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

[Mizzy]

Hello! Reading posts up til this point...will post again when I am all caught up

[Mizzy]

Okay, caught up! Whew, there's been a ton of vote-switching and not a whole lot of what I consider honest scum-hunting in the first sets of pages, but I think the game's getting on track.

As to trying to atone for some of my predictor's posts that drew attention, he was obviously hurting on time (and so probably not giving things much attention) and I agree that when someone has that much suspicion on someone, you should vote and not sit on the FOS pot, as it were.

I, myself don't find skitzer all that scummy...it feels like there's been a few mountains made out of molehills and in trying to avoid a mislynch day 1, I'm going to watch him and see if he does anything else. 1 slip can be a mistake, pure and simple...2 can be a scumtell.

I also don't like YS's question about what kind of opportunistic wagon it was/is...opportunistic wagons in general aren't very pro-town in my eyes, but we honestly have no way of answering that question because how is town to know definitively which people in the wagon are scum and which aren't? We can only speculate.

Vote: Yvonne

I realize this may seem like it's an OMGUS vote, but I did give it careful consideration and read these posts more than once just to make sure. Misdirection or a real scum hunt?

As for Ether:

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

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

[Mizzy]

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.)

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

You are

so

scum.

Prove it!

[Mizzy]

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?

Nonono, I said I can see how it might LOOK like it's an OMGUS vote, but it's not. I thought it through based on my perceptions of her actions.

[Mizzy]

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.")

If you want opportunistic bullshit, go read your own voting record.

Oh, did I type that out loud? My bad.

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, 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.

[Mizzy]

This is circular logic.

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.

[Mizzy]

Just tossing my thoughts in to help generate discussion:

Porochaz

: Went for the same options as ckillor for scum poweroles, which were farily decent. But unlike ckillor, he didn't change his second option to the most popular one at the time. Then again, he didn't post again in the Powerole Votes, so it may be a case of not being around rather than being determined to stick to his guns.

His early few gameposts seemed to focus a lot on Skitzer, before FOSing Yvonne. In other words, he only focused his posts on those who were under the spotlight at the time. He's also somewhat buddying up to Ether, one of the more experienced players in this game. He has more recently began to make other players the subject of small parts of his posts, but it's still mainly been about Skitzer and Yvonne. I also found this post sort of interesting.

I would agree with a YS lynch but find skitzer worse

I want to hear from ckillor before anything else though

When you compare it with the votecount at the time.

[snip]
skitzer (4) -- Porochaz, JDodge, JordanA24, YvonneSeer
YvonneSeer (1) -- Gorrad
[snip]

Interesting how he finds Skitz more suspicious than Yvonne when there are much more votes on Skitz.

And his last couple of posts raises my suspicions as well

unvote vote ckillor

Post or die!

For the uneducated, who are bound to ask me why...

AH. sorry bout the inactiveity. i will definently post something today. i promise on the ghosts of christmas past, present and future

Find the next post!

Setael replaces ckillor. Please spell her name correctly.

Yeah chaz, might want to read a little bit...

damn

unvote

I hate everyone

Alright, so he votes ckillor for what he sees as avoiding the game, which is, I admit, scummy. What I find interesting is that he unvotes as soon as it's pointed out Setael has repaced him. Why the Unvote? Set's still got the same role as ckillor, so the evidence against her is still there. My theory is that he could be scum wanting to push a bandwagon on a inactive townie (he even said in his voting post "Post or Die!", and as soon as he realises that that's not going to happen, he hastily unvotes.

I can easily see him opportunistic scum.

I don't remember him buddying up with Ether...I tried to find it but I failed. Can someone give me a post number?

Also, about the "I would be okay with a YS lynch" versus the current vote count, YS pointed that out, herself, but she also so kindly reminded us that there was a great bit of conversation going on about voting for/lynching her, so I don't see what's so interesting about Poro saying anything about it.

I dunno, I just find it all too weak to stand on its own. Maybe not the best of actions, but I don't think it's enough to warrant votes at this time; not when taken in all by itself.

[Mizzy]

Ether: I'm sorry. HER. Anyway, I approve of your explanation of Mizzy. Using innuendo hinting at "I'm town". Is simply repetitive to me, because everyone in tis game is town until proven scum, IMO. Saying "I'm town" is like saying "I'm alive", because everyone in the game wants everyone else to believe they are town.

FoS: Mizzy

I see where Ether is coming from now.

Reading into things much?

[Mizzy]

"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.

To be honest, I don't blame people for having voted for my predecessor. He was highly detached from the game, came off as wishy-washy, and generally didn't seem to answer statements/questions about him in a good, direct manner. I can't explain his actions for him, because I'm not him, but I can say that he did go inactive, and did get replaced, and played kind of distractedly before that. I have nothing against Setael's vote on him, and I can see why it happened.

My vote on Seer was not driven by others' opinions on her, but my own. Setael's vote on YS came off as mostly pressure, but relatively harmless pressure (she bitched about a wagon, and so I think Setael voted to see what reaction that would get.)

So in short, I voted for who I thought was scummiest based on the information at hand and my own opinions. I don't necessarily think you are enough scum to vote for you at the moment, hence just FoSing you before, but I do think you continually over-react to everything and generally just make distractions instead of helping matters.

I also feel that Skitzer voted for me just to get the focus off of himself in the hopes of ending the talk of wagoning on him. It also came off a bit as buddying up to Ether, and I'd like an explanation on that. I didn't suspect Skitzer before, but now seeing his vote on me after voting for YS and being strawmanned at by Ether, it makes me see this possible bizarre love triangle thing going on.

So:

@Skitzer:

Why the semi-opportunistic wagon vote without strong evidence or without any of your own opinion?

@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?

@Setael:

Now that perfect has been replaced, and you can review his comments/posts in the light of his lack of time and attachment to the game, do you still find him/me scummy? Please explain either way.

[Mizzy]

I should also add that this:

I hadn't posted because I didn't have much of anything to go on. Right now, Ether makes me somewhat suspicious due to his spontaneous suspicion of Mizzy.

Followed by this:

Ether: I'm sorry. HER. Anyway, I approve of your explanation of Mizzy. Using innuendo hinting at "I'm town". Is simply repetitive to me, because everyone in tis game is town until proven scum, IMO. Saying "I'm town" is like saying "I'm alive", because everyone in the game wants everyone else to believe they are town.

FoS: Mizzy
I see where Ether is coming from now.

Smells like a rat. "Too Townie" as I've said, is not a valid argument because it can't be proved or disproved until a lynch or nightkill.

*Hangs a sign up that says WIFOM arguments need not apply.*

[Mizzy]

Mizzy: I sometimes unintentionally skip over things when I'm reading. And I never voted. I FoSed because it was not a point of my own doing. I'll vote when I have a good reason to state.

Also, you had one vote from Ether, so even if I would have voted, two votes is not a bandwagon on day 1.

You are correct, it was an FoS and not a vote...I'm sorry for the mix-up. I understand about the skipping parts. Thanks for answering

[Mizzy]

This is only partially correct. I voted her because she was my second best candidate and my first was getting replaced and I wanted to hear from the replacement before deciding to put my vote there again or not. You are right, however, that I was nudged by her comment "Half of you would agree to lynching me but there's only one vote on me. Are you all waiting for someone to get the bandwagon going?" She hasn't posted since then - nearly a week ago. Oh Yvonne.... where are you, Yvonne?

Partially is better than not at all! I was hoping to see a reaction from her, too, but alas, none yet.

The fact that he was replaced does not necessarily mean that he didn't have time and wasn't attached to the game. It kind of makes me raise an eyebrow that you'd try to get us to assume that. It also is very possible that he wasn't dealing well with the pressure and didn't think he could talk his way out of a lynch. Not wanting to let his scum buddies down, he opted to replace out. All kinds of possibilities. So no, I won't be reviewing his comments in the light you suggested. Other than that, I've liked your posts so far and I'm keeping my vote on Yvonne since she's scum.

To be perfectly and completely honest with you, it hadn't crossed my mind that it may have been for reasons other than lack of time. He did admit to having studying to do and such, and told the mod (I assume because of what the mod said) that he needed to be replaced for lack of time. I just didn't consider that he could have been lying and while it's possible he didn't lie, you're right; it's just as possible that he did lie.

[Mizzy]

Mizzy:

Why do you think it's possible that Perfect might have lied about that? What other reasons could he have had, in your opinion, that would have created the need for a lie?

It's POSSIBLE but I didn't say

probable

. But people lie, all the time. They lie to get out of commitments, lie to make themselves look better, etc. There's a possibility he lied and even though I believe he didn't, I have no proof of that.

[Mizzy]

If Perfect lied for out of game reasons, it's irrelevant to the game. And thus isn't really worth addressing. If Perfect had other reasons to lie (and scum are about the only people who could know that) then it becomes relevant to the game. We can't know anything about Perfect's reasons for leaving the game, if they are not game-related. But saying that Perfect might have lied looks very seriously like scum-uncertainty and not town-uncertainty. Town would not respond in such a conciliatory manner, in my view. My own response as town would be something like, "How should I know why he really replaced? I would ASSUME he was telling the truth, do you have evidence to the contrary?" Yours was "You might be right, I just don't know." It looks a little too appeasing, to me.

You can see how this is so, yes?

I'm still not happy with Ether and I still have no level of certainty that she's town OR scum, but I'm pretty sure this response wasn't one a townie would make, especially given your ability to argue quite forcefully regarding other points.

unvote; vote Mizzy

In response to Kitty, I had already said he replaced out for lack of time reasons because this is what all signs point to:

@Setael: Now that perfect has been replaced, and you can review his comments/posts in the light of his lack of time and attachment to the game, do you still find him/me scummy? Please explain either way.

Setael made a very excellent point:

The fact that he was replaced does not necessarily mean that he didn't have time and wasn't attached to the game.

Your logic is flawed. While I did and still do believe he replaced out of the game due to lack of time, I have to accept the fact that

I cannot be 100% positive

, and neither can scum. Scum don't have ESP and neither can they break the rules by conversing during the day. Alignment has nothing to do with knowing WHY someone wanted replacement.

So, no, I can't see how that is so and I think you're stretching things a great deal, especially after speaking out against someone who wanted to lynch me.

I'm still not happy with Ether and I still have no level of certainty that she's town OR scum, but I'm pretty sure this response wasn't one a townie would make, especially given your ability to argue quite forcefully regarding other points.

Again, your logic is flawed...I wasn't arguing any point, I was conceding to a point.

If you think Ether is scum, and you think I am scum, why would she be so adamant to lynch me and why would I be fingering her?

I don't think you thought that through very much.

[Mizzy]

It sort of argues that YvonneSeer isn't scum, though. JDodge stuck to his case on Skitzer right through the Perfect thing, and threw some suspicion at Ether (though not even FOS-worthy) during that, but when Mizzy started getting tough questions, he makes a "wall-o-text" comment and votes YvonneSeer.

Could be just a playstyle thing, but it also could be trying to take the heat off Mizzy.

I am not ready to dismiss the second possibility, especially if she comes up scum.

Why don't you just ASK him why he did it instead of speculating?

[Mizzy]

Have you ever played with JDodge before, Mizzy?

And there is only one relevant reason why Perfect would have asked for replacement: if he was scum under pressure. All other reasons are irrelevant to the game. Saying "he might be lying" is meaningless if you don't mean it in context to THIS game. If you don't mean it in context to this game, what's the point of the statement?

And I've been pretty clear that I don't know if Ether is scum. She's made arguments I don't agree with (and one that seems more and more valid to me, actually), but my vote is on you because to my mind you're more a sure thing than she is, based on your recent posts. So that argument isn't holding up either.

I've read games he's played and ones he's modded. Close enough.

The point of the statement was to respond to Setael, and for no other purpose. I wanted his opinion, and I asked for it, and in a conversation between Set and I, he made a point that I had to accept.

Just because a statement has no relevant bearing on the game

in your opinion

doesn't mean someone else won't find it useful. You know, like the person I was discussing it with?

And just because a statement made is not one that you find useful to a game, that does not mean that the person who made that statement is scum. That's reaching.

[Mizzy]

EBWOP: Set's a girl, sorry I lose at pronouns.

[Mizzy]

@Ether:

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

[Mizzy]

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

That's mostly Perfect, though, and can mostly be explained by his lack of time. Those are really not scumtells under the circumstances. Do you have anything else against ME?

[Mizzy]

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.

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.

[Mizzy]

Exactly WHY do we find YS scummy?

She's been a middlesome player, but I have no idea what exactly warrants her mafia ness.

I, personally don't like a bunch of the things she's said, especially her wagon comments and now this pot-kettle vote of hers. The point of my vote on her was because a lot of her words had a scummy film on them and because I wanted to see if she could/would actually generate some content we could go on to let her off the hook, if possible.

