Open 81 - The New C9 - Game Over

[iamausername]

Vote: -TinVision-

. Because he was the mod last time I played this setup, and that is obviously going to confuse me. And the dashes technically make him first alphabetically.

i should mention that the lynch is now either strife or armlx.

i would like everyone who checks in from here on out to say which of those two they find scummier, just from the posts they've made so far.

strife looks scummier at the moment, because I think following onto the first bandwagon with any reasoning behind it at all is slightly scummier than starting said wagon.

[iamausername]

roflcopter, your 'trap' is terrible. Town have just as much reason as scum to want you to actually give some reasoning when you declare someone 'obvious town'.

Greasy Spot, Forbiddanlight, don't answer if you don't feel that either of armlx/strife is the scummiest so far in the game.

Why should that affect their inclination to answer? If they think someone else is scummier, I'm sure they're perfectly capable of saying so.

[iamausername]

How exactly does roflcopter's question tarnish the people's voice?

[iamausername]

@iamausername, you may think its a stupid trap, but it worked. when someone says "player x is obvtown" at the start of day one, and someone else says "why?" the only answer they're looking for or thinking is "because i'm a town power role duh."

Eh, I can kind of see where you're coming from, but I think it's equally possible that a pro-town player would ask that because they don't want to let anyone set a precedent of making statements about other people's alignments without anything to back them up.

Unvote, Vote: Korts

, by the way. I can't see a pro-town reason to object so strongly to this line of questioning.

[iamausername]

You ask us which we think is scummiest yet there is no case against Strife so how could I possibly decide right now?

What do you mean by "there is no case against Strife"? Do you mean that you don't think he's done anything scummy, or just that no one has pointed out what scummy things he's done?

[iamausername]

You ask us which we think is scummiest yet there is no case against Strife so how could I possibly decide right now?

What do you mean by "there is no case against Strife"? Do you mean that you don't think he's done anything scummy, or just that no one has pointed out what scummy things he's done?

That's exactly what I mean. I haven't seen anything scummy yet and you and rofl pushing his lynch haven't shown anything that gives cause for his lynch at this time.

So do you think there

is

a case against armlx?

p.s. Outing the masons at this stage is a terrible idea.

[iamausername]

You ask us which we think is scummiest yet there is no case against Strife so how could I possibly decide right now?

What do you mean by "there is no case against Strife"? Do you mean that you don't think he's done anything scummy, or just that no one has pointed out what scummy things he's done?

That's exactly what I mean. I haven't seen anything scummy yet and you and rofl pushing his lynch haven't shown anything that gives cause for his lynch at this time.

So do you think there

is

a case against armlx?

Hi, Greasy Spot, this question would still like an answer.

It's pretty absurd that we've already had three claims at this point (albiet one of them involuntary). If everybody could stop doing that now, that'd be lovely.

[iamausername]

Also, I don't think I need to justify my intuition, but whatever.

No.

[iamausername]

I claimed to be a regular townie...I don't think that really counts as claiming, lol.

Why wouldn't it?

[iamausername]

No. Everyone claims to be pro-town, but whether or not they have a power role is not something they ought to be addressing until such time as they are close to being lynched. Well, on day one, at any rate.

As a vanilla townie, claiming lowers the number of potential townies from the scum's point of view, and it is thus anti-town to do so at such small provocation.

[iamausername]

Um...that's...pretty ridiculous. The scum know who they aren't. They already know I'm a townie, no matter what I said.

But before your claim, they didn't know if you had a power role or not. Also, there are two scum factions in this setup (SK and mafia), so actually, scum wouldn't

know

you're a townie even if you are telling the truth.

And plus, I could be lying about being a townie, and could have a role I'd rather keep hidden. I don't, but it's a possibility.

And if you did, and were later forced to claim truthfully, people would later come back to this claim as a reason to doubt your future claim. Here's a thought; If you have a power role you want to keep hidden,

don't claim anything at all.

There's also the fact that since it looks like we had a rather fast wagon on me that possibly could have gone to completion, claiming regular townie at least reassures people they aren't killing an aux.

You weren't even at half the votes needed for a lynch. It would take some really dumb play from a lot of people for you to go from 4 votes to 9 without a chance to post in between, so your claim came far too early.

And none of this is remotely consistent with the suggestion that your claim might not actually be true.

Really, I don't see stating "I am a vanilla townie" as a tell either way.

