Mafia 64: The New "C9" - Game over!

[Glork]

No, Shteven. You didn't revise the 40% figure until

after I had asked why you didn't say anything more about Guardian

. It is because of *THIS* that I was going "wtf, this guy's votign somebody he thinks has a pretty good chance of being the Doc?"

I realize 100% that

SINCE THEN

you have revised your opinion. But at the time, I saw and was thinking "huh, 40% yet he's voting him." Admittedly, I did not see the "I'm becoming less sure of his claim" comment. I hereby officially rescind that point against you.

And for his earlier post:

But for clarification, just for you, Shteven:
I think that YB has been scummy.
I think that you have been scummy.
Yesterday, you voted Albert instead of YB.
Today, YB seems to be deflecting attention to Spryte and away from you.

Let's number these points 1 through 4.

1) opinion; you're entitled to it.
2) opinion, you're entitled to it.
3) As did 7 other people; this is rather week by itself.
4) opinion. I can't control the actions of others. If all of the surviving players were attacking me I would already be lynched.

Gee. It's fucking

CRAZY

how I base my suspicions on MY PERCIEVED OPINIONS OF OTHER PLAYERS' SCUMMINESS AND INTERACTIONS.

It's almost like I'm playing Mafia or something. *gasp*



And 3) is most certainly *NOT* strict burden of proficiency. It's more the fact that you didn't go after YB (whom I also percieve to be scum, obviously) that made me think there was a connection. Point 3) is poorly worded. It should probably read "3) You showed a clear preference for lynching Albert over YB."
Yes, if you took point 3) in absolute isolation, it would be nothing more than burden of proficiency. But you and I both know that context is everything in mafia. Nice spin, but it ain't gonna fly with me.

[Glork]

Er, wait, that *IS* what I said in Point 3. So basically, you chose to mischaracterize the "lynch Albert" while ignoring the "lynch YB" and the fact that Points 1, 2, and 4 are

ENTIRELY RELEVEANT TO MY OVERALL OPINION AND THAT ALL FOUR POINTS ARE INTERRELATED

.

[Glork]

If I may play a little as MBL - SK, kill Guardian, k? 'cause, I don't see any way that Guardian is SK.

Whoa. Time out. When I said "the SK is probably going to end up killing Guardian," both AE and you flew off the handle at me. And yet now you're directly telling the SK to kill Guardian.


What the fuck, inHim?

[Glork]

However, I find it highly likely (say, 80%) that the SK will target Guardian (again, unless Guardian is the SK -- a probability which I find to be insignificant). I'd give about a 50% chance of scum targeting Guardian. There is only a 50% chance that there is even another Doctor alive, and probably only a 60% chance that any living Doctor would protect Guardian.

Hey Glork? Stop telling the Serial Killer what to do, ok?

FoS: Glork

for essentially saying "Hey SK, you kill the doc and the mafia'll kill someone else, ok?"

I think you just hit the nail on the head. Don't just FoS... vote, please.

Honestly, inHim. I demand a thorough explanation

IMMEDIATELY

.

[Glork]

You've got to be kidding me.

That's

your explanation?

"Guardian will probably be killed by the SK" means I'm scum, but "Hay SK, get rid of the Doc" doesn't mean you're scum?


In fact, I would argue that the uncertainty is better for the town than your request.
1) Assuming the SK takes your advice, the Mafia knows not to target the SK
--1a) If there is no SK death tonight, both scumgroups will know that there is a second doc in the game who protected Guardian.
--1b) If Guardian dies, both scums would know that either there is no doc, or they did not think that Guardian was worth protecting
2) The possibility of the SK doing something deviant should weigh pretty heavily on the scums' decision tonight:
--2a) Factors which could keep Guardian from dying:
-----2z) (Second) Doc protects Guardian
-----2y) SK elects to kill Guardian tonight
-----2x) Guardian is the SK
--2b) Factors which would result in Guardian dying:
-----2v) No Doctor (or no second Doctor if Guardian is one)
-----2u) SK + Mafia both kill Guardian and he does not recieve double-protection (presumably because he himself is one of the Doctors)


Now, of course, the above assumes that Guardian is not the SK. However, like you, I agree on that point. Still, it's an awful lot to consider, and if the scums don't know what each other are doing, it's a hell of a lot harder for them to get more information on the setup. The way you're doing it, there's ZERO doubt what the SK would do, and both scumgroups will have an assload of information about the setup tomorrow.

[Glork]

here goes "Glork for the greater good" again. The tone of those particular posts = so scummy.

....and you continue to make no sense whatsoever.

Promoting what is best for the town is good for the town. I fail to see how that's scummy.

Quoting AE for saying "Glork is telling the SK what to do" and then

TELLING THE SK WHAT TO DO

is hypocritical at best. Really, if you hadn't quoted that post, which emphasized the "directing the SK" part, I probably wouldn't be going off like that. But you said that AE "hit the nail on the head" with "Glork is directing the SK" and now you're trying to direct the SK. And you're using nothing more than semantics/word choice to paint some huge vast difference between your play and my play, when that difference

simply doesn't exist

in the scope you're painting it out to be.



Really, inHim. It's okay to admit that you are/were wrong. Either rescind the earlier point against me or concede my current point against you. You're just digging a deeper hole by trying to claim that semantics and "tone" make the difference between "GlorkScum" and "inHimTown."

[Glork]

I'm going to make one quick statment, and then I think we should probably save this debate for the postgame: While I agree that tone has its place, and that it can be a deciding factor, content most often takes precedence, in my opinion. In this case, I happen to feel that the difference in tone is not enough to override the similarities in the content we posted, which is why I feel I've been slighted and why I felt you were being so hypocritical.

Looking at things from your perspective, I think I can see where you're coming from. I disagree completely, but I'm willing to agree to disagree, at least for now. I still find you to be probably protown (and actually, your most recent post pinged hard on my TownMeter, which is comforting), and your explanation has satisfied me for the time being. Again -- from a gameplay/theory perspective I disagree with you, but I'm willing to take the explanation at face value until further notice.

[Glork]

Mmmm, Strawman. Again, I don't think you're scum based solely on your vote for Albert. I have no idea why you're trying to isolate that point.




Come on, Shteven. Tell me that if you suspected A and you suspected B and you saw two possible links between A and B that you'd come to the conclusion that A and B are probably scumbuddies. I cannot believe that you are criticizing that conclusion on my part. It is pure and simple logic that drives such a conclusion. Nothing more, nothing less.

[Glork]

But GIVEN that the other points are ENTIRELY REASONABLE, wouldn't that make Point 3 seem reasonable, too? Are you trying to deny that context is relevant when looking at Point 3?

You never directly answered the question I posed in the last post. Why?

[Glork]

Sorry. Statment/Request. Techincality

Tell me that if you suspected A and you suspected B and you saw two possible links between A and B that you'd come to the conclusion that A and B are probably scumbuddies.

[Glork]

Yeah, Jack, it's called "playing both sides of the debate." Common scum tactic.

And Shteven, you're still being incredibly thick. I am not accusing ten (or even eight) players of being scum for voting for Albert. I am saying that

YOU

having voted Albert

IN COMBINATION WITH THE OTHER POINTS

is an indication that

YOU

are more likely to be scum.


I'm really getting sick of the strawmen and misrepresentations. You can die in a fire now. Or in a noose. Either way.

[Glork]

Unvote

[Glork]

I'm starting to wonder if YB's "playing both sides of arguments" tendency is related to his playstyle in general, Jack.

I do not support an inHim lynch.

I think I could still support a Shteven lynch.

I'd like to see more pressure on both MBL and Sarcastro, and I'm sure there are lower-profile players who are lurking through this mess.

[Glork]

I think if inHim is scum caught with his pants down, he's probably the SK and he was trying to signal to the scums that he's going to target Guardian.

I agree completely with Guardian's post about YB being terrible town, which is why I've put him back down on my list. However, what I find strange is that in consecutive posts, Guardian says that "a YB lynch...would not disappoint [him]" and then says he thinks YB is just bad town. Mind explaining that one, Guardian?

Vote: Sarcastro
Mod(s): Prod MrBuddyLee

, please.

Mod Edit by PJ: MBL has been prodded.

[Glork]

TCS, do you honestly think that all of the scums are people who are sitting right in the limelight? Have you even considered the possibility that at least one or two of them are trying to skate by -- whether they're not contributing at all, or popping in here or there to say a few choice words and support the convenient wagon(s) at the time?

Case in point: Calvin & Hobbes Mafia just ended recently. While LoudmouthLee, Glork, PJ/Pooky, and Thok ripped each other to shreds, VitaminR snuck completely under the spotlight


Now, TCS... The last comment you made about various players:

• MBL, August 3: "MBL seems like he wants to suicide though. " --Nothing more than a throwaway comment, and no other comments since the start of D2.
  
• BillyTwilight, July 13: "I'm sure he'd mention his discomfort because of my overwhelming townie-ness. " (in response to a question by Jack posed to Billy)
  
• Battle Mage, July 13: "Oh, and Vote: Battle Mage. A birdy told me. " -- A completely unsubstantiated vote, as far as I can tell
  
• ManaSpryte, HackerHuck, Sarcastro, Jack, Yosarian2 --
  NOTHING AT ALL SINCE THE START OF DAY TWO

This game, I would imagine, is progressing almost ideally for the scums right now. All of the focus is on like four players, and they're just sinking their teeth into each other.

TCS, I want you to post your thoughts on

EVERY

single player in that last bullet point, and I would like you to run full/thorough analyses on at least two of them. Furthermore, I would like you to explain whether you really think that all of the scums would be sitting right in the game's spotlight, all attacking each other.

Start pulling our weight, and stop playing like an idiot, TCS. I know you're capable of more than this.


In fact...

Modprod: Sarcastro, Yos2 and ManaSpryte

in addition to the MBL prod I requested earlier.
None of these players has posted in at least four days, and many of them have not posted in a solid week. There is a deadline coming up before too long, and there are far too many lurkers in this game.

Mod Edit by PJ: Yosarian2 and ManaSpryte have been prodded. Sarcastro has since posted.

[Glork]

Cute, TCS. So you're going to just go an entire gameday without commenting even once on a full one-third of the players? Can't stomach the fact that I'm right about your shoddy play, so you're going to pretend to get all pissed off and basically OMGUS me? Why don't you have an *actual* response to the points I made about why your play is terrible?


Guardian: Sarcastro's play in this game is reminiscent of Newbie 368 where he was an IC with me. He basically did the same thing: Lurked a lot, made a few comments which were fairly uninsightful, and kept promising to do better without actually doing so. Eventually he got replaced, and then his replacement dropped, and then the mod abandoned the game... but he was scum nonetheless, and my read on him was dead accurate.


Jack: Having MoS die is probably insignificant in the grander scheme of things. In the game I cited, Calvin & Hobbes Mafia, there were only two mafiates (it was a 10-2 Mountainous setup), and we lynched one of them D1, and

then

VitaminR slid under the radar and the vocal players all got each other killed. The numbers can be misleading. And the chances of the "top suspects" being scum is clearly in debate. I don't think YB is scum, I think inHim is rather unlikely to be scum (in spite of his play -- like I said, *if* he's scum, he's probably the SK). Shteven is still a pretty good candidate, but I'd guess that 2 (maybe as many as three) of the living scums are semi-lurkers or full-blown lurkers, and that they're just not gettnig noticed.

[Glork]

This feels like Good Cop, Bad Cop with Guardian/Me grilling TCS. Guardian is playing the role of JDodge, and I am playing the role of Bad Cop. Guardian, I'll get to your request by the end of Thursday.


Fake or not, TCS's current attiude and behavior are not going to help him or the rest of the town at all. If he can make an objective, sound argument as to why his actions in this game are strong, I'm willing to listen. However, I've seen a tunnel-visioned and lazy player who is continually failing to take any initiative to look elsewhere. Unfortunately, there are

LOTS

of tunnel-visioned and lazy players who are continually failing to take any initiative and look elsewhere.

[Glork]

EBWOP: I will get to ManaSpryte by the end of Thursday (visitor coming this afternoon through tomorrow). I thought I had mentioned a bit about her earlier, when AE was attacking her, but perhaps I didn't.

[Glork]

Oh, so now me making a valid point against you is "trying to seem pro-town...to deflect suspicion"? Nevermind that I have a completely legitimate point about the fact that

you've not said a single word about five out of fifteen living players during this game-day

.