Now her vote on Scot also bothers me, in part because she says that there hasn't been much from him in the game and she is guilty of the same, but also because she said this way, way before:

Actually, I see scotmany as a fence-sitter along with a few others in this game. You know who you are. Nothing scummy about that though, but it could be scum watching town lynch themselves.

Scot hasn't done anything scummy to deserve a vote...and he hasn't done anything I find scummy since she posted that. So why vote on him now when she's guilty of the same thing?

[Mizzy]

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.)

I mostly agreed with Setael's case when she presented it. Yours was not as clear as hers, and I am less suspicious of Setael than of you. That said, I felt Perfect might have replaced out due to being pressured (as town or scum) and Mizzy's response to Setael's comment was not one I thought town would make. It's certainly not what I thought of, when I read Setael's comment, but it was oddly conciliatory and in my view was a fairly serious scumtell, given the combative nature of her responses to you for what was essentially the same case.

Except, if you notice, there's a huge gap of posts during the time perfect got replaced out:

Perfect

Posted: Sun Dec 23, 2007 9:18 pm

and then not again until:

Posted: Tue Jan 01, 2008 2:08 pm

which is honestly a huge chunk of time. Those posts were also in General, and not in games. He also /out-ed of a mini normal this past Friday also due to a lack of time. Most of his posts have not been in games, but in the general forums.

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.

So does that still feel like pressure made him leave? All he's doing now, it looks like, it playing in card games.

[Mizzy]

That said, I felt Perfect might have replaced out due to being pressured (as town or scum)

What makes you feel that way and do you still feel this way after I presented the information in my last post? Do you not think it more reasonable, due to the timing of his posts and his lack of participation in other games, that he did not replace out for pressure and instead actually had no time?

and Mizzy's response to Setael's comment was not one I thought town would make. It's certainly not what I thought of, when I read Setael's comment, but it was oddly conciliatory and in my view was a fairly serious scumtell, given the combative nature of her responses to you for what was essentially the same case.

What DID you read from Setael's comment, and her comment directed to me? Here it is for ease of finding and please note the bolded parts, which were what prompted the response that you seem to hate so much:

The fact that he was replaced does not necessarily mean that he didn't have time and wasn't attached to the game.

It kind of makes me raise an eyebrow that you'd try to get us to assume that. It also is very possible that he wasn't dealing well with the pressure and didn't think he could talk his way out of a lynch. Not wanting to let his scum buddies down, he opted to replace out.

All kinds of possibilities.

So no, I won't be reviewing his comments in the light you suggested. Other than that, I've liked your posts so far and I'm keeping my vote on Yvonne since she's scum.

How can I refute, with any amount of sanity, that all kinds of possibilities exist?

I had never thought that Perfect might have replaced out because of pressure because there didn't seem to be a need for it, and the lack-of-time reason synched up to his activity for that time frame. But that doesn't mean that I have any way to be sure.

As far as why I was not hostile towards Set, and why I was towards Ether, was due to the presentation of the questions and concerns. I am always more willing to talk with someone rationally, even when they think I am scum and want me dead, when they provide arguments that are not, well, bitchy. If Ether had said, "Hey look, I think you're scummy and here's why...can you explain it please?" then I'd have been much more inclined to answer back the same way. My personality tends to meet fire with fire...so if you ask me a question in a level-headed manner, you get a level-headed answer. You, yourself was a victim of Ether and felt what her attacks are like...they raised similar reactions in you.

Sorry for the long post, but I wanted to explain myself one last time before moving on from this completely pointless and distracting wagon and doing some more scumhunting.

[Mizzy]

Do you have someone else in mind that, hypothethically speaking, a scum would have it easier building a case against?

I'm stating that people are misrepresenting my actions. True, it can be said that I asked for this when I jumped that wagon back then and it's not like I'm not demanding anyone to take their votes off me. That's for them to decide. But using something I didn't say and voting me as scum because of it? That's not fine by me.

I think that mostly, people are mis-interpreting your actions (if you are telling the truth) and then using what they interpret to build a case...which is the basis of mafiascum. If you wanted the spotlight, intentionally getting it is a bad idea...if you are townie, you could easily put the game in jeopardy for the rest of the town by singling yourself out.

Experimenting with playstyle is fine...as long as you play to win and don't endanger the game by making power roles waste time on you, and don't earn yourself a NK or lynch.

If you honestly made an error in your calculations (not realizing that people would use this against you) then you should consider contributing to the game more than you have...voting someone with little-to-no discussion on them and scarce participation makes you look even scummier.

You earned yourself the spotlight and now it's going to be neigh impossible to get back out unscathed, which I'm sure is stating the blazingly-obvious.

In the future, keep in mind that many people see actions that can endanger the town as scummy, even when performed by someone who is not scum.

[Mizzy]

let me sum up that post for you all:

I'm not really going to think at all.

I don't think that can be used as evidence for/against skitzer... I am still waiting for a post from you(skitz) that doesn't make me think "god, is it me who's going crazy here?"

No, that in and of itself doesn't make him scummy...but it does look like he's trying to look "there" without pinging radar...and failing.

[Mizzy]

let me sum up that post for you all:

I'm not really going to think at all.

I don't think that can be used as evidence for/against skitzer... I am still waiting for a post from you(skitz) that doesn't make me think "god, is it me who's going crazy here?"

The insinuation there is two-fold; it is that he either never thinks (pro-town scenario) or is not really going to think (anti-town scenario).

Yes, and considering that thought or lack of thought should have already happened, now, I want some conclusions, Skitz!

[Mizzy]

Lulubelle has a point with that...there's been a whole lotta distraction and very little actual scumhunting. We're letting people slip under the radar...at least she called us on it. She could have let it continue.

[Mizzy]

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

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

Hell--you aren't even bothering to defend yourself against the attacks I've leveled against

you

.

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.

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

posted

since she replaced in.

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

[Mizzy]

Mizzy, do you feel Lulubelle is justified in not commenting on any cases regarding you or others? Do you feel that it is in the town's best interest to lurk and not post content and then blame the town for not stopping that behaviour?

I don't really understand your response.

Let me try to explain. I, in general, don't like lurkers who are your stereotypical breed. I feel that if you are in here, you should play the damned game. While I don't subscribe to Lynch All Lurkers, I do feel that they should be replaced if possible. If not, lynching is better than having them sit around.

Lulu, though, attempted to make a point and seems like she's trying to come out of lurking. She drew attention to herself...lurkers don't really do that intentionally very often. It doesn't excuse her from lurking before this, no, but I can appreciate her attempts at bringing some activity back to the game.

In my opinion, also, townies shouldn't allow someone to lurk in the way that we did here...there was no conversation directed her way, no questions, not much else to comment on if you didn't want to get into a distraction-war. Townies should ask questions of everyone...and deal with lurkers we find accordingly.

I suppose I just respect the fact that Lulu was willing to gain unwanted attention in order to make the point which was a good one.

[Mizzy]

I suppose I just respect the fact that Lulu was willing to gain unwanted attention in order to make the point which was a good one.

Hey guys, you remember that time Yvonne gained unwarranted attention... Oh no I forget my point...

It was a crap way of putting it simply. Gaining unwarranted attention is anti town.

I didn't say whether or not it was pro-town or anti-town. And the mechanisms with which YS and Lulu gain themselves attention are vastly different and can't be compared very well.

I agree that gaining too much attention if you're townie doesn't help the town, but neither does a dead game. Although, there are times when a townie would want to gain attention and it would be a pro-town move...but we won't get into that. It's too WIFOM.

[Mizzy]

Dont get me wrong I dislike lurkers... however, I dont really see a situation outwith cop results or something similar where you would gain attention and it being pro town... so although you are saying its to wifom could you please state an example. (eta. I see scum hunting and gaining attention as being different)

Ah, see, I meant

anything

where a townie pulled the "spotlight" onto themselves intentionally. A claim would do that, which is pro-town, or a vanilla townie could make a nuisance of themselves to protect someone else they think is a power role. Anything that's not a form of scumhunting then I agree, such thing is anti-town in effect.

[Mizzy]

You know WIFOM creates discussions, WIFOM has a large part to play in the game of Mafia...

And that part usually leads to lynching townies, in my opinion. I don't mind debating a point when there's something to be had out of it, but just using circular logic for the fuck of it isn't pro-town either.

So why do you always try to drop it whenever you feel you may get into some discussion, I mean after all WIFOM discussion is better than no discussion at all... also awaiting an answer to my question.

I won't discuss it with Ether until she grows up a little bit. ("Your face is WIFOM"? Seriously, this isn't kindergarten.) If anyone else asks me about things, I'd be more than happy to talk with them about it, which I have in the past already, as long as they do so in a mature manner.

As for whether or not WIFOM discussion is better than none, I don't agree. Conversation that is TOO WIFOM can cause confusion, distraction, and tunnel-vision, which is not more helpful than silence. Again, opinion.

[Mizzy]

EBWOP: I lose at quoting:

You know WIFOM creates discussions, WIFOM has a large part to play in the game of Mafia...

And that part usually leads to lynching townies, in my opinion. I don't mind debating a point when there's something to be had out of it, but just using circular logic for the fuck of it isn't pro-town either.

So why do you always try to drop it whenever you feel you may get into some discussion, I mean after all WIFOM discussion is better than no discussion at all... also awaiting an answer to my question.

I won't discuss it with Ether until she grows up a little bit. ("Your face is WIFOM"? Seriously, this isn't kindergarten.) If anyone else asks me about things, I'd be more than happy to talk with them about it, which I have in the past already, as long as they do so in a mature manner.

As for whether or not WIFOM discussion is better than none, I don't agree. Conversation that is TOO WIFOM can cause confusion, distraction, and tunnel-vision, which is not more helpful than silence. Again, opinion.

[Mizzy]

@Mizzy and Lulubelle: Do you think that the way in which Lulubelle gained attention was a pro-town move in this case? How does Lulubelle's behaviour differ from YvonneSeer's?

I feel that Lulu's actions are part pro-town and part anti-town. She tried to revive the game and generate discussion, along with pointing out that the townies were letting someone (or someones) escape detection. That is pro-town to me. However, she also brought the spotlight onto herself, and if she is pro-town, that's dangerous for her and thus dangerous for the town.

[Mizzy]

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

I already said that I don't agree with what he did and I think there's also people in the game who deserve more scrutiny. Most of your case against him has explanation...you're just saying, "Eh, well, I don't believe it" for whatever reason, even with overwhelming meta evidence against your beliefs. I can't answer for why he did what he did. I can only say that he played his role poorly (in my opinion) and I am trying to move on from it and salvage what I can.

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

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

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

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

I already did. Any new points? Anything that I have done since replacing that I have not responded to?

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.

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.

[Mizzy]

Im not voting...

vote YvonneSeer

The LOOK AT ME NOT BEING SCUMMY!!! routine is getting boring...

@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?

Furthermore, is no one going to question it?

Unvote

I think I missed this post of his earlier and just saw it now while re-reading. And I don't like it.

YS isn't around to defend herself and while I think her words and actions were scummy, I'd rather hear more from her before watching her get lurk-killed. Or better yet, see her replaced.

[Mizzy]

Here's a brilliant idea I just cooked up out of the blue... why don't YOU question it?

I did...which is why I unvoted. Do I need to blatantly ask everything here? Alright, fine:

What the hell were you doing, Porochaz?

[Mizzy]

You are forcing the town to think if a scum would offer themselves to be lynched like you just did.

And how is making the town think a bad thing?

[Mizzy]

My mistake, she is making the town over think and over analyze if scum would do what she just did...

Besides, if I were scum, what would I be doing attracting all this attention towards myself? Are you thinking I'm newbscum?

Same can go for that...

That makes more sense. However, we all know for a fact that both scum AND town would say something like that. It can't really be used as a town-tell or a scum-tell. Unless I missed something somewhere.

[Mizzy]

No response to this at all.

Actually, my post 202 was meant to be in response.

I feel it's fair to say that everyone, if blatantly asked if they are pro- or anti-town, is going to say pro-, including myself. I don't see why insinuating pro-town for myself could be considered scummy when all of us do it and the vast majority of us ARE pro-town. Even you do it here:

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.

I don't, and can't, feel that your logic is inaccurate due to alignment because I am undecided as to what alignment you are yet. I feel that your logic is inaccurate because your case against me seems to mostly be based off of a couple things:

1) Perfect's moronic wagoning
2) Perfect's asking for a replacement
3) My insinuating pro-town alignment
4) My inability to answer everything you say in exactly the perfect way for your tastes.

Did I miss anything? I re-read and I don't think I did, but your posts are not the easiest to read. Anyway, I don't think your logic is sound because only one of those (#1) can be true scumtell some of the time. The fact that he wanted replacement doesn't make him scum, neither does insinuating pro-town alignment because it's something we ALL do inherently when playing. Every time we vote, every time we FoS, we're really saying, "I am townie and you're a threat to my town because you're scum!" A gallows can't stand on one leg.

