Webcomic Wars Mafia: D7- Be Thankful I'm Not The Author

[Fishythefish]

/confirm

[Fishythefish]

vote: Vino

Because he is scum.

[Fishythefish]

Any further elaboration on this? Are you familiar with the last game that Vino & Rofl played in?

I feel his wording is slightly forced ("Okay. Random vote time. *vote*), but nothing beyond that. I am not familiar with that game.

[Fishythefish]

Yeah. The solidity of this bandwagon is pretty much beyond doubt at this point. Particularly after Vino's latest post- trying waaay too hard to look nonchalant about being caught.

[Fishythefish]

Any further elaboration on this? Are you familiar with the last game that Vino & Rofl played in?

I feel his wording is slightly forced ("Okay. Random vote time. *vote*), but nothing beyond that. I am not familiar with that game.

Ya I noticed that too. Good point.

You agreed with my original vote. Now, after a post from Vino about a different game, which you "like" in some unspecified way, you don't like the wagon on him. What changed your mind? Also, why does Korlash's opinions (wrong or right) about a previous game have any correlation with his alignment in this one?

[Fishythefish]

I find tss’s comment about a 1-2 mislynch decidedly off. The fact that I cast the first vote is hardly going to make me the automatic lynch on a 13-player wagon, even if I happen to leave my vote there throughout the day. Lamont’s agreement with the original statement looks bad also.

I said I also noted how he said "random vote" and so I agree with you in noting that. However, in my mind that only sets up a potential relationship between him and Rofl. I questioned him about it and like his repsonse and don't actually think his vote is random. Therefore no reason that is being used to advocate his lynch is working with me at all.

OK. This makes sense in context of your next post.

I dislike Lamont’s repeated usage of “the famous Tar” (114). He appears to be attempting to avoid attacks by saying that attacks from Tar need to be of a particularly good quality, even so early in the game.

Some other points against Lamont have been not all that good. He has espoused antitown positions- basically, lynching for reasons other than probability of being scum, and insulting arguments rather than replying to them. I don’t think these are very strongly correlated with scum rather than simply wrong town- I’ve always found the image of a scum who knows the right theory and argues the opposite to confound the town deeply unconvincing, at least for such simple points. Similarly, I can’t imagine the scum who sits down and decides the best way to evade arguments is to say they are nonsense. Such things are perhaps marginally scummy, but my limited experience suggests that the pretty well the same players would always get lynched off them, independent of alignment. Having said that,

unvote, vote: Lamont

Nevertheless, the scummiest player.

[Fishythefish]

Fishy argues that I am trying to look nonchalant, which (not that I agree with it) is a reasonable argument, but not in light of the fact that he seemed to be at my teeth from the get-go. I don't like any of those. I'd like them to explain themselves.

Not much to explain for me. I placed an almost random vote, which at one point got slightly less random. Something more compelling has come up, and I've taken it away.

[Fishythefish]

I can role claim if you like, but it would only help scum safe claim later.

This sounds incredibly insincere. Surely you don't think that anyone wants you to roleclaim, nor that anyone would think it was a sane idea.

FoS: Santos

[Fishythefish]

Fishy's here mainly because of one post in particular:

I find tss’s comment about a 1-2 mislynch decidedly off. The fact that I cast the first vote is hardly going to make me the automatic lynch on a 13-player wagon, even if I happen to leave my vote there throughout the day. Lamont’s agreement with the original statement looks bad also.

I said I also noted how he said "random vote" and so I agree with you in noting that. However, in my mind that only sets up a potential relationship between him and Rofl. I questioned him about it and like his repsonse and don't actually think his vote is random. Therefore no reason that is being used to advocate his lynch is working with me at all.

OK. This makes sense in context of your next post.

I dislike Lamont’s repeated usage of “the famous Tar” (114). He appears to be attempting to avoid attacks by saying that attacks from Tar need to be of a particularly good quality, even so early in the game.

Some other points against Lamont have been not all that good. He has espoused antitown positions- basically, lynching for reasons other than probability of being scum, and insulting arguments rather than replying to them. I don’t think these are very strongly correlated with scum rather than simply wrong town- I’ve always found the image of a scum who knows the right theory and argues the opposite to confound the town deeply unconvincing, at least for such simple points. Similarly, I can’t imagine the scum who sits down and decides the best way to evade arguments is to say they are nonsense. Such things are perhaps marginally scummy, but my limited experience suggests that the pretty well the same players would always get lynched off them, independent of alignment. Having said that,

unvote, vote: Lamont

Nevertheless, the scummiest player.

Notice the wishy-washy, people - he argues against the arguments for why Lamont is scummy... then votes Lamont for being scummy (says "still the scummiest" but with little elaboration except for one point about Lamont's ad hominem defense). This is town behavior why, exactly?

To vote for Lamont, I don't have to agree with all the arguments against him. I think his ad hominem in response to your attack was easily the worst thing he has done- it reeks of trying to avoid an attack through completely unreasonable means. The rest is marginally scummy, but easier to dismiss as town playing badly. I also mention the fact that he agrees with tss's stretchy 1-2 mislynch theory, which I think was an attempt to throw the town off his wagon.

I associate the phrase "wishy-washy" with an ill-defined position. I think my thoughts on Lamont are set out quite clearly in the post quoted.

[Fishythefish]

Urgh. I take back what I said about my read on LC. On a reread, it was both an inadequate summary and not what I think.

1) His initial support for my vote on Vino, later turning into criticism of the wagon.
It’s very plausible that he did mean just that Vino’s vote was not random. However, in post 71 LC “does not like this Vino wagon at all”. This seems off given the very small amount of content in the game up to that point.

2) When questioned about arbitrary support for wagons, he justifies this by supporting Empking’s wagon for lurking (questionable) and Korlash’s for matters unrelated to this game (unquestionably bad).

3) When his criticism of Vino’s wagon is remarked upon, LC gives more game-unrelated reasoning and reverses the question to “why are you voting him?”- which is no more than a distraction.

4) He says that the idea that Vino and I were being set up for a 1-2 mislynch “very interesting”. As I’ve said, I don’t have much time for this theory, and I find LC’s following when he was under pressure another attempt at distraction.

5) I hate the attack on Tar’s case. He later justifies this as “self-defence”. Well yes, that’s exactly what it was. It just wasn’t true. Later still, he claims the reference was a humorous nulltell. I disagree vehemently.

6) The focus on Vino’s wagon (less me). It gained four votes, out of twenty five players. Many, many players on this site like to build a bandwagon early D1. The premise that it is particularly likely to have scum on it is a bizarre one.

7) The reaction to Santos. That’s not a soft claim. This looks like trying to do something, anything dramatic to deflect the wagon.

The post which Tar criticised said that there were large sections of the case I disagreed with. Basically, this is the “bandwagoning for lurking” aspect- which occupies a large amount of the actual text of the wagon.

Of the above points:
1) and 3) point to LC having a connection to Vino.
2) I don’t see as very important. I think hunting lurkers is more or less a nulltell. Attacking Korlash for a previous game is worse- it shows little concern with whether or not he is scum.
4) and 5) I think look bad.
6, 7 are LC trying to distract us from his wagon.
I like my vote where it is.

[Fishythefish]

That character is pretty consistent with LC's claim. It is just as consistent with various flavours of scum role, and does little to help. However, it clearly makes LC a bad lynch for now.

unvote

I'll get my thoughts on other people collected this evening.

[Fishythefish]

Nooooo just lost my post to the preview button... here goes again.

@ Sensfan: if he really is a cop, we lose a lot by lynching him now. If he is mafia, we lose rather less by leaving him alive a day or two.

Vino comes top of my scumlist:
1. In a very minor way, I still believe in the point at the beginning of the game; his random vote sounded false.
2. His “I always look scummy” post. Trying to get us to treat scumminess as a personal nulltell.
3.Vote for Sensfan, above the people actually voting for him. As far as I can see, Sensfan’s crime was simply a weaker version of the people actually on the wagon.
4. The defense following this vote;

Post 146 by Vino: I'm not sure why you're voting for SensFan here? at all?

Because I want to. I sense a subtle defense of SensFan from you, what's the deal?

This is horrible. Vino’s vote on SensFan was practically unexplained (“he should know better”- nothing else). hasd asking for clarification is completely reasonable, and responding by accusing him of defending Sens is no more than a way to stop people questioning Vino’s votes.

5. I agree that 326 is a bad misrep of rofl
6. If LC is scum, I’ll bet Vino is. That’s not a reason why Vino is scum; it is a reason why we should lynch him.
7. Voting for Vino is a solid move.

Other players I’m suspicious of:
Head Honcho: hasn’t committed to anything (including a non-random vote).

tss: unreasonably fixated on a near-random wagon. His reasons for thinking the wagon was not random boil down to “it wasn’t”. There is nothing in his posts that explains why he distinguishes this bandwagon from any other early d1 wagon with a few votes on it. The whole affair seems contrived.

I have not fully explained why I think this was a setup for a 1-2: because those "sound reason for a bandwagon" posts looked to me like they might be cop fishing. Maybe they thought that "I thought he was a cop and had a guilty! Now that he's not, I'm suspicious of him!" or something similar would help get them votes on day 2, or

maybe they honestly thought he might be one.

Really?? So after one post in a day start, the scum thought I was a cop with a guilty- presumably on another scum. They decided that the best course of action was to join the wagon as quickly as possible. Perhaps I misunderstand you?
Even the actually possible explanation (they were going to claim they thought I was the cop) is unrealistic. No scum could be so deluded as to think that was going to stick.

There are a few more players I need to read (those beginning with S, for some reason), so more may follow tomorrow.

Vote: Vino

[Fishythefish]

Fishy, you lost a post to the preview button?

No, to accidental hitting "back" in my browser

I did end up explaining my vote on SensFan in a later post.

Yes. But the reason you give seems to apply in greater measure to the players who actually voted you.

