Mini 520 - Triumvirate Mafia - ABANDONED

[Elmo]

<-- Always keeps promises, Shanba

*<3*

* I assume cop/doc is useless to the mafia.
* Using RB is counter-productive for (at least) tonight - 1:9 (10%) to block kill vs. 2:8 (20%) to block cop/doc. (Still bad if no lynch.)
* I think we should claim what we did last night when we get powers.
* Therefore we should be getting an investigation claimed each night, and most of them will be accurate, we hope.
* Lynch town/scum, we got 8:3 (72%) / 9:2 (81%) chance that a townie gets a given power.
* First cop claim is most reliable statistically until we lynch scum, so probably most important - WHO WE INVESTIGATE NIGHT 1 IS A BIG DEAL.
* Therefore perhaps we should do majority vote for who should be investigated? Or something?

I am concerned about claims. The scum have no reason not to claim tri, modulo ssf's post. If we want to win, we are probably going to have to lynch someone claiming tri, which makes our life fun. Maybe if someone claims tri, then both the cop and the doc target that person the following night? Scum can always fake-claim guilty as cop, but still. Hmm, not sure, worth thinking about though. Is it is best to ignore claims entirely? Probably not, but then we're stuck with lynching people who are claiming townie. The WIFOM here stinks.

The MoS thing is playable but boring. I will

unvote

:

FaerieLord

and

vote

:

Miztef

for being scum. Also, I claim serial killer. The Phate wagon is meh. I think skitzer is a bit scummy, but obviously it's hard to tell. Everyone who thinks SJ is scum fails at life (until proven otherwise).

MoS: "Pot calling kettle black" in 107 strikes me as bad. Why do you object to Phate making a perfectly logical statement about another newbie?

I really think that most of the people on this SJ things are either over ambitious or complete hypocrites.

Really? Why?

ssf: I agree on the WIFOM. I also think a l - 2 claim is probably good in principle - it would be better if people simply announced they were willing to vote and hammer instead of putting any more votes on. That seems the best of both worlds, to me. I also agree we need a plan on how to play the setup. I also think we shouldn't be relying on the cop power, and (controversy ahead) we shouldn't seek to protect the triumvirate at the cost of finding the scum. In the worst case, the game becomes mountainous. At which point we will need to have done scumhunting previously, or we're screwed. Contingency plans are good. I don't mean we go rambo, but there's a balance, and I don't want people to use the kid gloves and find neither instead of both. We are here to lynch scum, and only to protect the tris inasmuch as it helps us to lynch scum.

Maybe a no-lynch isn't that bad at all, remember, if we lose one triumvirate, the power roles are all gone, as far as I understand the rules.

If we

lynch

one. Not just lose. I'm pointing this out for everyone because I missed this for a bit.

miztif: The mafia pick one to do the kill. RB has to pick that one to block, or the kill goes through. I'm not sure why I'm helping you nightkill, but I'm feeling informative today.

I believe that could be considered a role claim right there

Not by anyone sane, no. Assuming it were, it's obviously unintentional, so

why are you pointing it out

? What good things come from this action?

The next person to speculate in

any way

over the identity of a triumvirate member gets a punch in the mouth. Scum don't do this because they can say nothing and then compare notes at night, but don't be dumb and help them out.

Why are Flyinghawk and spurgistan lurking? Also, YuanTi is active lurking and/or dead.

Mod

: If a triumvirate is killed, do we see which power they control? Also, please prod YuanTi. Thanks.

[Elmo]

All triumvirate powers are lost

only

if the triumvirate is lynched, no other way. If a triumvirate is Nked, only their specific power is lost, and all surviving triumvirate powers continue to function normally.

Yeah, that's what I meant. Rereading it, it does seem a bit ambiguous, so thanks for that.

For the record, I'm a dayvig, and the next person to vote me dies.

No, you're not, because I'm a daycop and I have a guilty on you. Die, scum.

I remain deeply unconvinced on a no lynch. The primary issue is that we're probably going to have to risk lynching someone claiming triumvirate at least once. I don't see how no lynch today really helps us with that - we're getting a cop investigation which we can have 75% confidence in. Mafia have a 1 in 3 chance of getting a tri tonight. So we trade one townie (we hope) for one somewhat-but-not-really confirmed innocent. Also, if we random lynch today, we have a 75% chance of not getting a tri - the same chance that tonight's investigation is reliable. I'm open to discussion, but I don't see what a no lynch gains us, at the moment. I haven't worked it out properly, but at this point, the doc / RB have very poor odds to block a kill - the only thing going for us is the cop power.

Basically: No Lynch = 1 dead town (1 in 3 chance dead tri), 75%-reliable 1 cop result. Why is this a good trade?

I'm also going to say that unless we've lynched two mafia already, I don't think the tris should be counterclaiming. Tris should be claiming when near lynch, obviously. Also, don't fakeclaim triumvirate - I'm just saying.

We need to be clear on "agreeable". Being "agreeable" means being nice, friendly, polite, and is a good thing. Anyone thinking SJ = scum because he's being nice fails. Agreeing with everyone else is a valid scumtell, but people need to make a case why he's scum - if someone says that water is wet, and I agree with them, that doesn't mean I'm scum.

Also,

FoMS: Spider Jerusalem

for being way too agreeable. That always makes me suspicious. Also for his name, which I can't figure out.

PROBABLE FAIL. Anyone seriously following this needs their head examined.

Agreeing with the majority view here. [...] Again, more agreeing.

NON-FAIL. Detail about how this indicates his guilt would be nice. I disagree, but this is not horrible.

FaerieLord: A person might disagree with everything except that SJ was agreeing with everyone. In this case, they are not guilty of what Miztaf says, which (I believe) started the wagon. Why do you feel they are "over ambitious" if they are not hypocrites?

Miztef: Recently, I tend not to give my reasons for voting, at least to begin with. I do not approve of Phate either, if it makes you feel any better.

Just by stating your suspicions normally, you are pretty much saying who you want investigated indirectly. Is it really that much different?

Big difference: if we collectively agree on one (or perhaps two) people, then if scum gets cop, they have to investigate that person. Otherwise, they can have a much freer choice of who to investigate. Essentially, this way, the town controls who is investigated, even when scum gets the investigation. This improves our chances of forcing the scum to lie about a result, instead of being able to get away with claiming a plausible but fairly useless innocent result.

spurgistan: I do believe ssf has a good post on this issue in 134 on that. Are you familiar with WIFOM?