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.

I want to answer directly, even though it's old, to this so that you understand why I called you opportunistic. Joining a wagon isn't the only way to be opportunistic...it really felt that as soon as I joined in, you jumped on me in part because I couldn't answer for Perfect (because I'm not him) and because I was a new target. I feel like after you dropped off of Kitty, you were just looking for someone else to rally against, wagon or no. You even mention that it's part of your playstyle to be so aggressive...but it comes off as hurting more than it helps, in my opinion.

Yet at the same time, you've shown next to no curiosity about my alignment up until the Porochaz thing, which feels fake.

Just because I don't show curiosity doesn't mean I don't wonder. I watch and read what you say, and even though a lot of your words have a scummy feel to me, I think it's just because of your playstyle and I think you are actually trying to scumhunt (or at least appear like you are) ...which is why I haven't voted for you. I just happen to think your methods are kind of crappy.

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.

All you did was make me wonder about your age. I honestly feel like most of your arguments about me ARE WIFOM because they contain logic that can't be proven by any means, and in some cases, has felt circular.

It feels like you were/are saying: "Perfect, if scum, would have known he was scum under too much pressure and could have left the game because of that pressure, confirming him as scum." But you didn't add the opposite, which has equal probability of being true: "Perfect, if town, could have left because he would have felt like he was under too much pressure from scum and so left because of that pressure, confirming him as town." And the third option all together, and the one I believe in, is something you have actively blown off: "Perfect left, regardless of his alignment, because he didn't have time to play the game, confirming him as neither scum nor town."

You pulled in meta data to back your claims that turned out to be incomplete and incorrect meta data and when I pointed this out, you brushed it off and didn't seem to care.

...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.

I can see how that stood out, but just about anything she did after having come out of lurking was bound to stand out to us. But how does Lulu's actions effect the shittiness of Poro's vote? Poro voted on YS, not Lulu, and Lulu didn't vote on anyone. I think I'm missing your point, here.

By the way, that post of yours felt MUCH less bitchy, and I'm more inclined to speak with you over questions like those in a calmer tone like the one you just used. Thanks for that.

[Mizzy]

That and you trying to blame your lurking on us...

I just want to interject my opinion here...what Lulu said wasn't, "I was lurking and it's ALL YOUR FAULT, town!" She said something more like, "I was lurking, and you guys allowed it for too long." Slightly different, no?

[Mizzy]

It appeared to me like she was trying to dismiss her responsibility; she was lurking, and she is accountable for it, not the town.

She never said that anyone but her was accountable...but what she did do was point out that we are/were allowing lurkers to lurk without taking action on them. She doesn't say that she feels we forced her to lurk, or that her lurking was because of the town...she said that the town allowed her to continue to lurk and

that's true

. We didn't ask to have her prodded, or replaced, nor did we lynch her for lurking. We LET her continue...and she at least stepped up and said something.

[Mizzy]

Once again, she only accepted responsibility after she was pressured. Her first statement was she was upset that the town allowed her to lurk, like it was the town's fault.

I just think you're being overly defensive when honestly, you're just as guilty as she is of lurking, and fence-sitting to boot, and didn't actually attempt, until lately, to remedy that. Lulu at least had the testicular fortitude to out herself and help the game progress.

[Mizzy]

I don't really think over defensive describes this...

It feels to me like you're all, "OH SNAP, she insulted us townies, and I am town, so I am offended!" Just my opinion.

That isn't my main argument though...I viewed her a having an urgency to end the day, and I think she basically admitted to it here:

I ended my own lurking by pushing the town slightly closer to the Yvonne lynch knowing that I would either get rightly jumped for it or that she would be lynched and the game would progress a little in either case.

I feel she was more pushing for

progress

of some sort. And not only scum have been known to want night to come quickly, you know.

I don't really see it as an urgency for night as more of an urgency to get people off their asses. She admits, in that line, that if she had been jumped, it would have been rightly so, and honestly, I can't see scum being all, "Oh man, I can't wait for night, so Imma call attention to myself and get myself killed so I can have night!" Kind of defeats the purpose if you're dead.

[Mizzy]

Well that's the thing, I don't consider it a stretch for scum to try something like that. In bringing attention to herself it appears like she has at least convinced you, mizzy, that she is town. It is definitely well possibly that she is scum trying to provoke that reaction in people.

It's not, but it's also not a stretch for town to try something like that, either. I don't like at all that she was lurking, but yes, I do feel that at least her current actions are pro-town.

[Mizzy]

Mizzy: Who do you think is most likely to be scum?

Honestly, Porochaz (I really don't like his recent actions) and scotmany12 (the transition from lurker to all-out war on Lulu pings my radar) are looking rather suspicious. I also, in light of his more recent posts, wonder a great deal about Skitzer.

[Mizzy]

By the way, do you no longer think I'm scum or am I sitting comfortably at fourth on your scummy list?

You are slowly falling down my scumlist, yes. That's why I remain voteless for the time being...because I can't decide who's scummier of the 3 I mentioned quite yet, but I THINK it's Poro. Even if you are still scum, there's more dangerous/lynchworthy people out there to me and now that we have some participation (thanks to Lulu, I might add) I feel the scum are losing their shields and are being easier to see.

He has spent the entire game pushing extremely hard on skitzer until new potential targets presented themselves, at which point he abruptly excuses himself to look for a lynch elsewhere.

This is one of the reasons I have my eye on Poro...because it could be a form of bussing.

[Mizzy]

Mizzy, I came back from lurking an attacked someone I thought was scum. My increase in posting makes me scummy? Also, I might be mistaken, but did you not say that lulu's attempt to draw attention to herself makes her town. Why does this not apply to me?

Yes, you came back when an opportune target appeared. You also weren't the first to go after her, and so it feels again like you were going, "Oh hey, a line to fall into!" Your sudden increase in posting when there was a target other than you makes me wonder if you're trying to hide in the turmoil.

As for Lulu drawing attention, and how that hints at what her alignment is, Lulu drew attention to more than just herself. She drew attention to a blaring mistake the town was making and she didn't have to. Her intent, I feel, was not to pull attention onto herself but onto the mistake and lack of forward momentum in the game. That's what makes me think that she is town.

As for why that does not apply to you, well, you didn't do anything even remotely similar, and I cannot see that your actions can really be compared to hers. You thought you found scum (or so you say) and so launched into an attack on someone that whether scum or town has, I feel, helped the town tremendously.

The act of pulling attention to yourself is not pro-town...but I don't feel Lulu was trying to get the attention for herself; it just happened that way. So that part was not helpful to the town, but what she SAID was extremely helpful. In my opinion, it more than covers the scumminess of lurking and of attention-grabbing.

Why ask me why it doesn't apply to you? Were you TRYING to get attention?

[Mizzy]

Yes, I was the second to go after lulu, Ether was the first.

That's what I said.

My intent wasn't to draw attention to myself, but I definitely did.

But your actions, to me, didn't help the town. So it's not the same as what Lulu did.

Lulu also did this. She went after Yvonne, who is an opportune target. Was she trying to hide in the turmoil?

Lulu didn't vote...or FoS...she merely voiced contemplating it.

If you think I am opportunistic for going after lulu, then there is no way you cannot call lulu opportunistic for this:

Scum or not, Yvonne seems to me to be providing such distraction that I can't help but feel our chances of finding scum are improved without her playstyle experimentation going on in the background. Incredibly tempted to put her at L-1 and ask for a claim, here.

I don't call that opportunistic because she didn't vote or really wagon. I don't like the idea of lynching someone who you don't think is scum, which is why I was wary at first, but I feel she was trying to help.

So if me and ether never pressured her, I am inclined to believe that she would have went back to lurking.

And I am inclined to believe that if Ether hadn't said something first, you wouldn't have piped up at all. Also, that should be "Ether and I" not only due to grammar but also due to order of actions, which I feel is noteworthy.

[Mizzy]

@Setael:

Lulu is defending herself on her own quite nicely. What I am doing now is defending my feeling that Lulu is town, and only against one person. I should also mention that the person I am defending against is someone I feel has a high probability of being scum. I'm not going to sit by while someone I feel is most likely town is attacked by someone who is most likely scum in my eyes. I hope that explains it.

[Mizzy]

@All:

So, we mention that skitzer has gone quiet and suddenly he perks right the hell up...hmm. Interesting. Not only that but he's fingering YS for a bullshit reason. There's 9 townies in here, remember. His nitpicking over semantics makes me want to shave the cat in his avatar.

@scotmany12:

I'm taking into account everything that you feel makes Lulu scum, and deciding that I don't agree with you. Just because I don't agree doesn't mean I'm ignoring you or not addressing your concerns and "overlooking" Lulu's actions. I just have a differing opinion. Also, why are you not all up in JDodge's shit for wanting to end Day 1 so quickly, too?

Oh, and:

Vote: Skitzer

for being a double-talking rat bastard:

Anyway, I approve of your explanation of Mizzy. Using innuendo hinting at "I'm town". Is simply repetitive to me, because

everyone in tis game is town until proven scum, IMO.

Saying "I'm town" is like saying "I'm alive", because everyone in the game wants everyone else to believe they are town.

Mafia Rule #1: Mafia until proven town.

[Mizzy]

I did attack him mizzy...Great catch on skitzer

Mizzy, what do you think about lulu refusing to respond to me?

Thanks As to why Lulu isn't responding, I think the conversation has been drawn out a lot and it's a bit aggravating for all of us. Ask nicely, maybe?

[Mizzy]

I'm aggravated too, but I have responded to everything that both you and lulu has posted towards me. I personally don't think I was derogatory or insulting in my attacks either. Really, if she was town, it would be in her best interest to respond because she has nothing to hide. Personally, in her refusing to respond to me, I see two possible reasons.
1. She is content with you defending her, and is no longer responding to prevent herself from accidentally slipping up
2. She simply cannot defend herself anymore; she has given up.

I guess I just feel like you can only repeat yourself so many times before you hate yourself, and most of the argument between all three of us has been the same. I'm content with my defenses of my views for the moment, and I can see where you are both coming from, even if I don't agree with all of it.

[Mizzy]

Wow, Mister Mod, you really keep up with things! Cheers to you!

[Mizzy]

Yeah, I knew there was something wrong with skitzer FoSing me out of nowhere with a crazy reason. Let's see what he has to say about his second slip-up now.

I really want to hear from him as well. It's not JUST that he said two different things, but the context in which he said them.

The first time, he used the logic to FoS me. That was the reason he gave for doing so. Then he FoSed Yvonne for the complete opposite reason.

I can see having two opinions in differing contexts, but not when they are

that

scummy. And as soon as he said it, I remembered that he had said something else different previously...the forums just needed to stay up long enough to let me find it.

[Mizzy]

No one hammer until skitzer shows up.

That kind of negates the reason for him TO show up...if he never shows up, he doesn't get hammered. So I say:

Wait to hammer until the end of the day on Sunday, then he has the weekend to get his nails done and his eyebrows waxed, or whatever it is that he's doing that's more important than defending himself. That way we're giving him a chance with consequences if he snubs it.

[Mizzy]

I forgot I said that. My philosophy changed.

Claim: Cop.

That way, If I get lynched, It'll be because I told the truth.

I highly, HIGHLY doubt the mafia would have given us a cop. It's one of the two most powerful roles they could have chosen and the role that could do the most damage to them if not discovered.

Even if you ARE the cop, you're useless to us now.

[Mizzy]

And I should also mention that you haven't given defenses for the charges against you very well. They are, I believe:

1) Stating philosophy A as a reason to FoS someone then switching to the direct opposite to FoS someone else.
2) Lurking, hiding, and giving half-assed posts, logic and answers
3) And the previous reasons for the wagon that had formed on you previously.

I'd also like to add that a real cop, in my opinion, wouldn't have claimed that way. They would have done their best to get out of a lynch

without claiming

first, because as I said, if you ARE the cop, you're bloody useless to us now. Your claim feels like a half-assed last ditch self-preservation effort.

Confirm Vote: Skitzer

BTW, what the hell is, "That way, If I get lynched, It'll be because I told the truth."?

[Mizzy]

But I am the cop, and if there is a Weak Doc out there, If I'm not lynched, protect me.

And why not ask for the not-weak doc because we're not sure that we HAVE a weak doc, now are we? Why specifically mention the WEAK doc? Is it because you KNOW we have one?

And besides, I think that if we do have a doc, they'd be smart enough to know who to protect and they don't need your sorry ass ordering them around.

[Mizzy]

I must say, I second the, "...". I feel like pretty big amounts of ass right about now.

I'm going to re-read a bit and see if, with the new knowledge we have, anything stands out.