6. If LC is scum, I’ll bet Vino is. That’s not a reason why Vino is scum; it is a reason why we should lynch him.

Who is "him" ? Do you mean that we should lynch me, or LC?

You. If we can get information on a cop/scum without lynching him, that's a good thing.

[Fishythefish]

Apologies for double post.

There is nothing in his posts that explains why he distinguishes this bandwagon from any other early d1 wagon with a few votes on it.

Nothing? How many times have I said that it is the convergence of one bandwagon getting all its wagoners themselves bandwagoned immediately thereafter by the same few people, including the bandwagonee of the original bandwagon? It's the way both of them tie back to the old roflwagon that distinguishes it.

True. This tie, however, is based on a two vote wagon- it's pretty weak imo.

[Fishythefish]

unvote, vote: Lamont

[Fishythefish]

vote: Vino

for reasons stated yesterday.

I think it's very likely tajo vigged tss.

[Fishythefish]

To me, Vino's recent posts have looked bad, but probably noobtown rather than scum. Any competent scum knows about the 'this sucks' scumtell and can transverse it pretty easily, and I don't think scum would push a NK theory they know to be false that hard.

This is irrelevant. It is clear that Vino, town or scum, does not know the "this sucks" scumtell. Therefore, it applies to him.

[Fishythefish]

@mod

(and others): I'm not sure how much access I will have over the next few days, and I won't have any this weekend. I'll catch up early next week.

[Fishythefish]

Sounded false? What about it? Nobody else had any problems with it.

It sounded like you were trying too hard to make your vote sound random. This is a subjective/gut point.

I don't hold that conviction as strong as I did before, but I think it still applies. He gave no why's and then jumped on a bandwagon. The post looked pretty scummy to me, and people are still saying that he's not talking enough. That argument doesn't apply to Korlash Tajo and whoever else.

But he didn't "jump on the bandwagon"- in the sense that he didn't vote for you- whereas Korlash etc did, with equally little reasoning. Lurking was no part of your argument at the time.

Now this makes zero sense. I wanted to address it yesterday but I didn't want to detract from the pressing matter of the Cranston lynch. Maybe I just don't understand the theory enough here, but at the time we had a claimed cop that looked very scummy, but you thought we should lynch

me

instead. What am I missing?

Lamont defended me a lot in the beginning stages of the game, which would have turned out looking bad for me if he flipped scum. Thank goodness he didn't, but I can understand you saying, "Let's lynch Lamont to see if Vino is scum." That's a pretty obvious train of logic, if Lamont defends Vino and then flips scum, perhaps he was defending his scum partner. (

In reality I would think a smart scum would be more low-key than Lamont was in trying to defend me, but regardless...

) If he had flipped scum I would have likely been today's lynch target, barring unforeseen events.

It doesn't follow the other way around. How does lynching me tell you anything about him? A renegade townie (which is what he ended up being) is just as likely to defend someone of unknown alignment as a scum is to defend his scum buddy. Whether I flip scum or townie doesn't tell you anything about Lamont because I had very little interaction with him. The logic doesn't work the other way around. You were (and still are) suggesting that we lynch me because someone who has now been shown to be a townie was defending me. It makes no sense. Explain your logic please.

To be clear, this reason is no part of my argument today.
From LC's actions, I believed (and, trivially, believe), that if he was scum, you would very likely be scum. This made you a good lynch because if you showed up townie, I would be inclined to trust him (at least to the point of not lynching him), and the town's loss would likely be less than a cop.
These are not all the points I made against you in the post in question.

[Fishythefish]

rofl

,

has

,

SC

,

populartajo

and

fishy

jump back on the L_C wagon

without saying

anything

, except for populartajo who says:

In the unlikely but still possible scenario that Lammont is indeed a town cop, the doc should still protect qwints since its very likely he is the town cop.

So I'd like to ask

those voters

why they thought that even though the issue of not being sane and not being alone had been raised, why they were willing to jump on the wagon with no discussion.

LC was a very scummy player. If LC was either a non-sane or a one-faction cop (who didn't know it), it was going to be very hard to disprove him being a cop, whatever results he came up with. The counterclaim made him more likely scum, less useful if he was a real cop, and harder to out as scum.

I've been skimming along this week. I have no access until Monday, when I will reread and make a decent post.

[Fishythefish]

On my meta:

1. It's pretty early days for my meta. The two scum games you list are two of my last three completed games, out of a grand total of 6 or 7. My playstyle is developing. In the other of those three games (Mini 801- Kubrick Mafia), you will see some numbering of points, and I think you will see a general trend over time in my posts towards order.

2. My posts tends to get more ordered when I have a lot of thinking to do- because it helps clarify my thoughts. This is the case as replacement scum (having to make up said thoughts), or here as someone who is struggling a little to keep up (having to think about a lot of pages at once and nail down some opinions). This post, for example, has needed me to reread my own meta and think about it- and I'm hopping backwards and forwards editing it and making it make sense, much as I do as scum. As a townie with a good handle on the game, I often dash off a few lines which I know make sense and represent my opinions, and this leads to both worse explained points and more suspicion on me.

To summarise, I suspect you have spotted my "scum or barely keeping up" meta- which until now was indeed merely my scum meta- and also that this meta is exaggerated by my scum games having been played recently.

3. Inverted meta (insofar as it does not overlap with 1 and 2): you are right that I looked pretty good as scum- in the only game I've played as scum which wasn't a completely foregone conclusion when I entered. However, I also look pretty good in most of my town games. Of the four finished games I've started as town, I was lynched once and barely suspected in the others. In my sole townie replacement, my play was pretty much irrelevant to my lynch. Even in that scum game (756), I looked good largely because of my bus on my partner, and the complete disarray the town was in. I looked townie much more for substance than style; there is no great deal of substance here yet (though see later tonight for a bit more after a proper reread).
Apart from an aberration in Antarctic Mafia, my meta could better be described as "looks townie" than "inverted", judging by reactions of other players in my games.

[Fishythefish]

In support of the above:
My two numbered posts in this game came after I had reread- first to clarify my stance on LC, then to decide who was scummiest after he claimed cop.
In the scum games you reference, posts where I take important stances tended to be very ordered. This is in stark contrast to 144, which drew a lot of attacks.

[Fishythefish]

Assorted stuff- rereading the whole of day 2:

I've played one game with Fishy, and he was excellent scum.

For example, from my experience Fishy is truly impressive scum. In the one game I was in with him (though he replaced in after I died), everyone in the game, dead and alive, would have sworn black and blue that Fishy was town. Many people seem to have quite a town read of Fishy, and the read seems to have been formed really early. The faith people have in meta (because what else could it be?) is often misguided, imho.

Firstly, I don't really understand the last sentence- where is the suggestion any early read on me was based on meta?

Also, I am quite surprised you have now brought this game up twice in a way which clearly casts doubt on any town reads of me. In that game, I bussed my partner very strongly in a perfect information setup (for the scum, by that stage)- to the point of accusing mith of being inconsistent by not voting for him. It was entirely

what

I said, not how I said it, that convinced people I was town. This game would be relevant if, say, I had just lynched scum (and I fully expect my [small sample] bussing meta to inconvenience me one day). Since I didn't, reads on me shouldn't be affected by it, and bringing it up is just slinging mud at someone people find townie.

Percy’s reaction to Santos’s bizarre claim is hugely over the top. The accusation of Santos softclaiming is pretty much a misrepresentation (also from Head Honcho, later retracted).

Percy’s odd claim to have thought qwints has a guilty; my first instinct here was to go for the “stupid mistake” explanation. However, in the context of the post the claim was made in, I’m not so sure. It fits with the view that Percy was attacking Santos in a disproportionate way; trying to discredit anything Santos said, he put forward a view without thinking it through (and, being scum, he wouldn’t have had to think very hard about what to do when qwints counterclaimed LC). He then has to defend this view. I’m torn between the two explanations- if he was scum, he slipped up badly, and if that was genuinely his read of the situation day 1 he made a very bad read. Overall, I tend to think it was a stupid mistake. I see no reason that the word “counterclaim” in a short hammer post such as Percy’s couldn’t have meant “claim of investigation - in opposition to LC’s claim”- as far as I’m concerned, if I claim X, and you claim something that contradicts me being X, that’s a counterclaim.

I find SC’s “if he flips town, lynch me” act deeply insincere. As far as I’m concerned, that’s merely a parody of tunnelled town.
Tar’s analysis of Sens is compelling, and I totally agree with his reaction to Vino after this.
I’m happy with where my vote is. I carry on disliking Vino’s play:

I have a lot to say about recent posts but this stuck out at me:

I also believed he screwed up something with a nk last night, but I can't talk too much about that without a confirmation from him in a pm.

You would never know or think this if you didn't send him an NK.

Unvote, Vote Mufasa

I demand an explanation.

I'll respond to the other posts later when I have time.

This is outright rolefishing. Mufasa volunteered the information that he was surprised that an action of his was not resolved. Clearly, he did this knowing what he was doing, and equally clearly it’s a softclaim of a town PR. Making him firm this claim up is of no use and is potentially harmful.

Korlash, I think I understand your angle, but your stalwart defense of Percy's slip in trying to make your point has reflected poorly on you.

Paraphrase: “Korlash, your defense of Percy is a reasonable one. However, if you continue it you look scummy. So stop.”

[Fishythefish]

Korlash, I think I understand your angle, but your stalwart defense of Percy's slip in trying to make your point has reflected poorly on you.

Paraphrase: “Korlash, your defense of Percy is a reasonable one. However, if you continue it you look scummy. So stop.”

Could you explain to me the purpose of this paraphrase? I think I know what you mean, but I'd rather be sure.

I think Vino was trying to get Korlash to stop his fair defense of Percy, and discredit said defense, by telling him it looked scummy.

Tar's meta of me is accurate in the "ordered" regard, and my post explains rather than denies this.