[Glork]

I suppose I'm a little miffed that you don't seem to care that a third of the town is lurking, and that more players (yourself included) are reasonably active but slacking off and ignoring the inactives. In your own wiki, you say this:

Newbie 290 Vanilla Townie (Scum Win). I screwed up on Day 1, and crypticgeek screwed up on Day 2. Good game by gootentag/Glork;

we lost because the town didn't participate actively in scumhunting.

(Emphasis mine.)
Have you learned

nothing

from that game?


On a separate note: I'm curious to know why you think I'm the

Serial Killer

and not Mafia. What SK-specific tells do you believe I have given off in your opinion?

[Glork]

Jack, what exactly are your thoughts on the lurkers. Which among those four players is most likely to be scum? Which is least likely?

[Glork]

....






Now do you see why I'm bitching about the status of this game and the fact that nobody seems to give a shit that so many players are inactive?

[Glork]

Oh... I guess I've not said as much as I thought I did.

As stated before, Spryte hasn't given us much to work with. I said I found Yos to be more suspect than Spryte, and that I felt earlier that YB was trying to deflect attention/momentum from Shteven onto Spryte.



I don't really see the case against Spryte. I believe that AE has stated that she feels Johhan (Spryte's former incarnation) is playing differently here than he did as town in another game. However, I don't consider that a reliable tell, especially based on a single game of experience. Some players (*points to himself*) intentionally shuffle around their playstyles from game to game specifically to obfuscate that kind of metagaming. Other than that, I don't think anybody has presented nearly enough of a case against Spryte to convince me to vote her. It's mostly either sheeping what AE said or voting her solely because of lurking. I am very underwhelmed.

[Glork]

HH: I'm only "going after" TCS in that I think he's playing terribly by focusing only on the people who already have the most attention on them. Really, the only lurker I think I'd be willing to lynch outright today is Sarcastro. And lo and behold, I'm already voting for him. I also find it odd that you think I'm "going after" TCS, who is on your list; and that I'm voting for and actively attacking Sarcastro, who is on your list; and that I've attacked YB for a significant portion fo the day.... another player on your list.
I would like you to spell out exactly

why

you think each of us is at the top of your list.

Sarc: It's not just your lurking, but also your attitude and "contributions" when you *are* here. The whole "let me pop in to defend myself, make a throwaway comment, and not add anything new to the discussion" (gee, isn't that what you've just done *AGAIN*?) is what gives me a bad feeling about you.
Who do you suspect other than Shteven, and why do you suspect them?

MBL: Elaborate?

Shteven: What do you think of the other inactives from Day Two? Is there anything that distinguishes Sarc from the rest of them? If so, what?


Also, an unofficial vote count, for interested parties:

Unofficial Vote Count:

4 votes for Yogurt Bandit (HackerHuck, ManaSpryte, InHim, BillyTwilight)
3 votes for Sarcastro (Glork, AutumnEvenings, Shteven)
3 votes for Glork (Yogurt Bandit, TCS, MrBuddyLee)
2 votes for InHim (Yosarian2, Jack)
1 vote for Guardian (BattleMage)
1 vote for ManaSpryte (Guardian)
1 votes for Shteven (Sarcastro)

[Glork]

unvote,vote:inhim

We still have 5 days. Do you guys really prefer sarcastro to inhim?

Yes. I would prefer most players to inHim.

[Glork]

MBL, several players have expressed willingness to lynch a player whom they believe is an SK. Why did you single out AE and not anybody else?

[Glork]

EBWOP: Also, you never explained your GlorkVote when I asked you to elaborate. I'd like you to do so.

[Glork]

Unvote, Vote: MBL

[Glork]

I d'no... some (such as AE) might allege that you have been in lurk mode because you need to survive. I remember, after I died in Committee Mafia, I was talking to you and you said that when you go into lurk-mode, people tend to not notice you, and you tend to stay alive. Logical extension: You're more likely to go into lurkmode when you have a greater need or desire to survive.

[Glork]

That or I don't see my #1 suspect being lynched, so I'm applying pressure where I think pressure is deserved.


Y'know... either/or.

[Glork]

What makes you think it was

inHim

who influenced Jack's vote?

[Glork]

Well, I can at least get behind *that* vote. I'd lynch Sarc over YB, inHim, or TCS.

Unvote, Vote: Sarc

[Glork]

I find it reasonable to believe either scenario. Regardless of who was successfully protected, I find it highly unlikely that MBL is a member of the Mafia.

I was reviewing people not on the Sarc wagon, and HH fit the profile of somebody I'd like to look at. Yos2 and Billy did, too. Surprisingly, I don't think Shteven is a member of the Mafia right now. Given how devastating losing a second member by the end of D2 would be, I believe that both other Mafiates were off of the Sarcastro-lynch.

[Glork]

Because Yos2 is smarter than that. He was on ABR rather than YB on Day One (incidentally,

Mod

, today is Day THREE, not Day FOUR), and the whole "I saved Sarc by effectively hammering YB" thing makes it kinda way obvious. Sarc wasn't going to survive much longer, and when he died, Yos would have been absolutely

grilled

on his decision to change the outcome of the lynch.


That and/or Yos never made it on before he got a chance to drop the hammah on YB.

[Glork]

Guardian: YB is definitely

not

the SK. He was the first person to claim on D1, and he claimed Townie. Considering he wasn't going to be counterclaimed (unless he was moronic enough to claim Vigilante or Cop), he could easily have claimed Doc and bought himself some time. As people discussed around the time of his claim, Townie is a weak claim because it gives a town no incentive to keep you alive. Townie is

especially

a bad claim for an SK. It is also especially a bad claim for scum on D1.


I'm not sure why you've listed YB, Glork, and ManaSpryte as possible SKs while leaving off others such as Yos and TCS, whom you've asked to explain their actions more clearly. I get the feeling that you've listed YB because he's been a prime suspect, Glork because two people (inHim and TCS) have accused me of being the SK, and ManaSpryte because... well, I'm not really sure why. Could you elaborate on why the kills "makes sense" for Spryte to have made?


I also take severe issue with your claim that Sarc wouldn't have garnered suspicion had he not been lynched. I find it absolutely likely that he would have been not only

looked at

, but almost certainly

lynched

today.


Shteven: AE said she was absolutely not willing to lynch Guardian. Try again, mate.

I'd like Jack to explain his vote.

I'd also like TCS to explain

why

he thinks Billy is scum, but I don't find that particularly likely, given how obstinate TCS has been. (In fact, I'd still love for TCS to give his thoughts on anybody, but we all saw how well

THAT

went over yesterday. :/ )

[Glork]

I always play to live, because when I'm town and I die the town

inevitably

loses. I'm so sorry that this is borne out in the statistics. No town has ever won a game in which I was lynched as town.

Classic example of Appeal to Emotion. Good job with that, champ.

Mod:

Replace Battle Mage, please. His contributions in the last

MONTH

amount to the following three posts:

i'm going to reread some of this game soon.

shit. have i missed a whole day-night cycle?

this game is next on my reread list. will get to it as soon as i have time.

[Glork]

The mafiates are probably among {HackerHuck, BillyTwilight, Shteven}.... could be up to one of inHim/TCS/Yos, though I find that less likely to be the case.

SK is probably among {MBL, Yos, HH, BT, inHim}.

Number of power (Cops, Docs, Vig) should be obv by now. No comment on masonry at this time.

[Glork]

Unvote, vote: HackerHuck

[Glork]

Sorry for the triple-post.


I'd like

EVERYBODY

to answer Questions 1 and 2 in-thread. However, at this time, I would not like anybody to state reasons for their top suspicions. I plan on grilling people and opening this all up for discussion after everyone has weighed in.

[Glork]

Mana, the reason that claiming and mutually protecting is a bad idea is because twofold:
1) The Mafia and SK will work together to kill one of you. Note that one Doc protection cannot protect against a double-nightkill. Eventually, one of you would be killed, and then the other would be killed.
2) If you both mutually protect each other, the scums have free reign to kill

anybody else in the game

as they see fit. You two might survive, but you're basically offering up

every

other player in the game.




That said, I believe Mana's claim entirely. I think that he meant well by the claim, but that's a pretty common mistake for new Doctors in a two-Doc setup.

I do not think that either Mana or Guardian (again, I believe his claim as well... for the time being) should announce who they will protect, but I think it is reasonable to conclude that Glork/MBL/Mana/Guardian will be high among their potential protection-targets.

YOU ARE IDIOT!

No personal or ad-hom attacks, please. We don't need those in this game.

[Glork]

But I'm still mighty suspicious of both Guardian and Mana at this time. Right now though the mafia DO know who is a real doc among the two of you because it seems like a doc protection at night caused them to miss a kill. With that being the case, someone is not going to be safe tonight...

This is exactly why both Guardian and Mana,

even if they suspect one another

should give serious consideration to targeting each other, but

should not announce in-thread who they will target

.

[Glork]

What I'd really like to point out is that I'm not sure I understand why Glork is suggesting to the docs what they should do.

You don't understand why I told the docs not to divulge their targets ahead of time? Please, if you have an argument for telling Doctors to reveal their targets ahead of time (that doesn't fall to simple WIFOM), I'm more than happy to listen.


The comment on us being more likely to be protected was nothing more than a simple observation. If the Mafia tried to kill somebody who was protected, it's perfectly reasonable to conclude that the Doc might try to keep them safe once again:

• Premise A:
  Doctors protect players whom they believe are protown.
  
• Premise B:
  There is a significant possibility that the lack of a mafia kill was due to Doctor protection.
  
• Observation A:
  A Doctor who protected somebody they believe to be protown and who observed a missing Mafia kill could reasonably conclude that the Mafia tried to kill their target.
  
• Conclusion A:
  The Doctor finds their target A) Less likely to be Mafia; and B) Reasonably likely to be a target for a Mafia kill
  
• Conclusion B:
  From Conclusion A, the Doctor will give serious consideration to protecting his target a second time

I would argue that it is also reasonable to conclude that a Doctor will protect a fellow Doctor, provided he believes (or even finds it significantly possible) that the other claimed Doctor is telling the truth. If you'd like me to go through that thought process, I can.

That's how I arrived at my "MBL/Glork/Mana/Guardian will be among potential targets considered" conclusion.

I'm really not sure why you take issue with my stated observation, though I welcome you to critique my line of thinking. If you feel that there is something wrong with any of my points, let me know.

Regarding the "doublekill" theory, I find that to be rather unlikely. I believe that the Mod would list the victim as having been both shot and chainsawed. Doublekill + One Doc Protection is possible, though I find that to be somewhat unlikely. I suppose we can try to clear this up by asking for clarification, though.

Mod: If two (or more) kills succeed on the same player on the same night, will both (or all three) kill methods be revealed in the death scene?

There were no reasons to lynch Sarcastro yesterday.

None

. I voted for the player who was the most scummy, and we got lucky to deadline-lynch mafia.

Although your argument is decent otherwise. I haven't been terribly helpful this game anyway.

Just because you couldn't see why he was scummy doesn't mean that others couldn't. Obviously, AE and I went after Sarcastro because we believed him to be scum. If you want to pass that off as mere luck, be my guest. I'll have some choice words for you after the game, because I currently find your haughtiness to be distracting and counterproductive. If you can back up your arrogance with results, I might be willing to listen to you. However, you have not yet done so, and I am not at all pleased with your attitude towards me or the rest of the town just because people disagree with you and suspect you.

I am a townie. Who lied.

Yes, let me repeat that -- I am a townie who lied.

I am not a doctor. I fake claimed to a) prevent being mislynched and b) hopefully draw night kill.

a) happened, b) didn't, considering we lynched scum I was very very happy with the results of day two. Not mislynching me and instead lynching Sarc-scum was a great result from my gambit.

The ends do

not

necessarily justify the means, but I'll save this discussion for postgame. Suffice to say, if you're protown, I'm pretty miffed at you right now. A significant portion of my perspective at this point in the game hinged on believing your Doc claim. Now I have to go re-read the game yet again and see if/how my suspicions have shifted.

[Glork]

Since when is a day 1 vanillia townie claim a pro-town tell?