[Mizzy]

Anyways, Yvonne is still scum. Also, I find that Bookie is likely town.

vote: YvonneSeer

Yvonne, though, didn't vote for Skitzer. She could have helped kill him, but didn't. So why do you think she's scum?

[Mizzy]

How does her lack of a skitzer vote in any way absolve her?

It doesn't, I suppose, but I think there might be better people to prod at for new information. Beating a dead horse, even if it deserves it, isn't as good if there are other unbeaten horses that ALSO deserve it.

[Mizzy]

Why are you defending Yvonne in such a manner?

I'm not defending Yvonne, especially, I'm telling you to stop being tunnel-visioned. We ALL thought (cept for the scum) that Skitzer was scum, no? We were wrong. Why be so quick to kill again now? There's a lot to be discussed.

Your "Let's lynch nownownownow!" posts look scummy as hell. You should think about maybe not making yourself look worse.

[Mizzy]

Let me just ask those of you who did not or would not have unvoted skitzer: Is it good to hammer a claimed cop with possibly no counterclaims on day 1? Wouldn't it be better to keep the so-called cop alive and see the kind of results that the cop gets on the next day?

I honestly didn't believe his claim when he made it, and I did ask for there to be some time before a hammer even before the claim.

I wanted others to have a chance to react to his claim. Just because I had my opinion doesn't mean anyone else would have shared it, and it doesn't mean I couldn't have been swayed by some good defensive posts by Skitzer.

Unfortunately, I don't think there would have been any good defensive posts from Skitzer...he played his role pretty poorly in my opinion.

[Mizzy]

Then why exactly are you trying to steer me away from Yvonne with thinly-veiled words as opposed to just explicitly saying what you mean?

I don't see how me telling you to stop beating a dead horse and look for others to beat is "thinly veiled."

How is wanting to keep the game moving at a steady pace (which is good for towns) a bad thing in any manner?

Moving at a steady pace is good, but I feel like you pressuring for a lynch when good discussion was happening. You got what you wanted, and it was a mislynch. Steady pace towards a mafia win isn't pro-town.

[Mizzy]

EBWOP: Sorry for the misquotes, I'm not proof reading very well.

[Mizzy]

Um, you and gorrad, gorrad mainly didn't even give people time to discuss the claim, so I don't think you are justified to say that we all thought he was scum.

How did I not give anyone time? I was the first vote on him. I asked to give Skitz time, til Sunday, so we could discuss things when he came back out of hiding.

[Mizzy]

@Mizzy: Even if you didn't believe his claim, I don't think it would have been a bad idea to have kept him alive for one more day.

Actually, to really benefit, we would have had to keep him alive for 2 nights worth of investigations because he could have been insane (there was a 50% chance of that) but keep in mind that I was the FIRST vote on him, not the last. I contributed to his lynch, but remember that everyone after me wagoned like no tomorrow on him, going on what I said. I asked for time. I could have unvoted, but someone else could have, too.

[Mizzy]

@JDodge: You didn't answer my question. Again, why do you still think that Yvonne is scum? I want to know.

Furthermore, you are not getting my point at all. You are not trying, in any way, to get me to "stop being tunnel-visioned".

I am, actually, it's just failing, miserably. It's fine to me if you think Yvonne is scum, I just want to know WHY and see what you have to say about her lack of voting on Skitz. I said explicitly that it doesn't absolve her, but I want you to actually give some content to the game here and tell me your thoughts.

A wishy-washy, non-committal response in a way in which you also heavily imply that

you too are suspicious of Yvonne

, yet for some unknown reason pressuring her is bad.

Right now, I am suspicious of everyone in here but one person. My point that I am trying to make is that pressuring the SAME person when there are others you could be directing to is not helping.

Since you seem to be heavily implying that you feel I am scum, why don't you just come outright and say it instead of beating around the bush with shadily-worded, weaselly little responses.

Actually, before saying anything to this, let me ask you this:

I am now certain that the scum group is one of:

Yvonne-Ether-Mizzy

OR

Yvonne-skitzer-someone else other than Mizzy or Ether.

Do you or do you not still believe this and stand by it? The answer is going to mean a lot so please think it over carefully.

[Mizzy]

I still have no clue WHY the scum would want to give us cop.

This was my thought, too. The fact that he had a 50% chance of being insane was maybe something they thought they could deal with...but I didn't think they'd give us a cop.

[Mizzy]

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

If you want to follow JD blindly and say I'm defending Yvonne, go for it...I'm just trying to get some of the pressure spread out. We got a lot of pressure info from Yvonne yesterday but other folks have gone under the radar.

[Mizzy]

Seemed like you were in a hurry to me at the end of the day mizzy, after the claim. You didn't even unvote to prevent a quicklynch, which is what gorrad did.

There were multiple other people voting on him...they could have unvoted, too. But they didn't, either.

What? First off, no he wouldn't have been useless. Secondly, if you thought there was a possibility for him to be the cop, why didn't you unvote?

Yes, he would have been. He'd have been NKed and we'd never have gotten an investigation from him. The moment he claimed, he had no chance of lasting through the night if he was town. If he did claim and wasn't nightkilled, do you honestly think he would have been a real cop on D2?

I didn't believe him to be the cop, honestly. I thought it was a bullshit claim because I didn't think the cop would actually play as terribly as that. Mistake on my part and I admit that.

[Mizzy]

Ok... Im not blindly following JDodge, Im following my own suspicions... I think the connection between you three is too strong and I want some pressure on you, seeing as we have already put Yvonne under some. Its time to see how you react.

One vote isn't really pressure.

And here's a question...don't you think townies have just as much a chance of forming alliances between each other as the mafia do?

[Mizzy]

Seemed like you were in a hurry to me at the end of the day mizzy, after the claim. You didn't even unvote to prevent a quicklynch, which is what gorrad did.

There were multiple other people voting on him...they could have unvoted, too. But they didn't, either.

That totally avoids his point.[/quote]

I didn't want the day to end so much as I wanted the person I thought was scum dead.

Scot's screamed "Omg, they want the day to end!" at 2 people now, Yvonne and myself. But he hasn't gone after JDodge, and he also backed the Skitzer wagon, though not with a vote...convenient that playstyle thing is, eh? No responsibility for D1 actions.

[Mizzy]

You don't know if anyone else checked the thread. You were the first to respond to his claim, and if you really wanted to prevent a quicklynch and wait, I think you would have unvoted.

And what, I'm supposed to magically know that he was about to get hammered?

[Mizzy]

Jdodge also didn't say anything after the fucking claim, because It is possible he didn't check the thread. You clearly did mizzy.

Ooh, touchy, aren't we? I didn't say he did. I thought we was validly scum, but I also didn't think he would get hammered right then. I might, MIGHT have unvoted if Skitzer's only response that I did reply to hadn't been complete bullshit. And I was waiting for a response from him to my questions before deciding whether to unvote or not.

[Mizzy]

Well, you said you wanted to give him time until sunday. I would think that if you really wanted that to happen then you would have unvoted. Or is it because he claimed you were happy for him to be lynched right away?

I did, yup. I didn't expect Gorrad to hammer irresponsibly. Out of the few of us that hadn't voted, I was pretty sure that Scot wouldn't vote (playstyle) and I didn't think Yvonne or Gorrad would vote/post so soon.

[Mizzy]

No because thats anti town... unless your claiming mason?

Also, I dont expect to much pressure on you by myself, its up to the town to do that.

Are you asking me for a claim?

[Mizzy]

Theory: Scum would have known that a) we would likely give them a godfather, weakening the cop, and b) that we would be convinced that scum would never give us a cop, therefore we wouldn't believe a cop claim made under any circumstances. In that situation, cop becomes the single

weakest

role, not the strongest, and therefore giving us one would be a smart scum play.

Mafia chose roles, first, though, didn't they? I can see how it might be reasoned that we'd give them a Godfather...it's one of the safest.

Bleh, this is a good point.

[Mizzy]

and Mizzy you COULD of unvoted... but you didn't, dont try and pass this off otherwise, you voted and said noone else vote thats like saying "Dont press this big huge button with the word push on it". You failed to act, whats more you knew what you were doing when you said it, and that to me makes you more scummy than the person who hammered

I could have unvoted, but I did not, because I honestly thought he was scum and I try very hard not to be wishy-washy on my votes. I take full responsibility for that. But it doesn't make me more scummy because I'm not scum. It makes me fallible.

and no I dont expect a claim, I was just wondering how a town alliance actually helps the town... I mean how do you know Lulubelle and Yvonne are town?

You already know how a town alliance could help...you already said it, yourself. Secondly, I DON'T know they are town...it's just a guess based on information.

[Mizzy]

Yes, this is all your opinion. I have a different opinion and I would have wanted to discuss this. If you were pro-town and convinced that lynching the claimed cop was the right thing to do, you could have stated your argument as such instead of quickhammering like a scum.

It also makes me wonder....Gorrad SAW me asking questions and not unvoting. Convenient.

[Mizzy]

It also makes me wonder....Gorrad SAW me asking questions and not unvoting. Convenient.

I don't follow.

Weren't you curious as to the answers? Did you think a few more minutes would make that much of a difference? Or did you vote knowing I was actively viewing the thread and didn't want ME to unvote? Just questions.

[Mizzy]

I was not curious at all, and frankly found the point irrelivant. It seems to me, from early day 1 and pre-game, that the consensus was that there was a weak doc. No matter how he answered, and there's really only one way he COULD answer, niether of our opinions would have changed.

True, very true. Thanks for answering.

I very much agree on your earlier point, too, that it would have taken too much time and too much possibility of collateral damage to actually find out what kind of cop he was.

[Mizzy]

Right now, I am suspicious of everyone in here but one person.

Are you suspicious of them, or do you think they are town? What makes you think each of them is town, apart from them having called a lot of attention to themselves in different ways?

I'm suspicious of everyone, as I said, but one person, because everyone's done and said some pretty scummy stuff. That said, I feel Yvonne and Lulu are pro-town because they have said/done some things that make me feel that way. I have already explained why.

I can be suspicious of everyone and still find some of them to be possibly town. Nothing is black and white. All of us have done something scummy looking in this game. Does that mean I should clump you all together? No, of course not.

[Mizzy]

I would suggest you read my previous posts, I believe I outlined it fairly clearly way back when although I might be mistaken

I mean NOW, Day 2, with new information.

This is not conditional. I will answer your question as soon as you give me an actual response.

Because the ANSWER you give to the scum-buddy-groupings you gave will tell me whether you are just moronic town who's extremely wrong or whether you are scum. So answer, and depending, I will either call you scum to your face and vote you, or I will not.

You saw the possibility for something, you saw the dangers within, but you did nothing to prevent it because you "didn't expect it"?

That sentence is inherently contradictory. I didn't expect it, so no, I didn't really realize there was a possibility.

[Mizzy]

Thank you for your response. Yes, they have changed. No, I will not post new ones now because I need more time to think on them.

No worries, thanks for responding, too. Just wanted to know about those specific groupings.

@All:

As for the whole Why-didn't-Mizzy-unvote thing, I honestly believed, as I said, that he was a) scum, b) fakeclaiming, and c) I didn't think Gorrad (or anyone else) was around yet to hammer him. I don't think I would have removed my vote, anyway, until I saw something substantial from Skitz.

I'm sorry that my discovery of the scumtell ultimately caused his mislynch, and I am sorry that my conviction got him prematurely hammered. Well, mostly sorry. I'm still pretty miffed at his poor play. But the loss of a townie is never a good thing, and for that I am sorry.

That's all I can say; I made a mistake. I don't expect anyone else to understand...and I'm carefully re-evaluating my scumlist based on the current information so that I hopefully will not make another mistake.

[Mizzy]

It certainly caught my eye and I would be voting for him if I didn't feel Mizzy-Yvonne-Lulu were scummier... I feel that whilst Gorrads vote was scummy the "don't vote for skitzer even though Im not unvoting to make sure" was more scummy... I don't feel theres an valid excuse for that. Anyway, your question was about gorrad and my answer is town for now, however if Mizzy or Yvonne were to be lynched and come up town I would certainly take a closer look.

Because of sentiment like the above, I feel that the town is heading in the wrong direction. I wasn't going to do this unless I needed to, but I want the town looking in the right places, not the wrong ones, and I feel the information outweighs the dangers.

Role Claim: One-Shot Masoniser

My power is used up, however, and in doing so, I found that Ether is also a townie. Sorry, Ether, didn't want to out you, but honestly, 2 people chatting at night isn't that great. I feel that the information could and should be used

now

.

For those that may want to know, I chose Ether because she honestly thought I was scum, and this not only showed her that I am not, but also proved to me that she was doing honest scumhunting.