[Fishythefish]

I apparently didn't get the memo that softclaiming is a pro-town tactic. Are you saying you actually believe him? And how is it role fishing if he's outed himself? There are scum protection roles, and there's also the possibility that he's lying. I think town needs to know which it is. He didn't need to post this issue in the thread. Also none of the questions I asked said anything about claiming or revealing information about his role, in fact I believe I specifically asked him not to do that.

He outed himself as some kind of PR. If he's scum, he has a claim prepared, if he's town, it's best not to out the details. In either case, forcing a full claim is not beneficial to the town, and is potentially harmful. This has no bearing on whether or not I believe him (actually, I really don't know whether or not his is telling the truth). None of the questions you asked said anything about claiming? You said "I demand an explanation". What form did you expect that explanation to take, without revealing role information??

No. More like my way of saying

FoS: Korlash

. How do you read that it's me trying to get him to do something? Saying something "reflects poorly on you" doesn't mean "stop doing it." It means it looks scummy. What if I say that trying to put words in my mouth reflects poorly on you?

Adressing someone directly, telling them what they are doing "reflects poorly on them", is clearly giving them a reason to stop. Your tone reads more like advising Korlash to stop his defenses than fossing him, particularly "I think I understand your angle but...". For me, your post is far more about building the Percy wagon than attacking Korlash.

[Fishythefish]

... is not what I'm trying to do. Look at the questions I asked him. I did not ask him to claim.

Unvote, Vote Mufasa

I demand an explanation.

This is the post I object to. I ask again- what did you expect this explanation to consist of, if not role information?

I think your way of criticising Korlash is deliberately passive, and the focus is on getting him to abandon his defense of the Percy wagon, rather than actually accusing him.

[Fishythefish]

An

explanation

not a

claim

. When did I ever say I wanted a claim? Never. The persistence with which you're trying to frame me as role fishing is starting to look scummy.

This response is not an answer to the post you quote. You didn't ask for a claim, and I haven't said you did. But you haven't answered my question: what form did you expect Mufasa's explanation to take? Rolefishing is rarely someone saying "what is your role?", and the fact that you didn't say you wanted a claim doesn't mean you didn't want one. As far as I can see, any explanation of Mufasa's actions would include more role information, and your demand for one is therefore rolefishing.

[Fishythefish]

Vino your the one that rolefished that information... >.>.....

Vino's rolefishing is not what made you claim, and latching onto this idea to excuse your actions is very suspect.

[Fishythefish]

I am very much against the idea of mufasa claiming flavour.

He may well be effective only against some kinds of kills. But us knowing which is not useful (afaic), and it tells some killing factions whether or not he needs taking out/roleblocking.

Massclaim feels premature. Sure, we've lost a lot of roles we'd normally be worried about outing, but there will still be some prs out there (eg. other protectors, if mufasa is not universal)- and this makes full massclaim a bad idea for now. A name/origin only massclaim I can't see getting us any information, but I wouldn't oppose it.

[Fishythefish]

FoS: Empking

, for shifting responsibility onto Tar (particularly since i think what he's asking for is antitown). "Tar knows what he's talking about" is an unacceptable reason to want a flavour claim. Even if you think Tar makes decisions perfectly, he could be scum. Why do you want the claim?

[Fishythefish]

I actually find Fishy pretty scummy too. His initial vote on LC was wishy washy and he did seem to lurk during day one, only posting when others called him out.

Pretty good reasons. My vote on LC was unimpressive, and my stance needed the rethink it got. My access this game has been very variable, and often not as much as I would like, but I think I have comitted to positions and arguments, which is kind of what lurking is supposed to avoid. Lurking is also very much not part of my scum-meta.

[Fishythefish]

Wait, hang on a minute. Lurking day one? No I didn't. Day two is when I've been a bit inactive, day one I posted lots.

Jeremy, The Tao of Geek

[Fishythefish]

Here is a link to my comic, The Tao of Geek[/url]

[Fishythefish]

I am unimpressed by the Percy wagon. It is based on one point, which I think is weak, and from his reactions Percy doesn't feel like scum to me.

I think that Vino is much more likely scum, and is still a realistic lynch. If it came down to Kise vs. Percy, I'd be voting Kise.

Vino should claim.

[Fishythefish]

P.S. At this stage, I see no reason for any player not to be voting for one of Percy, Kise or Vino. One of them is going to be lynched, and having your vote elsewhere is just avoiding responsibility.

[Fishythefish]

Hmmm. It is true that the "doesn't die if hides with scum" detail makes Percy's claim worse. Without this, scum-Percy can be outed when he claims to hide with scum (presumably of another faction), who are later killed.

However, other than this I dislike the wagon on Percy. With is confirmable claim, Vino is now a terrible lynch.

unvote, vote Kise

[Fishythefish]

Percy's claim is not totally untestable. If we know in advance his target, or better yet select them, then if they are town and die, and Percy doesn't, his claim is disproved. Any killing group not involving Percy has an incentive to kill this player; they either kill two townies at once or, better yet, kill a townie and out a rival scum for a lynch. If Percy is town, he dies, but with the levels of suspicion on him that's not so bad.

[Fishythefish]

An interesting theory. Tomorrow the sample size will make it more convincing if it remains true- currently it could well be coincidental.

[Fishythefish]

A majority is not needed for a lynch; the player with most votes will be lynched.

[Fishythefish]

Seriously though, with Fishy seemingly pushing a deadline kill over a lynch and Delathi's "Well I guess Kise is the only option left" how can anyone agree with a kise lynch? Insanity...

I made that post with (I thought?) 24 hours until the deadline. There were, realistically, three wagons which had a chance of producing the lynch in that timeframe. I asked players to vote for one of them (not necessarily Kise, who I wasn't voting at that point). How is this an argument against voting Kise?

[Fishythefish]

As most in my games have noticed, I am currently V/LA due to a broken computer. When it's fixed, I will catch up.

[Fishythefish]

No longer V/LA (not sure I ever was going to be?)- just busy over the weekend. Will make serious post later tonight.

[Fishythefish]

Apologies, other things came up. I will be caught up in 24 hours time, and stay that way.

[Fishythefish]

Things:

Percy feels like a bad lynch for the day, as every night he claims his hidee is a tempting target for any scumgroup not containing him or his hidee. As it seems likely we have 2 scumgroups, or 1 + SK, I think letting him live for the moment is sensible. If he is scum, he will likely be outed in due course.

Empking wasn't killed, and if Percy was scum, why would the scum oblige in outing one of their members? Korlash flipped scum as expected, Percy will flip scum too.

What do you think the odds of there being only one scumgroup are (where SKs count as scumgroups)?

FoS

SC for that post (760). It feels like the “mafia hitman” hypothesis is made to justify advocating a Percy lynch on grounds that fail if there are multiple scum groups. Also, the lack of attention to basic facts (mufasa doctor, not noticing Korlash’s two reasons for fakeclaim [discontinued+kill method]) doesn’t look good.

“Erasure” appears to point to a player/group who is not actually in a comic? Doesn’t feel like a vig kill style to me if this is the right interpretation- more the crazed comic writer SK or similar.

No reason for Vino to claim his visit.

Sajin’s post on Percy is awful. Of all the players in this game, accusing Percy of taking the back seat is totally unwarranted. Feels strongly of scum pushing Percy’s wagon along.

I think Percy’s wagon is scumdriven- although I certainly wouldn’t rule out him being part of a different mafia.

I agree that the posts Tar quotes make it less likely that he is Discontinued.

I have nothing to add to Tar’s analysis of SensFan from yesterday, but I agree with it. Always a horrible way to suspect something, but it’s true.

FoS SC, Sajin, SensFan

- basically, if your name starts with S you are probably scum.

vote: Sajin

I think we should massclaim.

[Fishythefish]

fishy's last post especially looks bad, admitting that percy is scummy but suggesting that we not do anything about it because it'll somehow work itself out. how exactly do you suggest that this is going to work itself out, not forgetting that his claim is synonymous with nightkill immune?

and fishy, what on earth makes you think its appropriate time for a massclaim?

1) Putting yourself in the shoes of a scumgroup not containing Percy, all other things being equal, who would you shoot?
2) How likely do you think it is that such a group exists?

I explained how I think it will work out. At some stage, Percy's claimed target will die. If he dies, we have saved a mislynch, if he lives we lynch him. If it gets near lylo and this hasn't happened, sure, we may need to lynch him, but for now it seems stupid.

I didn't say that Percy was scummy. AFAIC, Korlash's defense of him is the only point against him of any merit, and even that could well be buddying. A connection from scum to another player (rather than vice-versa) is a very dangerous thing to put too much trust in- a defense like Korlash's can be faked by the scum and carries practically no risk, as Korlash getting lynched before Percy was an unlikely event.

Massclaim would enable us to assess flavour, setup balance etc., and with so many prs dead I doubt it will hurt us much.

[Fishythefish]

If I get time, I'm going to look into Korlash's scummeta- I think it's important in determining whether his defense of Percy was of another scum or to look good when he flipped town.

[Fishythefish]

@Fishy: Just how long are you willing to give Percy before you think he would be a good lynch?

To clarify; if I thought Percy was very likely scum, I'd be up for his lynch now. His claims just means that it will take a bit more for me to want his lynch.
How I feel about Percy tomorrow would depend to a great extent on what happens in the night.

[Fishythefish]

My post about the next night is entirely about information gained from Percy's claimed hide; ie. whether he and/or his hidee dies. It was not intended to hint at me being a PR, or trusting a PR to deal with Percy, and certainly wasn't a softclaim.

[Fishythefish]

i killed korlash. that much should have already been obvious. i'm not willing to claim anything further at this point.

Did you kill night 1?