'Anti-town' isn't the same as 'scummy'. I more or less agree with this statement.

Unvote, Vote: Greasy Spot

, by the way, which I should have done when I first noted that he failed to answer my question.

[iamausername]

Unvote, Vote: Greasy Spot

, by the way, which I should have done when I first noted that he failed to answer my question.

What authority in this game do you have to demand me to answer a question.

Um, my authority as a scumhunter. If you're town, why would you have a reason to not answer my question?

Unless your too busy to read the thread and note that both Korts and myself have current arguments against Armix, you wouldn't be asking this stupidly obvious question.

OK, I'll take that as an answer. So, why say:

You ask us which we think is scummiest yet there is no case against Strife so how could I possibly decide right now?

when you obviously

had

decided who you thought was scummier?

[iamausername]

unvote

Why?

[iamausername]

So, why say:

You ask us which we think is scummiest yet there is no case against Strife so how could I possibly decide right now?

when you obviously

had

decided who you thought was scummier?

At the time I made that statement (which was in the beginning of the game) I didn't find either one of them scummy enough to vote.

Voting doesn't come into it. The question was simply asking which you found scummier.

You bring it up now knowing full well that much more scum hunting has been going on, so that statement is not even relevant now.

Why would the fact that other scumhunting is going on make any difference to its relevance?

[iamausername]

IAU was semi-in the right to vote. You not answering his question is definitely votable, but he didn't do it in the post he asked again, and instead waited till later, without you posting in between, to vote.

Are you suggesting that my delay in voting is scummy? What do you think I stood to gain, as scum, by doing so?

[iamausername]

Voting doesn't come into it. The question was simply asking which you found scummier.

I take issue with the question not having a neither option. If GS hadn't stalled on answering, I would 100% support him instead of being on both sides.

Who said the question didn't have a neither option?

And which stall are you talking about here, the stall on roflcopter's initial question, or the stall on my request for elaboration on his response to the former? Or both? (Or neither? )

[iamausername]

At post 17 my answer is, neither, for lack of sufficient evidence.

So what happened between post 17 and post 31 to change your answer to "You ask us which we think is scummiest yet there is no case against Strife so how could I possibly decide right now?"?

[iamausername]

And by 31, I mean 42.

[iamausername]

I'm not the one who apparently changed my answer after 25 posts.

[iamausername]

OK, so let's get back to the original point; why say you can't decide between armlx and strife when you did, in fact, think armlx was scummier?

Alternatively, if you didn't think either was scummier than the other, why specifically say that there was no case against strife?

PS, thanks for the OMGUS, I shall treasure it always.

[iamausername]

It's true that he can hit power roles, but he doesn't have to kill randomly.

He does on Night 0.

Which is what was being discussed.

[iamausername]

I doubt I'm gonna be an NK target for it

Oh no, scum are totally going to go for a claimed vanilla townie.

[iamausername]

This is poor logic because there is 5 scum compared to 15 town. So even if you eliminate 1 town (the vig himself), it's still only a 5 in 19 chance of hitting scum, with a decent chance of hitting a town power role.

I will be happy to argue the logic behind N0 vigging outside the thread some other time, but for now no one should bring up the subject any more as it will give away who can't be the vig if people agree/disagree.

And with that, you've just given away that you're not the vig. Good job.

roflcopter, this is what rolefishing looks like.

Unvote, Vote: Korts

[iamausername]

What benefit did you think that post could have?

[iamausername]

I actually buy Korts' defense that he misinterpreted armlx. What I think the latter is saying is that vigging Night 0 has its reasons. Yes, Korts may have ended up rolefishing as a result, but it's minor compared to Lowell asking the masons to claim Day 1.

I believe Korts misinterpreted armlx too, but I don't see how that changes the fact that he was rolefishing.

And I don't think it is minor compared to Lowell asking for mason claims. The idea behind rolefishing is that you make some seemingly innocuous comment, and see if anyone's reactions to it unconsciously betray some hint about their role. Which is what I believe Korts was doing.

If you directly ask them to claim, that's not going to happen. The only reason to directly ask someone to claim, whichever side you're on, is if you genuinely believe that it could help the town for them to do so. I don't agree with Lowell that D1 is the optimum time for masons to claim, but I don't think he's scummy for thinking it is, and my opinion on the matter is pretty immaterial anyway seeing as how they have claimed.

[iamausername]

Let me say I don't support the KortS lynch. I feel he made an honest mistake, that was worth an FoS, but he doesn't need to die for it.