While I know that this makes the both of us targets, I would still rather the town have the information NOW than after another mislynch or an unfortunate nightkill. I feel kind of bad outing Ether, as I feel it's almost not my place, but I couldn't very well not reveal my findings, since it's the closest we'll get to cop findings D2. I know it doesn't make up for the cop's mislynch, but it really was just a mistake and looking back at skitzer's play, I still cannot believe he played his role so poorly. I was ready to bet money he was scum.

This is also why, I might add, that I didn't not believe skitzer's roleclaim. I did not believe they would have given us a masoniser AND a cop.

Speaking on skitzer's mislynch, ANY of you that voted could have unvoted at any time, not just me. The mislynch is on ALL of our heads, just as much as it is on mine. I feel that when you vote, you should vote on someone you wouldn't mind seeing killed and I did that. The entire responsibility for your combined errors should not fall on one or two people...every vote helped to kill the cop. If any of you were unsure, then you should never have voted in the first place. Just because I look like a damned fine scapegoat doesn't mean you should be using me as one. Take some fucking responsibility for your own actions, would you?

[Mizzy]

Ether, confirm or deny.

Mizzy, that was a horrible play and I have no clue why you even claimed like that.

I explained why, didn't you read it? I was a ONE SHOT Masoniser. Me and Ether talking at night (which we will still be able to do one night until/if a nightkill happens) isn't as good as two confirmed townies. We can't do much with just the two of us, now can we?

Do you not feel like the town going in the right direction is better than the wrong one? Do you think that I'm still useful as a power role? Well, it is and I am not.

I weighed the options sufficiently and after doing much reading and internal consequence review, decided that it would be better for the town to have this info now rather than later.

I don't care how good or bad a play you think it is (I think your plays have been pretty shit-poor but I don't have any say over them and my opinion doesn't matter) but I'd already pretty much outted myself as the masoniser a couple pages back (and Ether already said I'm townie, if not in so many words, after having been against me most of D1) if anyone had been paying attention, as a way to get people to look at the right targets. It failed.

There's a lot of anti-Mizzy sentiment right now, and what should I do? Just LET them lynch me? Yeah, because seeing another dead power role (even if an ex power role) is going to be REALLY great for town.

Now at least, should you choose to believe me, you have this information to consider and hopefully stop another mislynch before it happens.

The confirmed townie list, should you decide to care, is: Skitzer, Ether, Mizzy. Go back and re-read and see if anything else pops into the limelight using that information.

[Mizzy]

Also, to answer your question more directly, because if I claimed when is normal, aka at -2 or -1L, no one would have believed me, I don't think. I made a mistake in helping to lynch a townie...I don't want that to happen again.

[Mizzy]

Mizzy

I disagree with you that it was the right time to claim, but what's done is done. Who do you think is scum? Your thoughts are very valuable now that your days are numbered. And Ether's as well.

Why would my days be numbered? Do you think the mafia would waste a nightkill on me now? Even if they do, better me than the last remaining power role.

Which, by the way, is part of why I did it. Let them kill me, it's a "safe" nightkill now that I'm not a power role.

[Mizzy]

Also, you had one vote on you mizzy. That's hardly close to a lynch.

I didn't say I WAS close.

[Mizzy]

People would have believed you if your partner confirmed you...

Watch me shoot myself in the foot by saying this but...people would have made the argument that I was scum siding with a scumbuddy, or worse, scum saying a townie was linked with them. I worried that claiming nearer to a lynch would cause a lemming-run, so to speak, the wrong way.

[Mizzy]

Wrong. Entirely wrong. There is so much two masons can get out of nighttalking.

And we will get one night of talking. They can't kill both of us in one night, so there will still be, if they waste a NK on me, some chatter.

It was already going in the right direction. You were still useful as a power role.

I honestly don't see how...but then again, I've not heard of a one-shot masoniser before, so maybe I misunderstood. Please explain?

And pointing the scum to them is better?

Scum already know who is town and who is not. All I did was let them know that I knew some, too.

No "choose to" about it. We can confirm your claim immediately at no risk.

Yes, but as for no risk, I expect Ether to flay me tonight.

Knowing that I am town, and almost entirely certain that Bookie is town as well, that leaves Setael, Gorrad, Lulu, Yvonne, Prozac, scot and Jordan. Setael seems likely town, scot seems to be giving off his usual town tells, and I don't think Jordan over-analyzes that much as scum, so that leaves Gorrad, Lulu, Yvonne and Prozac.

I was asked, too, who I think is what. Honestly, I'm up in the air right now about a good many people. Setael and Kitty come off to me as town. Yvonne's blatant fingering and thinking skitzer was scum but not voting used to look town but now I'm not so sure. Scot, JDodge, Lulu, and Jordan are maybes in my eyes with more leaning towards town, but I'm not really sure. Gorrad's hammer looks scum-coated to me, and we still have some lurking going on.

[Mizzy]

@Ether:

I know, I'm sorry...I just feel/felt that is was the best move I could make for the town. And yes, this also frees me up to

Vote: Porochaz

without it looking like a full-on OMGUS vote, which would have made me look scummier than a pond bed. I also figure that we kind of outted ourselves earlier, it wouldn't be a total surprise. Flay me at will.

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?

[Mizzy]

Id like to point out here, that I never asked Mizzy to claim and I said that earlier on in this thread.

I know you didn't...I asked you explicitly and you said that you "didn't expect me to claim." You didn't ask me to. I did anyway.

[Mizzy]

If a doc (weak or not) is smart they'd be protecting Mizzy and Ether. I don't think we'd get any more confirmed innocents out of a weak doc through not claiming, and by claiming now we prevent the possible loss of the information.

I would hope that they'd not protect me. We know I'm not the doc, mm?

[Mizzy]

I don't think now's the time for the final powerrole to claim. Yeah, it lets us afford some mislynches, but if, like JDodge states, the final role is protection, then tommorow all the town would have left would be mason. Now, don't get me wrong, mason's good peoples, but compared to a protection role they're not nearly as good. If the doc or weak doc doesn't claim, at least not this early, we have a good shot at a) getting another cleared and/or b) blocking another NK. If both of those happen, we'd have to screw up hard to lose.

But what if the doc gets NKed? Then we lose the information they have already gotten with no chance of getting it back. I'm not saying they should claim, just pointing out the danger in waiting.

[Mizzy]

Question: Are we then assuming that we have the weakdoc?

Even if I have narrowed town possible doc candidates then it's only by two and in order to find the doc, and there's still too many townies to make that possible without a huge amount of luck.

I like option 3 as well.

We're pretty close to positive that the mafia were blocked at night from killing yes? Who all do you think the target might have been? You don't need to answer, I'm just brainstorming out loud.

[Mizzy]

Everyone (except Mizzy): Who would you have protected last night if you were the weak doc?

Fine, I'll just go eat cake on my own then And no, this cake is not a lie.

[Mizzy]

Why are we revealing who we would have protected as doc?

If it's true that there was a successful protect last night, the scum know who they targetted and they can easily narrow down the weak doc through this. Unless you're suggesting that the weak doc lie, which defeats the purpose.

This is not for last night, or wasn't supposed to be, but for tonight. Who would you protect tonight?

[Mizzy]

Yes, but it's already turned into a "Let's help scum find the doc" session. I don't even know why JDodge would ask this.

As for tonight, I'll suicide on Gorrad as a weak doc.

Mmm, things rarely turn out how you mean them to, I suppose :/

Even though JDodge didn't include me, Imma stick in my two cents, anyway. I, too, would attempt a Gorrad poke if someone else wasn't in need of saving.

[Mizzy]

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

I'm getting old.

I agree...before we all give the wrong information for us and the right info for scum. That's why when I asked, I said that if someone didn't want to answer, it was understandable.

[Mizzy]

Vote: Porochaz

It seemed like the only reason you were considering mizzy to be scum was because she defending lulu and yvonne. However, it seems you have other reasons to suspect yvonne. Wouldn't you go after yvonne first instead of mizzy? If you thought mizzy was scum for defending those two, wouldn't you have to know their alignments first?

He was also going after me for not unvoting because he thought that is more scummy than hammering.

[Mizzy]

Chaz is more scummy than gorrad. His hammer is scummy, and I don't like his defense of it, but chaz is scummier. Gorrad could have also just not been thinking.

Mizzy, when chaz first voted for you, he didn't mention that at all. He focused solely on your defense of the other two. He actually only stuck to that point of you not unvoting until after I questioned you for it.

Oh, I didn't say it was intelligent or unscummy...just that he said it

[Mizzy]

Yeah, I wasn't sure if you were doing it as a point against me or something which is why I said what I said. Still, what I said is true.

Interestingly, if we were to lynch Poro and he were to come up as scum, I would then suspect Gorrad since Poro attempted to drag the attention off of him and onto me.

[Mizzy]

I noticed that too mizzy. He subtlety defends gorrad. Like in this post

I'm not sure I'd call that subtle. But yes, precisely Though I HAVE seem scum defend townies in such a way to ensure that even if a scum dies, a townie looks like scum too.

[Mizzy]

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

I'm getting old.

No, we should not. How does stopping help us in any manner?

The worry is that we don't want our last power role outted when we are trying to help them.

[Mizzy]

@All: Stop arguing! This is why we can't have nice things!

I'm pretty sure that by arguing about who is the doc and who can't be, we're giving scum way more info than we should be. 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.

Anyway, here are the points people have brought up:

1) Everyone claiming is good. It creates buffer around the real doc's choice, and gives us information to go on.

2) Everyone claiming is not good. It allows the scum to zero in on the doc much easier and the real doc's choice may get lost in the shuffle.

3) I like cake.

Seeing as the only one we can ALL agree on is #3, because I do in fact like cake, I feel that protecting the doc right now is of the utmost importance; if they get killed, we don't get their results, nor any future results and we are out of power roles.

So, why don't we discuss:

A) Who we gonna kill today?
B) How we gonna protect the doc?
C) What the hell we gonna do if the doc dies.

Mizzy's answers:

A) I voted Porochaz and stick by it thus far.
B) Have the majority of us decide on a well-thought-out plan and go for it.
C) I have no idea.

[Mizzy]

EBWOP: By claiming, I mean us all saying who we WOULD have protected if we had been the doc. Not roleclaiming.

[Mizzy]

Mod:

If a weak doc were to protect a mafia and die as a result, would the resulting "death" post be different than a mafia nightkill post? Such as, "Person A, the doc, was killed in the line of duty," as opposed to, "Person A, the doc, is found dead."

Depending on the answer to this, I may has a plan. :3

[Mizzy]

I prefer pie over cake...

You can have my pie if I can have your cake!

B)I don't thing there is really any way for us to protect the doc that I can see off. With the claiming of targets, I really don't know what to say. We probably shouldn't have done it in the first place, but as to whether to continue or not, I am undecided.

That was kind of why I put it out there as a discussion topic with a "you don't need to do this if you don't wanna" clause...and people just kinda did it.

So, should I put my plan forth for discussion?

[Mizzy]

In that situation mizzy, there would most likely be two deaths. The night kill, and the death of the weak doc. I don't think it is really going to matter how the mod says it

Not so! What if the mafia choose NOT to kill? If we only see one death post and don't know what it's from...eesh.

[Mizzy]

Porochaz's not wrong about the first part, you know. I don't think he's THAT scummy, just not on his game.

As for defending me, is that wrong?

It's a valid point.

Considering the amount of shit he gave ME for protecting someone else, it's a blatant case of the pot calling the kettle black. So yes, it's "that wrong."

[Mizzy]

All night deaths in this game look the same. So no, in the scenario you've given there, you wouldn't be able to distinguish between a nightkill and a weak doc dying because they protected scum.

Shit. Problem, then.

[Mizzy]

If the weakdoc's target has already been claimed, more people claiming that helps hide the weak doc.

Think about it - if half the people claim, say, Bookie, and the scum

did

try to kill Bookie last night, who do you think the scum are going to go for first? What if the weak doc has already claimed? Don't you think it's safer to continue along instead of protecting someone who may or may not have claimed already?

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?

I guess my question is: how do we weed out the fake claims for the real one until the doc dies? How can we guarantee that the doc's protected person gets called out by MORE than just them? If the doc, say, protected me, and no one else claims me, then we're fucked because the scum know who they targeted.

[Mizzy]

We don't try to weed out the fake claims. That is bad.

That is worst-case scenario, Mizzy.

But we haven't had the best of luck so far, and shouldn't we PLAN on the worst-case-scenario in case it happens? I'm a kind of cautious player...bear with me.

[Mizzy]

Why am I getting drug into things?

[Mizzy]

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.

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

not

claiming puts a possible already-claimed doc at risk.

You are BOTH right. Because we have stopped in the middle, we have essentially fucked the whole concept behind the "let's pretend to be the doc" scenario. Because we started it at all without the consent of the majority, we've probably caused the doc to have a heart attack or to be bald from pulling their hair out in frustration.