For relatively inexperienced players, I think it is a town-tell. The desire to claim power to survive is so strong, it even causes Townies to claim something else (read: Guardian). If you claimed Townie in that exact same situation, I'd have probably lynched you dead without hesitation. YB was a very new player, and the fear of being lynched would very likely have scared him into claiming power.

I suggested Doc because it was least likely to be counterclaimed. In all fairness, now that I think about it... with one Cop already dead, there really isn't a good fake-claim for scum (especially the SK) to make. Vigilante can't be proven, since we know the SK chainsaws and the Vig shoots. Cop could be counterclaimed, and it would force the SK to give accurate results. (If, for example, he'd declared an innocent on Sarc, the SK would be dead by now.) Doc is, as you say, dangerous, but probably the most likely falseclaim from a newbish SK, in my opinion.

[Glork]

Yos, rationalize for me why it's a good idea for Guardian to fakeclaim Doc as mafia and then hammer his scumbuddy Sarcastro.

[Glork]

Also, please comment on my response to your "that's strange logic, Glork" post. I think my logic is pretty good. :/

[Glork]

so does the chance of him being a SK.

...this in spite of the fact that you

JUST SAID

that Doc is the worst claim an SK could make?



*cough*

[Glork]

Er, wtf. I somehow missed the second half of your post. Doesn't make the flip-flop any less disconcerting.

[Glork]

Also, I would argue against the likelihood of Guardian devising a plan to bus Sarc to become "uber-confirmed." No offense, Guardian, but I just don't think that you have the necessary experience/exposure to come up with a ploy like busing Guardian on the fly, and I certainly don't believe that you planned to claim-then-bus-Sarc in advance.

[Glork]

Also, please comment on my response to your "that's strange logic, Glork" post. I think my logic is pretty good. :/

Eh...well, I can kind of see what you mean, but it still seems like a bit of a strech. In an open role game, claiming townie when under pressure seems like the most obveous possible move for a scum who's bandwagoned to a claim, especally on day 1, and I don't necessaraly think that how experenced the person is really makes much of a difference there; it seems like claiming townie is the obveous thing to do for any scum in that position, newbie or experenced.

Meh. I disagree. Newer players tend to be the most self-centered. SKs are forced to play for self-survival. Experienced players such as you or I can recognize instantly why fakeclaiming power in a pseudo-closed setup is a Bad Thing, but new players are rarely savvy enough to pick up on those reasons on their own.

[Glork]

...while we're here and discussing...

Yos, could you take a look at the following players and give me some thoughts:
TCS
MBL
HackerHuck
BillyTwilight

[Glork]

Well, I do have one question for hackerhunt, after that re-read of the end of day 2.

I would say that this latest outburst by Glork only makes me think he's more likely to be scum. The argument he makes against TCS is somewhat reasonable, but I'm not sure why he's such the target here. If you're going to be targeting lurkers, why are you going after TCS so hard? I get the feeling that you're trying too hard to be helpful. I felt that you made a good observation on Sarcastro (see Old Maid Mafia for another example) but you glossed over it very quickly. You also seemed to be in agreement on my concerns about YB, but yet again, you didn't seem to take that any further and you're instead working on engaging people in these heated debates.

Right now, my top four would be YB, Sarcastro, Glork, and TCS. I feel pretty good that there are two scum in that little group.

Hackerhunt: Why did you put Sarc into that list of yours of likely scum? You didn't actually say anything about him, either there or, unless I missed it somewhere, anywhere else. Could you explain why you thought he was scummy? Because I'm right now trying to decide if you just put that name in the list as distancing, which, considering you never actually attacked him anywhere else or voted him anywhere, seems fairly likely to me.

There is hope for you yet, my good man!

[Glork]

Preventing a single mislynch is not worth outing possibly the only Doctor of the game. Try again.

[Glork]

Glork, I wasn't referring to the fact that you recommended the docs

not

announce their intentions. I simply don't see what benefit there is to the town if you are pointing out tonight's "likely outcomes." I don't disagree with your logic, I just think it's scummy to point those things out. I also think your response to my post is scummy. You managed to redefine my attack as something else and then reiterate how accurate your logic was.

If you think that pointing out likely outcomes is scummy, why didn't you simply state it as such? You said that I was trying to direct the Doctor(s), which is such a complete mischaracterization of my intention that now you've backpedaled away from it.

[Glork]

Unvote, Vote: Guardian

A townie breadcrumbing to set up a fake doc claim is not an explanation that flies with me. At all. Now it

DEFINITELY

seems as though he's making things up and changing stories as he goes along.

[Glork]

I fundamentally don't understand and disagree with why lying to save my own skin was a bad move. Correct lynch > mislynch, and that's what happened.

Like Yos2 said, it only seems to have

delayed

your lynch, which would ultimately have been inevitable. And as I said before, the ends do not justify the means. Suppose the alternate wagon had been on a Cop or a Doc and Sarc had been unable to claim as such due to his being away. What explanation would you have to offer then?

Consider the following scenario:
Spryte is a Doctor
Sarc is a Doctor
Sarc is lynched while away
Spryte counterclaims you on D3
You get lynched

What would you have accomplished then?

One cannot say "Hey, but it worked!" and make that the basis on whether they made the right play or not.

In a game recently, I made a play decision which I am absoultely sure was the right decision, but some bad luck just produced the wrong results. If you really are a Townie, you obviously did not consider all of the possible ramifications of your post. I don't think that you expected



Personally, I am seeing Guardian as a very likely SK candidate right now. As both inHim and I previously have pointed out why the SK would (or, in inHim's case, "should") target Guardian, does anybody else find it odd that the SK went after AE? Given his self-survival play, the somewhat odd kill choice (which, I think, was a weak attempt to frame MBL as an SK), and his constantly-changing stories, I'm willing to prusue a Guardian lynch at this point.


I'm still very suspicious of HackerHuck, and I will definitely be returning to the HH issue at some point. I'll respond to Billy in just a minute.

[Glork]

Glork has me as suspicious because I wasn't voting for Sarc. Well, I was gone and/or not reading the thread during that period, so I wouldn't have been able to comment on Sarc's wagon. If I had, there is no way in hell I would have voted Sarc. The case against him was stupidly weak, I've seen many players play with that style. Basically he was lynched because he was lurking and popping in the snazzy comments that didn't really help the game - a weak case in comparison with some of the others, including YB. I would have been pissed if I realized that YB was going to not be lynched again because of a bad wagon on another player; the fact that Sarc was scum doesn't make the case against him any stronger, either.

It's not just that you were off of the Sarc-wagon. There's also the fact that you've laid rather low throughout the game (in my opinion), although I'll have to go back and look at that. Truth be told, you're mostly on there by process of elimination, and I want to take a long look at your posts/interactions before coming to a decision as to whether I think you're scum.

I am now extremely suspicious of Glork. Glork's play so far this game has been very wishy washy. Look at Day 1, especially towards the end, day 2, the multiple cases he has brought against Shteven, Guardian, inHim, Yos2, even MBL, YB, and TCS to some extent. He's had relatively good evidence against all of these players, and has backed off again and on again against them throughout the game.

I'll admit that I've backed off on a lot of players, but that has an awful lot to do with the way my playstyle has evolved over the past four months or so. In Lights Out 2, I was hyper-aggressive, stubborn, and I made a ton of noise during my time there. Unfortunately (as I think I've mentioned before), that led to me being on four mislynches during Day One. While I managed to right the ship and pushed two correct lynches on Day Two, I was still lynched D3 primarily because of my bad play early on. In Scrubs Mafia, I staunchly pushed a lynch on VitaminR D1 based on some metagaming and nightkill analysis. As it turns out, my nightkill analysis was

COMPLETELY

wrong, but I lucked into hitting VitR as scum that day. After the game, when night actions were revealed and I noticed how wrong I was, I again looked at my gameplay fairly critically. There are some other ongoing games where I've either played stubbornly or have referenced my change-in-philosophy, but the fact is that I'm trying not to do the kind of thing that I did in LO2, Scrubs, or to Shteven early on in this game.

I also have game-related reasons for backing off of the players that I have. And I find that your claim that I've backed off of everybody is rather flawed. If you'll note, I listed Sarcastro as one of my three Most Likely Mafiosi, yet you assert that I've "backed off" of him just because I'm poking around elsewhere. Considering I'm making a concerted effort to scale back my tendency to tunnel-vision my play, I don't think it is at all odd that I'd look elsewhere.

As much as he has been jumping around, he landed on Sarc with the worst case out of any of the players and effectively stayed there. I find it ridiculous that someone who has been so inconsistent in his scum-hunting managed to nail scum on such a bad case without waivering on him. The closest Glork came was switching his vote to MBL, but when MBL voted Sarc Glork jumped right back on the wagon.

Again, I assert that my case (at least in my own mind) was strong enough to push Sarc as I did. At first, I was only interested in applying some pressure, but when Sarc's subsequent behavior fit in with my opinion of SarcScum, I definitely wanted to stay there. I regret that I never explained myself more thoroughly at the time, but I'm actually getting rather irritated that people keep stating that going after Sarc was "bad," "weak," or "lucky."

Then day 3 Glork's first post tries to eliminate an entire set of players from suspicion, including himself.

Inaccurate at best, disturbingly misrepresentative at worst. I have not tried to clear an entire group of players. I stated that I found the Sarc-lynchers to be less likely to be his scumbuddies.
--First of all, that is

far from

attempting to clear any of them. Again, note that since then, I have named Shteven,

who was on the Sarc-wagon

, as one of my Most Likely Mafiosi.
--Second of all, stating that I found them less likely to be buddies with Sarc

does not say anything about the likelihood of them being the Serial Killer

. I have not tried to "eliminate from suspicion" ANYBODY, because I fully realize that the tells for finding an SK will be vastly different than the tells for finding the last Mafia Goon or the Mafia Godfather.
You claim that I want to call six people in the game innocents, when I do not want to do that at all. Try again, sir.

And since then he is back to his flip-flopping around ways on players. I just find it incredibly strange that Glork managed to be on Sarcs wagon with so little evidence, then turn around and say "we shouldn't look at anyone on Sarcs wagon as being teamscum"

This is ridiculous and absurd and a horrible misquote. Go back and

LOOK AT WHAT I ACTUALLY SAID

regarding that issue:

I was reviewing people not on the Sarc wagon, and HH fit the profile of somebody I'd like to look at. Yos2 and Billy did, too. Surprisingly, I don't think Shteven is a member of the Mafia right now. Given how devastating losing a second member by the end of D2 would be, I believe that both other Mafiates were off of the Sarcastro-lynch.

This is merely a statment of what my initial reaction to the current game-state was. I stated

MY OPINION

and never stated that anybody (neither myself nor anybody else) should accept my hypothesis as true. Note that my statement that Shteven was unlikely to be mafia was qualified with "right now." The reason for that is because I was not willing to commit completely to a gut reaction, but that I wanted to note and point out said reaction. Any assertion that I "tried to clear an entire group of players" is a complete and utter misstatement.

Plus Glork seems to be convinced that Sarc was doomed to a lynch at some point anyway, I'm sure if he is teamscum that he'd prefer to be on and to some extent to lead a wagon against Sarc.

Yes, I am convinced that Sarc was doomed to a lynch. The reasons for that should be obvious enough, but I'm going to be stubborn and refuse to go through them in detail right now.

Suffice to say that the Mafia probably already knows what I'm talking about.


----------


Also, I want to point out that while Guardian brought up being crazy to revert his claim, it makes

PERFECT

sense if he is the SK and feared a second counterclaim. That would doom him 100% and cause him to lose the game, whereas by unclaiming, he might have been able to talk himself out of getting lynched.


I think that HH is very likely Mafia (prolly the last Goon), and that Guardian is the SK. I'm not sure who the Godfather is yet, but after those two are out of the way, we can figure that out.


GG, scums. You've been paragon'd.

[Glork]

Consider this scnerario:
Spryte is a Doctor
Sarc is a scum
Sarc is lynched while away
Spryte doesn't counterclaim you on D3, realzing that counterclaiming makes little sense

Look, it worked!

Y'know, this "defense" kinda dies when the "Spryte doesn't counterclaim" bit doesn't work out.


Look, it didn't work out as envisioned!



I mean, really... if we're just going to examine the ideal, how about this scenario:
GF kills SK
SK kills GF
Two Cops get two guilties on two different Goons
Cops get guilty on third goon

Look, we're so fucking good at Mafia and nothing had to do with forces beyond our control such as lucky nightkill choices and lucky N0 investigations!! The ends clearly justify the means!!

