposed to a vig; if the doc is a weak doc, and they targeted someone but did not die, we have 2 more confirmed town. Does anyone support the remaining power role claiming at this time? I think the benefits outweigh the risks by this point; assuming a doc, the masons get 1 more night to talk, plus the confirmed innocents help out quite a bit.

I don't think it's necessary. If a doctor doesn't claim, we

already

have up to two more confirmed innocents in a can. (By the way, I will not confirm or deny that I previously had a vanilla role.) And if it's a weakdoc, it can not only protect confirmed people but, with a few risks, confirm

new

people.

(Hmm. I suppose if a weakdoc gets itself killed now, that'll take away the extra lynch we just got, which would be unfortunate. Hypoweakdoc...wouldn't prevent that, but it

would

give the town a confirmed scumbag if there were two kills in a night and one was the weakdoc. It's tempting?)

Setael hasn't done much that's scummy to me but I'm still in the process of re-reading. Any thoughts, anyone, on Set?

But she hasn't done much of

anything.

Ether... case, please...

I still need cases?

Bah.

This is just off the top of my head. I didn't like your 109, for reasons I explained in 114. Mizzy was quite right to attack your 276 vote on Yvonne as the wagon was building up; her attention-getting wagoning was old news. You just generally have a vibe of keeping your head down; I hate it when people call something anti-town and then have to disclaim later that that doesn't mean scummy. The term for such an action is "stupid."

The Mizzy/Lulubelle/Yvonne fixation doesn't make sense, especially when you singled out Mizzy for what's apparently defending

other

people you dislike. Well, other people who you find "anti-town." (Hey, is there some reason you haven't unvoted?)

[Ether]

Who would you have protected last night if you were the weak doc?

Bookitty.

I am having trouble with this. I think I would have protected Ether, but I'm not sure how much of that is because I know her role now. Leaving the masons aside, I guess I would have protected Setael or you as having the most "town" reactions.

This format is incorrect.

I support Option 3. Throw in a backup plan, even. (A fulldoc can just be left to its own devices; we'll figure it out eventually.) My own vote tonight would be YvonneSeer/Ever. Possibly the other way around--JDodge, help me here?

If there's a vig, I don't support it claiming.

[Ether]

No...Yvonne's right. We should stop now.

I'm getting old.

[Ether]

unvote; vote: Setael

[Ether]

Setael, if Mizzy had tried to masonize you, she'd have failed.

JDodge is probably also scum at this point. Nice.

[Ether]

'Kay.

As soon as you made your 415, I was sure you were the weakdoc. Bookitty was an obvious doctor choice, and she wasn't in any trouble--the aside that she was probtown was out-of-place. That made me more inclined to go along with you.

But if if you

were

the weakdoc, the optimal play for you would be to get

your

target out and shut up. Yvonne's outburst would have

benefitted

you. So at this point, I'm pretty sure you're just trying to out power roles.

[Ether]

No.

It's

not

logical.

If you're the weakdoc, you've

gotten

your information out. All claims by nonweakdocs are irrelevent--they're camouflage, and a bunch of people agreeing with YvonneSeer and not giving results would be

better

camouflage because the scum wouldn't be able to eliminate everyone with a fake target. So sit down, shut up and bus Setael.

[Ether]

Yes.

It

is

logical.

If you're the weak doc,

surviving

also helps you out. All claims by nonweakdocs are relevant--they may contain info that we can use to find connections later, and a bunch of people agreeing with YvonneSeer and not giving results would give the scum more reason to off correct people as they still have a better chance of eliminating the weakdoc than shooting blindly. You essentially increase the pool of choices.

Claiming does not help hide the weakdoc.

Anyone who claims a target that the mafia did not try to kill is claiming non-weakdoc to the mafia.

If we keep going down this road, we might as well have the damned doc our themselves and TELL us who they protected because they're going to be dead either way.

Exactly

.

A) Who we gonna kill today?

Whichever of Setael and JDodge does not claim encryptor. I love the encryptor. It's too awesome to lynch first.

B) How we gonna protect the doc?

Stop claiming and hope for the best.

C) What the hell we gonna do if the doc dies.

Lynch Setael, lynch JDodge, find the last scumbag and lynch it also.

[Ether]

The people who have not already claimed are a shield for the weakdoc--be it someone who claimed or one of them. More claims do

not

help the weakdoc hide. There is no situation in which they do. None. If the weakdoc isn't in {Jordan, Lulubelle, YvonneSeer}, then their claiming

only

serves to help the scum further narrow down the pool.

You could argue that we're trying to make sure we know who the weakdoc's confirmed innocent is. But that's the weakdoc's business. Not yours. (And it's a bad idea--more claims will just guarantee that the first innocent it gets is also its last. Right now we have a chance. Maybe.)