If you think it was an honest mistake, why is it worth a FoS?

---

BlakAdder case is not terrible, but Korts and StrangerCoug have clearly outed themselves as scumbuddies.

armlx, it was stupidly, blatantly obvious who my mason partner was if i just claimed mason, thanks to you rolefishing for just that information.

Pretty sure it was stupidly, blatantly obvious who your mason partner is thanks to you saying "iron man is obviously town. obviously.", which was nothing to do with armlx. Don't understand why you're pursuing the armlx wagon when it's led by obvscum.

[iamausername]

I evidently missed that quote when it was originally posted, but saw it in my catch up read just now, and felt a need to point out how wrongheaded it is.

[iamausername]

setting up a Day 2 lynch is

never

good

Not true. Setting up a D2 lynch is not good if it's done regardless of the outcome of D1, but I don't see a problem with pointing out connections when they're this obvious, and if one of those players turns up scum, of course the other is going to be a leading lynch candidate the next day.

trying to pin SC to me while ignoring the same tell in the case of forbiddanlight is

very

bad.

forbiddanlight does not have nearly the same connection to you as SC, and the fact that you're so desperately pushing the idea that she does just makes me more convinced that you and SC are scumbuddies freaking out because you've been caught so soon.

[iamausername]

Greasy Spot would make an excellent vig kill.

[iamausername]

And, by the by, I certainly won't argue that I asked some leading questions, but I disagree that my final pair of questions was presenting Greasy with a view that he never directly said he had. I could have just asked those questions immediately, without all the preamble, but I thought that Greasy Spot might slip up and implicate himself further if I approached from another angle. I don't think he did, but I still find the initial post extremely suspicious.

If he'd just said "How can we possibly decide right now?", that would be fine, if he'd just said "There is no case against Strife", that would be fine, but the combination of the two creates a clear inconsistency. Either he thought armlx was scummier than Strife, in which case I'd like to know why he didn't just say so, or he didn't, in which case I'd like to know why he specified that there was no case against Strife. One of those is clearly a view that he had, unless you think he actually thought Strife was scummier than armlx, in which case his initial post makes even less sense.

[iamausername]

How could I decide which case to go with when one of them didn't even have a case.

Maybe you could read their posts and make a case yourself? But I guess scumhunting's a lot easier when all you have to do is look for the first Vote: Greasy Spot and never stop OMGUSing.

---

Wow, silence. Are you really suggesting we should lynch fl just because she isn't a power role, or do you actually think she's done anything suspicious?

fl, you have a vote, use it.

[iamausername]

I do apologise. I remember asking you about another FoS you'd made earlier and evidently got the idea in my head that you were throwing FoSes around without actually voting. SC is an entirely acceptable vote.

[iamausername]

Greasy Spot would make an excellent vig kill.

This post is scummy because:
a) Trying to control the Vig's kill-choice is anti-town
b) Greasy Spot actually provided a bit of a case against AIUN
c) Like 4 people have already said Vamp would be an excellent vig
d) You suggesting otherwise is defending Vamp (see b)

Wait, so it's OK for people to direct the vig to kill Vamp, but not Greasy Spot? GS/strife connection is starting to look as significant as Korts/SC.

By the way, I'm absolutely in favour of a Vamp vidging too, and have never said otherwise.

[iamausername]

Point b) is total crap, since Greasy Spot has never presented any case against me besides "too stupid to be a townie", which is in fact not a case at all.

Point c/d) is also crap, because as I said, I'm in favour of a Vamp vig as well.

Point a) is also wrong, for the record.

Also, "trying to undermine the majority" is not a scum tell. Anything else?

[iamausername]

Yes, but we're not talking about presenting a different view, we're talking about forcing that view on the whole town, without the consent of the majority.

This is such a ridiculous statement I don't even know how to respond to it.

---

I'm pretty sure whoever the vig is is reading your posts and mine, because the vig might completely throw GS and Vamp out the window and pick someone else, if only for the moment.

Well, exactly, the only opinion about who the vig should kill is that of the vig him/herself. If they disagree with the reasoning behind people's suggestions, then they can make their own choice and there's nothing anyone else can do about it. If it's good reasoning, hopefully they won't disagree with it.