I think that scum will not always claim tri, because this may well end up being catastrophic for them in the endgame. Depending on how many tris die before then, it may narrow it down significantly. I would, however, be fairly sceptical of any tri claims. Not quite sure how to play this, yet.

[Elmo]

Everyone who claims a cop result is either town or mafia lying.
If the mafia lie, we have a chance to catch them in a lie later.
If the mafia get a cop results and don't claim it, then we know someone has not claimed. This narrows the field down over time, because the number of people who have not claimed results decreases.

[Elmo]

EBWOP: Mafia are not necessarily lying. But if we pick who to investigate well, they should be forced to lie about their buddies being innocent more often.

[Elmo]

FlyingHawk, SJ, not to call the kettle black, but you guys are new here. And thus it might stand to reason that you'll make mistakes, especially in the area of keeping things hidden if you have them to hide. And it strikes me as interesting that while you've been quiet all game, you both fairly well jump to defend MoS. This might (indeed, probably) be nothing, but I think it's worth mentioning.

Phate, regardless of saying that you aren't doing it, you are

totally

calling the kettle black here. Even worse than that, FlyingHawk has been a member of this site since the end of

May

, and he even played mafia elsewhere before joining. So he is definitely *not* new here. And SJ joined this site before you did, Phate, so you have no business acting like you know what you're talking about when it comes to newbies here. That's just ridiculous.

Phate's Argument

People who are newer are more likely to make mistakes when posting. If they are scum, they will be quiet when they can. They have been quiet, except for defending you. If they were your scumbuddies, they would jump to your defence. Therefore, there may be a link between the three of you.

I see nothing illogical with the above, although I have not fact-checked it. FlyingHawk may have been here since May, but he seemed confused by my SK joke, so I think (no disrespect to him) that it's perfectly possible he would act like a newbie in another way. I dislike the fact that you try to pooh-pooh his concerns without actually showing why he is wrong.

How do you know FlyingHawk has played mafia before on another site before he came here?

SJ: Sorry to see you go. Have you considered playing until a replacement is found, and conversing with the person replacing you before they post, if the mod allows?

[Elmo]

Knock it off.

MoS: How do you know FlyingHawk has played mafia before on another site before he came here?

Phate: Do you have any thoughts on MoS's reaction?

Everyone else needs to be posting words. Especially Miztif.

[Elmo]

Even worse than that, FlyingHawk has been a member of this site since the end of

May

, and he even played mafia elsewhere before joining. So he is definitely *not* new here.

Does it matter that I don't have 100% definitive proof?

If you'll pardon the pun, you do seem quite definite there.

It's just that if I were scumbuddies with someone, the one question I'd be guaranteed to ask them is how experienced they were.

[Elmo]

Oddly enough, that's exactly what he says here - the signup for a game which you're not in, and in which you have no reason to have read. I also highly doubt you just happen to remember what someone wrote in a signup thread back in May.

Unvote

:

Miztef

;

vote

:

Mastermind of Sin

. DIE, PLEASE.

[Elmo]

Does it matter that I don't have 100% definitive proof?

This, by the way, is the absolute 24 carat gold standard of overdefensiveness that everyone who hasn't had their gut surgically removed wants to see.

[Elmo]

Odd things stick with you sometimes.

It was six months ago. It's not odd, and it's not memorable.

Because you have *how* much experience playing with me that you can evaluate to know what overdefensive is for me?

Do you have some kind of psychological issue that causes you immense fear and stress when people ask you perfectly simple questions?

[Elmo]

Mastermind of Sin is still not lynched. This brings shame on our town.

[Elmo]

Me. Still thinking. I'm worried about the apparent lack of actually working it out, although it might be a good idea.

Should I post a full working out so far? It lets the scum know what the best moves are, but it also helps us understand what may be about to happen.

It's also possible the scum have already discussed trying to claim pre-game. If you're paranoid, you might say they're fully worked out it's bad for the town and are trying to get us to do it. So basically I want it to be watertight before we out the power roles.

SSF / MoS: You're smart, how far have you thought this through?

[Elmo]

I'm just going to post stuff. Best move for town and best moves for scum are intertwined, there's no way we're going to figure out what it means for us without informing the scum. They're the informed minority, that's their advantage and there's no changing that. But we simply can't go into this eyes wide shut.

6 triumvirate 6 vanilla: 6 confirmed innocents
3 triumvirate 9 vanilla: 3 confirmed innocents
5 triumvirate 7 vanilla: 2 scum in triums, 1 in vanilla
4 triumvirate 8 vanilla: 1 scum in triums, 2 in vanillas

Scum aren't retarded. 6 trium claimers is close to autowin for us, as has been posted many times, so

they won't do that

.

9 vanilla claimers means 3 confirmed innocents, but they're also the power roles. So then we're guaranteed to lose one power role every night, modulo doc protects, which (3/4 chance of town doc role * 1/3 chance of chosing right trium to protect = 1/4 = bad odds) isn't that likely. So we've very likely (2/3 ish) lost the cop role by the dawn of day 3. That's two investigations. Not liking this.

I think the next two are more likely as they cause us problems, and I have no idea why people haven't considered that scum will claim different to each other. On the bright side, they can't kill off the power roles without increasing the chances of outing their own, but that's more than balanced out by the fact we're going to have to be very careful about who we lynch.

I think the worst case is 5 tri 7 vanilla. We can then pick from finding the 2/5 scum triumvirate claimers and look forward to losing all power roles if we're wrong, or get to weed out one scum from the seven vanillas - this does not fill my heart with joy. We don't have any confirmed innocents, the most we know is the two of the five triums are scum, which doesn't tell us much. If we mislynch vanillas (likely) 3 times, then the scum win with 3 kills (12-3-3 = 6, 3/6=50%), and we probably don't have enough time to narrow down the triumvirate group enough to get a good lynch. If we mislynch in there even once, it's vanilla, and the one vanilla scum is going to screw us in the endgame.

4 tri 6 vanilla is roughly the same, only we've got more chance of finding the vanilla scums. But it's still quite bad.

By the by, I am convinced the scum has already done something similar to the above working-out. I am also

very

interested that spurgistan says "Just seems like this set-up is just about the least conducive to a mass-claim there is" because virtually all setups nowadays are designed to be resistant to a mass-claim. Mods spend great deals of time and effort to figure out setups that won't be trivially breakable, and this is the first thing anyone'd think of. Indeed I did think of it soon as I saw the setup, and discarded it as probably a bad idea without thinking for very long. I really don't think it's coincidence that the idea has appeared. Part of the reason for not posting my thoughts for a bit was to see who was going to argue against it - spurgistan gets town points for at least being willing to think about it.