[Fishythefish]

Kills so far:

14. Qwints, Elan of Order of the Stick, Town Cop, Chuckshot N1
7. The Silent Speaker, Davan of Something Positive, Vanilla Townie, Death Ray'd N1
5. Populartajo, Evil Atom of Evil Inc., Town Vig, Erased N1

10. Delathi, Skull of PvP, Town Roleblocker, Erased N2
6. Mufasa, Mr. Jinx of Starslip, Town Doctor, Beaversticked N2
8. Korlash, Flintlocke of Flintlocke's Guide to Azeroth, 2-shot Hitman of the Discontinued Mafia, Electrocuted N2

Here's a fun explanation for things:
The discontinued mafia have a kill a night. The method is "Erasure"- this kind of fits with them flavourwise (they are jealous of existing comics? that kind of feel, anyway). On top, they have their hitman, who gets through protection- and kills two outed PRs. On night 1, tajo kills the person he was most supsicious of day 1 (given kill method and day 1, I would say this is extremely likely). On night 2, rofl kills the person he was most suspicious of day 2, with the exception of someone who cannot be killed at night.

In other words, I think the facts are perfectly consistent with single scum- in which case we can typically expect one death, by Erasure.

Unvote, vote Percy

Single scum scenario would take away a lot from my "wait and see" approach. (In reverse, the lack of shooting of Empking last night points, at least a little, to Percy being scum in single scum). While I dislike voting Percy on the basis of Korlash's actions, SC's wall of Korlash in 816 is fairly compelling. If that's scum on town action, it's an extreme and rather clever example of it. Also, Percy's claim is still ridiculously convenient for scum.

[Fishythefish]

I thought Percy's claimed hidee would be the target, not Percy himself. If Percy is town, two birds with one stone. If Percy is scum, one town dead and one rival scum is outed. A pretty tempting target for non-Percy baddies.

[Fishythefish]

Here's a fun explanation for things:
The discontinued mafia have a kill a night. The method is "Erasure"- this kind of fits with them flavourwise (they are jealous of existing comics? that kind of feel, anyway). On top, they have their hitman, who gets through protection- and kills two outed PRs. On night 1, tajo kills the person he was most supsicious of day 1 (given kill method and day 1, I would say this is extremely likely). On night 2, rofl kills the person he was most suspicious of day 2, with the exception of someone who cannot be killed at night.

In other words, I think the facts are perfectly consistent with single scum- in which case we can typically expect one death, by Erasure.

Again I ask - why didn't roflcopter target Empking in this scenario? Does this make you think that Empking is scum?
Also, you're saying single mafia faction with two NKs. It's a possibility, but I don't know why you're sure enough to vote me over the issue.[/quote]
If you read day 2, rofl thought that Korlash was scum. He was pretty sure about this. I find that a very credible vig killing. I don't think this sequence tells us very much about Empking- although in multiscum he is a little more likely to be a member of another killing group (since such groups must all have had some reason not to target you).

There is a pretty good reason to think that the scum have (so far) had two nks. We know for sure (kill method) that two of the kills have been carried out by their hitman, and so were presumably seperate from the main scum kills.

[Fishythefish]

I am content without a fullclaim, although at some later stage I would be asking why we didn't get one. If it's not game-relevant, I would be curious to know what power Tar thought rofl was claiming.

[Fishythefish]

I have never heard of a mafia team with two kills. Perhaps it's my lack of experience, but the Hitman role allows the scum kill to go past any protection and can't be RBed. This is already a pretty good power for scum to have. To say that they have this power

as well as

another kill, even though it can be blocked, is a stretch too far. You're putting a lot of faith in this theory, and I think far more than the knowledge we have warrants.

Not really. It's more that I'm no longer confident we have multiple scum factions, than that I'm certain we don't.

If there is only one mafia, they are probably quite powerful- we had quite a lot of PRs, and it's a very big game. Having a factional kill, plus an individual with two unblockable kills, certainly doesn't seem unbalanced.

Tar; much of your recent analysis has been based on whether this is multiscum or not. Do you think single scum is credible? If not, why not?

[Fishythefish]

I want to point out a worrying trend I see in Tar's posts. Essentially, he will do something (such as say "MoS should claim") and will always ask us to trust us - ("I won't tell you why he should, just make him do it"). Especially alarming is Tar's post where he says MoS and Honcho are definitely town, again deferring an explanation - completely reversing his insistence on MoS claiming, and not telling us why he should have claimed in the first place. Given that most of his theories have turned out to be wrong, he's either softclaiming a PR or overinflating his theories again.

What really bugs me is that asking him to explain feels anti-town - outing information and all that jazz. What we're left with is an enigmatic, authoritative softclaimer, who is trying to direct the game by deferring explanations and his insistence that we should trust him, and that he'll explain later.

The way I look at it is, withholding information is anti-town unless he has good reason. At some stage, I'm going to be asking Tar for explanations. If these are good, that's fine, if not then that's scummy. At the moment, it doesn't feel urgent- there some other players I'm more inclined to lynch.

[Fishythefish]

You'll notice that big infodump post I just quoted from the end of D2 that explains a lot of my actions during D2.

Indeed, that cleared up a lot of things I wanted explained about your day 2. As of now, the only thing that springs to mind is your town reads on MoS and HH, for which you have implied you have pretty good reasons which you don't want to reveal.



Right now, rofl seems a very bad lynch indeed.

[Fishythefish]

The intent of those posts was not primarily to criticise Vino's attack on Korlash- rather the way he chose to present said attack, which felt to me like he was pushing your wagon more than attacking Korlash himself. As such, it would be more likely to force Vino go after Korlash than to leave alone. If this were a chainsaw defense of anyone, it would be of you, intended to fuel an argument between Korlash and Vino, and pressuring the latter.

At that time, I didn't have any strong opinions on your alignment, or on Korlash's (iirc- long time ago).

[Fishythefish]

Percy you touch on some of the issues that I am having with Fishy right now. His whole reaction to you just doesn't feel right to me. He is willing to wait and see on you until he comes up with a theory about their being only one scum. I'm not sure how the two interrelate honestly and his vote change coming so soon after I called him out on it doesn't sit right with me.

To explain my change of stance more fully; before, I was kind of tunnelling on scum who weren't in Percy's scumgroup. I was sure they existed, and the Percy bandwagon looked bad- particularly Sajin and SC. I thought that there were very likely scum on there- and I still think that's very likely if there are multiple scumgroups. The single-scum theory is not the only thing behind my shift, but that thought together with a review of Korlash convinced me that Percy is more certain scum than any of his voters.

If you don't understand how my "wait and see" attitude interrelates with there being multiscum, you clearly don't understand why I wanted to wait and see- since the two cannot be seperated. In which case, I'm very suspicious of your post which said it "made your skin crawl", and the above post. Why do you criticise an opinion if you don't understand the reasons given for it? This smacks of scum leaping on an opportunity to criticise and potentially link me to Percy.

FoS: Sotty7

I wanted (and almost want) to wait and see about Percy because his claim is, under certain circumstances, testable. In particular, if there are multiple scumgroups, all the scumgroups Percy isn't in have an incentive to shoot whoever he claims to be hiding behind. If he is fake, he will survive when his townie hidee dies, and be outed as scum. If he is real, he will die. If there is only one scumgroup, and Percy is in it, they won't shoot Percy's hidee, and so there is no point waiting.

If people don't want to lynch Rofl, my second choice is Fishy. I don't like how he's attempting to pin the "erasing" to a group when we honestly don't know if they are the ones who do it (the flavor for Korlash's kill is with the animals, Rofl claims electrocution).

I'm not sure I understand this post. I didn't try to pin anything on anyone. I put forward a theory to suggest it's possible there is only one scumgroup. How does that make me likely scum?

[Fishythefish]

Well, a hitman would be able to kill through RB/Doc, but has to perform the kill for the team. So I don't understand how you can think a mafia would have two kills a night.

I was under the impression that a hitman's kill could be seperate from the main mafia kill; if this never happens, then clearly we have another scumgroup/SK.

I will explain why MoS needs to claim once he's fullclaimed. I will explain why I currently consider MoS and Head_Honcho (particularly the latter) softcleared once massclaim is done.

I agree that MoS needs to claim. I disagree about the softclears.

@mod

MoS hasn't posted in 3 weeks. Please replace? Also, is there a deadline coming up? By my count it would be this Friday. Thanks!

[Fishythefish]

It's these quotes I really can't resolve:

Fishy's whole “wait and see” attitude with [Percy] just makes my skin crawl.

His whole reaction to you just doesn't feel right to me. He is willing to wait and see on you until he comes up with a theory about their being only one scum.

I'm not sure how the two interrelate honestly

and his vote change coming so soon after I called him out on it doesn't sit right with me.

In these two quotes, up to the bolded, you are criticising my stance on Percy. The bolded, as far as I can see, means you really weren't thinking about that stance while writing this- the "wait and see" attitude was totally about multiscum.

The bit after the bolded I'm happy with (in the sense of understanding your point). I'm aware that when I come up with theories I often convince myself of them unreasonably, at least at first, and this together with the timing could look suspicious.

[Fishythefish]

Yes. I understand that, and think it's reasonable (though wrong). That really doesn't answer my problem with you, which is:
You criticised my "wait and see" stance twice. Yet in the second post, you also say you don't understand how it relates to multiscum, which strongly suggests you haven't thought about it in the slightest. It feels very much like you were throwing out an attack without really believing in it.

[Fishythefish]

Dammit. If there's one thing I'm good at, it's reading about-to-be-lynched posts, and for once I'm going to trust my instincts- I'd be amazed if Percy were scum.

unvote, vote: Sajin

. It's pretty late for this, I realise, but this is a much better lynch.

I just had a look at Sajin's iso. It's not pretty. It's also not long, and I urge everyone to do the same. I have no time right now, but later today I will spell it out. He is scummy, and when he's not scummy it's because he's lurking.