[Glork]

PS, I like the OMGUS, Guardian. Very classy.

[Glork]

If you really are a Townie, you obviously did not consider all of the possible ramifications of your post. I don't think that you expected

things to go perfectly as planned. I think that you were just completely short-sighted and self-centered, and that you didn't really care about the ramifications of your lies.

Fixed.

[Glork]

PS, I like the OMGUS, Guardian. Very classy.

I'm not trying to be classy, I'm trying to catch scum (hi Glork ).

Pointing out that I'm not being "classy" has very little to do with the game, and very much to do with you trying to discredit my opinions when I show up as town when lynched.

....


My point is not that it was "not classy." It is that it was scummy.

[Glork]

If you really are a Townie, you obviously did not consider all of the possible ramifications of your post. I don't think that you expected

things to go perfectly as planned. I think that you were just completely short-sighted and self-centered, and that you didn't really care about the ramifications of your lies.

I expected that no doc would counter claim me, since a doc counter claiming with ONE claimed doc makes no sense in this setup. I was quite frustrated when a counter claim came, because that was the singular thing that would have made fake claiming go haywire, and counter claiming just didn't make sense.

What happens if one Doc dies and the other counterclaims?
Short-sighted, as I stated.

I expected that other than that, the only implications of me fake claiming were that I would not be mislynched, possibly with scum NKing me, a vanilla townie. I do not think it was at all unreasonable to anticipate my fake claim helping the town.

Self-centered, assuming that scum would kill you. A) It assumes that the scum disbelieve in the existence of a second Doc; B) It asumes that the scum will not leave you alive in the hopes of you looking suspicious down the road.
Self-centered and not thought through well... As I stated.

If your point was that it was scummy, why say "Very classy"? I don't like your word choice at all.

Because sometimes I like to use dripping, oozing sarcasm to get my point across.

[Glork]

If another doc is outed, then I claim townie, as I *just did right now*.

And you die, as you are about to do just now.
If you honestly believe that a Townie can claim Doc and then reclaim when counterclaimed, I'd like you to explain why scums don't do this all of the time.

Go ahead. Try it. If you can convince me, I'll shut up and leave you alone.

Me getting NKed would only be a slight possibility, as I stated. Me not getting mislynched was the main thing -- and OMG -- it worked!

It has not worked. It only works if you don't get "mislynched" for the rest of the game.

Question:

If you get lynched as Townie, would it be a mislynch?

Answer:

Yes. Yes it would be.

Question:

If you get mislynched today, what is the point of having lied to the town and outed a Doctor?


I'm saying that you didn't think this out because you are assuming that we would believe the unclaim and would choose not to lynch you.

HAY GUARDIAN, THIS IS A FLAWED ASSUMPTION.

Your whole point is "If I don't get mislynched, then it's worth it." Not getting mislynched is contingent upon us believing you.
Convince me that we should universally believe somebody who Unclaims Doctor and Reclaims Townie. Go ahead. I dare you.

Ah, so when the logic isn't good enough you appeal to emotion?

I don't think you've logicked anything. My logic is sound. Your logic is based on the assumption that we'd believe you and would never mislynch you in the future.

[Glork]

I don't think you'll be convinced, but the argument is best put in a few thought provoking sentences:

What incentive would scum have to unclaim? What incentive would an SK have to unclaim? What incentive would a townie have to unclaim?

• Mafia has little incentive to unclaim. If they get countered/lynched that day, there's only one scum left. That, an SK, and nine protown roles. GG.
  
• SK has
  every
  incentive to unclaim. As I stated earlier, if the SK gets countered, he's completely and utterly screwed unless he tries to back off of the claim. If he doesn't back off, he will very likely be lynched, and he will
  lose the game entirely
  . If he unclaims, there is a chance (albeit a slim one) that he will be believed and can maneuver himself into a position to win the game. No unclaim = 100% guaranteed loss if countered. Unclaim = Slim possibility of survival/win.
  
• A Townie has very little incentive to unclaim. If he fucked up badly enough to fake-claim in the first place, he should maintain his current position, stand down and allow himself to be lynched. I could potentially see the desire not to out a second Doctor (which is your claimed rationale for unclaiming), but it still makes little sense to me. I say you grit your teeth and continue to try to draw a nightkill.

Your turn.

Aside from a doc being outed, which I feel we can both agree shouldn't have happened, then

at worst

fake claiming does nothing for the town -- I don't get mislynched early, and instead get mislynched later.

At best, it prevents me being mislynched entirely.

I disagree with this in general, but I'm going to attack it in a different angle.
Again: Explain to me why people (town and scum) wouldn't start doing this all the time if that were true. You never answered my earlier question regarding this.

[Glork]

Also, I think your "thought provoking questions" were not the "best" way to put the argument. I want you to reason out for yourself why you should have done what you did, and why it's a good idea in general to lie to the town.

[Glork]

Unvote

to give Billy a chance to respond and to prevent any premature hammers. I plan on re-voting Guardian once Billy has replied to me, though.

Guardian, I don't think anybody is simply policy-lynching. Your behavior has convinced me that you are very likely the SK. Period. I think Yos2 (and probably everybody else who is voting you) agrees that your play is indicative of being SCUM and not something that *ANY* decent Townie would do.

Also, I think your "thought provoking questions" were not the "best" way to put the argument. I want you to reason out for yourself why you should have done what you did, and why it's a good idea in general to lie to the town.

In general it is a good idea to lie to the town if you can convince them, through lies, of something you know to be true.

In this case, I convinced you not to lynch me, as I *know* my alignment to be town and you don't.

But again, you didn't "convince" us to do anything. You tricked us into not lyncing you for the short time period before your lie inevitably fell apart. And by claiming doc, you incresed the chances of the real doc and/or docs either claiming or otherwise giving themselves away.

QFT, QFT, QFT.

this is so unfortunate.

Yes, if you are town then it is unfortunate that you played such a self-centered game that you placed your own survival over that of every other player. But right now, your actions ring of being the SK. Period.

I did claim in a situation where I was about to be lynched, true, but in general, as you pointed out to Yos2, doc is a bad claim in the first place.

But again, making a 'bad' claim such as Doc is preferrable to getting lynched if you're an SK. Do you understand that an SK's top priority is survival? Do you understand why players who will do anything to survive (as you have done) will be seen as being a likely SK?

[Glork]

Guardian: You say you did it to avoid being lynched.
You are going to be lynched.
Bad play.

I did it to delay being lynched. I delayed being lynched. Stop acting like a pompus ass,

for the record people, check out 24 mafia, where Kinetic admits that being a jerk to me is a scum tell for him

.

No, up until now you've been saying that you PREVENTED a mislynch on you -- not delayed. Now you're changing your stories again.

I also love how you're extending your OMGUS to Kinetic, too.

You distract the town from lynching scum if you town, and you are dead to your rights if you are scum.

ME BEING LYNCHED EARLIER WOULD HAVE ALSO BEEN A DISTRACTION FROM LYNCHING SCUM. WTF KINETIC.

The point is, you've given everyone -- both town and scum -- more than enough ammo to make your lynch a slam dunk. That's why it's a distraction, as opposed to being a hotly contested (and particularly telling) lynch. Whether you're Townie, SK, or Mafia, I don't think we'll get much info from this lynch.

However, if I come out of this with the meta that I am KNOWN to lie as town, and even lie as town MORE OFTEN than I do as scum, I don't see how that is at all a bad meta .

If you come with the meta that you lie as town, nobody will ever believe you in any games, and you might as well stop playing altogether. You'd be complete deadweight.

I would hope you think LONG and HARD if you EVER pull a stunt like this again.

I thought LONG and HARD about EVER doing this in the FIRST PLACE and since no one has CONVINCED me OTHERWISE I would do a STUNT like this AGAIN in the FUTURE.

Here's a reason: If you're so concerned with being mislynched, remember that if you do this as town in the future, you will be mislynched.

Guardian, I don't think anybody is simply policy-lynching.

I think both Kinetic and BT explicitly claimed that they are at least in part policy lynching.

You're right, but note that I stated that nobody is

simply

(meaning "merely" or "only") policy lynching you. Kinetic has stated a 65-75% confidence that you are scum -- which, in and of itself is more than enough reason to vote to lynch. It just so happens that any doubt is assuaged by the concept of a policy lynch. You're choosing to focus on the 25-35% that is policy lynch and not the 65-75% likelihood that you are scum.

Because I am town, and a me-lynch is a mislynch.

I should count the number of times you say this, just for fun. Has anybody ever told you that Argument from Repetition means nothing?

I really do not care for being told how bad a play this and how I hurt the town is when for all intents and purposes no other doc should have claimed, and when we lynched scum instead of lynching me as a direct result of my action.

No. All your actions did was speed up the inevitable SarcLynch and delay your own lynch.
Sarc being lynched was most certainly

NOT

a Direct result of your actions. It was a direct result of the cases laid out by his most prominent attackers. At the very best, I might concede that Sarc being lynched D2 was an

indirect

result of your actions.

eah -- and me unclaiming obviously wasn't going to be pro-me surviving. I unclaimed as not to expose a second doc (a second doc who I am at this point pretty sure I know who is, btw).

Okay, two things here:
1) I've already explained why unclaiming as an SK is preferrable to not unclaiming. You have even agreed with that. Unclaiming wasn't "obviously" going to be you dying, and it gave better odds than being counterclaimed by a second Doc.
2) If you're right about the existence/identity of a second Doc, you're giving information to the scums by stating that you think you know who that second Doc would be.

I understand that. Do you understand my reasons for doing it, how it helped the town, how it should have had very little chance of hurting the town, and how I'm NOT scum?

No, no, no, and no.

[Glork]

Glork:

Yes, I am convinced that Sarc was doomed to a lynch. The reasons for that should be obvious enough, but I'm going to be stubborn and refuse to go through them in detail right now.

Suffice to say that the Mafia probably already knows what I'm talking about.

If the mafia already knows, how about you tell the rest of us town?

Alls I'm saying is that the scums knew that I was onto Sarcastro and would've busted him soon enough. They know I'm a viable threat to them, and so they had to try to take me down when they hopefully thought that a Doc would be tied upon Guardian.

[Glork]

A mislynch here could mean, worst case scenario, 7 alive with 2 Mafia and an SK still out and about.


We should probably consider a massclaim at this point in the game.

[Glork]

Vote: MrBuddyLee

Response to Billy forthcoming.

[Glork]

As to the first paragraph (regarding your inactivity), there's not much to be said, I think. I've noticed that you've been relatively inactive. You've explained that you've been busy/away, and fairly disinterested. Unfortunately, it's really hard to assess a response like that. (I went after Thok early in Calvin & Hobbes when he was inactive, but he turned out to be town in that game... but then, I've seen players -- Sarc here, Thok in LO2 -- lurk as scum.)

This goes more towards my argument against you than it does as a defense. If this is the way you have decided to play this game, why the hard-core stance on Sarc? (By hard core I mean your current stance that he was doomed for a lynch and the way that you stayed on his wagon with a lack of real evidence, especially any evidence that you really made against him.) It doesn't make sense to me, as I just find his play (or lack thereof) in this game to be a difficult read at best.

I would hardly describe my stance as "hard-core." You yourself looked back over the interactions, and I was definitely hunting about elsewhere... as indicated when I went after MBL briefly.

I just don't see it. You are retroactively trying to tell us that you had a very strong case against Sarc at the time that you neglected to inform us of. I went back and looked at your posts that have something to do with Sarc or his predecessors. You were very wishy-washy on BBB, saying you'd take a look at him, he might be scum, agreeing with him on some issues involving MBL, etc. Overall I get the feeling that his play was sticking out to you but you weren't making a lot of effort to comment on it. You never mentioned Plessiez as far as I can tell, and you only had 3 comments on Sarc leading up to your initial vote of him.

As stupid (and probably hypocritical) as it sounds, I never made a case against Sarc because of a slew of real-life events. If you care to reference, you can check the plethora of V/LA posts I've been making in the past month and a half or my post in the Dantes in Fresno signup thread.
Early-game, I just had my focus elsewhere. It was mainly on Shteven, with Guardian, Albert, BM, and a couple others catching my attention from time to time. I didn't comment on Plessiez because his only posts were his "hey, glad to be here" and his "Still rereading the thread" posts. I could pretty much tell that he'd just end up getting replaced, so I didn't bother.