JDodge could be trying to discover who the doctor is...maybe he wants more to claim because the person targeted hasn't been mentioned already. Maybe he's town, trying to get as much info from the doc as possible without outting who the doc is.

Either way, I don't think JDodge is right in telling everyone to claim, NOW, just because he wants us to. He's a headstrong player...he can be as aggressive as you are, Ether. That doesn't make him scum OR town.

I do believe (unless you changed your mind) that we have found scum in Poro. Do most of you still agree?

What do the rest of you say we do? Continue claiming or stop?

[Mizzy]

I'm going to trust JDodge on this. He's seemed very protown so far and I don't expect he's trying to out the doc. As for Poro, I see his scumminess, but Yvonne still seems to be the better lynch in my eyes. Poro could well be tommorow's lynch.

I am not even going to go into how scummy that sounds. I need to go wash the scum off my eyes, now.

[Mizzy]

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.

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

Ah well, night shall come eventually and you can kick my ass a good one, then. ><;;;

My eyes still sting from the scum-removal process.

[Mizzy]

What about Setael? Can we lynch her?

Um, I guess so? What about Poro? Can we kill them both?

[Mizzy]

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

Damn. Okay, well, next game, then, yes?

Unvote. Vote: Setael

Setael is scummy as hell, yes, but I swear, if she comes up town, there's gonna be Ether stew tomorrow. On the house

[Mizzy]

@Setael:

I'm following Ether because:

A) Because she's the only person here who I know is town (who is alive.)
B) Because I respect her intelligence.
C) There are aspects and posts of yours that I do find scummy.
D) You're nowhere near a lynch and I want to see how you react to this.
E) I want to see how others react to this.
F) It was fun.

[Mizzy]

@Setael:

I'm following Ether because:

A) Because she's the only person here who I know is town (who is alive.)

B) Because I respect her intelligence.
C) There are aspects and posts of yours that I do find scummy.
D) You're nowhere near a lynch and I want to see how you react to this.
E) I want to see how others react to this.
F) It was fun.

Setael is scummy as hell, yes

Which is it?

All of the above.

[Mizzy]

Ok, then I refer you back four posts. Why is she scummy?

I'll do a nice post about it sometime today during work...probably at lunch.

[Mizzy]

@JDodge:

As I mentioned before, I am going to go back and make of post of the scummy things Setael has done/said. I also mentioned in an earlier post that I am on the fence when it comes to Setael's alignment, and as I said in my reasons post, I want to see and gauge reactions to the vote. My one vote isn't going to cause a lynch, but it may give us some information and help me fall off the fence one way or the other.

Setael isn't on the top of my to-lynch list, but a good hard prod in the chest can't hurt. It's a personal experiment vote, mostly.

I would much rather see a Gorrad or a Poro lynch, if anyone cares to know.

[Mizzy]

Considering your own reaction to Ether's aggressive behaviour when it was turned in your direction, Mizzy, and how scummy you came off in responding to it in a LOT of people's eyes, are you sure this is a tactic you want to adopt for yourself?

What, so everyone's allowed to be hypocritical bastards but me?

Ether bothered me because of HOW she attacked me. As soon as we started talking in a civil fashion, I toned down and so did she, and things were no longer as scummy.

[Mizzy]

Setael and Kitty come off to me as town.

Be sure to include how you said this 2 days ago and see if you can find a reason why you changed your mind other than "Ether told me to."

Actually, part of your post #567 is what sat me on the fence between thinking you town and thinking you scum. It's the part about Yvonne:

I think Yvonne intentionally tried to keep the rest of the players from saying who they would've protected last night in order to stop the doc from saying it in thread and therefore keep us from having another confirmed townie if the doc gets NKd.

vote: Yvonne

That statement doesn't take into account the possibility that the doc already HAD spoken...it's written rather confidently, in fact, giving the opposite impression - that the doc hadn't posted yet.

It made me wonder if the reason you're mad at Yvonne is because none of the protect-claims that had been given out before she spoke were the one the scum targeted, and you want the claims to continue to see if you can get a match and therefor out the doc.

At this point, I am of the opinion that continued claims will only hurt the doc and therefor the town because we cannot guarantee that the doc's protect target is one that anyone else would have chosen. As JDodge put it, that's the worst-case-scenario, but so was mislynching the doc the first day and guess what happened? I'd rather play it safe when it comes to the doc for the time being.

[Mizzy]

How am I being a hypocritical bastard, exactly?

Not YOU >< Cripes.

[Mizzy]

This also makes me raise my eyebrows:

Votecount

Gorrad (2) -- YvonneSeer, Bookitty
YvonneSeer (4) -- JDodge, Gorrad, Porochaz, Setael
Porochaz (1) -- scotmany12
Setael (2) -- Ether, Mizzy

Not voting: JordanA24, Lulubelle
11 alive, 6 to lynch.

Please note that while Yvonne hasn't done anything particularly scummy (post me some examples from D2 if you disagree) she now has 4 votes on her...mostly from disagreeing with the protect-claiming conversation. Out of the people voting for her, I'm highly distrustful of both Gorrad and Porochaz. Setael and JDodge's take on the protect-claim thing bother me, and Gorrad's blind JDodge faith bothers me, too.

The general consensus is that Kitty and Scot are likely town, yes? If so, notice the

weird circular vote action

going on here.

I also want to mention that there were two wagons (skizter and YS) D1 that were both driven by roughly the same people; I checked the vote counts. Correct me if I am wrong, but while there is a little variation, it all sounds like singing the same tune. It looks like, looking at voting trends, that JDodge has a brown-noser named Gorrad, and Porochaz has almost always been hot on their heels.

[Mizzy]

We should continue with the claims. Stopping half way through was a bad idea. Say the doc has claimed already. More claims help hide the doc's. Yes mafia know who they targeted, but we already have people repeating targets. More of this and we force the scum to weed trough every claim that is the same. If the doc is one of the ones that did not claim yet, and their target has not yet be mentioned, we risk losing the doc without knowing the results.

So, we lynching chaz right guys?

But what if the doc is one of the last to claim and no one else has said the name that they protected? Most of you are already lumped onto the same person...Bookitty. There's 11 of us.

[Mizzy]

I already said that. We risk losing the doc without knowing the results. The scum have a 1 in 3 chance of getting the doc then, assuming that the three to have not claim are all town. If one, or even two are scum, the chances increase from a one in two chance to a guarantee basically. Its not like the scum are just going to guess either, they are going to research the three. They would already have a high chance of getting the doc, and we will never know the results.

Mmm, I see what you're saying.

Well, we have 3 avenues to choose from then.

1) Stop claiming and pray the doc is safe.
2) Keep claiming and watch and see who our innocents (doc and saved) are.
3) The doc claims outright and gives us a total of 4 or 5 out of 12 innocents, 3 or 4 out of 11 alive.

Keep in mind that if the doc protected me or Ether, then we double-confirm one target.

Like I said before, I really feel that because we have stopped halfway, we have fucked the whole thing sideways, putting the doc in maximum danger.

I really dislike that JDodge didn't allow for discussion on my suggestion and just had everyone start claiming protection-targets. Something like that shouldn't be done on the say-so of one person.

[Mizzy]

What ever happened to this idea? It seemed like a good plan to me, and I'd be more than happy to volunteer to be the protected person, seein' as how it looks like I'm one of the scummier people to y'all and this way I'll be cleared for tommorow.

How noble of you.

As Lulu said, it wouldn't work in a worst-case-scenario. Best to stick to safer mechanisms, for now.

Until I heart from Set, I'm going to leave the argument against her alone and go for the scummiest target.

Unvote. Vote: Porochaz

[Mizzy]

You can say so now, or we can lynch you today. How's that sound?

Lynch me today and you'll never find out, I suppose.

If you insist...

Unvote, vote: Lulubelle

Wait, wait...

we

can lynch Lulu today? Who died and made you Godfather, JDodge?

[Mizzy]

NOTE TO EVERYONE

: I just headed off that fakeclaim before it happened. Please note that Lulu knows more than she should, but has admitted to not being a weak doc. That implies knowledge she could not have unless she already knows who the weak doc's target is.

4 people in total have hinted at being the doc/weak doc. This is not new information.

[Mizzy]

Which is why hinting at not being the weak doc is such a strong tell. Please read my statement before commenting on it next time. Thanks.

I did, and you're missing something huge. Or hoping that everyone else does. I suggest you rethink things before posting.

[Mizzy]

I'm missing nothing. You cannot see what I see for reasons you cannot know.

The only way you could "know" something I do not is if you are scum.

[Mizzy]

I'm missing nothing. You cannot see what I see for reasons you cannot know.

The only way you could "know" something I do not is if you are scum.

There's another possibility you're missing.

And so why does Lulu have to out her reasoning but you don't need to give yours?

[Mizzy]

And regarding my reasoning, I cannot say what it is because I want to be able to use it later should the same tell come up. Don't arm the scum with more knowledge than is necessary.

I hope you see how laden with hypocrisy that post of yours is.

[Mizzy]

Paying attention or no, you told someone to do something, which they refused to do, and you gave them shit over it. Then, when asked to do the same thing, yourself, you refuse...

[Mizzy]

Paying attention or no, you told someone to do something, which they refused to do, and you gave them shit over it. Then, when asked to do the same thing, yourself, you refuse...

Differences:

A) I gave a reason why I choose not to disclose what I found.
B) I am choosing not to disclose a tell I found; Lulu is refusing to disclose something she knows that is independent of role (unless she's scum).

There are two distinct differences there. See, that wasn't so hard!

Those two things do not make it any less hypocritical.

Hypocrite

(noun)

- A person who professes beliefs and opinions that he or she does not hold in order to conceal his or her real feelings or motives.

Has nothing to do with whether your intentions or not are beneficial...just that they are concealing.

[Mizzy]

Having different circumstances doesn't magically alter the meaning of the word "hypocrite." You'd have to call the myriad dictionary companies to do that.

[Mizzy]

Hey mizzy, why don't you not talk for a little bit and see where this leads to between jd and lulu. You don't need to insert yourself into every single conversation; its not helpful.

At least I got some more information and talk out of him...it's better than lurking, or just caving to JD's ideas and rude banter.

[Mizzy]

No, there would have been a time for you to voice your opinion on the matter mizzy. That was not the time.

Voice my opinion on the complete load of hypocritical bullshit? I think I'm allowed to point out scummy things I see happening.

Making an alliance with town is so stupid its unbelievable... something you admitted to earlier on, would of made sense with Ether sure but with Lulu and Yvonne? How the hell are you meant to know there town? Let them speak for once, how the hell do you think we/anyone are going to scumhunt if you dont shut up for once, we already have opinions on you, let us focus on someone else...

Wait, WHAT alliance? The only real alliance I have is with Ether. I wasn't ragging on JD for arguing with Lulu, I was ragging on him

for being hypocritical.

I don't care who he attacks, but if he does attack, I'd rather see him do so in a non-hypocritical fashion.

What you see as "defending" Lulu is, I think, you reading far too much into the argument. When did I ever say anything in defense of Lulu? I didn't. I only brought up how hypocritical JD's play is right now, and how much it stinks of scum. I'd have done that no matter WHO he was talking to, and since he addressed everyone in the post I originally responded to, I feel I was more than in my right to question it.

My posting is in no way, shape or form hindering anyone else's posting capabilities. So get over it.

[Mizzy]

and no I dont expect a claim, I was just wondering how a town alliance actually helps the town... I mean how do you know Lulubelle and Yvonne are town?

You already know how a town alliance could help...you already said it, yourself. Secondly, I DON'T know they are town...it's just a guess based on information.

Could only find the tail end of it... I am still struggling...

Struggling with what?

[Mizzy]

@Setael:

You still haven't responded to the post of mine below; could you, please?

Setael and Kitty come off to me as town.

Be sure to include how you said this 2 days ago and see if you can find a reason why you changed your mind other than "Ether told me to."

Actually, part of your post #567 is what sat me on the fence between thinking you town and thinking you scum. It's the part about Yvonne:

I think Yvonne intentionally tried to keep the rest of the players from saying who they would've protected last night in order to stop the doc from saying it in thread and therefore keep us from having another confirmed townie if the doc gets NKd.

vote: Yvonne

That statement doesn't take into account the possibility that the doc already HAD spoken...it's written rather confidently, in fact, giving the opposite impression - that the doc hadn't posted yet.

It made me wonder if the reason you're mad at Yvonne is because none of the protect-claims that had been given out before she spoke were the one the scum targeted, and you want the claims to continue to see if you can get a match and therefor out the doc.

And no one has responded at all to my post 627. Any thoughts on it?

[Mizzy]

Oh, and no, I am not trying to revive doc talk, I more just wanted a response from Setael because she wanted to know what changed my mind about her being probably-town.