[Fishythefish]

So, here's why I think Percy's post is real, apart from a feeling:

1. Sajin's contribution to my wagon has been incredibly scummy.
2. Empking continues to avoid my questions, and has disappeared. What a surprise, given that this is exactly what I predicted would happen.
3. Don't let Tar have a free ride. Make sure you ask for his explanations and are satisfied by them.
4. Fishy and Sotty are having an interesting interaction here. I get scumvibes from both of them in different ways, but I'm not going to be around to feel them out.
5. a) Sotty's entrance was opportunistic, but I can see a townie do it. b) Fishy is more of a worry - his attitudes on D1 weren't great, and his monoscum theory doesn't stand up to sensible analysis.
6. MoS and Head_Honcho are on my scumdar, but that wagon's been shut down until Tar explains what he means.
7. SensFan needs to answer or be policy lynched.

For me, these are uniformly sensible protown points. 1 is very true (see later). 4, 5a) and 5b) are (afaik) new points. While scum about to be lynched would produce such a list, this one has had an awful lot of effort put into it for scum- "his attitudes on D1 weren't great"- whether or not this is true, it's a new point which doesn't feel like it was just pulled out of the air. All this is more significant because I really do get the feeling Percy is genuinely giving up here.

The "you're all stupid" part I would expect from town or scum, not setting much store by that, but I really think what Percy's telling the town isn't the random flailing of scum.

Incidentally, I've pretty much discarded monoscum since it's been generally agreed hitmen only perform the kill for their mafia. We'll know tonight, at any rate.

Why Sajin is scum:

I dislike serials reasonings on percy. I do not think that play would be made as town. Therefore I will

vote SerialClergy

Said reasoning was the "Percy thought qwints had a guilty" point. I find it surprising that this point would make anyone feel SC was scum, whether or not they liked the reasoning. To me, it felt extremely genuine at that point, post 489.

Vote: Percy

I think if percy was town he would be helping out more and asking for more contributions rather than taking the backseat.

This was at a time when Percy was under constant fire, was pretty active and there were several serious lurkers. I think it is an obvious excuse to jump on a wagon which is rolling nicely at this point.

This addition hardly helps:

Its not the post amount but rather the post aggressiveness of Percy. It does not match his town meta imo.

For me, Percy's play has been fairly similar to the other game I've seen him in- and a brief perusal of Percy and Sajin's common game says nothing to suggest that was much different- certainly there is plenty of aggression from Percy there. There is no attempt to back this up, and I think it was simply a lie. I suggest people read Percy's iso in that game.

That's not very many posts, but Sajin has not made many posts- and none of them make convincingly protown points. I find a huge proportion of the information on Sajin points to his being scum.

fishy's unvote is so lame right now

I was voting for someone I decided was relatively unlikely to be scum. What would you have me do?

Fishy, get back on the wagon or be more convincing.

I specifically said I intended to explain.

[Fishythefish]

Said reasoning was the "Percy thought qwints had a guilty" point. I find it surprising that this point would make anyone feel SC was scum, whether or not they liked the reasoning. To me, it felt extremely genuine at that point, post 489.

I find SC’s “if he flips town, lynch me” act deeply insincere. As far as I’m concerned, that’s merely a parody of tunnelled town.

It's not even vague - both Fishys are talking about EXACTLY THE SAME POST, 489.

These posts are talking about different aspects of the situation. I honestly can't remember what I thought about your attack itself 37 days ago, but reading it now it feels like you could easily have believed it. What I didn't, and don't, believe, is you're "if I'm wrong lynch me" act- whether you are town or scum, I thought and think this was just an act to be able to say "PERCY IS SCUM" more strongly.

[Fishythefish]

A correction- I do know what I thought about your attack itself 37 days ago. I thought it was wrong. What I can't claim to be sure about is how insincere I found it.

[Fishythefish]

It's a

deeply insincere

extremely genuine

'if I'm wrong lynch me act'

that you

didn't and don't believe whether I'm town or scum

despite it being

merely a parody of tunnelled town

that would be

very surprising to feel I was scum!

The only way you come out of this looking good is if you're doing an imitation of Sarah Palin.

Yeah, brilliant. Here is what "it" is in that sentence:

In red and blue, it's your "If I'm wrong lynch me" act; you said "If he flips town, lynch me next, I'll self-vote.". I didn't believe you.

In green, it's your attack on Percy. This reads like you believe in it.

I'll say it one more time: I think that your attack on Percy does not look like an artificial scummy attack. Your method of supporting it, claiming you will self vote if you are wrong, does not look genuine- such claims very rarely do, from scum or town.

It's rather unfair to quote me about two different (though linked) things, implying they are opinions on one issue.

If you made a post saying "Fishy is town, the moon is made of cheese", I might sensibly quote the first part for truth and criticise the second as insane. Judging from the above, I imagine you would reply "

SC is correct

but

is totally wrong and as mad a teapot

. That is pretty much what your post is.

[Fishythefish]

Incidentally, if you intend to play the "color different things different colors" game again, green is the mod's color in this game.

[Fishythefish]

if this percy lynch fails to happen i am holding fishy directly responsible

We don't need a majority at deadline (if we did, this post might make some sense). For Percy not to be lynched, at least three more people would have to change their minds. What possible purpose does this post serve?

If, by some miracle, I managed to lead an alternative lynch on Sajin, I would happily take "responsibility" for leading away from Percy. I think he's the wrong lynch.

[Fishythefish]

Sajin: it makes you scum that you have pushed a popular wagon for no good reason. With lies. I would like you to explain your points on Percy's meta and taking the back seat.

V/LA notice

I will have limited access until Wednesday. Should it be night, my access will be good enough to send in any night actions I might have.

[Fishythefish]

Good news, V/LA may not be as limited as feared.

Sajin is on the most popular wagon. He has two reasons. The first is a piece of meta which does not fit with the facts, and that he refuses to support. The second is an accusation of "taking the back seat" which was completely unwarranted.

I really can't see a townie doing what Sajin has done, and I'm surprised that noone else feels the same way.

SC, rofl, anyone: any comments on Sajin's reasons for being on Percy's wagon?

[Fishythefish]

Yes. I understand that, and think it's reasonable (though wrong). That really doesn't answer my problem with you, which is:
You criticised my "wait and see" stance twice. Yet in the second post, you also say you don't understand how it relates to multiscum, which strongly suggests you haven't thought about it in the slightest. It feels very much like you were throwing out an attack without really believing in it.

Poor wording on my part. I'll say again that don't understand why you suddenly went from two scum teams to one just so you could vote Percy. I think the theory is just something you pulled from your ass. Something I see you have gone back on again.

Also post 922 is more of how I think you and Percy are both scum just from different groups. If there is only one group, you are more likely the scum. That said, I do agree with you on your read of Sajin, he is pretty damn scummy. so yeah I'm torn. Percy lynch seems like so much hard work it makes me believe there must be scum actively muddying the waters to stop it. Yet I find Sajin very scummy and would be tempted to move my vote if the wagon wasn't being pushed by two others I think are scum.

---

on this like jaundice

vote percy

Reasons please.

Poor wording indeed- pretty sure this answers my question (which doesn't mean I'm happy with it- "poor wording" can be that or it can be a way of scum covering up). And yeah, I have discarded the one-scum theory after players offered opinions on it, and more experienced players than me said it was very unlikely- enough of them that I'm pretty much convicned. I do tend to get excited about these theories of mine, and believe in them disproportionately to how good they actually are (for an example, you could see Antarctic Mafia, easily my worst game. I got horribly carried away with a flavour argument and lynched). I really thought I had hit on the true setup, which everyone else had missed, and based my actions on that. The timing was unfortunate and I can see why outcome wouldn't look good.

I'm not sure the picture you have of me as non-Percy-aligned scum is very coherent- my original attitude to Percy isn't something scum would have had a reason for. Regardless, in a likely multiscum game like this, I don't think you should let the company stand in your way unless you think Percy and/or I is actually scummier than Sajin. You may not like my reasons for voting Percy; Sajin's are far, far worse.

[Fishythefish]

@Fishy: Can you link me to Antarctic Mafia please?

viewtopic.php?t=10626
What your looking for is in day 2. Not a pretty sight .

Basically because of the way he keeps jumping back and forth on you. Often it reads like he is scum and you are town and he is torn about wanting to be linked to your flip.

"Keeps jumping back and forth" might be a trifle strong. IIRC, my stance on Percy has gone moved back and forth exactly once. And I am indeed torn about wanting to lynch Percy- although my current stance is probably the most certain I've been since early day 2.

[Fishythefish]

Why are people not voting Percy?

Maybe its just me but recent posts don't seem to be that useful to the town.

Speaking for myself, I'm not voting Percy because I see no particularly compelling reasons for doing so, and my instincts are firmly that he is town.

More to the point, why are you voting Percy? Your stated reasons aren't exactly coherent-

Vote; Percy

- For trying to get out of the consequences of hammering the town cop.

He chose to hammer the likely cop but is now claiming to have hammer'd a guilty investigation.

He had a believable claim made stronger by the Elan claim.

Elan being the only cop would be unlikely.

As the point of making Elan a cop is naive speculation.

Naive speculation is more likely to happen with multiple cops.

This was the "I thought he had a guilty" thing- fair enough. In justifying it though, you said that LC was likely to be cop. You didn't express that when he was being voted for (why not?), and said that the Elan-cop claim made LC more likely to be a cop, which is weak at best. All in all, your positions seem a rather artificial way of justifying your Percy vote. There is also a hugely anti-town tendency to volunteer absolutely no information. When asked whether you thought qwints' claim made LC a more likely cop, you said "yes". Clearly, the person asking wanted you to explain why you took this odd position.

@ anyone with a decent meta of Empking

: in this game, Empking is lurking, and volunteering a minimum of information only when asked direct questions. Is there

A note (particularly to Percy): Empking never asked for the nature of

Tar's

protect. The wording isn't totally clear, but in context it is pretty obvious he was asking for the nature of

Mufasa's

protect. I am still unimpressed with Empking's reasoning for this, which was "because Tar thinks it's right".

I agree with everyone that Percy's attacks on Tar are very scummy.