So yes, I didn't put as much pressure onto Sarc as I could have. I fail to see how this is, by any means, a fault of mine or an indication that I might be scummy.

My comment in 1302 was more pointing out how hotly contested Albert's wagon and lynch were. It seemed rather pivotal. I can't honestly remember why I put those three names. Looking around, nobody seemed to suspect AE, and Yos/Sarc were fairly inactive... so it seemed like a random lynching of either of them would have yielded less information.

1716 -- I didn't avoid answering them... if you honestly think that I deliberately avoided in-plain-sight answering those questions and then caved to a single pressure vote from AE, you're delusional. As I stated, I had forgotten that she asked those questions... and obviously I had no qualms about answering them. Anyway, what I said about Sarcastro was truth. I had noticed his inactivity, but hadn't looked at him to see if it was indicative of him being scum.

1829 -- To say that I hadn't looked at Sarcastro is an absolute lie. There is a very specific reason that I cited SARCASTRO and MRBUDDYLEE among the players who were lurking. They were the two who struk me as most likely to be scum. This is evidenced by my subsequent votes on both players, my support of the SarcLynch D2, and my current vote on MrBuddyLee.
Just because I don't say "I think that Sarc is scum because of X, Y, Z, and YourMother" does not mean that I hadn't examined his play. Sometimes, instead of laying it thick on somebody, you call for pressure and see who responds to that call. Seeing which players openly and willingly join you in pressuring a scumbag into activity (and/or an eventual lynch) can give you an assload of information. I wanted pressure on Sarc because A) I wanted to see Sarc actually do something; and B) I wanted to see who was willing to go after him.

The reason for my vote was essentially the same. I suspected him enough to lay down a vote, and I wanted to see who else would answer my call regarding Sarcastro. While you're right in that it was to encourage Sarc to talk more, that was not

"simply"

the case.

You are in some ways underestimating your sway in this forum. You were on a successful lynch to end day 2. You suggested at the start of day 3 that "I believe that both other Mafiates were off of the Sarcastro-lynch." I think a lot of players, perhaps without even thinking it through, would think "Glorktown is paragoning the mafia, lets follow his lead and not look at people on the wagon." The fact that people ignored that and still looked at the full set of players, and thus forced you to also look at the full set of players (example, Shteven: you said in that post, "Surprisingly, I don't think Shteven is a member of the Mafia right now," and you have since reneged when other players continued to look at Shteven) doesn't change anything. In your first day 3 post you suggested that we don't look at Sarc's wagon for mafia and at the same time quasi-cleared Shteven, the player you have fought with the most in this game. I think you were trying to say "I don't think we need to look here anymore; see, I'm even clearing Shteven who I've been gunning for this whole game".

Perhaps you are right in that I underestimate my level of influence around here. I tend to label my influence as what I

think

it should be, rather than what it

really is

sometimes. (Case in point: McDonald's Mafia, where like four or five players just followed me blindly, and it became really hard to get decent reads with just a bunch of "Yay, Glork voted X so we should vote X" posts.)

Your paragraph here makes it sound like I intentionally tried to get everyone to clear six players while failing to understand my own influence on the game. I see these two points as being contradictory.
If I were intentionally trying to influence the town's thinking, then I must necessarily believe that I have a significant level of influence on the town.
Contrapositively, if I don't think I have a whole lot of influence, I likely wouldn't be trying to influence everyone by way of a single side-comment or a gut-reaction post.

I think that you're missing the pink elephant on the coffee table, Billy, while attempting to swat the gnat on the windowsill.

Then why did you make it? Why state what effectively comes down to "we don't need to look here now" if you were perfectly ready and willing to go look there then??

Because as I said,

I wanted to note my gut reaction

. I didn't yet know if I thought I'd *REALLY* end up believing it, but the very first thing that went through my head was "Man, the last two scums were probably pissed about that lynch." That, to me, implied that they were probably off of the lynch.
I felt the need to note that reaction because my gut is usually fairly accurate. There are, however, exceptions, and MBL is likely one of those exceptions. (More on this in my

next

post.)

I still don't understand this. Maybe I'm just at a meta-disadvantage here for not having played with Sarc or most of these other players before, but I honestly can't see such a strong case against him... and you have never, ever laid out what that case was.

This is my main problem: Anytime I see a player who exhibits far different play with regard to one wagon than on any other wagon that has happened in a game this large, and especially when that wagon lynches scum, I become extremely nervous about that person's play. When that person's first post on the next day hints that town shouldn't look at the lynched-scum's voters from the previous day, indirectly including them self, it makes my skin crawl even more. My FoS stands.

I really truly can't fault you for this reasoning. I didn't explain myself, and that's my own damned fault. You don't understand how I could have been so certain that Sarc would be lynched on D3, and it's not completely unreasonable for that lack of undersatnding to lead to suspicion. I understand exactly why you don't like my behavior towards Sarc. Unfortunately, I really don't think I have any explanation that can properly satisfy you. Suffice to say, I fucked up and didn't nail Sarc down when I had the chance. I would've gotten him D3, had it come to it, but that just didn't happen.

I would, however, like you to explain one thing. You stated that my behavior being different,

especially since it led to a scum lynch

, made you nervous. I'm curious to know how you came to the conclusion that I was

suspicious

for my behavior towards Sarc, as opposed to simply being right (for once). If you'll note, my track record as a whole isn't that good, and when my behavior percievably changed, I helped lead a lynch on scum. Why was your reaction "Wow, that's suspicious" rather than "Wow, he changed things up and finally did something right"?

[Glork]

@glork: did you think massclaim was a good idea? Why did you ask about it?

I think it's a good idea in that there are about three players whom I would like to see claim, and having only half of the remaining players claim doesn't make much sense to me.

I also come from the unique perspective of knowing that I am A) a likely scum target, based on the failed mafia kill and Spryte's protection of me; and B) a protown player. So I see the massclaim as being less destructive than you or Yos would. I'm essentially confirmed as non-Mafia, and while a couple of people have expressed Glork-SK sentiments, I know that's not the case. I won't be lynched today, and I'll be killed tonight, so making some suspicious players (MBL, Sarcastro, possibly inHim or something) claim would be beneficial in my eyes.

[Glork]

I'm not sure how "I was right about HH, and Glork was wrong, so he must be scum" works out, Shteven. But the fact that you've launched a fresh attack based on that, right after HH dies, suggests to me that you're the one who made him die.

Instead of citing two posts where you call HH town earlier in the game, I'd like you to explain exactly why (citing posts of HH's, interactions with other players, and his behavior towards the two dead scums) you thought he was protown.

That's not the point I was making. To this point in the game you have been fairly wishy washy in regards to your opinion on other players. I didn't see that with Sarc. Even when you jumped off him for a while, there was never a "maybe Sarc is, maybe he isn't, etc." feel to your posts that I got from other people you have targeted. For instance, I think you had some arguments about Albert or YB on day 1 saying something along the lines of you calculating him to be a slightly better than random chance at being scum, or the like. There was never any of this kind of give with respect to Sarc. You switched your vote to MBL, and when he voted Sarc you had a statement like "Now, there is a vote I can get behind," or the like and you went straight back to Sarc. That is what I meant by "hard-core". You never had any analysis that made me think you had a real reason to be so ready to lynch Sarc, as you obviously were.

I'm going to just kill this entire thing with a claim, since I'm growing irritated, the mafia very likely already knows who I am, and I was going to be killed this coming night anyway.


I am the town's second Cop. That is why I kept backing off of other players.
That is why, on D1, I kept hesitating to vote for TCS in spite of my opinion of his play,
That is why I backed off of inHim at the start of D2, placing him "in the exact same category" as TCS, and refused to vote for him in spite of his play.
That is why I mentioned Yos as the start of D3 as someone I wanted to look at, and then said "at most one of TCS/inHim/Yos is mafia" (because only one could be a Godfather).
Last night, I investigated HackerHuck as an innocent, so there's not really anything to gain from that.

The reason I said that even if Sarcastro hadn't been lynched that day he would have been lynched the following day is because I had already slated him for investigation. I would've gotten a guilty result on him, claimed it partway into D3, and it wouldn't have been an issue. Sarcastro was not long for this world because he was going to have me, a Cop with a guilty on him, all over his ass until he was lynched. I even said that I was certain that Sarcastro would not only be "

looked at

" but also lynched. I know it doesn't explain my behavior towards him at the time (one would think I had a guilty result on him -- I didn't), but again, all I can say is that I never got to properly articulate my case because of outside restraints.

Anyway, I've been dropping hints on my role throughout the game (such as when I mentioned playing "Good cop/bad cop" with somebody, insinuating that Guardian would be suicidal to fake-claim Cop -- because I was the cop) and so on.



For the record, of the three I investigated, I find inHim most likely to be scum. (Note how he has backed off from posting much at all lately -- I think he skipped out on all of Day Three.) I think that MBL and Shteven are most likely to be the other two scums.

Mod: Prod MrBuddyLee, inHimshallibe, YogurtBandit, and Yosarian2

Truth be told, I wouldn't mind seeing replacements for some/all of these players. You stated in the initial post that there would be staunch restrictions, and that lurking as a playstyle wouldn't fly. That seems to have fallen by the wayside.

If I'm going to get killed tonight, I'm going to raise a little hell (in a good way) before I die.

[Glork]

I guess I have some meta on MBL... it's actually more in-game stuff than meta.

My biggest problem is that I'm actually trying to decide if MBL makes more sense as the SK or as a Mafiate. I've seen indicators of both -- more on the SK side than the Mafia side, though.



MBL as SK:

• He called SV's death an "odd" kill choice. I went after him for this on D1 -- it indicates an attempt to distance himself from the SK's actions by making people believe that, because MBL doesn't understand the motive for killing SV, he likely did not kill SV.
  
• He asserted that the SK should be going after scummy players, and then congratulated (or at least pointed out that the SK was following him) when MoS died N2. This is odd, because MBL assumes that the SK killed MoS
  because the SK thought MoS was scum
  and therefore was following MBL's advice. It is entirely possible that the SK was hoping to hit power and "missed" and hit a scumbag instead. Yet MBL assumes that the SK had A) deduced that MoS was likely scum; and B) hit MoS
  beacuse
  he thought that MoS was scum. Now, couple that with this post, and it gives me strong incentive to believe that MBL is an SK who just decided to off MoS there and then. And for reference, here is the "good job SK" post to which I am referring.
  
• The N3 death on AE is interesting. AE was definitely pointing at MBL as an SK, and then she got Chainsawed. He also openly tried to convince us not to take her word for things and describes getting a bad vibe on her, all in this post. Again, if he really thought AE was scum, her death would not only fit in with his "SK should be hunting scum" ideology, but would also serve to silence one of his harshest critics.
  
• Last night's HH kill makes sense if he thought HH was scum, like I did. Unlike what Shteven claims, I think that there was a pretty decent case for HH being scum -- enough so that I was obviously willing to investigate him. Unfortunately, explaining this ahead of time means that any thoughts MBL gives on HH's death will be chock full of WIFOM. What I will point to, however, is this:

  Huck: you're playing the way you criticized me for playing in Mormon2. Lurky-scummy.

  ...from his last post from yesterday. A) Hypocritical (at least in my opinion) that he calls HH lurky-scummy. B) An indicator that he finds HH scummy, and that HH subequently died.

A few other random things:

Glork, if you're scum please don't NK me.

That stuck out to me. Vested interest in not being killed. When I think about it more, though, it seems less of a tell than one might think, because I doubt MBL consciously and intentionally would hint-drop SK. He would, however, want to dissuade possible mafia from killing him, though, so I don't see that as being a major issue.

MBL's fervence D1 with hunting mafia piqued me. In Kelly's "Moses in Egypt" game, he was part of one scumgroup and dedicated himself wholly to busting everyone in the other scumgroup first. I remember him telling me on AIM (after I had died in that game and guessed that he was scum) he was pretty much hellbent on finding the last werewolf. A weak meta-tell at best, but another thing that stuck out to me. MBL and I are alike in that, if we're scum in a game with two factions, we're going to do our absolute best to nail the other scum faction, because A) people think you're more likely to be protown since you're hunting scum; and B) you don't have to waste nightkills on the rival faction.