[Mizzy]

Mizzy, I was just taking a look back and I forgot to ask you. What did you mean with this sentence of yours that I bolded?

Well, I took a look at that specific vote count, keeping in mind known and commonly-agreed-upon alignments, and saw an interesting trend that seems echoed in most of the vote counts:

Votecount

Gorrad (2) -- YvonneSeer, Bookitty
YvonneSeer (4) -- JDodge, Gorrad, Porochaz, Setael
Porochaz (1) -- scotmany12
Setael (2) -- Ether, Mizzy

Not voting: JordanA24, Lulubelle

Looking at some of the voting trends through the game (which is really easy thanks to the mod's spectacular attention to detail) you can really see some links between these groupings (aka they voted similarly and for the same people around the same time):

JDodge, Gorrad, Porochaz
YvonneSeer, Bookitty, Ether, Mizzy

scotmany12, JordanA24, and Lulubelle have voted less than the rest.

Interestingly, skitzer seemed to jump between those two heavy-voting groups. I think this is part of why he seemed scummier.

Of course there are breaks in the trends, and the trends themselves are fluid, but over-all, those are the impressions I got. It really feels like there's been some tag-teaming and circular voting (A votes B, B votes A) for better or worse. That's what I meant.

[Mizzy]

mizzy, i wanted to know if there was anything else I could respond to (that didn't have to do with the doc discussion). What you mentioned I can't explain now (other than to say you're wrong). My posts will make sense to you once I can explain them, but for now it's not in the town's best interest.

Nope, I just wanted to make sure you saw it. I didn't want you to think I was ignoring your question.

[Mizzy]

@Mizzy: Okay, I guess I can see similar voting pattern within the group of JDodge, Gorrad, Porochaz (and Setael I might add). I already think Gorrad and Porochaz are likely scum, so it's not a surprise to me that they're doing the same things. JDodge and Setael, I'm not too sure about them and why they have similar voting to the two most scummy players, maybe one of them is scum as well, though I would think scum would be more subtle with their voting. I'm just mostly frustrated that they think I'm scummier than either Gorrad or Porochaz.

Regarding the other group, two are confirmed town, one is pro-town to most of the other players, and then there's me, the potential lynch. Pick the odd one out. But honestly though, I don't actually think I've voted similarly with you girls except for D2 where our thoughts on likely scum are similar.

Well, I had to stick you somewhere, and you didn't hop around as much as Skitzer did, and your D2 voting/suspect list did match up better with us than with the other group.

I just thought it was kind of interesting overall.

[Mizzy]

To find a good reason for your alliance with Lulu and Yvonne...

Firstly, I never said I was in an alliance with anyone but Ether and it amuses me that you won't drop this.

I think its scummy that you keep defending those 2 when you dont actually no their alignment, but apparently your the mason so you can't be scum...

I haven't defended either of them in a while...again, I'm not sure why you're bothering on this strain of thought?

Just play along with me here for a sec... stop looking at me just for a minute and ask yourself, for the majority of the time, when someone puts pressure on Yvonne or Lulu why is it you that has to defend them? Is it because you get in there so fast they dont get a chance? or do they clam up because they know your coming to the rescue?

In the past, I defended them because of reasons I've already given. Lately, though, I haven't been on the defensive for anyone because a) they don't need me to be and b) I've been on the offensive.

I really think you're reading me being in defense of Lulu and Yvonne where it isn't actually there. As I said before, as of late, I'd have responded the same way to JDodge no matter WHO he was attacking because hypocritical play is not something that I tolerate. I also never said anything like, "Leave Lulu alone!" and in fact, I let them argue between each other a good deal and only chimed in when I got sick of seeing JD being hypocritical. I wanted him to do himself what he was wanting someone else to do. One shouldn't play a double-standard.

The way I see it the thing with me, Gorrad and JDodge is because were voting similarly... I dont see this as scummy... Yvonne did something scummy so we voted, person B stood up for her so we FoS'ed that person, person C then posted something blatantly out of context etc. etc. Its the way the game roll's... Im not really sure you can use it as a scumtell...

It's not the only reason I suspect you....far from it, in fact. You've been on my scum list for a long time, and you'll remain there until I have some damned good proof showing otherwise.

In short, I think you're way over-analyzing my words and seeing only what you want to see.

[Mizzy]

I don't believe this to be the case, but if it is, that powerrole (NOT the doc) should claim now.

We were only given 3 pro-town power roles. I double-checked the mod's rules.

[Mizzy]

Mizzy, the only way that this would apply is if Porochaz was right to question you, because you and Ether are scum together. In that case there would be a third pro-town powerrole unaccounted for.

Otherwise he's wasting our time questioning you about your actions, when you're confirmed town and he's debating about your playstyle.

Hope that is clearer.

Oh. Well, you seemed like you wanted to know if there were 4 power roles for town. My bad. It's not been a good day.

[Mizzy]

I have felt for most of this game it has been pointless going for Yvonne or Lulu because Mizzy gets in the way constantly... I mean you look through the thread and the times I have questioned Yvonne (and less so Lulubelle) I personally feel I get answered by Mizzy. So, rightly or wrongly, I have shifted my focus onto Mizzy due to the fact that I feel she is blocking my oppurtunity to scumhunt beyond her own suspicions.

My posting does not hinder anyone else's posting, nor does my defenses give you or anyone else an "out" for scumhunting. If you honestly think someone is scum, ask them questions, and hold them to it. Don't let them use anyone else's answers, and don't be derailed.

By the way, the only arguments that you and I have had are 1) back on page 12 around post 289 which ended 2 pages later 2) page 19 around post 453 which ended 1 page later. Those were nearly 10 pages ago, and I haven't defended YS or Lulu since my earlier times. I even addressed that to you and got no response (my post 693.) And by arguments, I mean more than 3 posts back and forth.

Argument 1 was about me and Ether though it began amid Lulu defense posts, and argument 2 was about my lack of unvoting for the skitzer lynch. NEITHER are directly about Lulu or Yvonne.

I fail to see how two short arguments that happened almost 10 pages ago keep you from scumhunting NOW.

[Mizzy]

I don't like Porochaz basically telling mizzy not to talk anymore. Her insight is very helpful - there's a difference between asking someone to let others answer for themselves and what he did.

I'm not bothered that I was told to STFU...I know that I'm a very prolific poster and not everyone appreciates that. (I'm trying to post less but post more meaningfully when I do post. I'm still learning, here...most of my experience has been RL mafia/werewolf games and these differ greatly.)

What does bother me is that Poro won't let go of the fact that I defended folks in the past and says that because of it, he can't scum hunt. What bothers me about that is that the times I did defend Lulu and YS were not ones where he had much say or interaction, and they happened over 10 pages ago. I can't imagine that actions that took place so long ago could or would have such an impact on his scum hunting abilities NOW. It's almost like he's using me as an excuse to keep from scum hunting.

I addressed that, and pointed it out to him, and have yet to hear back from him about it. Does anyone else have any comments related to it? Did I miss something somewhere?

[Mizzy]

Brief reply, cause I need to get ready for my birthday party tonight and I

really

need the toilet. I did not ever tell you to STFU, stop overreacting.

When you're done with what I suppose are more important things, please do respond to my posts before? And I'm not over-reacting...I just felt that "STFU" was faster to type than "be quiet and stop playing the game like a good lil townie."

[Mizzy]

I said you were blocking my attempts to scum hunt, not "be quiet and stop playing the game like a good lil townie" because lets face it, you blocking my scum hunting isn't being a good little townie now, is it?

My point has been,

if you had bothered reading it

, was that I haven't defended anyone for over 10 pages. What's stopping you from scumhunting NOW?

You have my permission; scumhunt away and I will be sure to stand back. You can stop using me as an excuse, now.

[Mizzy]

Jordan, I wasn't saying that she shouldn't comment. I would have rather waited to see where jd and lulu went with the whole thing, but we will never know now. Her injecting her opinion at that point ending the whole conversation(if you can call it that) between jd and lulu. I felt like it would be more helpful if she held off commenting until a later point.

Lulu, though, said that she didn't feel there was much else to say and they were just going 'round and 'round in circles. Again, I feel like people are using me as an excuse.

[Mizzy]

Lulu said that after you chimed in. I was interested into how lulu was going to respond to this jd's latest post before you started to question him mizzy. Also, I'm not using you as an excuse, chaz is.

Yes, I know she did; never said otherwise. And actually, the post that I interjected was to get more information out him, not questioning him. I just pointed out that what he was saying was something we already knew in an attempt to get him to open his mouth a little more. Lulu and JD could very well have kept talking in the meantime. My posting, again, doesn't hinder anyone else's and a thread is capable of supporting multiple strains of discussion.

[Mizzy]

no please drop it

So, when you going to start scumhunting now that I'm not "blocking your opportunity to scumhunt beyond my own suspicions?"

[Mizzy]

Ok, you(Mizzy) still defend Lulubelle after page 23, when JDodge/Lulu and the fake claim (which interested me a quite a bit), I wasn't involved in that part so I can't say you blocked me from scumhunting however you have been defending them throughout the game. As for the Lulubelle and JDodge thing, I thought it made Lulu look very scummy until JDodge refused to carry on...

I didn't defend Lulu, not one bit. I would have questioned JD's hypocritical play in exactly the same way if he had been targeting ANYONE with it, even YOU, and not just because it was Lulu. I didn't tell him to leave her alone, but what I did do was see if he would do what he was trying to goad her into doing. That's not defending, that's scumhunting.

I feel at L-1, Im going to be lynched at some point (presumably by Lulu). You are going to throw my theory away as idiotic... however Im going to state it anyway... my current thoughts are that mafia didn't choose the 1 shot mason. That directly contradicts Mizzy/Ether's claim, which would make them incredibly stupid (unlikely) or that their scum. I thought about it a while and I can see it happening, the other 2 power roles do not want to claim currently (and rightly so...) therefore Ether/Mizzy have a free reign with this strategy making them safe. There is nothing in any posts past the claim that makes me think that goes against this.

Wow, talk about a last-ditch effort. I can see why you might think that, and I'd question the town's sanity of every one of them didn't wonder at least once...but I also think you're reaching.

Okay, say you're right and we don't have a mason. That leaves us with having a vig, a weak doc, or a strong doc. We got no vig kill last night...granted, a vig wouldn't have to kill, but I doubt they'd hold off. Plus, a vig could claim safely, because the doc would/could protect them. So I can't see why they wouldn't claim. The ONLY power role, in fact, that wouldn't claim due to safety reasons

is the doc

.

[Mizzy]

Oh, and

unvote

because I want some responses here.

[Mizzy]

I disagree I can see the weak doc not claiming as well... This was one of my theories that I feel is the most likely out of them. My vote is on YvonneSeer, due to the fact that in my scum combinations she could be placed in a lot of them... where you could only be placed with Ether and vice versa... anyway tea time... after tea Bookie's post and more on my theories, as I see Bookie's asked about that

I meant EITHER doc, A doc, ANY doc, weak or not. If we have another power role that is NOT A DOC OF ANY TYPE, then it is safe for them to claim.

[Mizzy]

Setael, if there are two docs, they have no way to know that there are two docs.

Exactly, which is why any type of doc is the ONLY type of power role that should not claim now.

Godfather, where aaaaaare you? <_<

[Mizzy]

Okay, I'm not clear. Are we all going to come to a consensus on whom the weak doc (and ONLY a weak doc) should protect tonight? So that when night falls, we have an investigation on someone?

I still think that's a decent plan. Decide who we'll lynch, and who'll be protected, and then we get an investigation out of the deal. If the weak doc doesn't die, we can be pretty sure that the person investigated was innocent (I think. If there's a flaw in this, please point it out now.) and if they do, we know who they had a guilty on.

Nothing in my question should be in any way construed as a request for a claim.

What do you think?

We talked about that not working out well because the death note for a mafia kill and for a weak-doc-found-scum kill are the same and you can't tell the difference. It might cause confusion.

Plus, if we tell the doc who to protect, if that person IS mafia, then the mafia can just not nightkill and let the doc self-destruct. We would never know if the weak doc had been legitimately targeted or not.

[Mizzy]

Hmmm, okay, this third-order thought thing is making my head hurt. But I'm going to try it.

• Weak doc targets scum. Scum kills weak doc. One death, scum identified.
  
  Weak doc targets town. Scum kills weak doc. One death, town mislynched.
  
  Weak doc targets scum. Scum doesn't nightkill. One death, scum identified.
  
  Weak doc targets town. Scum doesn't nightkill. No deaths, town identified.
  
  Weak doc targets scum. Scum kills non-doc town. Two deaths, scum identified.
  
  Weak doc targets town. Scum kills non-doc town. One death, town identified.