Here, you offer a secondary attack on Percy, in which you appeal to the popular opinion of "everyone". Two problems here; first is that you are just "me-too"ing, and not saying how Percy is being scummy. Second is that "everyone" consists of Tar. And noone else. This is just horrible.

The more I look at the players on the Percy wagon, the less inclined I am to vote him.

@ Head Honcho:

why are you voting Percy?

[Fishythefish]

Simulpost, EBWOP:

@ Head Honcho:

why

were

you voting Percy, and what made you change your mind?

[Fishythefish]

@ anyone with a decent meta of Empking

: in this game, Empking is lurking, and volunteering a minimum of information only when asked direct questions. Is there

Although you didn't finish your question, the answer is yes, he does this in pretty much every game he's in, and I hate him for it.

Cheers. I was really looking for the answer "yes, always when he is scum and never when he is town", or vice-versa, but you can't have everything.

[Fishythefish]

Was Elan alone as a cop? No? Then I was right.

That's really beside the point- you offered this explanation after the events. You being right doesn't change the fact that your explanation was contrived.

Now that you realise that not many people were saying Percy was scummy for attacking Tar, do you want to explain why you hold that view?

I support massclaim. I think we can do better than a Percy lynch.

[Fishythefish]

V/LA notice

I'm going to have

no access

from this Saturday, 5th, until Monday, the 14th.

@mod

It is possible that night will fall while I have no access. Should I have any night actions, is it acceptable for me to send in night choices now, which might be dependent on deaths and flips?

If I don't get an answer to this in time, and I do have night actions, I'll send them off regardless before I leave.

I'll also do a thorough review of the game, get all my thoughts on all the players up.

Apologies for this long period of no access- I hadn't realised I would have no internet at all. I will catch up fully when it's over.

[Fishythefish]

With so many PRs outed and/or dead, it won't do much harm. It might give us a good lynch.

[Fishythefish]

Thoughts on everything, pre-V/LA:

1. Hasdgfas

Not a player I’ve thought a great deal about, to be honest. Gut says town weakly.

3. Tzeentch

Has made one post worthy of the name. Was getting bad vibes from Tar for his “lead=vanilla” theory- personally, I can’t see how that theory could ever have been beneficial for scum. The criticism of the theory did not justify the conclusion that Tar was scummy. Also throws out 3 unjustified suspicions. Slight scum read from this post- very little evidence though. Needs replacement.

4. Sotty7 (Slicey)

Slicey said little, and nothing worrying.
Sotty is a supporter of the “thought qwints had a guilty” bit of the Percy wagon. He is coherent on this subject, and this is his primary (and pretty much only?) reason for voting Percy. His comments on me have been reasonable, and a very plausibly genuine read of me. No major concerns, and probably town.

9. Empking

Horrible lurking, and very anti-town attitude to giving opinions, but apparently that’s his meta. I'm inclined to say he's scum- despite his explanations, his reasons for voting Percy seem contrived. In particular, it seems odd to effectively attack Percy for thinking qwints' claim made LC's more likely false when this applies to everyone in the game. Feels like it was cooked up to attack Percy.

12. Mastermind of Sin (Santos)

I really can’t read play like Santos’s very well, but it feels more town than scum, apart from the odd piece of serious active lurking. MoS hasn’t said too much.

13. SerialClergyman

No problems prior to Percy wagon.
Behaviour on Percy wagon:
He really, really like the “qwints’ guilty” reason. I think he gets carried away here. Whether or not you find Percy’s explanation believable, there is no clear lie, as SC says. However, he feels more carried away than faking, until he starts talking about self-voting if he’s wrong. For me, that’s pretty much a lie, and is just screaming that he’s right- supremely unhelpful. If your reasons for lynching are good, you shouldn’t need to promise you will vote yourself to push them through.
Goes on to make valid points about Korlash’s posts about Percy.
I dislike his misrepresentation of me, even if it was in pretty colours.
Overall, leaning town, though too certain about Percy.

15. Head_Honcho

Agree with Tar’s softclear here.

16. Vino

Thought he was scum, but pretty convinced by his claim.

17. roflcopter

Has a pretty convincing claim. Doesn’t have a case on Percy. I’d like to hear one.

18. Sironigous

Getting a scum read here, based mostly off gut. Seriously non-confrontational. When he disagrees, it often comes with a qualification. His posts are pretty superficial, with no obvious attempt to add anything much.

19. Sajin (xRECKONERx)

I’ve given this one recently- he’s scum.

20. Riceballtail (Timeater)

Rice has failed to give a serious analysis to many important issues, preferring instead to sit on a vote for rofl, with one reason (albeit a decent one). Has just today declared a town read on Percy- why? What does he think of any of the case on Percy?
Very possible scum- seems to be studiously avoiding discussion of the Percy wagon, which is clearly the most important feature of the day.

21. Percy

Here, I remain deeply torn. My reread of SC has reminded me of the cases against him- the wall of Korlash is strong stuff, his hider claim is super-convenient for scum, and his claim he thought qwints had a guilty was either a scumslip or a combination of a slightly surprising interpretation of qwints’ post and a rather unfortunately worded hammer post.
Of these points, the Korlash one is the one I like most. I don’t think his claim role is implausible, and nor do I find his actions around the end of day 1/beginning of day 2 incredible as town. Town players do some pretty stupid things (eg. claim doctor for no reason).
Head says scum. Gut screams town. Left foot just wants him dead so I know what alignment he is. Gut is winning atm.
In the (currently unlikely) event Percy survives the day, he should claim his hide again. Gives non-Percy scum factions a target which is beneficial for us and them.

23. SensFan

Needs replacement. Some points from day 1 still stand; in particular, focusing on players who were already under scrutiny, weak reasons and general lack of content.

24. ZazieR

Needs replacement.

25. Tarhalindur

Tentative town read, simply based on large volume with nothing very scummy in it. Here or there reading Tar’s posts I think something’s slightly odd, but no more than you would expect from the sheer amount of content there. If we’re both still alive in a few days I suppose I’ll have to do a thorough reread of him; not something to look forward to

massclaim

We have huge numbers of PRs dead, and one still active PR claimed (though without power). I can’t imagine massclaim will have serious adverse consequences. I see no reason to delay massclaim- and the earlier the better from the point of view of forcing scum into difficult positions.

My vote and night actions during no access

If I have night actions, I am sending them in advance.
My vote remains on Sajin. I was half-planning to switch to Empking, as he is a more realistic lynch atm, but I am much more confident on Sajin. He is on Percy’s wagon with terrible posts; first criticising Percy’s “taking the backseat” (false) and, when pressed on this, “aggressiveness” (not particularly) which “does not match his town meta” (imo false, and certainly unjustified).

[Fishythefish]

In response to SC:
It is not accurate to say I agree with all your reasons. I find the slip significantly less compelling than you. I find Korlash's day 2 play more likely to be a combination of buddying and uncertainty as to joining Percy's wagon than you (though you make an interesting point re multiple scumgroups and buddying- if Percy had flipped scum, Korlash really would have looked awful). Also, Korlash's focus was on you- when not taken in isolation, some of the wall of quotes become rather more tame (something I’d missed before). And I don't find his role so outlandish as not to believe it possible.
My head agrees with all your reasons, to a lesser extent than you believe in them.

On the wall o' quotes:

For now, I thought I'd post up some highlight's of Korlash's love/hate relationship of Percy to give something concrete to what I asserted and most people didn't immediately respond to in 799.

In his hammer post he doesn't specifically say the "counter claim" is the reason he is voting, he says it "needs addressing today." His explanation was that he felt the counterclaim was unneeded, thus his statement that it needed addressing makes sense. i'm trying hard not to answer this stuff for him but its hard to argue my points without addressing yours...

I do agree with you him not including his reasoning about the day investigation at the time of the hammer means that he could be lying here now, but it doesn't prove it. It doesn't even suggest it really, unless you're saying it's impossible for a townie to hammer someone without giving a reason.

In all fairness it means very little coming from me and not him, but if I have to answer for him in order to address your BS accusations then I gotta do what I gotta do...

Oh yeah, that's very good. Automatically pair the guy your voting and the guy pointing out your BS attacks. How original.

Sarcasm aside, it's not sympathetic. I was all ready to join the wagon on Percy until he posted his explanation, causing me to reread and edit my post the otherway. I actually read the entire thing with the added perspective that I was open to him telling the truth, and you know what, it actually made sense. Why don't you try it and instead of reading it with your biased "i'm right and nothing can change it" attitude and maybe you can make something of this discussion.

The sad part about all of this is I originally agreed with you. But that aside...

Which means via his explanation there is no lie. Whether or not you believe this is up to you, whether I believe it or not is up to me. My view point on Percy has changed may times today I'm sure it will change many more. But that's irrelevant as I care only about my viewpoint on you atm.

This is my biggest issue with you and I would like it clarified before i press on with Percy.

Yes, it's indicative of me thinking SC's is pushing the Percy wagon for means other then good old fashioned scum hunting. The fact I had to resort to defending Percy to push my own point is regrettable, but luckily it hasn't seemed to do any damage to the case on him or his own defense.

As far as my own defense of Percy goes, Devil's Advocate is a pretty good way to describe it. To make my own point clear I don't disagree with *most* of the attacks on Percy, but the ones I do I need to push against. And I can't do that without in some way shape or form defending Percy in the process. My first and foremost thought has not been to defend Percy but to push my vote on SC, something that has yet to be cleared up mind you. I will say once it has been cleared up I'll have some words for Percy as well, so no fear there eh?

And just to ease your troubled mind, when I said "I don't care about... (insert three things I said here)" I didn't mean I don't care about them, just that I don't care about talking about them with SC at that time. I don't want SC to talk about whether or not I should believe percy. I don't want him to talk about percy's lie and what makes it a lie. I almost entirely don't want him talking about Percy at all. (Minus the stuff he has to explain in order to back up his statement I have concerns about.)