Why am I scum for presenting a viewpoint that opposes yours and Mizzy's? Is it because you're confirmed innocent? How does that make you incapable of being wrong?

You're scum for trying to out the weakdoc, and then trying to bully people into continuing even after your craplogic was pointed out. You're also scum for panicking and trying to paint my confirmed status as a sign of mental decay when I started attacking you.

Mizzy, why is it taking you this long to realize that JDodge is full of shit?

[Ether]

Why am I getting drug into things?

I'm trying to save a day here. If I could just take you aside for a few minutes to AIM, I'd show you the light; unfortunately, we're

night

masons.

If the theoretical weakdoc isn't in {Jordan, Lulubelle, YvonneScum}, then their

not

claiming puts a possible already-claimed doc at risk.

No it doesn't.

I do agree that Gorrad's post sucks, though.

[Ether]

What about Setael? Can we lynch her?

[Ether]

What sort of timeframe are we talking? He's like Day 4 or 5 now.

[Ether]

Scum
↑
JDodge
Setael (but I'm too lazy to upgrade my vote unless it means we get to kill JDodge)
Gorrad
Porochaz (independently, he'd be higher, but...)
Ever (hmm)
Jordan
Lulubelle
Bookitty
YvonneSeer
Mizzy
↓
Town

I think Porochaz's vanilla claim is kinda townish, especially because it was JDodge pressing him. Eh. I guess he's not a

bad

lynch, but he's not my favorite.

I'd say something to Setael at this point, but it'd drag the town back into doctor speculation. Which I don't actually mind, as long as we're getting scumbags out of it, but I'll follow the rest of the cast's wishes 'cause it's not like my opinion can be wiped out overnight.

[Ether]

The doctor argument. And that everyone in my top four is, and has been, voting her.

any assumptions we're making there could be incorrect.

That depends on the nature of the assumption. I'd say the second reason I provided is based on more assumptions than the first--the first revolves more around Yvonne's strategic judgement than around who is and isn't a doctor.

[Ether]

Sorry. I'll post recent thoughts once the other protection choices are out of the way.

Setael (JDodge)
Jordan (Ever, Bookitty)
Yvonne (Setael, Gorrad, Ether)

Unnecessary (Mizzy, Porochaz)
Unspecified (Yvonne, Lulubelle, Jordan)

[Ether]

I'd protect Setael.

[Ether]

(Limited access.)

By the way; just looking at the few posts we've had recently, looks like the activity in this game is a bit low; are people still playing this game? I hope I didn't replace into another dying game, those suck.

We go on and off. Currently we're waiting for you/Lulubelle specifically to give a theoretical response to a plan JDodge made.

I

had

a topic lined up after that, though right now I'm thinking it'd probably be more likely to out a power role than scum. There's still a bit I'm holding off on for your sake.

Porochaz, you claimed vanilla.

[Ether]

I hate how I, like...agree with JDodge.

[Ether]

I don't get why we're wagoning Gorrad

now

, but, um, okay.

I want someone's alignment. JDodge's, Gorrad's, Ever's, it's all good. (Porochaz and Setael are merely

acceptable

, from a pairings standpoint.)

Anyone following the weakdoc plan had better not attack its claimed target tomorrow.

I'm not really sure how else to contribute right now.

unvote

[Ether]

That means I want to kill someone.

Actually, Setael/Porochaz is a pretty feasible pairing, off the top of my head. Heh.

[Ether]

I said "now," as opposed to "immediately after he hammered the cop."

Ever, what are you thinking?

[Ether]

Eh.

I still hate JDodge, but I have my doubts about his associations with other scummy players, especially Porochaz. (JDodge/Ever is still quite acceptable, though.) Gorrad/Porochaz/Setael is...I don't really have any formal complaints, but it doesn't feel quite right, either.

Setael needs to give her thoughts on Gorrad now, anyway.

[Ether]

Setael needs to give her thoughts on Gorrad now, anyway.

What I said.

I find it very odd how as soon as Ether points out a possible Chaz/Set pairing, Set votes for Chaz, but even odder that Chaz points out this, and then votes for Set, so now both the players that were linked are now voting for eachother.

What he said.

Just a heads up:

I will be away with limited or no internet access until late Monday, Feb. 18th.

What she said, except until Tuesday. Don't hammer anyone until we get back, 'kay?

[Ether]

I sort of think that if Gorrad and Porochaz were both scum, the day would be over by now. (On that note, if they

are

both scum, the third scumbag is currently voting Porochaz.)

Also,

vote: Gorrad

.

[Ether]

Shit, and before I forget--someone remind me why we've been encouraging the weakdoc to target probscum.

[Ether]

...eh. Never mind.