Another meta-argument for MBL-scum. In Mafia 60, I explained that MBL has a tendency as scum to stay away from the big wagons/lynches and keep his vote either nowhere or on somebody off-wagon. This post, and MBL's subsequent vote on Albert (about two RL-days later), made me wonder if he was trying to actively avoid doing the same thing here. As you can see, I had also noticed that MBL was withholding his vote. His response was to stop witholding his vote and place it on the Albert-wagon.

[Glork]

Oh, and the main thing "for" MBL being a mafiate isn't really a point specifically for him. He has a tendency to bus and to try to act like a turning point against scum. His behavior towards Sarc seemed that way to me. He tried to be a turning point on both CDB and CES in Mafia 60, and it very nearly allowed him to ride to victory.

I should also point out that MBL did not make a single post yesterday. His last post in the game was his D2 vote for Sarcastro. Like I said earlier in the game, MBL has a tendency to survive when he lurks, as he freely admitted to me. I realize that he's done it both as town and as scum in the past, but it sets up a rather good front for lurking as an SK.



I'd really like to drop the SK today, because it means only one nightkill from here on out. 8 alive with 2 Mafia left is definitely something I can live (or, rather, get nightkilled) with.

[Glork]

Okay, in all fairness to MBL, his lack of activity yesterday was spawned by inactivity from this post in the Dantes in Fresno signup thread.

I think he still has an awful lot to answer to, though. And I'd like to hear his thoughts on yesterday regardless.

[Glork]

Yes, Kinetic, I was basically planning on coming out at some point today. I was wavering between seeing if a wagon developed against me and just trying to take control of things right away, and obviously decided to go with the latter.

As far as why I never investigated Shteven... other people kept getting in the way. TCS was N1, before anything had happened. I actually used a dice function to choose my investigation. (The first result was actually my own number, but I didn't really want to investigate myself. )
inHim's behavior towards the end of D1 struck me as somebody trying to heap suspicion on me to hopefully dissuade me from getting protection. I actually thought at the time that my investigation would be mostly useless, because I figured that inHim & Co. would kill me off.
In retrospect, I wish I had investigated Shteven N3 instead of Yos2. However, as I mentioned at the start of D3, I didn't think most players (Shteven included) would bus Sarc like that, and Yos/HH/BT were the ones off-wagon that I wanted to look at. So I went with Yos because I have the most experience with him and he still seemed off to me.
Last night, I was pretty sure that HH was scum. I wasn't expecting him to get nightkilled, but I got an innocent result anyway (obviously), so that was rather moot.

[Glork]

And why did the Paragon investigate three innocent players as cop? You'd figure he's a better scumhunter than that...

A) This does not account for the possiblity of me having investigated the Godfather and/or the SK.
B) This is a classic example of Burden of Proficiency. Recently, Pooky made almost the exact same assertion ("You'd think that Glork would do better than one guilty in the first three nights!") as scum against me.

Not doing yourself any favors here.




I'm quite happy with my vote, really, especially after that response from MBL.

[Glork]

And yeah, as Yos said... what doesn't make sense about the timing of my claim?

Given that ManaSpryte protected me on the night of a failed mafia kill and given that Spryte was killed last night when it was widely accepted that he was a Doc (and therefore should've recieved protection from a second Doc), do you find me likely to be Mafia?

Given the nightkill choices, my level of behavior and interaction/conflict with other players, do you find me likely to be the SK?

[Glork]

Oooh. I like the emotional reaction. Keep doing this, MBL, while I get the popcorn.

[Glork]

You think I could've lived another day? Nevermind the fact that it's at least 90% that the scums tried killing me once, the night Spryte protected me?

[Glork]

Sarc and YB were neck and neck when I did a reread and decided to vote Sarc yesterday. Are any of you of the opinion that that was a bus?

Hi, please recall Face-To-Face and then tell me that you don't try to bus and then garner credit for it and/or use it to your advantage.


Tell me, MBL. Do you have any last thoughts or requests before you die? If you really are town, it'd be worthwhile to see your entire thoughts on every player laid out before us.


Also,

FoS: Kinetic

for trying to lead me. I will investigate whomever I damned well please.

Minor FoS: Yos

for trying to dissuade an MBL lynch. Kinetic (ironically enough) summed it up well in that MBL is not only likely to be the SK, but his behavior is certainly

NOT

indicative of him being non-mafia.

[Glork]

I felt the need to note that reaction because my gut is usually fairly accurate. There are, however, exceptions, and MBL is likely one of those exceptions.

No, the exception was to the "scums are unlikely to be on Sarc's wagon" observation I had made.

[Glork]

I don't like this Kinetic wagon. MBL is obviously trying to wrangle a lynch on an apparently weak player. I'm not sure what BT is up to, but his play is shoddy at best as town.

If Kinetic is lynched as town today, I would look

VERY HARD

at the people who have put pressure on him already.


MBL is still the SK, and eliminating him eliminates a nightkill upcoming.

MBL, if Kinetic is lynched as town, you should probably be hitting scum tonight. On the off-chance that you

don't

get lynched tomorrow, you'd already want only one scumbag alive. If tomorrow is 7 players with 2 Mafia and just you... Bad Sign. You need to even the odds before endgame approaches.
I figure you already know this, but I want to make it explicit.

[Glork]

Sarcasm aside, I still have my BM-town tells. I think that Kinetic is an inarticulate and bumbling player (no offense to him), but when it comes down to it I do not see him as scum. Period.

[Glork]

I should also point out that BM's request not to be replaced is not indicative of anything. In a game I modded (well, took over for mikeburnfire), Suicide Bombers, Twito fought my replacement of him (a townie) and even posted his role PM after getting replaced, causing his replacement to get modkilled.

Some players just don't like to be replaced. Period. Even if they aren't contributing a goddamned thing and they don't have any abilities.

[Glork]

No. At this point, if one scum can push a lynch on another scum, they should do so. As far as night actions go, they should be targeting each other, especially if we mislynch today. But keeping scum alive to hoepfully rely on crosskills is a Bad Idea. I think that if we lynch Mafia, they'll both try to kill town tonight to make it 7 players alive with 5 Town, 1 SK, 1 Mafia. That is their best hope for survival. Our goal should be to eliminate a kill altogether. Alternatively, hitting scum is the second option, but going after the SK is definitely, IMHO, the right play here.

[Glork]

I'm not telling you to assume I'm right. I'm telling you that I will, under no circumstances, vote for Kinetic today.

[Glork]

While I will agree with Kinetic's assertion that there are certain parallels between Mafia 60 and this game (the most recent being your assumption of your own protownness in "calculating" statistics -- while from

your hypothetical protown perspective

I am 42% wrong about Kinetic based on raw numbers, from

my

perspective, I am likely right based on raw numbers, and even more likely to be right when actual gameplay is taken into account), I agree with your own point that blindly following me is a Bad Thing unless I specfically say that it's a Good Thing.

(Basically, I usually like to see everyone think for themselves unless I am very sure that I've zoned in on a scumbag. There are, of course, exceptions, but that's a pretty decent general guideline.)



Kinetic: The post you are looking for is here, though it doesn't apply to MBL at all, really. It just concerned my own assessment of Zindaras' alignment and Patrick's opinion of why I was protown:

You've made much of his supposed certainty and "bluster" on various people, but I don't see how it's particularly different to how he plays normally. For example you went on for ages about how Zindaras gave us pretty much zero material yet Glork changed his mind on him from thinking he was scum to thinking he was town. I thought it was clear he'd switched mainly because of the attitudes towards Zindaras from certain people (mainly you), and whilst I didn't agree with his specific assessment, it was correct.

My god.... somebody else on this website understands me.


I was beginning to think that all of those people had left forever.

(For reference, Patrick's quote is part of a response to MBL's request to have Patrick explain why I was protown.)

[Glork]

Ok, this is chock full of selective and misleading information.

Speedy KQ's
Glork was certain MBL was scum, MBL was certain Glork was scum
Glork was scum, MBL was town

Irrelevant since I was scum in that game and was fabricating suspicions to push lynches I wanted to go through.

Jelly Mafia
Glork mislynched the doc and a townie D1/D2 then died
MBL was scum

Admittedly not my best game -- also (one of) the very first game(s) I had played with you before I had a well-developed read.

Face to Face
Glork ran up the vig and the cop to claim D1/D2
He hit scum D3, mislynched D4, didn't vote to lynch scum D5
and end of D5 thought an innocent townie was the godfather and final scum but a cop investigation saved him from mislynching
MBL was scum

This is the worst one of all.
First of all, MBL's language implies that the wagon on SV was my fault. I put a random vote on her, and three other players (yourself included) joined that bandwagon, which ultimately led to her claim.
Second of all, if my play towards SV and Adele is indicative of my abilty to read

YOU

, I'd love to hear that argument be made. You're posting irrelevant side information in an attempt to discredit Glork's early-game play in general as being an inability to read you specifically.
Thirdly, the only reason I "didn't vote to lynch scum D5" was because two other people voted/hammered CES before I could do so. I made it

ABUNDANTLY

clear that I wanted CES dead. Another misleading statement trying to discredit my play in general.
Fourthly, the D4 mislynch is again misleading. Even Thesp, who had otherwise been accurate in nearly all of his suspicions, was convinced that Nightfall/BM was scum. Terrible scummy play from somebody doesn't make me the terrible player. Also misleading.
Fifthly and sixthly, I think that the same can be said for Mgm (the townie who I suggested was Godfather). A lot of people had CES/Mgm at that point. Additionally, CES/MBL was a rather close second in my mind. My suspicions on you did not let up after your protection of CDB and sudden flip-flop on D3 -- my focus only changed when CES became the safer, more likely scumlynch.

Space Monkeys
Glork was positive MBL was scum, MBL was positive Glork was scum
MBL was town, Glork was scum

Again, irrelevant because I was pushing the easy wagon on you as scum.

Kelly's Mafia v. Werewolves
Glork didn't suspect MBL and lynched a townie D1 then died
MBL was scum

I never had a chance to flesh out many of my suspicions at all in this game, as I died N1. Technically correct, but far from a strong statement on my ability to read you.

Lights Out 2
Glork was 100% positive MBL was scum and got him lynched
MBL was town

Admittedly my worst read of you.



I would also posit that my later-game reads on you are more accurate as the game progresses and as I interact with you more and more.
Cases in point:
--I actually started to back down from my "100%" claim in LO2 after we argued, but not enough so that I was willing to switch to another player so close to a lynch deadline.
--In KM2, I sparred with you for quite a while before deciding that you were very probably protown
--In FTF, my initial read on you was in fact protown, but that clearly changed as the game progressed. Aside from Thesp (sortof), I was the

FIRST

person to definitively peg you as scum after the CDB lynch, and I only backed off of that on D5 while going after CES (the other living scum)


You're right in that your playstyle rubs me the wrong way. However, much of the time I simply need to get involved in a substantial debate with you before I can get a more accurate read on you. This time around, my read isn't changing much at all. Still likely scum, especially after this most recent post. I'm surprised that you posted this, MBL. Did you really expect to get away with this many representations against

ME

of all people?

[Glork]

EBWOP: I should also point out that, the day after my death in Kelly's Mafia/Werewolves game, I told MBL via AIM that I was sure he was scum He obviously was. So even though I died that night, I actually had an accurate read on MBLscum as a protown player/observer.

[Glork]

Jack, could you elaborate more on why you think Kinetic is "clearly the correct play"?

[Glork]

Yes. It is. Saving YB for possible lynch on a future day seems to make the most sense to me of all. As Mafia, I'd be okay with busing Sarc in that instance. As SK, I'd leave YB alive because he probably buys me another day/night.

[Glork]

But arguably, you have been more ardent about my scumminess in the games in which you've been wrong.

That is certainly

arguable

:

...so your defense is essentially "I was wrong, but the scums were sitting back not attacking Zindaras so I'm not scum." Am I missing something?


MBL, I demand that if you go to lynch anybody today, it's me. I'd rather die and have my alignment revealed to everybody so that they can take you down in a fiery salvo tomorrow. I think you know that once I'm revealed as town, your house of cards will collapse all around you. Ever since the day started, you've accused me of being scum, but you still refuse to lay a vote down on me. I think it's for one of two reasons: You're worried that you can't actually get anybody else to follow you for a mislynch; or you're petrified that once I'm revealed as a pro-town entity, it will be

damning

for you as a player.