I think the reasoning for vidging Vamp or Greasy Spot (and it is the same reasoning) is good. Both these players are totally useless if they're on the side of town, and if they're not, it will be hard for us to detect this, because they're not making any attempt to actually play the game. It's much better to vig these kind of players than lynch them, because the voting records on these lynches will give us far less information than those on a player who is actually participating because, as armlx said in his original vig-directing post, their lynches are not likely to be polarising.

In fact, iamausername, your response to point d implies that you approve of both Greasy Spot and Vamparific vigged. What's up with that?

See above. Obviously, this would take more than one night. That's fine by me.

Calling others' arguments "idiocy" and not commenting further isn't just rude. That's also not a valid refutation of the argument.

He wasn't saying Greasy Spot's argument was based on idiocy, he's saying Greasy Spot's reason for voting me was "idiocy". As in, I am the idiot. You can't really make a more valid refutation of that argument than "that's not a legitimate reason to vote".

Considering multiple (scummy/lurking) players for vigging is just not, as I see it, scummy.

Weren't you arguing the exact opposite like, three posts earlier?

[iamausername]

IGMEOY: armlx

Way to be polite about it.

(Note: I don't object to your saying we shouldn't discuss the vig, as I tried to avoid talking about it as well. What I object to is the way you said it.)

Impoliteness is

definitely

not a scumtell.

I didn't suggest lynching her. I just stated that might be what I would do if I had to decide now, as I haven't been convinced about anyone to be likely to be scum. After re-reading I'm further convinced that Vamparific's actions don't make sense and would probably lynch him rather than forbiddanlight.

So you don't have any thoughts at all on any of the players who have been major points of discussion today? You have completely neutral reads on Korts, armlx, StrangerCoug, iamausername, BlakAdder, etc.?

P.S. I enjoyed Korts and StrangerCoug's little staged tussle there. So convincing.

[iamausername]

Hey, Lowell, could you try explaining your vote on Sun Tzu in a way that makes sense to people in

this

game?

[iamausername]

3 Would you say it is fair to describe your play today as jumping, tarzan-style, from popular wagon to popular wagon?

The wording of this question makes me laugh every time I read it, by the way.

[iamausername]

Lowell, that's a terrible vote at this point. You're not going to start a wagon based on nothing.

I'm still feeling a Korts lynch, but StrangerCoug would also be a fine choice.

[iamausername]

If you're going to vig on N0, then spite is as good a reason as any.

[iamausername]

The case on Korts is certainly not entirely based on an SC connection, since it came up before there was any major suspicion of SC, although SC being vig weakens it some.

TinVision needs to say more, but he's not the only one, and I'm not really seeing what sets him apart from other lurkers (like, say, Sun Tzu, Jordan, silence).

Gonna take a closer look at things later, but right now I think I'd be most likely to switch to strife or BlakAdder, if at all.

[iamausername]

Here's a reason why using the vig to test the masons is a bad idea; it's unnecessary, because the SK will almost certainly be doing that for us before LYLO.

That's not even mentioning the fact that potentially outing half your scum team on the 50/50 chance that there are no real masons to counterclaim is an insane play that I couldn't see roflcopter trying, for all of his madness.

[iamausername]

IAUN, more likely mafia then SK, but same diff.

Well, not if they actually turn out to be lying scum.

[iamausername]

However, the idea of lynching a mason to test them is retarded.

Muerrto wasn't suggesting that we

lynch

the masons, but that we get our vig to kill them. Not that that's a whole lot better.
However, I don't think his suggestion is scummy for the same reasons I didn't think Lowell wanting masons to claim immediately was scummy. Dumb, not scum.

Why? Masons are simply townies who can PM. If I was mafia OR an SK there's no way I'd waste my kill on a mason instead of hunting a power role.

Masons are townies who can PM,

and will never be lynched after claiming

. That's far more significant than being able to PM.

Also, SK is inv-immune, so he has no need to hunt cops. One doc is already dead. Vig has claimed. So, at the most, he's got one doctor to worry about hunting. I'm pretty sure he'll be taking out a claimed mason soon enough.

The whole town is taking Rofl's word for gospel.

I'm honestly not seeing a lot of this, most people have been either ignoring or disagreeing with his "WE ARE LYNCHING THESE PEOPLE" posts.

IAUN: I have no scum read on you whatsoever but Kort never rolefished. He confirmed what Armlx had already said(wrong but till). Pretend Armlx HAD been against a night 0 kill. Then HE'S the own who accidently claimed non-vig. Kort reapeating it was stupid, not rolefishing, and not scummy(as stated above about him being able to PM and all).