[Ether]

vote: Setael

[Ether]

Also, Bookitty was a strange kill. Mizzy and I are explicitly confirmed; Bookitty's just a probtowngoer who'd already outed herself as vanilla. What's up with that?

[Ether]

We'll know more after another NK,

No...we won't know a thing.

Not to mention, Mizzy, I'm not sure how you could read the day yesterday and come to the conclusion that Sestal and Porochez are likely to be scum together.

Please elaborate. (I keep waffling on Porochaz and his interactions with Setael. I'd be at his throat, but with the encryptor, I'm just confused.)

Who do

you

think is the third scumbag?

I only knew because I kept track of all the protect claims as part of my reading the thread.

Er, reference question--who claimed to protect whom on Night 1?

[Ether]

Yosarian, I see your point on Porochaz.

Ever, who's scum?

[Ether]

...

What the hell just happened?

[Ether]

I think it's one of {Eldarad, Scotmany, Yosarian}. Yvonne is obvtown, and I agree with Yosarian's assessment of the interactions between Setael and Porochaz. I won't be voting either today.

I'm unsure what to make of Lulubelle, and there's something that's something that bothers me about Ckillor not being the goon, though that might be chatcentrist. But I quite like Yosarian's play. Eh.

Vote: eldarad

is a good start.

[Ether]

I don't think it is.

[Ether]

I don't think it is.

Why do you think he's a townie?

1037.

[Ether]

Ether, are you going to explain your vote? Or not?

Some combination of Jordan's lurking and never coming under any sort of fire or bothering Gorrad or Setael, his Chazvote, your Chazvote, the way you put Setael at -1 instead of answering Yosarian's question, and the doubt you tried to cast on Porochaz today.

Some of that was also committed by Ever, who's my number two at this point. But not all of it, and JDodge did at least mention it was sort of in-character.

[Ether]

Eldarad, I'll respond to that later in a post that isn't too awesome to be marred by quote tags. In the meantime, neither you nor Ever have gained any stock.

Anyway--I didn't get around to posting this on Gimmick Day, sorry.

Please, Chaz, Yvonne, stop fighting
This OMGUS suits you not
It's caught you in a mindless spat
And what the hell is up with that?

Chaz, note the voting records
It's clear Yvonne's not scum
I'll say in the politest sense--your vote is pretty dumb.
(dumb, dumb)

Yvonne, those counts mean little
There wasn't much at stake
It's cake to wait, the last I checked
Your lynch can't hurt the scum--correct?

And

when

we wagoned Gorrad
That Chazcount took a climb
Again, no disrespect, but damn, your vote's a waste of time
(time, time)

As early as tomorrow,
I'll be a kitchenee
I'm scared that this distraction's gonna reach the final three!

[Ether]

Yes, but I don't have a microphone, so you'll just have to take my word for it.

Why are you still voting Yvonne?

[Ether]

Eldarad and Scotmany are good bets.

To Eldarad's 1078: I acknowledge that the "no one attacked Jordan because he was lurking; that's only

one

strike" bit is fair. The rest of his defenses don't really sway me.

As I said, there's not much point having that discussion when we're not certain of Setael's alignment. We have have a much more productive discussion today now that we *know* Setael's alignment.

We already knew it.

So your issue isn't so much that I didn't answer Yos' question, more like you didn't like my answer?

My issue is both.

[Ether]

We lost Mizzy.

I think you were stalling.

Setael is clearly the play for today. We may as well wait to see if she has anything to say for herself before lynching her. I'll not push her to L-1 because we don't want her to self-hammer before we're ready.

That's what you said at the beginning of Day 3. The last sentence implies that you wanted to find her scumbuddy before we could go to night. But you did put her at -1, just when Yosarian asked about your opinion.

What changed?

[Ether]

I am satisfied with the current span of Patrick's sig-debt. Somebody hammer.

[Ether]

SCIENCE.

[Ether]

I, too, am surprised by how little distancing there was, and by the role assignments--why weakdoc/masonizer/cop? More importantly, how did you lab-rat scumbags like your encryption?

In retrospect, my early adamance on Bookitty looks idiotic. Sorry 'bout that. (With Mizzy, eh, I wish I'd been more polite and open-minded, but I still don't think the case itself was bad. Thanks for being a power role, though.)

I like how Porochaz hammered all three scum three days in a row.

[Ether]

Yeah, JDodge was silly.

I'm definitely interested in seeing scum daytalking in some more games; unfortunately, it'd be kind of bad form for me to start a discussion thread right now, as I'm currently modding such a game.

Patrick's sig-debt to me will last until the end of Sunday, May 18th. His signature and avatar will both then presumably go to Glork. He might or might not be free after that.

[Ether]

Also, I'm interested in reading any and all mafia transcripts.