I don't see how the comments above make sense in a scum-buddying-town narrative. I don't know why he's so keen to put himself at arm's length from the person he's trying to buddy. It is a textbook chainsaw case - his continued insistence that he is not defending Percy, and that he agrees about much of the case, or he's not even interested in discussing the case about Percy - all he cares about is his case on SC. It's just.. classic. He worked hard to derail the wagon and was a big factor is moving the wagon off Percy (which in and of itself doesn't make much sense from a scum standpoint). Then the continued distancing coupled with the continued defending is a clear scum signal, no matter what WIFOM is spouted (It's just a CLEVER way of buddying )

These posts:
1 and 2 are defences of Percy. Fair enough.
3 to 10 are actually points about SC himself- part of Korlash’s argument that SC’s case on Percy is weak/overstated/pushed through unfair means. At this point, Percy really was only tangentially connected to Korlash’s arguments. Now, this can be interpreted as a chainsaw defence. However, he doesn’t actually display any significant inconsistencies in his attitudes to Percy.
While Korlash defends Percy, directly and by attacking SC, I don’t think the distancing accusation is fair. For what Korlash was arguing, Percy really wasn’t all that important- but it was inevitable his name would come up a lot. Korlash made two decisions; attack SC over his case on Percy, and hardly address the case on Percy. There's nothing more complex than that going on.

As for his reasons for these decisions; well, a chainsaw defence of Percy is certainly very possible. But the same tactic could easily be used for buddying - just simply buddying, not with unlikely distancing as SC suggests. There is also the possibility that Korlash was trying to set up an SC lynch after Percy flipped town. Perhaps he just didn't want to be on that particular town wagon (for whatever reason- couldn't make it convincing, scumbuddies on it, didn't feel needed), and went for what he thought was another easy attack.

TLDR

Overall, when you take Korlash's quotes in the context of the case he was pushing, they make total sense. The only remaining question is why he was pushing that case- and I think there is more than one good explanation.

Seriously non-confrontational.

Is this a scum tell? >.<

.. I've always been posted in mafia like this. XD

Though Fishy, I honestly agree with EXACTLY everything else you've said.

I think this post is hilariously non-confrontational

Seriously, though, I’ve always viewed avoiding conflict as scummy. Conflict is often needed to provoke scum reactions, and avoiding it makes you a less likely lynch. So avoiding conflict is anti-town and scum have a reason to do it.

[Fishythefish]

*Maths was used in the making of this post*

Interpreting the questions in a way that makes sense to me:
I'd expect to see a claim that unusual from a townie about 10% of the time (that's pretty arbitrary, but right kind of ballpark). I'd expect to see a claim that unusual from scum slightly more- maybe 20% of the time. So assuming two thirds of the players in the game are town, given this claim I would think that Percy's claim was about 50% likely to come from scum, and 50% likely to come from town (if it was his only post of the game).

On the buddying, after my thoughts in my last post, I would say that Korlash buddying isn't dramatically less likely than Korlash chainsawing- if these actions were in some odd way in isolation, I'd probably think Percy about 40-45% scum (as opposed to a baseline of 33%).

On the slip, I find it pretty unlikely that Percy would make such a mistake. As town or scum. If he's scum, I can't see that it was at any point a deliberate tactic, or way of avoiding the consequences of his hammer. In other words, I find it more likely that he worded his hammer post badly than he decided afterwards to claim to have seen a guilty post. It's marginally more likely that scum make a stupid mistake like his misinterpretation, since they have less reason to think hard about claims etc.. Again, this might raise my suspicions of Percy to 40-45% scum.

If these were the only three events in the game, the logical conclusion would be that Percy is roughly 70% likely to be scum (using some fairly simple probability)- well above my 33% baseline (I'm surprised how far above). A quick calculation shows that to justify a neutral read on Percy, I'd need to think Percy's posts about 5 times more likely to come from town than scum. My gut is strong, but I'm not sure it's that strong. I'll be thinking hard about these numbers later today- making sure the maths is right and my percentages are realistic. Amazing how a few individually mild indicators of scumminess really do pile up.

[Fishythefish]

Fishy: Percy said that he thought a cop had a guilty result on LC(?) Do you agree with that? Do you agree with me that its complete BS? That's my reason for voting him and it always has been.

Fishy; When did I call Percy scum for thinking that the second cop claim didn't make the first more likely?

Percy said he thought qwints had a guilty on LC. I don't think it's obviously BS he thought that- indeed I can't imagine making something like that up as scum. The insanity of the idea far outweighs the benefit (that it was a reason for hammering).

You voted Percy for hammering a "likely cop", and trying to excuse it. This argument only holds water if LC was a likely cop. In effect, you are calling Percy scummy not only for his slip/mistake/idiocy but also for claiming to think LC was scum. Your reasons why LC was likely real are, to say the least, not something you would expect everyone to be thinking, and so this argument is invalid. In effect, you are calling Percy (but not the other ten or so players on the wagon) scum for not seeing a rather obscure point which you think made LC more likely real.

[Fishythefish]

On review, my maths appears fine, even if the result surprises me. It shows me that I should trust multiple independent weakish scumtells more than I do. The most dodgy percentages are probably about the claim; I have no real intuition for how likely a role such as Percy's claim is to exist. For that matter, I have no idea how common un-NKable scum are. But looking at the evidence this way, it feels like I should overrule my gut. Too tired to make a decision right now- I'll sleep on it, and decide before I leave tomorrow morning.

[Fishythefish]

Back. Access will be patchy until Friday, and excellent thereafter.

I'm still immensely torn about Percy. On first reading, Empking's recent posts look horrible. I'll post more substantially on both of these as soon as I get time.

@mod: votecount please?

[Fishythefish]

Back, with excellent access for the foreseeable future.

I find the lack of attention payed to Empking extraordinary.

Do we have a deadline?

I agree with everyone that Percy's attacks on Tar are very scummy.

Now, this could be an honest mistake from someone who really doesn’t care about reading the game in the slightest. I’d see this as marginally scummy – he’s made an easy “me-too” accusation without bothering to check his facts. However, he goes on to defend this-

"Everyone"? Just who is "everyone"?

The people who find your attacks on Tar very scummy.

Seriously? He didn’t check the facts after Percy questioned them? Clearly, Empking has no interest the truth of his attack.

Eventually, Empking accepts that noone agreed with him (except possibly Tar). He still fails to offer any reasons for thinking Percy’s attacks are scummy. This is absurd, and for me just says that he never thought they were scummy. He just wanted a cheap point to support his vote.

Later, he implies that the fact that Tar thought the attacks were scummy is sufficient for his original statement.

I think Empking has gone through this game answering nothing. Recently, when Percy and myself have criticised him, he has responded either with irrelevancies or by retracting points. He has tried to back his position on Percy with terrible additions (LC was likely cop, attacks on Tar scummy)- but on closer scrutiny these have had no justification. When these came into question, he quietly dropped them.
It’s not totally unreasonable to think Percy’s mistake/idiocy/scum-move was so stupid it simply couldn’t have happened by genuine mistake. Myself, I think even more unrealistic is scum sitting down and thinking “I know, I’ll claim to have thought there was a guilty- they’ll buy that”, but I could understand where Empking was coming from. But his attempts to add anything more have been exactly that- the focus has been 100% on building a case on Percy, and 0% genuine opinions.

Sajin’s vote on Percy remains terrible. He is scum.

I find it highly suspicious that the people voting for Percy show so little interest in examining the motives of their fellow wagoners (notably Empking and Sajin). rofl and SC in particular seem totally uninterested in anything other than a Percy lynch. Just because you think you have found a good lynch candidate, doesn’t mean you can stop paying attention to the horrible behaviour of people who happen to agree with you.

The million dollar question: is Percy scum? I have no idea. I do know that at the moment, two of his voters are more likely scum than him. At the very least, I want other peoples reactions to them. In particular, I would like Sotty, SC and rofl (in no particular order) to give opinions on Empking and Sajin.

Percy; please remove your vote. Whether or not your lynch is inevitable, there is more to be got out of this day.
---
Percy; I think your night one madness was a mistake – if it was a deliberate scum move it was one of breathtaking stupidity. I also think that such blatant misreads of the situation are a bit more likely to come from scum than town- they have less reason to care - and that's why I view it as a scumtell.
---

Going through a few posts made since I left;
Even if you think I abused mathematics (and see below), all SC did was ask me how good I thought the individual scumtells were- a very valid question. The fact that he asked for percentages doesn’t mean much.
On Antarctic Mafia- whether my flavour snafu got me lynched isn’t really the point. It was just to show I have a tendency to come up with these theories.
RBT’s “Tar should be dead by now” is rather horrible. Firstly, it is (likely) multiscum, so the argument applies even if Tar is scum. Secondly, the scum have had no shortage of good targets. It’s a cheap shot that makes little sense. Tar says this, and RBT claims that this shoots his town read of Tar. I really don’t get this, and would like further explanation.

FoS: RBT

---

Lastly, and least importantly: I don’t abuse maths. If there is an action that is twice as likely be done by scum as by town (say probability p of coming from town, 2p from scum), and two thirds of players in the game are town,
Chances of player being scum and taking the action = (1/3)*(2*p)=2p/3
Chances of player being town and taking the action = (2/3)*(p)==2p/3
These are equal, so the chances of the player being scum are 50%. Note that this emphatically does not mean it’s a nulltell – if I think someone is 50% likely to be scum on a baseline of 33%, that’s a pretty decent suspicion.

I’m not too bothered whether anyone understands or cares about the maths in my post – but it is real and can be summarised as “small scumtells add up better than I thought”. It’s not really intended to convince anyone to do anything, just give some insight into my thought processes for anyone who cares and understands. The reason I now think that three small scumtells maketh a lynch is that I thought about the maths of it.

[Fishythefish]

Fishy; I'm scum because I don't keep repeating points everyone knows about and by not repeating them I dropped them?