My old case against Zindaras was laid out long ago, back on Day Three when I was making my analyses. I posited that he was scum for his own rights, and I eventually connected him to CDB when I decided that CDB was likely scum. However, as today progressed, I obviously moved away from that stance. You say that I'm being opportunistic by going after Nightfall and yourself, yet you were the one pushing a lynch against an inactive player without making a substantial (or even well-defined) case of your own.

Did you ever stop to think for maybe just one second that the reason nobody would put forth a case against Zindaras is because players slowly realized that said case was little more than steam? That, combined with Ether's post (which was lost in the crash) convinced me that Nightfall was probably scum, and you (along with a re-read of interactions between you/CDB and you/Nightfall) have convinced me with your recent actions that you are the other scumbag. If you bothered to read the thread, you would notice why other players' suspicions have waned. The reason that Zindaras wasn't getting lynched is not because scum were too afraid to do it. It's because as it turns out, none of the Townies (except Patrick and, to a lesser extent, Ether IIRC)

really

actually thought that Zindie was scum when all was said and done.

You accuse me of not diligently hunting scum in the past day. I will admit that my activity today has not been up to snuff. I mostly blame graduation. But I think I proved my

diligence

yesterday when I read through some 27 pages, noted everything that looked interesting to me, found the Cop, decided Thesp was scum, voted for CDB, and got Fritz to follow me onto CDB -- which

eventually

led to his demise.

You also say you wanted to hear my DEFENSE of Zindaras. I gave it to you. I fulfilled your desire. What do you think of that defense? You say nothing about it -- nothing at all, except your unfounded repetition that I'm acting weird, that

you

wanted to see what everyone

else

had to say. I find it more-than-alarming that while you use this as your excuse for saying nothing, you attack *ME* for doing essentially the same thing. Yes, I said that I wanted opinions to formulate my own opinion. That was... a half-truth. I was already moving away from Zindaras, but I wanted to see

why

people were attacking Zindaras because

motive

and

intent

are important at this stage. I said that if we were going to pussy-foot around and do nothing, that we might as well just lynch Zindaras, because Zindie getting modkilled would likely mean a forced no-lynch the following day. I meant that 100%. Now it *does* look as though (unless you get lynched today and Nightfall the day after) we're going to have to no-lynch before this game is over. Either that or we can just deal with a 6p or 4p endgame. *shrug*

------

Note, everyone, that in a lengthy post attacking me,

my

tactics, trying to discredit

my

case against him, saying that

my

behavior doesn't ring true, he slips in one "likely scum" comment about CES and Ether, and votes for CES.
His tactic is obvious: Push a mislynch against CES, push a mislynch against Ether (or Thesp/MGM, if one of them becomes more opportune), then go all-out against me in endgame.

If you think I'm a dirty birdy, MBL, I demand that you put your money where your mouth is right now. Don't save me for endgame. Lynch me

today

. I dare you.

In fact, I'm going to suggest to the rest of the town that we lynch one of MBL/me today. It's obvious that there is a scumbag who was

astute

enough to notice that Fritz -- not Glork -- was the last power role remaining, because Fritz -- not Glork -- was killed last night. I acknowledged having recognized FritzCop yesterday. MBL has acknowledged having thought about the Cop situation yesterday (though he'd probably try to pass it off as me being "obvious" with my Cop-tells). We are both very, very observant players. It is extraordinarily likely that one of us is a scumbag.

[Glork]

Ooh, this post is a good one, too.

[Glork]

In other words, MBL is avoiding the important issues and going off on side-tangents in an attempt to obfuscate the case on him. Ergo, MBL is scummy. Ergo, he is probably scum.

[Glork]

And yet you think Kinetic is likely Mafia enough that lynching him is preferrable to lynching MBL?

[Glork]

Yos, could you post some more detailed thoughts on.... well, just about everyone? I'd like to know what's going through your head right now.

[Glork]

Yes.


Why isn't MBL dead yet?

[Glork]

Also, Sheven, what makes you think that TCS is the Godfather or the SK? I'd like specifics, please. <3

[Glork]

Yos, when you posted your thoughts on people, you missed Shteven. Mind enlightening us?



Also, I'm going to do a small thought experiment. No idea if this will be fruitful (or even relevant, considering the likelihood that I'll die tonight), but here goes:

If I were 100% confirmed as a Cop, who would you like to see me investigate tonight?

I want

everyone

to answer this question.

[Glork]

Also, MBL, if you want me to respond to your montage of posts, I can. It's mostly rhetoric, and I didn't feel like responding to it. If I think that my posting can convince enough people to lynch you today, I will. But at this point, it looks like things are going to go against my wishes, and we'll end up mislynching today.

[Glork]

Additionally, MBL, part of the reason I don't seem interested in your opinions of others' alignments is because I don't feel that you're necessarily telling the truth if you're an SK (which I obviously believe right now). You want a lynch that isn't you, Period. If we lynch scum, you will go after somebody you believe is protown. If we lynch somebody protown, you will almost certainly go after somebody you believe is scum. As long as tomorrow starts: "Seven alive, 1 Mafia, 1 SK, no confimred innocents," you probably don't give a damn who dies now and who dies overnight.

[Glork]

If.

But you're not town.

[Glork]

Also, second "Burden of Proficiency" argument noted, with the whole "I find your inability to point to scum fishy."

Misrepresentation, too. I've already stated that I want to eliminate a nightkill. I don't see crosskills happening unless we mislynch. You are the SK and I want you dead today. End of story.

[Glork]

MBL, you know I'm town when I'm stubborn. Stop trying to appeal to everyone else for your "answers."

[Glork]

Btw, I find all of this "are your notes legit or faked" discussion ridiculous.

• Nobody is going to be able to prove one way or another whether the notes were "faked" or not.
  
• I know several players, myself included, who take notes as both town and scum, so the existence of notes proves nothing either way.
  
• There's nothing to stop Kinetic from faking "notes" from previous games.
  
• I do not take notes in all of my games when I am protown, but I do take notes in some of them. I do not take notes in all of my games when I am scum, but I do take notes in some of them.

I refer to or mention notes sporatically in some of my games, and as far as I can remember, nobody has ever

once

asked me to verify whether I had actually been taking notes or not.

I would like to know what anybody hopes to accomplish by interrogating Kinetic about his notes in this game. What distinguishing factors are you looking for that might indicate whether Kinetic is protown or whether he is dirty scum?

**This question can wait until after Kinetic has responded to BillyTwilight, but I absolutely demand answers for this. I really am starting to feel that this "argument" is distracting, and that it's a pretty sorry excuse to make Kinetic look bad. The end.**

[Glork]

A few recent games (this one included) have destroyed all patience I once had. Plus, like I said, I'm willing to wait for you to finish your questioning before I demand reasoning. I just want to make my demands known ahead of time.

[Glork]

I don't see how it will be a signficant boost.



What interactions between TCS and other players have you noticed so far?
Whose alignments would you discern if TCS came up town? Mafia? SK?

[Glork]

For the record, Billy is pretty much confirmed town now.

[Glork]

Mostly 'cause you're the SK.

[Glork]

MBL, with no second Doctor and a Goon still out there, claiming Cop as SK would literally be giving up the game,

ESPECIALLY AS I AM GOING AFTER SOMEBODY WHOM I BELIEVE IS THE SK

. You *might* have a reasonable point if I were actively going after somebody I thought was Mafia (Goon). But I have signed my own death warrant. If the Goon is not lynched today, I die. And I am not going after the Goon. So your assertion that I claimed to save my own ass falls completely flat on its face (unless I fucked up somewhere along the way and

you

are the Goon).

Note that my claim occurred at a time where I had exactly one vote on me and one other person who seemed suspicious of me. There were already

more

people going after you, and I was just frustrated with what I saw as one likely townie (Billy) and one questionable (Shteven) going after me. It seemed bloody fucking obvious to me that I was a Cop, and I was a little frustrated that I could ooze so many blatant breadcrumbs into the game without anybody seemingly able to pick up on them.

I have yet to see you actually make an argument as to how or why my claim, its timing, the surrounding circumstances, and the implications make me likely to be the SK in your eyes. All you've said so far is "this sounds like Glork's the SK"

WITHOUT BACKING IT UP WITH A DECENT ARGUMENT AS TO

*WHY*

THAT IS TRUE

. Go ahead. Make your argument. I will rip it to shreds, light it on fire, and dance on its ashes. And then I will get you lynched today.

[Glork]

MBL: I don't think that Billy, as SK, would stick his neck out for

ANYBODY

at that stage, especially Kinetic. Kinetic was a likely lynch candidate, and as SK, I feel that BillySK would have let Kinetic sit there and flounder. Like I indicated earlier, the SK probably has little (if any) concern over whether we lynch town or scum today, so long as he survives. Whatever is lynched, he'll try to kill somebody of the opposite alignment tonight.

[Glork]

I can't help but feel your play has been incredibly thin--for example, you've focused on like 6 posts of mine out of 200

Overblown hyperbole, much?
First of all, you've barely made 80% of the "200" posts you claim. Apparently we're rounding to the nearest HUNDRED now?
Secondly, I've definitely addressed more than "like 6" of your posts. More to the point, I've addressed your general lack of posts throughout D2. I'm willing to give you a pass on D3, considering you were gone. And I've definitely looked at at least six of your today-posts.

You can seriously quit with the rhetoric. You should know, after FTF, that peppering towns with anti-Glork propaganda doesn't sit well with me, and consequently doesn't do you any good.

I find it difficult to believe you aren't picking up on several things about my play D1/D2 that make me much less likely scum of any flavor.

/disagree.
I've addressed your D1/D2 play, and I've explained my meta on why your play is consistent with you being an SK, if not possible Mafia.
1) You're bus-happy
2) When you're scum in a game with two known scums, you're prone to going heavily after one group while largely ignoring the other.

Where are your lengthy notes on TCS, Yos, inHim, Jack? You're slack, and that's wack.

Like I admitted in FTF, I have a tendency to slack with regards to people I think are town. Up until Sarc was lynched, the innocents on TCS/inHim were more than enough reason to shy away from focusing on them. Jack is somebody I've been calling town for most of the game, and a re-assessment of Yos, combined with the innocent on him both lead me to believe that he is very likely town. I realize that I'm not being completely up front, but I see no reason right now to post extensively on these players. If it comes down to it, I'll defend a player as I see fit (as I have with Kinetic).

As for Kinetic, I explained my stance on BM a long, long time ago. That has not changed. I would give at least 75% that Kinetic is town

based on Battle Mage's play alone

. I have also already shared my toughts on the earlier wagon on Kinetic and on his "bumbling town" behavior. I'm not sure what more you want, but you seem to be ignoring what I

have

said and claiming that I'm not saying anything.

Also, I guess you think I'm a different brand of SK than Billy, cause I've stuck my neck out left and right all game in defense of people who could have just as easily been steamrolled.

I've just looked over your posts, and I challenge you to find three examples of where you defended people who could "easily [be] steamrolled." The only things I've been able to find is you assessing AE as "townish," but she never picked up suspicion from anybody, and "mildly townish" from Jack, who also had garnered virtually zero suspicion early in the game. You call HJ/AE town in your long analysis, but again, neither of them were in any danger at the time.

I definitely call foul on this one.


As far as your "defenses" of Guardian: As far as I can tell, your only "Guardian is town" posts came after his Doc-Claim and before his Townie-Reclaim, when hardly anybody was voicing suspicion of him at all. You then came into the thread afterwards berating players for lynching Guardian and blahblah, none of which is the least bit provable and none of which means a shred of anything to anybody.

Can you explain my play as SK in the wider context of the full game?

Sure. Try this post. [/lazy]

[Glork]

I should also point out that your response to "I'd like to hear MBL's thoughts on yesterday" echoed about what I'd expect from him as scum. "You people are impatient morons and I'm right and intelligent!" He tried to use the "I was right about CDB/CES" argument as scum in FTF, clearly has resorted to rhetoric ad-hom attacks ("Glork is posting under the influence"), and seems to be trying to fling as much mud as he possibly can. He's dripping it into his posts. If you look at, say, his spat with me in Kingmaker 2, there was relatively little of that. Much more hyperconcentrated here.

I could point out the further "Burden of Proficiency" statements, but that'd probably be beating a dead horse.