Yes, if armlx had said what Korts thought he said, it would have been dumb. Korts still would have been rolefishing, because the way armlx (and possibly others) reacted to Korts pointing out armlx's apparent mistake could give more clues about the identity of the vig. I mean, I can see townKorts saying it without thinking, but it

was

rolefishing.

---

After a reread,

Unvote, Vote: BlakAdder

. He's been mostly lurking, popping in from time to time to make a poorly or not at all reasoned vote on a popular wagon (roflcopter here, StrangerCoug here), or a post that has no actual game relevance (asking for a votecount, telling everyone else to post more, etc.).

Also, re forbiddenlight's wall o' text post:

EBWOP: Finally breached the massive wall of text. Great job there, Forbiddan. This just made scumhunting loads easier.
In regards to the content itself, you did a good job of keeping neutral, not painting anyone in a good or negative light.
I'll have finished going over my own notes in a minute, and I'll have a more game-related post.

Pretty much freely admitting that he's just going to go along with someone else's reasoning, plus some total buddying up to fl. Also, this "more game-related post" doesn't appear to have ever materialised.

Also think this:

Crap, what is that, four claims on Day one, now?

is a scumtell in much the same way as the classic 'congratulating the doc'/'moaning about how bad the previous night was' tells are.

His desparation to distance himself from TinVision here is likely significant too.

[iamausername]

But being the sucker I am for WIFOM, I'm not sold that he'd take such a ridiculous stance (kill masons) and pursue it for so long were he scum.

This stance is weakened by the fact that Muerrto himself pointed it out before anyone else.

[iamausername]

Speaking of TinVision, he hasn't posted in a week. Jordan hasn't posted in even longer, also.

Mod, can we get prods on TinVision & Jordan please?

[iamausername]

unvote, vote Sun Tzu

. If he's scum he'll come totally unglued. Let's try it.

What makes you say this, because he's a newbie? Well, no offense to Sun Tzu or other newbies btw, quite often inexperienced players, regardless of their alignment, panic when put under pressure, one of the main reasons why Day 1's so often end in a town lynch, coupled with lack of info. You as an experienced player should know this. I don't like at all how you picked on Sun Tzu simply for being a newbie, which doesn't at all affect his alignment, nor your fallacy that only newbie-scum panic when placed under pressure, it seems a lot like trying to set up an easy lynch.

HOS: Lowell

.

Why do you assume that Lowell is doing this because Sun Tzu is a newbie? This is a pretty long rant to come out with based entirely on fabricated motives that you've attributed to Lowell.

I feel that there is almost certainly a connection between Blakadder and Tin (now Orangepenguin), and it's not particularly likely to be a Mason Connection... Tbh, I actually feel Penguin is a better place for my vote, despite the bandwagon on Adder, I'm more sure on Penguin being scum.

Vote: Penguin

Could you explain why Tin/penguin seems scummier than BA? Because I'm not seeing anything much against Tin that doesn't entirely depend on BA being scum.

Because there were some stuff building on armix at the time but absolutely nothing on strife. At the time I didn't think either was acting scummy

What do you mean by 'stuff building on armlx'?

[iamausername]

What do you mean by 'stuff building on armlx'?

Go read it yourself. It was on the first 17 posts.

I'm not asking what stuff was building on armlx, I'm asking what the word 'stuff' actually means in this context. It's rather vague.

[iamausername]

To prevent this game from dragging I am setting a deadline. The deadline will be Tuesday 29th July at 2:00 am GMT.

Yeah there is. Here.

I totally missed this before.

Mod, could you possibly edit "Deadlined" or something into the thread title?

I know that some people use that kind of thing as an indication of which games to focus their attention on when they're pressed for time, and activity has rather died down lately.

[iamausername]

Just noticed this:

I will have absolutely no access to a computer from July 19 - 26. Don't replace me, I'll be back ASAP.

So, yeah.

[iamausername]

If BlakAdder

has

an uncountered powerrole, I say we vote for an extension at that time

Possible slip?

If BA claims a power role, regardless of countering, I say we vote for an extension at that time. If he claims cop, we don't want a counter, because there might be two of them and it would prove nothing.

[iamausername]

Also, SC killing someone only proves he's either an SK OR a Vig, not a Vig.

SC not being killed by the real vig tonight would prove that he's a vig, however.

[iamausername]

Dammit, people need to stop NKing me. Go scum!