A lot depends how much you value the confirmed innocents, if it goes that way, but mostly it doesn't. Some of it is night choices and which triumvirate dies (remember, even they don't know which power they are), but most of it looks quite bad to me. Also, remember that if there's scum in the triumvirate group, we'll

have

to lynch right or lose all the power roles. My gut says a lot of the the outcomes end up with us playing vanilla and one/two scum will cruise to the endgame knowing they don't have to worry about power roles and can just play safe. I'm really not convinced this improves much on playing standard - we can just ask people who look scummy to claim, and if we get more than 3 trium claimers, we've narrowed down the scum.

I really do not like the trade. Discuss.

[Elmo]

EBWOP: In the above, the word vanilla is used to mean both "vanilla townie" and "vanilla game/setup", that is, a game with no power roles. Town have a horrendous record in vanilla games. Sorry for any confusion that causes.

[Elmo]

I cannot what could out benefit a 6 player "mason" team in this game.

Why would we get this?

What do we do if we have 9 vanilla claimers, FaerieLord?

[Elmo]

FL: Yes. I'm saying, why would all 3 mafia claim triumvirate? We're discussing the fact in plain view of the mafia that if they do this, it's very bad for them. So they're not going to do that. Do you see what I mean? We are never, ever going to get six triumvirates claimers, and we were never going to get that from the first point someone pointed out how good it was for us. Yes?

[Elmo]

On an ethics viewpoint, my view on the thread stands: I believe such things should be disallowed. That said, the idea is an interesting one.

My gut says that mafia do want a mass claim, but they haven't agreed on who claims what. The lack of coordination imposed by a enciphered mass claim changes things somewhat. I'll have to think about that a bit.

FaerieLord: The triumvirates do not know which power they control; see the role PMs on page 1. I agree somewhat, but I am more concerned about the solo mafiate in the vanilla group. That said, I do see both sides of the arguement.

Mod

: The first question to be answered would therefore be: is such an enciphered mass claim permissible?

[Elmo]

Me. 's pretty clear what the problem with it are, imo. If you're for it, you need to start explaining you me exactly what we do in each scenario.

[Elmo]

^ Miztif's post is the kind of thing that needs to be happening.

Let's say we get 7 civs, 5 triums. By lynching only townies first, we first of all, have a chance of hitting a scum, even if the odds aren't amazing.

We got 1 in 7. If we just lynch people as usual, we got 3 in 12 = 1 in 4. Why is this better, again? You just halved our odds.

In this situation, the triums opinons could be seen as less useful, because it is a 2/5th's chance they are scum, where as townies are 1/7th, and therefore likely town.

Everyone here right now only has a 25% chance of being scum. How much does that help? Not much. The problem is not we need people "probably innocent", the problem is we need to find

which person is scum

, and it's harder to pick one person out of seven than it is three out of twelve.

Once we hit that scum, we either have a decent amount of confirmed townies (if they didn't nk many) and just have to beat through the scum in the trium. Or we have only 3 or so candidates left in the trium, and we can crush the scum in there easily.

Key word is "once". If we lynch protown d1 d2 d3, we lose. So we don't actually have very long to find that one vanilla scum. Problem!

[Elmo]

FaerieLord: With the greatest respect, you're missing the point. Going through with the mass claim

makes it more likely

that we won't lynch correctly three times. Yes?

[Elmo]

Miztef: Yes, so we now need to examine our chances of getting it right. Using the same logic, it would be great to be in a situation where we've got a million townies and one scum, but we lose if we mislynch three times, because if we get it right then we've got 999,997 confirmed innocents. But we stand zero chance of getting it right then, and I'm worried about our chances of picking out one in seven with three guesses. No lynch is an interesting idea, though.

FL: The cop thing is beneficial, actually, but if we've got (for example) 3 trium claimers, then we've got ~2/3 chance to only ever get two investigation results. I'm not saying it's 100% awful bad, but we've got to understand the benefits and drawbacks of a claim before we do it.

[Elmo]

I would like to take the opportunity to ask everyone (aside from Mastermind of Sin, obviously) if they think FaerieLord's behaviour thus far is lynch-worthy. A simple yes/no would be nice.

[Elmo]

Yeah, sorry, excluding the last post. Also, yes/no is just nice, not required; what Phate's doing is fine, and actually perhaps more helpful. Whatever floats your boat.

[Elmo]

He's just continually repeating the same words over and over, trying to browbeat us, through repetition, into agreeing. Can we please lynch him now?

I'm going to think on that one, because I need to figure out what I think a town player in that situation would have done

Speaking of doing a 180...

[Elmo]

Obviously confused about the numbers rather than scummy, post 278 and so on.

[Elmo]

It's funny, that, because I thought you just said you were considering the possibilities.

[Elmo]

Why are you voting FaerieLord?

[Elmo]

That was in Cephrir's direction. I am, of course, shocked that you avoid giving a direct answer, in any event.

[Elmo]

The cardinal points and the associated cardinal planes are a set of special points and planes in an optical system, which help in the analysis of its paraxial properties. The analysis of an optical system using cardinal points is known as Gaussian optics, named after Carl Friedrich Gauss.

The cardinal points and planes of an optical system include:

* The focal points and focal planes
* The principal planes and principal points
* The surface vertices (or vertexes)
* The nodal points

For a lens, there will be two of each of these, identified by "front" and "rear" depending on whether they are on the input or the output side of the lens, respectively.

These points and planes, together with the aperture stop, and the chief and marginal rays of the system, define the locations and sizes of the entrance and exit pupils of the system, as well as its other image-forming properties, such as the focal length and magnification.

More detailed and accurate analysis of an optical system's performance can be achieved by raytracing, either within the paraxial approximation or using "real rays", i.e. rays that refract and reflect according to Snell's law and the law of reflection, without approximation.

[Elmo]

Weiss Umwelttechnik GmbH is one of the most important producers of standard testing chambers and systems for environmental simulation worldwide. The product range comprises temperature and climate testing systems as well as test systems for simulated exposure to weather, temperature shock, corrosion and for long-time testing in various test chamber volumes. Walk-in/drive-in chambers and process-integrated plants for environmental simulation and biology are designed, produced and installed in accordance with customer specifications. Weiss Umwelttechnik is certified according to DIN EN ISO 9001.