[Glork]

I've addressed your D1/D2 play, and I've explained my meta on why your play is consistent with you being an SK, if not possible Mafia.
1) You're bus-happy

Yay, thank you for the easy one to shoot down. My votes D1/D2:
Guardian (1st on "wagon")
N9V (1st on wagon)
Albert (4th on wagon)
Glork (1st on wagon)
Albert (3rd on wagon)
Glork (3rd on wagon)
Sarc (3rd on wagon)
You call this "bus-happy"? First on scum, third on scum, first on you and on an early meaningless G-wagon, third on you and on a terrible townie, 4th on that same terrible townie. Please clarify your statement that I've been bus happy.

Two things here.
First, I'm going to point out the hypocrisy of your "Shouldn't Glrok be doing better?" claims when your own defense on this point is that you've gone mainly after townies. You're at least as talented a player as I am, MBL, and if you're going to even attempt use burden of proficiency, it would go both ways.
Second, this particular remark refers almost exclusively to your behavior towards Sarcastro and your "you idiots went after Guardian" comments. You like to highlight whatever good things you've done while completely ignoring anything that wouldn't appear to be stellar protown play. In FTF, you went on and on about how you tried to draw attention from me, how you claimed to be pivotal in lynching CDB, etc etc... but as I repeatedly pointed out there, you actually

defended

CDB until his lynch seemed inevitable, then you tried to bus him as hard as you possibly could. I've yet to see a distinct parallel here, but A) I'd expect you to evolve your play and not be so obvious next time; and B) I've come to the conclusion that you're likely an SK, which means I should focus less on this point and more on.......

2) When you're scum in a game with two known scums, you're prone to going heavily after one group while largely ignoring the other.

As I've stated clearly several times, it's nearly impossible to distinguish a townie from an SK D1/D2, so I went after scum. Side benefit: crosskills D1/D2. I tried spotting SK with Guardian and was totally wrong. So I went after scum D1/D2, the players who were drawing associations with one another. The SK was probably hunting scum with us, so tough to pick out that early. But anyhow, your comparison to Moses is kind of silly, because in this game the 2nd faction is untraceable early, in the other game, the second faction was my own faction and according to your crappy metagame I'm prone to bus them, not ignore them. So you'd be looking for me to... bus... myself today if I'm the second mafia faction?[/quote].....this one.
The second faction is certainly NOT untraceable that early. There are tells,

such as the "separation from the SK" tell

, that I have already pointed out:
You "distanced" yourself from the SV kill by calling it "odd."
You "instructed the SK" on how to go about killing.
You then

CONGRATULATED

the SK on the MoS kill,

UNDER THE ASSUMPTION THAT HE HAD TAKEN

*YOUR*

ADVICE TO GO AFTER SCUM AND HAD KILLED MOS BECAUSE HE THOUGHT MOS WAS SCUM

.

Explain to me

EXACTLY

how you came to that conclusion? What inspired you to say:

I am SO proud of the SK

at the start of Day Two?

I think you made a slip-up that was fairly subtle, but unmistakable when noticed. And though I pointed it out earlier, I don't feel that you ever adequately replied to it.

[Glork]

And the capper: this flip-flop from the Glorkster:

As both inHim and I previously have pointed out why the SK would (or, in inHim's case, "should") target Guardian,

does anybody else find it odd that the SK went after AE?

Given his self-survival play, the somewhat odd kill choice (which, I think, was a

weak attempt to frame MBL as an SK

)

The N3 death on AE is interesting.

AE was definitely pointing at MBL as an SK, and then she got Chainsawed. He also openly tried to convince us not to take her word for things and describes getting a bad vibe on her, all in this post. Again, if he really thought AE was scum,

her death would not only fit in with his "SK should be hunting scum" ideology, but would also serve to silence one of his harshest critics

.

Seriously, why do any of you bother following this guy? He's tossing darts blindfolded, and can't hit a double to save his life.

Opinions are wont to change... what can I say? If they weren't, I'd have had BM lynched Day One.

Plus, I would argue that the second observation is more appropriate, because it falls within the context of an entire analysis of your play throughout the game. It is not a stale, isolated observation, but one that fits in with a much broader gameview... exactly the gameview that you just accused me of not having when I came to the conclusion that you are the SK.

[Glork]

I don't like to lynch solid players D1 if possible. Guardian shows potential to be useful if he's town.

Statement of utility is not defense of alignment. 'Nuff said.

Off the top of my head, YB is not playing unsubtly sneaky like he does as scum.

That's one.

Shteven is combative and has done some things I found sketchy but his earnestness makes me think he may be town.

Shteven's so argumentative and contentious he looks protown to me.

Shteven was not a prime suspect during D1. In fact, he had garnered little attention from anybody who wasn't me, I believe.

I don't think Yogurt has the panache to post this as scum:

That's two.

I'm not thrilled with Shteven, YB, Guardian, inhim lynches based on what I last read.

Guardian, InHim, and Shteven weren't viable lynch candidates at this point.

InHim's posts read genuine. I'll be impressed if he's scum.

Again, inHim was basically off the board by then. This is from the same post as the next quote, so see the note/ensuing-VC below.

I've gotten a lot of pro-town vibes from Shteven. His posts are also laden with the effort of frustrated/antagonistic town on the defensive.

Again, Shteven wans't a viable lynch candidate. Look at Guardian's unofficial VC from just a few posts later:

5 votes for Yogurt Bandit (HackerHuck, ManaSpryte, InHim, BillyTwilight, Jack)
5 votes for Sarcastro (AutumnEvenings, Shteven, YB, MBL, Glork)
1 votes for Glork (TCS)
1 votes for InHim (Yosarian2)
1 vote for Guardian (BattleMage)
1 votes for Shteven (Sarcastro)

inHim, one vote. Guardian, one vote. Hardly defense of players who were being "steamrolled" as you had claimed.

The last YB one would be legit, except you ended up voting for the other leading man, Sarc. I'll give you a half-point for YB and put you at 2.5.

Close... very close. But not quite.



Context ftw. It's easy to pick out a bunch of quotes, but I doubt that you bothered to look at the context of any of them. When you made your initial claim, it regarded players who were on the verge of being run up.

[Glork]

Feh. I've neglected this game. Still thinking that Yos is probably protown. Somewhat unsure of TCS.


I realize that there are probably some posts/points that I need to address, but I probably won't get to them until Friday.

[Glork]

EBWOP: Also, I'd *really* like to hear from CtD soon. I know that he's reliable enough to show up sooner or later (and I certainly don't want to replace another player who has read half the thread or something), but I'm growing impatient.

[Glork]

Agreed. I simply dislike it when people take "very likely" and replace it with "certain".

LULZ.

MBL, you should read this a thousand times to commit it to memory.

[Glork]

Glork's either the SK or the cop, that's nearly certain at this point. So he's not going to be steering us AWAY from anyone besides himself. If he's the SK, he'll steer us TO overly-obvious SK candidates like myself and away from himself. But you don't have to worry about his minimization of suspicion of Kinetic, for example, being suspicious. He pretty much cannot be Kinetic's scumpartner.

So yeah, Glork's just as interested in hitting the godfather and goon as anyone here.

Actually, I'd think that if he was the SK he'd be focusing on trying to get mafia members lynched today, and want to leave likely SK suspects like you alive until later to reduce the chances of the town figuring out his own alignment.

....which is exactly what I said earlier in this game-day, which is exactly why I'm unlikely to be the SK. If I'm the SK, between my claim and my behavior, today, I am playing to lose as hard as possible.

[Glork]

I find it difficult to believe you don't see the big picture here or that you could possibly be as certain as you are that I'm the SK. (Which I'm not.)

I've read your posts several times over, thank you very much.

[Glork]

"I refuse to lynch these players at any point in the game":
Jack/White
Yos2
Glork
BillyTwilight

"Probably town based on reads/meta":
BM/Kinetic
YB/mole/Rogueben

"Possible scum with the caveat that max one can be Mafia":
TCS
inHim et al

Odd Men Out (aka, likely scum):
Shteven
MBL

[Glork]

Shteven, you're putting words in my mouth.

All I said is that inHim/TCS cannot both be

MAFIA

. I

NEVER

said

ANYTHING

clearing them from being an SK. Yes, it is bloody obvious that I think MBL is most likely to be the SK, but I made no attempt to clear either inHim or TCS from possibly being SK, and I most certainly did not leave anything out. I'd like to know what you hoped to accomplish with the little pot-shot at me just now. The only things I ever get out of ad-hom attacks in late-stages of the game is a poor attempt to obfuscate facts and statements. If you had another, valid reason for doing so, I'd absolutely love to hear it.

[Glork]

Either way, if we do lynch you and you don't end up being scum, we'll "have [your]suspicions as gospel"

Could you explain what you mean by this?

[Glork]

So you're willing to follow MBL's suspicions if he's town on the basis that.....?

[Glork]

And as for you taking issue with my insulting Glork, he started it

Oh? I just remember calling you scum over and over again. We can do an ad-hom tally if you'd like; I'm pretty sure you'd be leading that category by a pretty wide margin, start to finish.

[Glork]

Glork, just on the chance this is a miscommunication, is the sk scum? Ie, when I refer to scum, I mean anyone who is anti-town. so saying that only one of TCS etc can be scum, that's wrong. If you mean strictly mafia, then that's different.

Uh, I said that both are "possible scum" (which, yes, does include the SK), but that a maximum of one could be Mafia.

I fail to see how you don't understand this.

[Glork]

Unvote, Vote: Shteven

I still think MBL is the better lynch 'cause he's the SK, but I don't seem to be getting the support I want right now.

Mafia: If we mislynch today, kill MBL tonight. Thanks. <3

[Glork]

Still kinda around, been obscenely busy, still happy with my MBL vote. *shrug*

[Glork]

Yos still wins the thread/game.



Can we lynch Shteven or MBL now? Why does this TCS wagon exist? Who shot Kennedy? Who shot at me?

[Glork]

Can we lynch Shteven or MBL now? Why does this TCS wagon exist? Who shot Kennedy? Who shot at me?

Glork, there are 3 scum out there. Sk, GodFather and Goon. Who do you think is the third scum?

Probably whomever replaced inHim.

[Glork]

EDIT: Well, it

miiiiiiight

be Rogueben, or I could actually end up eating my words re: TCS. MBL and Shteven are the safe bets, though. You folks can figure out the third once they and I are all dead, mmkay?

[Glork]

Uh.


MBL is the SK
Shteven is the Goon.
The GF is out there somewhere.


You can go read my posts throughout this game and figure that out. Just go sort by users and click on me, and read.

[Glork]

Did we ever get confirmation from the mod that masons would show up as such at death or if they would show up just as townies?

This game is full reveal.

Is it just me or does the selected quote by Kinetic sound like he's feeling out for a "safe"claim?

(Personally, LmL, I would've loved for you to have told a white lie and said that we won't know, to see if Kinetic would try claiming Mason with a deadperson. That angle of investigation is sadly dead now.)

[Glork]

Apologies if I gave too much info, but I thought it was fairly obvious.

Meh, if he's asking, it's not obvious to him. That kind of thing is the best time to set a trap.

[Glork]

I really don't care where it is, as long as one of you two gets lynched today. In case you haven't been paying attention, Mafia hasn't really been the focus of my life lately (I started a new job this past Monday), and I forgot that I had switched my vote to you. I think that, if I move it, TCS will be the Deadline Lynch, and I would rather see one of you two hang right now.

Three other players move to MBL, I will

gladly

move my vote there. But right now, he doesn't look like a realistic lynch, so I'm going with my alternate choice -- namely, you, Shteven.

[Glork]

Did we ever get confirmation from the mod that masons would show up as such at death or if they would show up just as townies?

This game is full reveal.

Apologies if I gave too much info, but I thought it was fairly obvious.

It just occurred to me that you're the MODERATOR and not a PLAYER in this game. Yeah, your response is perfectly justified.


I would've lied to Kinetic, though, to see if I could trap him. No jokes. That's one of those rare situations in which being deliberately misleading can be a good thing.

[Glork]

Can somebody briefly outline the case against TCS for me?


Also, MBL is still scum.
And Yos is still not scum.

[Glork]

Shteven, if you're anything but a Townie, now is the time to say so.


Also, White's most recent post has basically convinced me that he's town beyond reasonable doubt. Yeah, I realize it could be WIFOM, but that's a highly risky. *shrug*