This assumes that the town agrees on who will be investigated, and that the scum don't know for certain who the weak doc is.

Those are the only possible results I can think of. I still think it's advantageous to town, because the possibility of the weak doc being killed is the same regardless of whether we use this night or not. But I could be wrong.

As I said before, too, if we choose a target that IS a mafia, then the mafia will know, and just not perform a nightkill because then we have a dead doc and no proof that it was a death due to the protect-investigation.

DEFINITELY not a good idea.

[Mizzy]

That's how I'm seeing it. How am I wrong?

You are missing the fact that the mafia know who mafia are and they will know the moment we choose a target for the doc that isn't a townie. They can just LET THE DOC DIE and

we'd never know

.

[Mizzy]

In that specific case, yes, assuming that the Mafia know who our weak doc is, then we mislynch. But they give up their nightkill to do it.

But if the Mafia know who our weak doc is, then he's dead anyway, right?

The mafia don't need to know who our weak doc is for the plan to fail. In fact, the mafia could help steer our target TO mafia players so the weak doc dies. Then there are no more power roles, and yes, they give up a NK, but one less NK to ensure a dead townie PR with no links and a possible mislynch the next day is a pretty sweet deal to them, I bet.

[Mizzy]

And if the weak doc protects someone randomly, they may end up dead anyway because they protected the wrong person, and we lose them without ANY advantage to town.

Okay, now that I agree with. That makes me rethink things. Ugh. I wish we had a way to let the weak doc decide.

The flaw comes up if the weak doc is asked to protect himself/herself. I don't know what happens then.

Then we'd know they were innocent...they might as well not protect anyone and just let us see them alive the next day.

[Mizzy]

Well, if everyone states someone who they would protect tonight if they were the weak doc, then if tommorow if we find him/her dead, we'll know who they targetted and the scum won't beforehand. This greatly decreases the odds of scum not NKing and prevents the weak doc from having to protect his/herself. Thoughts?

We talked about that already and I think if we try and start THAT conversation again, a certain player with an alien "dog" avatar will kill us.

[Mizzy]

I should add: Or, at least, someone will.

[Mizzy]

My thoughts the weak doc, if there is a weak doc, should randomly select one of the masons. That way theres a greater chance both of them survive, if the weak doc survives it blows my theory out of the water and you have 2 confirmed townies. If the weak doc dies you have 2 confirmed scum.

And if the scum figure out who the weak doc is and NK that person, then you have one or two mislynches and a dead doc.

[Mizzy]

I disagree; weak doc is better as a pseudo-cop than as a protector. Instead of directing a weak doc, I want everyone to claim who they would protect tonight if they were a weak doc.

I'd protect Setael.

We did not decide to do this. You can't just tell us all to do something without discussion or agreement and expect us to do it.

[Mizzy]

Please note the CONTINUED TREND in the previous vote-count:

Votecount

YvonneSeer (4) -- Gorrad, Porochaz, Setael, JDodge
Porochaz (5) -- scotmany12, Mizzy, Bookitty, YvonneSeer, JordanA24
Setael (1) -- Ether

Not voting: Lulubelle

I am GOING to put Porochaz back at -1L as soon as we ALL decide what to do about the doc/weak doc.

I vote that we give a target to the doc who we feel is scum, but not someone we are going to lynch today. This way, either the target dies, or the doc dies, and we get someone confirmed one way or the other.

[Mizzy]

Ok let's take a vote.

Yes: JDodge, Gorrad
No:

Not voting: Everyone else

Wait, watch this. I bet it will look sickeningly like the current votecount.

Vote: NO to protect-claiming.

[Mizzy]

Oh, and one more thing before I go and enjoy my dinner and movie...if Porochaz was town, he'd have been hammered already. The fact that he was allowed to live shows that scum is in no hurry to kill him.

[Mizzy]

Don't these options basically amount to the same thing? Or am I missing something?

Is one way significantly safer for the doc?

I think they end up being the same thing. Don't they? Town knows who the doc protected, if they die, and if scum kills the doc, we're still not worse off than we would be if they just killed the doc anyway, right?

JDodge's plan and my plan both seem to amount to the same thing. The opposing plan is Porochaz's, to protect the masons (despite his suspicions, it's still a good plan). So there are two plans under consideration. If I'm wrong, please say so, but I don't see any difference (better or worse) between JDodge's plan and my plan, in its general effect. So I don't care which one is chosen between those two.

Mizzy: Or the scum are already all on his wagon (or afraid to hammer?). This can't be ruled out.

A downside to JD's plan is that is gives the scum clues as to WHO the weak doc is. They know who they will target...if that target doesn't die, then we've narrowed down for them who the weak doc is. If we state a name to protect, then it doesn't narrow the field for scum.

[Mizzy]

Luckily I don't need your info. Quit being so damn difficult and listen to reason for once, k?

I will stop being difficult when you stop being a tyrant. So, probably never, in either case.

[Mizzy]

If by "tyrant" you mean "correct", then no, I will not cease to be a "tyrant".

No, by tyrant, I mean it's proper definition.

[Mizzy]

Like I said, not likely to stop in either case.

As to the pros and cons of the mass-protect-claim, they've already been covered at length. Just go re-read the conversations we had previously...all sides and options were already covered.

The horse is fucking dead now; you can all stop beating it.

[Mizzy]

We did not decide to do this. You can't just tell us all to do something without discussion or agreement and expect us to do it.

I said CAN...as an option. Not as an order.

@Bookitty:

If you are going by that logic, then having the doc claim

now

would get us the same information without the possibility of the scum killing the doc before we get to hear it. If the scum might already know who the weak doc is, then going to night without them telling us who they protected LAST night is just as shitty for the town.

What I'm saying is that they have an innocent NOW. If you're worried about risking the innocent they might get tonight, why aren't you worried about the innocent they got yesterday?

So the question is, do we want the information we have now or do we want to fish for more? IF we fish for more, do we want to do so giving the scum more info or less info?

[Mizzy]

If there are other plans, I'll include those as well. But we need to be clear on the advantages/disadvantages/ramifications of ALL the plans before we choose any of them, in my view.

That's why I unvoted Poro, for more discussion, and that's why I don't like what JD did (again). We ALL need to help decide.

So before we decide something, why don't we wait for everyone to tell us what plans or ideas we have and put them in posts with conceivable pros and cons? We can discuss those easier without all the lil posts getting in the way.

[Mizzy]

@Kitty: Yes, like that! Perfect! Okay, I'm going to shut up now for a while and just read as conversation comes in.

[Mizzy]

There are three scum left in a pool of eleven people. That means that approximately 27 percent of the people voting for any candidate are scum.

There are 3 scum left in a pool of 9 people, if you believe Ether and I are confirmed town.

I also don't like the doc-on-their-own plan, but I don't think that an opinion on a plan here makes someone scum or not...for example, I don't think JD is scum because of his plan idea and opinions, I think he might be scum for other reasons.

I also don't feel like "contributions" are enough to make someone who looks like scum less scum.

If Lulu were scum, I can't imagine that she wouldn't have hammered...it would have been a guilt-free hammer because she announced that she was going to (or thinking about it) before hand. Losing one scum to get two more townies dead seems like it would be a really good trade for scummers, especially right now.

@Poro:

I unvoted you after you had been at -1L for a long while, already. ANYone had a few days to hammer.

@JD:

I feel you might be right, if only because I have a feeling the doc is as good as dead now, anyway. I would MUCH rather have even one night of info than none. If we announce targets for both nights, the doc has a damned good chance of dying. But we do get the information.

There's also the added bonus of having the doc being a confirmed townie, dead or alive. If they find/found an innocent we don't know about, that leads us to 5 confirmed townies. We will also know, looking back at the previous days, MUCH more information than we do now, and the scums might stand out like sore thumbs.

I really don't like sentencing someone unknown to their death, and I wish we had a way to ask them if it's okay with them or not...but we don't have that option currently.

Any other thoughts?

[Mizzy]

I can see it possibly leading to a mislynch tomorrow, but this is the closest we can get to turning our weak doc into an investigation role.

We will just need to take everything with a grain of salt tomorrow, no matter what happens.

[Mizzy]

SOMEONE HAMMER MY PLAN WILL YOU

Oh FINE I vote JD's plan too. (My first hammer ever!)

[Mizzy]

I'm here, just waiting for everyone else to do their thang.

[Mizzy]

DOes that about sum the debate up?

Yes, though we've already voted the majority to claim both protection targets (those of us who's claims matter, anyway.) I think the consensus was that we want as much information as we can safely get...which means a combination of tactics. JD put such a plan forth. This way, even if the doc gets NKed, we still know who they protected last night and the possibility of another target protected/"investigated" tonight.

[Mizzy]

Unvote

I'm going to vote Chaz as soon as Yos posts his did/will protect post. The Yvonne wagon's going nowhere and Chaz is my second choice. I don't care if this is L-1 or hammer vote, the only thing holding up the day is Yos.

Holy shit, is one hammer on your hands not good enough for a single game?

[Mizzy]

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

I know, it stings, doesn't it? ><

[Mizzy]

What in the nine rings is in it for me if I'm scum?

The weak doc DIES on you, if you're scum. I think that's a reasonable goal a scum would have; killing off the last power role.

[Mizzy]

Skitzer got lynched over a contradiction made with 10 pages in between each statement (I still feel like ass about that.) Now Gorrad makes a contradiction where the statements are in the

same paragraph

. Gorrad's lucky, though...he can't very well hammer himself!

[Mizzy]

@Gorrad:

The simple fact is that, while it may be annoying as hell, longer days are just about always better for town. I also feel that it's a widely held and accepted belief that longer days are pro-town, and that the concept is common sense.

I can understand a desire to switch to night, and therefor the next day, but I cannot understand why anyone would want to end the day when there could be more to discuss. I agree with Kitty here that a protect-claim from Yos would not be the end of things, necessarily, and in both days so far, you have expressed (and, in day 1, acted on) a desire to end the day, with implications that you were/are worried about actions/discussion that might occur should the day continue.

I also don't like that you tried to direct suspicion off of yourself by using

my

logic. Just because I'm confirmed town doesn't make it less scummy for you to point to my words and say, "Yeah, that! I did it because of those reasons!"

If you are pro-town, I suggest you start defending yourself a little more solidly.

[Mizzy]

... I did it because it was a timesaver. You'll see me do this in other games too- if someone has summed up an argument well, I'll often quote them rather than taking the time to make a post near-identical to theirs. ...

Laziness is close to scumminess.

The problem with laziness here is this: When you simply use someone else's words to reflect your own views, no one else can be sure that they actually are your views (you could just be saying that they are) and we lose valuable information from the posting you would have done.

[Mizzy]

Unvote

I'm going to vote Chaz as soon as Yos posts his did/will protect post. The Yvonne wagon's going nowhere and Chaz is my second choice. I don't care if this is L-1 or hammer vote, the only thing holding up the day is Yos.

So here's a question...Yos has posted his protect targets. So why didn't you hammer like you said you would? I'm not saying I'm upset that you didn't (in fact I'm glad you flaked,) I'm just interested in why you didn't do what you said you would do. He posted his protect claim an hour after you posted the above.

Please no one hammer.

Cripes, I hate people at -1L when there's answers to be given, yet.

[Mizzy]

Becuase I had voted him two posts before...

I looked O.o Didn't see one. Then again, I'm at work at my brain is kind of fried. I'll check again.

[Mizzy]

I could go for either a chaz lynch or gorrad lynch. Pretty sure they are both scum. I still think chaz is more likely, but Gorrad is looking worse and worse. Saetel's last post also scared me, not really sure why though. Just a feeling I guess.

I think Ether's logic just sank in...I think a Gorrad/Poro/Setael combo meal might be on the menu.

[Mizzy]

Ok, so, um why chaz then?

I could go for either a chaz lynch or gorrad lynch. Pretty sure they are both scum. I still think chaz is more likely, but Gorrad is looking worse and worse. Saetel's last post also scared me, not really sure why though. Just a feeling I guess.

You don't know, but now you suddenly

do

know?

Unvote, vote: scot

What me get my ass handed to me for this, but I think he was asking Gorrad why he was voting for Chaz. He was responding to Gorrad's post #901 with the question not realizing he'd already answered, I think. I could be wrong.

[Mizzy]

Mizzy, you are partially right.I was simply not satisfied with Gorrad's answer. Gorrad still hasn't given a sufficient answer for why he is voting chaz. As I said, I think he said chaz was scummy twice, but he never said why. Maybe he just dislikes giving reasoning at all. Personally, as jd said, he switches to chaz right after yos attacks him. It does not look good for him.

Oh, no, I understand, I just was pointing out that you weren't being wishy washy.

[Mizzy]

Did Yvonne ever post her protect claims? I can't find them.

I think we should put all the protect claims in one post for easy finding for tomorrow when it comes.