The company was founded in 1956, during the period of reconstruction of German industry. Karl Weiss founded the Karl Weiss company in Giessen, Germany. Their field was the production of physical measuring equipment, with environmental simulation and air conditioning quickly being added as new business fields. The company grew very fast and moved from Giessen to Lindenstruth in 1963/64. Since that time, the company has permanently been increased due to new production fields. 1978 Weiss Technik became member of the Schunk Group. In 1986 Weiss Technik was separated in the business fields environmental simulation and air conditioning technology which was an important event in the company's history. Weiss Klimatechnik GmbH and Weiss Umwelttechnik GmbH were founded. In 1995 Vötsch Industrietechnik in Balingen was acquired from Heraeus in Hanau. Since that time Weiss expanded internationally. In 2006 the Weiss Group comprises 8 subsidiaries and approx. 35 agencies world-wide.

[Elmo]

Nope.

[Elmo]

We could lynch Thin_Man now.

That would make me happy.

[Elmo]

We could lynch Thin_Man now.

For reasons passing understanding, I'm the only one voting you. So I'm examining other options.

Also, could is not should. You could (and should) stop doing that, ey?

[Elmo]

-1.

Fairly sure that FaerieLord is town.

[Elmo]

If you go back and look at FaerieLord's comments on the mass claim when people were actively discussing it, there's (no offence) a fair bit of confusion. Based on that, still arguing for the claim is a null tell; given the way everyone changed their views away from a claim, I'd seriously doubt any mafioso would think they could still argue the town into it. I don't see anything particularly objectionable in the way he argues it, and generally speaking, I get town vibes from him.

FaerieLord's been put at -1 for something (in my opinion) fairly spurious. The number of votes on FL is disproportionate to the actual level of suspicion evidenced, as far as I can see. Various people are slipping onto the wagon with one-liner posts like Thin_Man's 389 and somestrangeflea's 404.

I've been saying MoS is scum for quite a while, now. He's on the wagon, and pushing it in a way I consider disingenuous at best:

FaerieLord is continuing to argue for the mass claim without responding to the arguments that have been brought forth against his plan. He's just continually repeating the same words over and over, trying to browbeat us, through repetition, into agreeing. Can we please lynch him now?

This is a complete misrepresentation of how he was acting; browbeating, for crying out loud?

If you basically want me to shut up about it, I will. Though my opinion is still the same. I'm only pushing it because i think its the best possible plan at the moment, than acting it all out.

It is a much smaller group to me. But as I said, I'll drop it if you insist :/

Yeah, he's really amazingly aggressive, eh?

While I think of it, also interesting is that MoS immediately jumps to the conclusion that I'm scum making that comment about a townie; everyone else seems interested as to why I said it (see spurgistan's post, for example) but not willing to come (jump) to a conclusion. MoS has been arguing for FL's lynch for a while (and I might say the view about being unusually sure also applies to him there) but immediately does a 180 and flips to the position that FL must be town, and I'm scum defending his lynch. Why? He was pushing FL's lynch out of convenience, never really believing it, and now it's awfully convenient to find me scummy, because I've been the only one attacking him so far. If he's asking for FL to be lynched, and I say something that he takes to possibly mean (if I were scum, it's at most a pretty weak tell) that I'm scum and FL is town, it seems unnatural to immediately believe you've been totally wrong about FL for the last month.

MoS: FaerieLord is scum! Let's lynch him!
Elmo: I'm pretty sure FaerieLord is town.
MoS: Elmo's scum trying to look good defending a townie! Let's lynch him!

Anyway: everyone's a little bored, the day is dragging on, and there's a wagon on someone who's not

amazingly

scummy, but no-one's going to complain if you lynch him, and no-one seems to be motivated to go and find anything else (I think two or three votes on FL are simply "it's the only wagon going") rather than making the easy vote. There's an element of groupthink, in that no-one seems prepared to stand out of the crowd when everyone's happy to lynch FL; we'd be in significantly better shape if more people did what Miztif is doing, throwing your vote onto something that you think looks scummy rather than shrugging your shoulders and voting the safe option that no-one will blame you for. (In that vein, it's no secret that I would love a MoS wagon, but I'll settle for

any

kind of pro-active behaviour out of this town at the moment.)

It's a fairly classic type of bad wagon; there's a great description I read somewhere in (I think) Mafia Discussion that I can't find, but in general, when people are bored, tired of arguing without results, approaching a deadline, whatever, a favourite mafia play is to have a nice, convenient, almost tempting bandwagon that anyone can hop onto without any fuss. On a townie, of course, but it's all too easy not to care deeply because everyone just wants something to happen and get the day over; I know I've been fairly bored with this game for a while now. But I really hate this kind of thing; everyone ends up looking dumbly at each other on day 2, wondering what to do next. This is not how games are won.

I've been arguing against lynching FaerieLord for a while; this is not some sudden, off-the-cuff remark (although I've only recently become convinced he was town, he was a bad lynch from the start). I am making a clear statement that

FaerieLord is extremely likely to be town and we shouldn't lynch him today

. If I was scum and FaerieLord was town, as far as I'm concerned, I'd be doing the exact opposite - quietly pushing his lynch instead of genuinely arguing against it. I seriously doubt you can look back at what I've said and believe I'm not heavily opposed to it. This isn't some short throwaway comment I can refer back to to make myself look good, this is me trying to stop what I consider is an extremely bad lynch.

I'm pretty sure it's a scum-driven wagon on a townie, at this point. I can't force you not to vote, but I

am

going to make my views known.

[Elmo]

Yeah. It's kind of fuzzy, I probably should have edited it more before I posted. *shrug* I'm not at my best, right now; I just wanted to get that out there. I'm not entirely sure why "filler" would be interesting, apart from a critique of my penmanship, anyway.

SSF's vote on FL was very sketchy imo, kind of a jump on and leave it running.

Yup. Also Phate ("reasons forthcomign tongiht", except they weren't). Also Thin_Man, and something about his vote gives me the heebie-jeebies. I would like them all to justify their vote, especially Thin_Man. One of the insidious things about these wagons is that townies will frequently do that, so it's ultra-easy for mafia to hop on as well. So what we do now is grill people about why they jumped. spurgistan's vote is not award-winning, but it's got

some

reasoning, and I can see where it comes from. Nonetheless, I'd be interested to hear the detailed reasoning as well. I've already taken a dislike to MoS's reasoning, so I'd be interested if he could clearly reiterate it, as well. None of this "if you have to ask, you clearly haven't been reading very well", please.

