California Trilogy: City of Angels - Off Stage (Game Over)

[MrJellyLee]

Replacing Seraphim. This is MrJellyLee’s lesser half, PJ. I will put this at the top of my posts since the bottom of our posts are apparently reserved for voting.

I will start with my observations of the scenes (since it is shorter):

I think John Locke is lying about his consequence. From what I understand, the motives given to people were

random

– what if his consequence of “being turned from an innocent to a non-innocent” was given to somebody who was already not innocent? Additionally, changing alignments does not seem the type of thing Mr. Grey would reveal as a consequence. Granted, I have not seen anything Mr. Grey has directed beyond Verbose 2.

Given that consequences are revealed, however, I am confused. It seems that players have no incentive to

lie

about their consequence, because their lie would presumably be quickly exposed if they managed to convince people to vote with them.

Therefore, I am very skeptical about Valentine for not giving any information, and I have to wonder (i) if there is some gag order in play, or (ii) if Valentine would rather avoid being shown to be a liar by not saying anything. There is no point in being an

Advocate

without any information, and I think Valentine has information that is not being shared.

Summary: I think both Advocates are probably lying or avoiding lying by saying nothing, and I find that scummy.

~

1.) Now that I have read how the game works (that the decisions On Screen set up an “endgame”) I am doing some rethinking. It seems to me that since we will have

seven scenes

and an endgame of

seven players

, that each scene is determining a role or a mechanic for the endgame.

John Locke might be telling the truth because flipping alignment will put the town closer to “worst set-up” for town. I will give it thought. I still see absolutely no reason why Valentine is not giving information, though.

We have to remember that scum probably do not care whether they are lynched so long as (i) they can guarantee something bad happens for the town in the endgame, and (ii) they believe that they can keep at least three of themselves alive after seven scenes.

Therefore,

we need to lynch scum

in order to

prevent

the scum from "sacrificing" themselves in order to assure something bad happens in the endgame. (I guess this somewhat obvious, but I feel it has a different twist on the normal need to lynch scum).

Pre-post Edit: Mr. Grey seems to be telling us some information about alignments in the “jobs” section, so now I think John Locke’s claim seems more likely that I thought before. I still think Valentine is scummy, though: I see no reason to withhold information.

2.) Basically our job right now is to get the scum down to 2 members as quickly as possible, or if the time calls for it, to make sure the town stays above 6 members by the end of the seventh scene (which may require tactical No Lynches, but I am leery on trying to guess how many people are town and how many are scum, especially if alignments can indeed flip).

3.) I disagree that the Scene One choice is “random”, as Gaspar claims. I think both Advocates were given some information, and that each route changes the endgame in some manner.

4.) Wow, scary thought: can’t a scum Director just make sure at least three scum live at all times by keeping them on screen?

Pre-Post Edit: Forgot about the Stuntman. Also the assistant director can fire the Director. Crisis averted.

And wow, that just led to another scary thought. We basically want a good mix of town and scum for each thread, as otherwise the scum can take control and either (i) secure a mislynch in this thread, or (ii) secure a bad decision On Screen.

5.)

Question at large

: Was everybody able to read

all

the rules of the game prior to being put On Screen?

6.) This post seems to have turned into analyzing the set-up over scum-hunting. I will hopefully get to that soon, and it may take another reread.

7.) I think it silly to consider sending KY Krew On Scene when they are currently (at page 11 here) one of the top choices for a lynch. If we think we are lynching scum, I find that more important than making sure the current On Screen players understand our codes.

~

I’m beat. I will try to reread both threads tomorrow and find where my vote is going.

Tags removed. Please use bold only for voting. - Mod

[MrJellyLee]

PJ posting.

1.

MafiaJin

I doubt MafiaJin saying “your [sic] ignoring a win condition” is a “slip” of having knowledge about alignments other than Innocent / Something Else. Somebody would only

say

that with actual knowledge of an alternate win condition if they thought

everybody

had that win condition. I am leaning towards considering it to be an editing problem, but I would like to see MafiaJin explain that comment at the next opportunity.

I am more concerned that MafiaJin apparently had chosen who was going to be on camera so quickly (although I don’t know if Mr. Grey required a quick choice). Clearly MafiaJin was not being completely random, as MafiaJin avoided putting in actors who can already post in-thread, so I have to wonder about the rationale.

Gaspar focuses too much on the “to make sure there is a townsperson” reasoning (which I agree is not well thought out) from MafiaJin at the expense of ignoring other reasons offered by MafiaJin’s other half, namely:

You can still read my posts I will be posting. And you can read my vote in the decision as well as anyone else that will be on camera. I assumed a decision is more important or at least equally important to a lynch reading the rules (if we win decisions we can no lynch to day 7 to get to endgame under best circumstances; if we are lynching badly we can no lynch to salvage endgame still).