No. You are scum because you make points with no justification, and then stop talking about them. Later, you explain why you are voting for Percy, and make no reference to them.

Fishy: Were you even reading the thread? Percy was like "Only you found my attacks scummy and because only you and

nobody

else you are lying scum." (Paraphrase not an actual quote).

Not my reading at all. Unless I'm mistaken, Percy was merely pointing out your mistake about people finding your attacks suspicious.

Fishy, what makes my "not reading the thread and retracting points" scummy and Percy's "not reading the thread and retracting points" obviously cause for scum to jump all over him?

Not reading the thread well is, in both cases, a minor scumtell. Your retraction of points is bad because they were immensely crap points against the person you are voting for, and as such look like excuses for a vote rather than what you really thought.

To be clear; I'm not hugely bothered about your mistake that other people thought Percy's attacks scummy. But your reaction to this being pointed out was terrible, and

you have said nothing to support the position that the attacks are scummy

.

Which retractions of Percy did you have in mind? If you mean his retraction of "LC had a guilty on him", that is a completely different matter - he retracted something which (imo) scum had no motive to do, when his mistake was pointed out to him.

---

*An actual explanation of the maths post - feel extremely free to ignore*

@Percy; how we achieve 70%:

Three events, which we assume independent, are:
1. "guilty on LC"
2. Korlash's actions
3. Your scumtastic claim

We assume a baseline b probability of you being scum, based on the number of scum in the game - I've taken this to be a third (actually, it's totally unimportant).

Suppose the probabilities of townies performing these actions/being in these postions are t1, t2, t3, and the probabilities for scum are s1, s2, s3.

Then for one of these actions alone, the probability of you being scum would be (s1*b)/(s1*b+t1*(1-b)). This is exactly as in my last post - you look at how likely it is that a townie and a scum end up in that situation, and compare the two.

For all three actions, if we assume they are independent, the probability that a player would be scum and end up in your position is s1*s2*s3*b, and the probability they would be town and end up there is t1*t2*t3*(1-b). Hence the overall probability of you being scum in this postion is s1*s2*s3*b/(s1*s2*s3*b+t1*t2*t3*(1-b)).

I believe that in my post, I explicity said that I was taking s3 = 0.2 and t3 = 0.1. Implicit in the 40-45% figures for the other tells was that t2 was about two thirds of s2 and t1 was about two thirds of s1 - ie that townies are about two thirds as likely as scum to get into those positions. Overall, this gives s1*s2*s3 to be (3/2)*(3/2)*2 times as big as t1*t2*t3. This gives the final answer to be (3/2)*(3/2)*2*(something)*(1/3) / [(3/2)*(3/2)*2*(something)*(1/3)+(something)*(2/3)]. This is 0.692; a 70% chance of you being scum.

I'd like to reiterate that this really isn't trying to convince anyone of anything, and all it adds up to is that a few smallish scumtells make a great big scumtell; I merely want to be clear that I wasn't just waving the maths stick and pulling numbers out my arse.

---

As for your other point; the baseline doesn't really matter, it just comes from a random guess at the total number of scum. The maths does ignore everything else you've said all game, which as I've said I have a significant protown read on. The point I was trying to make (insofar as there was one) is that the evidence really does stack up, and it needs a serious protown read on other posts to overrule it. I don't actually think you 70% likely to be scum, otherwise I'd be voting you.

[Fishythefish]

The claims are completely different. Percy's were based on one simple, awful, drastic misreading of a post. Yours were opinions of an overall situation (LC was, at the time, a likely cop/Percy's attacks on Tar are scummy) with no such explanation. You haven't justified your posts, and you haven't explained why you made them.

This comparison to Percy is entirely spurious, and an attempt to cloud the issue. Something you specialise in.

Yes, you gave reasons LC was likely a cop. However, none of them came remotely close to the implication of your post; that Percy

should

have thought LC was a cop. Without this, the likelihood of LC being a cop is irrelevant to your vote.

[Fishythefish]

Admitting you are wrong is good. As far as I can see, that is totally irrelevant to our current discussion. I have not at any point criticised you for admitting you are wrong.

Where did Percy refuse to read the thread? Please try to give some context to these statements.

The post you quote read like it's an explanation of your opinions on Percy's attacks - but it doesn't really explain your position at all. What do you mean by his "not-looking-for-scum way"?

[Fishythefish]

@Fishy: That post was essentially a trap. I got what I needed out of it, and so you can see my thoughts in the response from that post.

I understand your post. You call Tar on misuse of the Too Townie fallacy, and say that PRs don't always get nightkilled.

Now, the Too Townie fallacy is simple. It says that any argument which starts "you are so protown that...." and ends "...you must be scum" is flawed. There is no way being protown can ever be worse than a nulltell. Your argument is most certainly in this category. (There is a related argument which actually makes sence, and goes:
1. Tar is highly competent
2. Tar is therefore a good scum target
3. Tar is alive
4. Tar is likely scum)

As for Tar's stating that other people made better nightkill targets, you are placing a completely false burden of proof on him. The way you phrase your post, it's as if it's Tar's responsibility to justify being alive. This is the wrong way round- your claim is that it's implausible Tar would be alive, and it's your responsibility to show that is true. Tar offers a reasonable outline explanation for him not being nightkilled so far, and you basically jump on it saying "ahhh, but they might have killed you anyway" - which is irrelevant.

In other words, I don't see any justification for your change in read on Tar.

If there are two scum factions, why do you think Tar is alive?

@ Tar (or anyone else): is there reason to think that all of Vino's recruitables are dead? You seem to imply this in knowing that scum had no recruitable member.

[Fishythefish]

Extremely good reason, namely Vino's claim itself:

I should be more specific. I can recruit members of Halfpixel only. I targeted Tarhalindur last night since he was the townliest. I supported the comic massclaim so I could figure out who to recruit. Mufasa and Delathi it looks are the only possibles since populartajo died, so I was going to do one of them tonight and the other the night after to make a three-man mason group, but now it appears that I am going to be NK'd instead, which is why I

really

didn't want to claim.

Disappointing.

Since it's safe to assume townies don't lie, then either Vino is scum or there are only four comics that he can recruit from (this can be easily checked by looking at the link to Halfpixel Vino provided) - namely, Sheldon Comics, PvP, Starslip Crisis, and Evil Inc.

Given that, any scum faction in the game would know immediately whether any of their members fit the criterion for recruitment, simply by answering the question "are any of our members from Sheldon Comics, PvP, Starslip Crisis, or Evil Inc.?". (Given currently available information, we know that the only player who *could* be scum from Halfpixel is Vino himself.)

You misunderstand the question, slightly. I realise that the scum knew whether or not they are recruitable; however you assumed that there are no recruitable scum. I have now realised that actually, we've seen a dead (town) player from each of the other comics (I had failed to register that tajo was recruitable). So under the currently pretty reasonable assumption that each comic is represented only once, there are no recruitable scum.

[Fishythefish]

Last post times:
Empking 30 minutes ago
Vino 17 hours ago
SC 2 days ago
Tar 2 days ago
Me 2 days ago
RBT 3 days ago
Snow White 5 days ago
Percy 5 days ago
rofl 7 days ago
Sotty 7 days ago
hasd 1.5 weeks ago
MoS 1.5 weeks ago
HH 1.5 weeks ago
Gorrad 1.5 weeks ago
Sironigous 3 weeks ago
Sajin 1 month ago
Tzee 1 month ago
ZazieR 2 months ago

This game is dead. There are three factions of players; those who think the Percy lynch is clearly right, those who have some level of doubt about it, and those who aren't actually playing any more. This last faction has a clear majority. I see no point in continuing.

[Fishythefish]

Er... good for you.

Fishy's unofficial votecount (disclaimer: may be wrong):

Percy (7, L-2): SerialClergyman, Roflcopter, Sajin, Empking, Sotty7, Vino, MoS
Empking (2): Percy, HH
Roflcopter (1): Riceballtail
Sironigous (1): Hasdgfas
Sajin (1): Fishythefish
Snow White (1): Sironigous

Not Voting (4): ZazieR, Tzeentch, SensFan, Tarhindular

I'm going to

unvote, vote: Empking

I still think Sajin is more (and very very) likely scum, but see no point leaving my vote there.

[Fishythefish]

EBWOP: simulpost. "Er... good for you" was meant for HH's last post.

[Fishythefish]

...and b) his alignment is critical. If he is discontinued mafia and there is another faction, then there are bound to be scum on his wagon, probably yesterday as well. If he's town, I'm less sure, but it's possible.

How would Percy's town/discontinued flip tell us about the players on his wagon? Any other scumgroup would (presumably) not know his alignment.

[Fishythefish]

Percy's town/discontinued flip

Ohai. Know something we don't? This kind of post makes me feel that there are two scum groups, and Fish here is in the other one.

I was quoting a post which said that we would know more from whether Percy flipped discontinued or town. Did you read what I was replying to? Also, the words "this kind of post" imply I have made such a post before. This is completely false.
This attack does not feel like one made in good faith.

[Fishythefish]

In any case, is Percy now at L-1? Maybe we can get the game to not die by hammering and asking the backup mod to move us into night. I know this is a rather anti-town thing to suggest, but given that the real deadline for this day was weeks ago and the game is threatening to stall without a mod around, I think it might be our most prudent option.

I toyed with the idea of hammering earlier. Thing is, with so many players just not here, there's no point going into night without replacements (as a minimum, for Zazie, Tzee and Sajin). While a hammer would move the game, it wouldn't move it far, and as you say is an anti-town move (at least if made for that reason) - when the town aren't doing so well anyway. We need some serious mod intervention before anything happens- whether that's for loads of replacements or just abandoning the whole affair.

[Fishythefish]

Saying things seems pretty futile atm. Percy is the lynch, there's no time left for a miracle, whatever my personal reservations. I'm gonna hammer it, and finally end the suspense....

Vote: Percy

[Fishythefish]

Bah! Go town!