Miztif, spurgistan, somestrangeflea, Cephrir: What do you think of the MoS - flyinghawk thing?

[Elmo]

Phate, regardless of saying that you aren't doing it, you are

totally

calling the kettle black here. Even worse than that, FlyingHawk has been a member of this site since the end of

May

, and he even played mafia elsewhere before joining. So he is definitely *not* new here.

MoS: How do you know FlyingHawk has played mafia before on another site before he came here?

I don't. Does it matter that I don't have 100% definitive proof?

If you'll pardon the pun, you do seem quite definite there.

It's just that if I were scumbuddies with someone, the one question I'd be guaranteed to ask them is how experienced they were.

I don't care how experienced my scumbuddies are. I just assume they're all n00bs unless I know them, and then half of them are n00bs anyways. Anybody who's played with me as scum would know that. Which is probably, like, no one in this game right now. But whatever.

Regardless, I've seen FlyingHawk say this in a couple queue threads:

May i play? i've played forum mafia online before.

Just, not on this site.

Oddly enough, that's exactly what he says here - the signup for a game which you're not in, and in which you have no reason to have read. I also highly doubt you just happen to remember what someone wrote in a signup thread back in May.

Unvote

:

Miztef

;

vote

:

Mastermind of Sin

. DIE, PLEASE.

I almost signed up for that game, actually. I just didn't have time to add another normal, unless I saw one I *really* liked. That one just didn't do it for me. But I did see him post that. Odd things stick with you sometimes.

It was six months ago. It's not odd, and it's not memorable.

Erm, not odd in that sense of the word. Odd as in random or unexpected.

Edited highlights. He is quite clearly lying about how he knew Flyinghawk had played elsewhere, in my view.

[Elmo]

Cephrir: Okay, but why? "I agree" posts irk me slightly. I want to hear what

you

think.

[Elmo]

Greetings, pink one. Cheers for replacing!

[Elmo]

^ Let's ask some questions!

phate: Please explain post 103 ("agreeable") to me. Also, please give an opinion of Miztif.
somestrangeflea: Explain your FaerieLord vote?
FaerieLord: Um, hi. You're being replaced?

*poke*

Mizzy: What do you feel about Spider Jerusalem?
Cephrir: What do you think of skitzer's behaviour, and why is it scummy?
Thin_Man: Besides FaerieLord, who do you find scummy?
Mastermind of Sin: What do you propose we do about Thin_Man's lack of voting reasons?
skitzer: What do you think of Thin_Man's behaviour?
Miztif: What is your opinion of Phate?
spurgistan: Why do you feel Faerielord's "non-logic" is worth a vote?
Sir Tornado: What do you think of the level of activity in general?

@SSF: What are you trying to get at with elmo's post? Do you find putting that filler in scummy?

Kinda. It seems as though he's laying a foundation so that, if he falls under suspicion later, he can say "Look how

much

I helped the town here!" It's kind of a stretch, but you have to evaluate all the evidence...

Also, please explain how this is not a variant of Too Townie?

[Elmo]

If I understand the question, pre-replacement.

[Elmo]

SUP RISHIFISH!

Perhaps this is just your playstyle, but I don't trust diplomats.

Why?

[Elmo]

Hm. Mizzy, do you see anything interesting about post 456?

[Elmo]

Bingo.

For now, I'll also point out the wording "a good moment" and the fact his primary criteria for lynching someone appears to be what other people think, rather than their likelihood of being scum.

Rishi, I'll get back to you on skitzer, like.

[Elmo]

I are posting!

Mainly the massclaim fiasco, but I didn't feel that was enough to warrant a vote alone.
Then the game died, so I placed a vote to get it moving.

a) More detail. "the massclaim fiasco" is not an explanation.
b) Placing a vote on someone merely "to get the game moving" that takes them to -1 is unacceptable, yaus?

Kinda. It seems as though he's laying a foundation so that, if he falls under suspicion later, he can say "Look how

much

I helped the town here!"

Too Townie is when a player attributes a number of pro-town actions to player, before using this as "evidence" of that players scumminess. What I said isn't a variant of Too Townie because I don't think that laying a fallback for yourself is a pro-town action.

Last time I checked, helping the town was a pro-town action. So either I'm deliberately trying to look like I'm helping while actually not, or I'm helping the town. If I'm not helping the town, point it out. If I am, the reasonable conclusion from the fact I'm helping the town is that I'm pro-town, or at least not that I'm anti-town.

---

Skitzer is quite lurky through October. I don't think that's out of character for him, but it does mean he's harder to read. I don't particularly understand why he unvotes when we're "past the random stage", but I can't really see any point as scum, either. His first opinions are in 120, basically he doesn't have anything firm, which is understandable, I guess. Then lurks most of November, saying his head is in a fog, etc. I happen to believe this for metagame reasons, i.e. he was lynched as a townie in another game I'm in for doing roughly the same; it's null, as far as I'm concerned. He FoSses a couple people, I don't particularly agree with either of them, but they seem okay to me. He notes that Cephrir hops onto FL's wagon very quickly, which caught my eye as well; noting that seems mildly pro-town. Wants to poke a bit of conversation in 423, and does, which also seems slightly pro-town. He dislikes thin_man.. I think thin_man's playstyle choices are null, if it's playstyle (I should probably check that).. he might be looking for an easy target, but I lean toward towniness there, because it

is

unhelpful. Gets Rishi to ask me a question, wanting to keep things moving again. Then wants me to answer promptly instead of going off about Miztif, fair point, lil' pro-town again.

So, summery, not a lot of content, but nothing very scummy, and a few teeny tiny pro-town things. So very very marginally pro-town, for me.

Also,

unvote

:

Mastermind of Sin

(note: still scum),

vote

:

Miztif

. Wagon plz kthxbai

[Elmo]

or me ;o

[Elmo]

Vote Count

:

Not voting: skitzer, Sir Tornado, Mizzy, MoS, Miztef, spurgistan

I'm not entirely surprised that we're getting nowhere when half the game isn't voting for anyone - that chain of unvotes was not very clever. (I don't necessarily mean votes for Miztif, but

something

is helpful.)

[Elmo]

Condorcet voting, maybe?