Also the assistant director was forced into the first scene. Its important for him to be able to read me. As long as he thinks I am innocent ( and is innocent himself) he should let me stay as director. If this job gets put in scum hands in later scenes they can force 4 innocents into a scene to shorten the majority needed etc etc.

MafiaSSK posted the “to make sure there is one townsperson” reason while Sajin posted the above. I think two heads agreeing on the same conclusion for different reasons is not farfetched. However, I am not convinced that the additional reasons were not just tacked on after the fact.

Overall: Moderately scummy, but I am nowhere near as convinced as Gaspar seems to be.

2. I do not think voting Mr. Grey will help us in the least. Our job is to lynch scum. I would only vote Mr. Grey as an alternative to No Lynching, but there might be a possibility that Mr. Grey counts as an “Innocent” for the purposes of 5 Innocents being alive to trigger endgame, so I would rather not.

3. Unlike elmosaurian, I do not think focusing on discussion of game mechanics is inherently pro-town. It is necessary to some degree to get everybody on base, but scum can talk of game mechanics as much as town. In fact, I think scum would

rather

focus on game mechanics over scumhunting as long as possible.

4. What do other people think about Valentine? I have seen opinions about Talilan, Hewitt, and MafiaJin as players “On Screen” but that is about the extent of it.

5. On screen, I think Valentine is scummy; (s)he actively suggests that they do not know the consequence of driving, and I highly doubt that.

I think it is likely that some players forgot the Script once On Screen. I, for one, originally had this post prefaced thinking that Mr. Grey never actually

said

Scene One had a good choice and a bad choice, and I only deleted it after having rereading the Script post. This might be the reason for Talilan’s and Hewitt’s posts (which suggest that there might be worse alternatives than having an Innocent flip to being non-Innocent, something I am quite skeptical about to begin with). However, I also do not think John Locke was being “vague” as Talilan claims.

But

seeing as my first reaction upon replacing and reading the On Screen thread was that John Locke was lying, I tend to think others may have had a similar thought-process; in other words, if John Locke is scum and lying, then he might actually have a “good” choice and is trying to make it appear to be blatantly bad; perhaps the "bad" choice is something like "Role #1 is: Townie" (which can be arguably seen as

good

in that it is not seemingly

bad

) where the good choice might have been "Role #1 is: Cop". Seeing as Valentine is not saying at all what the consequence of her driving the bus is, I am inclined to be skeptical about the conclusion being as foregone as the two Advocates suggest.

6. Overall, I dislike elmosaurian’s focus on mechanics and attempted justification for thinking mechanics-based posts are protown. Thok seems too distant, and I can't even recall any opinions from him right this second. I think a couple players are more likely to be town than a random player (as I suppose is shown in my Concordet vote) but I am largely unswayed about most players so far.

Vote: elmosaurian

, Thok, [Bagel Eating Cowfrog, KY Krew, Mighty Orbots, Rawr Hydra, Shadow Lurker, zwetschenwasser], Gaspar, GoofballsAndBaloons, No Lynch, Mr. Grey, MrJellyLee

[MrJellyLee]

PJ posting.

I had one of those "thoughts in the night" that made me realize the following cannot be true:

2. I do not think voting Mr. Grey will help us in the least. Our job is to lynch scum. I would only vote Mr. Grey as an alternative to No Lynching,

but there might be a possibility that Mr. Grey counts as an “Innocent” for the purposes of 5 Innocents being alive to trigger endgame, so I would rather not.

I sincerely doubt this can be the case, precisely because if Mr. Grey being alive allows the game to continue past 5 Innocents + Mr. Grey, then it is possible for the game to get to 4 Innocents + Mr. Grey, and I truly doubt Mr. Grey can be chosen as a player for the 7 person endgame.

The same rationale goes the other way: I do not think Mr. Grey can count as [Something Else] precisely because it would allow the game to get down to 1 Something Else + Mr. Grey.

Needless to say, I now -- even more so -- am convinced that trying to lynch Mr. Grey is a waste of time.

[MrJellyLee]

PJ posting.

(1) Why is Thok so high on the list? I can think of reasons, but I want to know yours.

Thok is high on my list because he feels like a commentator and not a player. In my experience (which admittedly has not included Thok in a long time) Thok is usually somebody I actively remember being in a game – here, after reading the game twice through, I did not really recall anything Thok had said whatsoever. After reading his posts in isolation just now I honestly can’t find anything in particular that makes me lean scum or town; it seems to be more of an ‘overall impression’ thing.

(2) What are your thoughts on zwet and KY Krew? Since you elected to vote off-wagon, I'd like to know why.