I think we need to lynch at some point, obviously, but in my opinion the problem is not lack of content, but lack of activity from most people in sifting through it. As SSF points out, we've got 21 pages worth, I'm sure there's scope for making a better decision than flipping a coin; certainly, I don't feel I have all the answers right now, it's day 1 after all, but I really don't agree with the idea we have nothing to go on.

I also think we should discuss what to do about the cop power, whether whoever gets it should investigate whoever they want, or whether we should nominate someone to be investigated.

I should also be annoying and point out that a townie lynch is not always strictly better than no lynch, although obviously we'd like to avoid it.

Mod

: If more than one person is tied for the vote lead at deadline, who is lynched?

[Elmo]

Technology!

For this calculator, if I wanted Alice lynched the most, then either Bob or Carol, then lastly Dave, the format would be: Alice>Bob=Carol>Dave. Everyone you don't put down is assumed to be equally preferable after everyone that you did mention. I think.

[Elmo]

*shrug* Just make a list from who you most want lynched to who you least want lynched, and I'll juggle it.

[Elmo]

Too many lurkers to not lynch one.

Buh, I've been lurking?

Mizzy: What has Cephrir done to catch your eye?

For the moment, mine looks something like this: Mastermind of Sin>Miztef>Thin_Man>somestrangeflea=skitzer>Cephrir=phate=Sir Tornado>Mizzy=Rishi=spurgistan>Elmo.

I imagine people prefer their choices, then anyone else equally, then themselves last (no-one wants to lynch themselves), so I'll tack that on.

Mod

: If you didn't recently, please prod Sir Tornado? And, um, I imagine a surprising number of people.

[Elmo]

Don't 100% agree with TrustGossip, but I agree with the principle; the reason I agreed with (suggested, whatever) condorcet voting is because we were supposed to be having a deadline placed soon after that time, and we needed some sorta consensus. Then the replacements started happening. I'd be quite happy to do it, like, the normal way, but it hadn't been happening for the past 20 pages, and it didn't look like it would happen, to me. I'm not happy about that, but that's the way it goes.

*shrug*

I think concorcet vote analysis is certainly different.. I'm not convinced that it makes voting records useless, although order is obviously important. My condorcet list is truthful.. I really, really dislike the idea that anyone is saying theirs is not, because, well, you shouldn't be lying if you're pro-town, obv?

Not sure what'll happen if we wagon someone claiming triumvirate. I would suggest that

we never put anyone at more than L-2 without a claim

as a scum quickhammer would be very viable if people didn't unvote.

You were top of the list. You just happened to be there along with 8 other people.

I especially dislike this. Why are you meant to be pro-town, again?

I'm kind of pissed that we've gone from everyone agreeing with each other that not a lot's happening and something should be done about it to everyone agreeing that MoS is scummy but not a lot's happened and something should be done about it.

My dislike of MoS stems mostly from this and the fact that he generally smells funny. I think he's scummy, but no, I don't know why he's public enemy #1 either. This fact annoys me.

edit:

I honestly don't truly agree with condorcet voting. But I DO feel we need to get off Day 1

Okay. Cop result claims, doc probably didn't stop the NK, statistically the roleblocker shouldn't have used their night action and either way didn't do anything. Assume we've got an innocent result and a dead townie. Now what? I mean siriusly, this is why we can't have nice things, kids; we need scumhunting, not so much just a lynch.

Mod

: I are voting Miztif from 495! Thanks!

*<3*

[Elmo]

Going along with the condorcet results is essentially me proxying my vote to the entire town

...what? In what way is that even vaguely correct? I suppose it's irrelevant, but I still wonder what's going on there.

Why do you think you're unable to single anyone out? I mean, you're here to hunt scum; what's been preventing you from doing so?

Ninja edit: Okay, good.

[Elmo]

I think you've missed the point of what I said, which is that we shouldn't put someone in a position to be hammered until we've heard their claim and decided to lynch them based on that.

Claiming is hardly irrelevant to me, I just don't subscribe to any hard-and-fast rules about what to do; I'll figure it out when it happens. I've toyed with some ideas, but I'm not happy with any of them, yet. But I do think we should be asking for claims, and I'm not convinced that all the scum will claim trium.

[Elmo]

EBWOP: What I am concerned about is the following:

1. Someone looks scummy and is placed at l-1.
2. They claim trium.
3. A scumbag comes online before anyone unvotes, and knows they must be telling the truth, and hammers.
4. We lose all the power roles in exchange for lynching one scumbag the next day.
5. We lose.
6. ???
7. Profit!

[Elmo]

Powers are useless to the mafia. So blah to that.

TrustGossip: I really dislike thin_man's FL vote, discuss!

Also, the more important question: why can't I be an unlimited non-day-ending dayvig? Just once?

[Elmo]

Mizzy: I asked the mod a while ago, the cop results only reveals alignment. They could use the RB, yes, I suppose. (Odds of it actually stopping cop/doc tonight with town lynch are 2/10 * 3/11 = ~5%, fyi)
Phate: No shit, sherlock, but I doubt he'll be overjoyed at that comment

[Elmo]

TrustGossip: Considering the deadline is in ten days, what are your thoughts on who should be lynched? (Modulo your policy on how much to say.)

What do you feel about the lurkers in this game? The meta policy of Lynch All Lurkers?

[Elmo]

I feel the need to QFT the entirety of TrustGossip's last post. Lurking really hurts the town, guys.

I rather like the idea of lynching lurkers.. I'll give it some more thought, I have a couple other people in mind (MoS / Miztif).

[Elmo]

Well, I meant apart from the lurkers, I might want to lynch MoS / Miztif. I don't think either of them have been lurking that much, relatively, although I could be wrong. (Certainly Miztif hasn't been very vocal, I think.)

[Elmo]

Miztif: Why do you believe it is more likely that Mizzy is scum than she is pro-town but either simply incorrect or disagreeing with you?

[Elmo]

Mizzy: Please analyse posts 651 and 661 in detail and give an opinion of Miztif?

I should probably say that I'm all in favour of random accusations, even if they're totally wrong. That is kind of what day 1 mostly consists of for a while, I think.

[Elmo]

At the moment, I feel a bit like if I don't ask people to scumhunt, they won't. I also think getting people to analyse each other is potentially more revealing than just stating my opinion. I do see how you could view it that way, but I took care to give my own opinion afterwards, last time, which was somewhat different from Mizzy's. I'm tempted to add something snippy about people avoiding responsibility for their actions and the FaerieLord wagon, but I suspect that would be flogging a dead horse.

Why do you suspect analysing Miztif would be a wild goose chase, MoS?

[Elmo]

What Elmo is doing causes people to overanalyze those posts.

I see.

How do you feel we should best scumhunt without being in danger of overanalyzing other people's posts?

[Elmo]

^ Not good enough. Why is a Phate lynch a good idea?

[Elmo]

Mizzy: I wouldn't have given you flack for doing it or not doing it, and would probably have yelled at anyone who did. In fact, I much prefer people do whatever they feel is best; I'm far from always right, and it's always a good idea to question what other people are advocating.

Flea: I read it.

Rishi: Please marry me immediately for post 701.

Miztif: Oh, my.

Unvote

for now, at least.. Hmm.

[Elmo]

Hm.

Phate: Why do you not believe him? Do you think we should lynch Miztif today?

[Elmo]

Hmm. Phate:

He didn't strongly advocate the mass claim, he just agreed with it when it was brought up; even at that point, everyone (including the triumvirates) thought it was a good idea, so I can't see how that's an indication of anything. Nothing in Miztif's play indicating triumvirate is at worst null; mafia are looking for them, yes? (I would like to reiterate that speculating over what triumvirates will do or how they will act seems unwise.)

How has "every single aspect of his play so far has been indicative of scum hunting the triums"?
How have you distinguished between triums trying to blend in with the townies and scum trying to blend in with the townies?
What makes you sure enough that Miztif is scum that you are willing to risk turning the game mountainous if you're wrong?

[Elmo]

Beep

: Hi there! People want to lynch Miztif, who just claimed triumvirate. If he's really a triumvirate and we lynch him, we're effectively screwed; that's probably the most important thing going, at the moment.

TrustGossip

: I don't recall who brought up the idea of a mass claim (it seemed to kind of appear out of nowhere), but I can't find anything like strong support in a short review of Miztif's posts.

Rishi

: I agree with you about Cephrir, but I'm unconvinced he's a good lynch for today, although obviously I would like it if he contributed more.

I'm not sure what to make of Mizzy's thoughts on Miztif's claim. Not even sure if I agree or not. Hmm. I don't want to lynch Miztif today. I don't think we should discuss what the person who gets the doc power should do tonight. Today, I probably want to lynch one of MoS, Phate, or thin_man. In that vein, and certainly until Phate pops up again to defend the alarmingly scummy post 719,

Vote

:

Phate

. (I would be overjoyed if the person who got the cop power investigated MoS tonight, seeing as everyone is allergic to wagoning him. )

[Elmo]

TrustGossip: No, I haven't assumed that, and I don't see how I'm "night conjecturing".

[Elmo]

I think it's likely enough that he's telling the truth.

[Elmo]

Mmm. I can certainly see where skitzer is coming from. Personally I'm not sure

b

was caused by

a

, but you can see what he's aiming for.

[Elmo]

If you really think that's true, then I can't wait for the day I play a game with you where I'm scum. Heck, anyone who's played with Pooky as scum can tell you that it's a great scumtactic. You have no idea how often entire towns have been snowed by a scum seeming to contribute by asking everyone else to give their opinions on various topics instead of actually contributing his own opinion.

Hm. Would you happen to have a good example or two, from memory?

[Elmo]

Not sure how much it counts for, but skitzer set up the 'SECRET PLAN' back in 652, which was about a week ago. If memory serves, the Cephrir wagon has developed since then, so I don't think it's opportunistic in that sense, personally.

I only have a weak preference for Phate over Cephrir, but, um, everyone saying "Phate or Cephrir but not Miztif" needs to get on one wagon or the other. Specifically, Rishi (?), Skitzer, and Cephrir should probably be voting Phate, at the moment, assuming they don't have a strong preference either way. Then we'll deal with the claim. I really feel we shouldn't be lynching Miztif today.

MoS: Why are you voting SSF?

Yuan, if you want some discussion, look at the people who massively unvoted, saying "the random stage is over". What a load of bullshit. I'd pursue it, but I'm lazy and have been arguing with SirT. Someone else can do it.

Also, is it just me, or are you contradicting yourself a little?

Mod

: Could we have another vote count, and could you please prod Phate and Thin_Man (yes, again )?

[Elmo]

assuming they don't have a strong preference either way.

If all four-ish people want Cephrir or Phate lynched, then it serves precisely no purpose for half of them to be on the Phate wagon and half on the Cephrir wagon. I'm not

telling

them who to vote for, I'm just pointing out that, assuming I've understood what they've said, what they're doing is close to pointless, because neither of the people they want lynched will get lynched today, so they should probably move their votes.

I thought what I was doing there was pretty clear.

[Elmo]

[Elmo]

Why do you believe is it fake?

[Elmo]

It doesn't say that I find Elmo scummy. It's saying that I heavily disapprove of what he did and another example of essentially "overdoing it". You're providing convenient outs for people. In the act of hunting scum one must also be careful not to subtly aid said scum by overproviding information or possible tactics.

They've already clearly stated that they're willing to vote for Cephrir or Phate, yes? I'm not telling them what to do, and I'm not "providing convenient outs for people". They've said they want Cephrir or Phate lynched, but they're not putting their vote where it's doing the most good, and I'm pointing that out. If they say "Oh, well, Elmo told me to" at some point in the future,

they're lying

and should promptly be shredded for doing so. So it really doesn't help the scum, regardless of who they are.

---

No matter how many times you bring that post up (between you and Phate, it's probably been quoted like 7 times), it's not going to change anything. I was very open about the fact that I was delegating responsibility and was not going to make any contribution of my own. You can't accuse me of any sort of diabolical scum plan when I was open about my intentions and my reasons to begin with.

I can't help but notice that you haven't answered the question.

Yuan, if you want some discussion, look at the people who massively unvoted, saying "the random stage is over". What a load of bullshit. I'd pursue it, but I'm lazy and have been arguing with SirT. Someone else can do it.

I'm suspicious of the way Elmo keeps asking Mizzy to analyze posts for him. He implies that there is something to be found in a post and then sends someone off to find out what it is, without having to do any of the work himself. It's a good way to send people on a wild goose chase without having to be responsible for the results.

You have

quite clearly

said that you were suspicious of me for asking Mizzy to analyse Miztif. You've also

quite clearly

done the same thing earlier in the game. You're contradicting yourself. Do you think I should I be suspicious of you for getting Yuanti to look over the people who unvoted?

[Elmo]

Skitzer being an awful lurker doesn't somehow excuse you; lurking is anti-town, regardless of what your alignment is.

For the second time, why do you want Phate lynched?

[Elmo]

That puts Phate at -1. I'm going to

unvote

and reiterate that

no-one should get put beyond -2 without claiming

, for serious. I remain happy with a Phate lynch, though.

CES: HI! Miztif is scummy, but he's claimed Trium, and we're screwed if we lynch him and he's telling the truth. So, um, yeah.

[Elmo]

Although he claims otherwise, none of his play so far has struck me as trium at all; instead, it has struck me as trying to

find

the trium.

For, like, the third, time, how?

[Elmo]

Because literally everyone except me thought it was the best play for the town at that point.

That's a pretty good reason to go along with a massclaim if you're town.

[Elmo]

The massclaim for example, was because I was quite fearful of being lynched early, and wanted to have the protection of saying my role.

He's been the day 1 lynch for some time, now. I think being lynched early is a perfectly fair concern if he's for real, considering how much it would hurt the town to lynch a triumvirate. I'm told that some good advice for playing a power role is "don't die".

Miztif has not vocally advocated a massclaim at any point. If I'm mistaken about this, quotes and/or post numbers.

I don't believe him because every single aspect of his play so far has been indicative of scum hunting the triums rather than triums trying to blend in with the townies.

Every single aspect of his play? You haven't shown

anything

.

You need to claim.

[Elmo]

You appeared to be angled more towards a Cephrir lynch a post ago, MoS. Anything change your mind?

[Elmo]

I will vote Cephrir if we have not lynched Flea by the end of tomorrow.

Pseudovote: Phate, Cephrir

I don't mean he's backed away from Cephrir. I mean, he favoured Cephrir with no mention of Phate one post, and then they were equal the next post, when he hasn't even spoken to Phate for ages. That is weird. If he's seen something to change his mind, he should be commenting on it, at least, I think. I'm not sure what to make of it, at the moment.

p.s. Sidenote, the deadline mechanics are whoever has the most votes gets the drop, we're not going to have a no lynch any which way about it. Unless I'm wrong.

Also, yea.

vote

:

Phate

.

[Elmo]

Mmm, okay.

[Elmo]

hi

[Elmo]

The vast swathe of people clamouring to end the day yesterday now need to impress me with, well, something.

Yes, I'm being lazy for a bit.

[Elmo]

Beep, what in post 888 changed your mind enough to do an apparent 180?

I'm still rereading, and I'm probably going to vote for MoS after that.

[Elmo]

Beep: Why did you vote MoS in post 885?

[Elmo]

Beep, I still want an explanation for your extremely quick vote on MoS and then subsequent extremely quick U-turn for no apparent reason. I also agree with Rishi.

[Elmo]

HI MIKE <3

Vote

:

Beep! Beep!

. Show you care. Lynch a road runner today.

[Elmo]

Unvote

for ze claim. Which I want, predictably.

Maybe after this day ends something will happen.

Think we've been here before.

[Elmo]

or you could try defending yourself

[Elmo]

Beep, I still want an explanation for your extremely quick vote on MoS and then subsequent extremely quick U-turn for no apparent reason.

With respect to myself, you could start by answering a very simple question. You could also explain why you think CES is scum, for example.

Seriously, I'm

very

careful about giving people the chance to defend themselves and listening carefully to what they have to say when they've been run up, and I find it

amazingly

frustrating when people just collapse for no apparent reason. So don't do that. (Rishi can probably tell you I can change my mind quite rapidly if given good reason! )

[Elmo]

You've just given me a list of stuff he's done without any kind of reasoning as to why it's supposed to mean he's scum. I've been reading the same game as you, and I've come to different conclusions, so this is the part where you try and explain how you arrived at those conclusions, yes?

You also, unsurprisingly, haven't answered my question. The really simple question that I quoted in my last post, you know, that one I've been asking you to respond to for I don't know how long? Does it surprise you that people think you're dodging the question at this point?

[Elmo]

Elmo, read my posts. I already answered your question.

Really? Where?

Good grief. I have to give you reasoning for CES's transparently scummy posts??? It is so self-evident.

Okay. I'll sit here and say "I don't understand why you think CES is scum", and you can sit there and say "But it's self-evident! Why do I need to give reasoning!?" and we'll keep doing that indefinitely. Because that's a great way to move the game forward.

I'll answer, then please lynch me immediately after and lose the game if you're town.

That's twice. This attitude is pathetic. If you ask again, I'm going to vote you and leave it there unless you convince me to move it; if you

do

get lynched as town, you have no right to complain.

I voted MoS because on the surface CES's case made sense. Then I voted CES, because MoS's defense made MORE sense, then I looked at CES's posts in isolation, and MoS's posts in isolation, and I decided that one of these two is scum, and that's CES.

Here we go again. I've read

what

you've done. I've asked

why

you did that. Specifically, things like:

* Why did you not check CES's case more thoroughly before voting?
* Why did MoS's defence make more sense than CES's case?
* Why did you decide one of those two is scum?

You've basically reiterated what you've done without providing any detailed reasoning as to

why

. The same thing is present in your case on CES; you say that you "smell an anti-town agenda" without showing how he's harmed the town, for example. I think it would be best if CES would respond to that case rather than me, but what you've said doesn't make me feel better about you right now.

Mike: From memory, there was a lacklustre random voting stage, then everyone unvoted for no apparent reason, then someone (Faerielord?) proposed a massclaim, then I posted why massclaim was a bad idea, then everyone got bored after discussion about the massclaim died down, then there was this hideous wagon on Faerielord (hi, MoS is scum), then everyone was

still

idle, then we wagoned Miztif who claimed triumvirate near deadline, then we lynched Phate. Night 1, the roleblocker blocked Cephrir who happened to have the cop ability. Then CES said MoS is scum, Beep voted MoS, MoS quoted a few random things he said beforehand, Beep did a complete 180 and voted CES, and now people are voting Beep whilst being idle.

Oh, yeah, when we get there: INVESTIGATE MASTERMIND OF SIN TONIGHT. REALLY.

[Elmo]

Abandon. I haven't been enjoying this for a long while, and I suspect that's true of everyone else.

[Elmo]

I am right about both of them, go me. For how many months have I been saying MoS was scum? Seriously nao. People need to make me king, we'd have had scum lynch d1, scum lynch d2.

Thought there was

something

odd about MBF, never really thought he was scum though. Did anyone figure me out?