I do not know enough about zwetschenwasser’s meta to really say if his play here is inconsistent with his play as town. Here, I have found his posts unimpressive, and not helpful or of maximum utility (see: his picture post On Screen), but so far I have not gotten a feeling his posts are more likely to have been written by scum than by town.

KY Krew has also been somewhat unhelpful, but I do have some very old meta on raj and InHim that tells me that raj is prone to OMGUS (I know that happened in Committee Mafia, although he was scum in that game) and InHim often has his own sort of agenda. I also believe that both generally post less than I would like.

I do not really think ShadowLurker has information on KY Krew being “99% Mafia,” and if he claims to be serious then I am not going to consider it unless I have an explanation -- this is because if we lynch KY Krew and he flips Innocent, ShadowLurker will have pretty much washed his hands of responsibility by his emphasis that there is a "big gap" between 99% and 100%. If you

really

think somebody is

that

likely to be scum, then I would think you would do a whole lot more to get them lynched than what ShadowLurker has done. Usually my strongest cases get to

maybe

65% certainty, so having something at 99% would be incredible and I can't imagine I would be doing anything but jumping up and down and screaming for blood.

I think the wagon on KY Krew started from a mixture of (i) ShadowLurker’s comment, (ii) KY Krew taking a long time to post in the game and being generally absent, and (iii) KY Krew’s reaction to ShadowLurker’s comment. I think the wagon has largely held weight because of the mentality of "a wagon exists, ergo it is good vote". None of those reasons really persaudes me to think KY Krew is actually more likely to be scum than a random person.

Scum often likes to hide off-wagon.

Tempted to bump you up on my list for this comment. Known fact: scum are “often” (read: always) either on-wagon or off-wagon.

[MrJellyLee]

PJ Posting.

Given that consequences are revealed, however, I am confused. It seems that players have no incentive to

lie

about their consequence, because their lie would presumably be quickly exposed if they managed to convince people to vote with them.

I may have jumped too quickly here, depending on the answer to this question:

Question at Large

: Did the town know that the consequences of the Scenes would be revealed prior to Mr. Grey making that clarification in the On Screen thread?

I ask because if Advocates

did not know

that lies would be revealed until Mr. Grey made that clarification, then that changes the entire situation. Mr. Grey made his clarification in Post 35 On Screen, and I think Mr. Grey made that post because he was specifically asked if consequences would be revealed. I am seriously wondering if Valentine was that person who popped the question, because if so, it definitely strengthens my theory that Valentine is trying to avoid lying by being vague.

That said, I actually do think now that the Town should choose to follow Valentine. If the consequence of that is very clearly

bad

, then I think it is safe to assume that at least John Locke is probably lying scum, and that there is a good chance that Valentine was scum squeezed into a situation where the best thing to do was to say pretty much nothing that could catch her in a lie. I think if the consequence of following Valentine is bad, a rebuttal would be along the lines of "Yes that was bad, but clearly not

as

bad as John Locke switching alignments."

In case it is not clear, I am coming back around to my original thought that both Advocates are scummy, but I am willing to wait and see what the consequence of following Valentine is.

~

Pre-Post Edit: DGB, I put Gaspar as slightly more likely to be Town in my Concordet list, if that tells you anything. I generally do not like to explain why I feel players are town unless I feel it is necessary to avoid that player being lynched, but I will say that although I disagree with some of his main points (especially against MafiaJin), he appears to be genuinely scum-hunting and I am not catching any whiffs of a bad motive behind his posts.

[MrJellyLee]

PJ Posting.

Well, that's frustrating. KY Krew gave us a completely vague post that tells us nothing, but only references "information" as if he is in too much of a hurry to bother explaining what the "information" is. I tend to agree that this looks like a last-minute attempt to prevent himself from being lynched, and maybe to get the Town to choose wrong On Screen in the process as a final "parting gift."

Do we know if the scum know the consequences of each decision On Screen? I am confused why a townsperson would be given such information in the first place; theoretically, he would have had that information prior to MafiaJin choosing who goes on screen, so if he were actually telling the truth it would have been possible for a townsperson to not be an Advocate On Screen but to still have information. My understanding is that only the

advocates

would have information, and maybe the

scum

.

[MrJellyLee]

PJ posting.

Wow, did I read this post wrong:

Just putting this out there and don't feel like making further comment on it atm but I don't like 99%. That 1% is a big gap from 100%.

Vote KY Krew

For some reason, both times I read this I thought you were claiming KY Krew was scum with 99% certainty, with a "big" 1% gap and that you didn't want to make further comment on it. I will retract my commentary that was based on this misreading.

Hi Thok. *waves*

[MrJellyLee]

PJ Posting.

Quick post: Gaspar, do you believe the Advocates were truly chosen at random? If so, what would you say if a [Something Else] received John Locke's offer to turn scum?

This is one of the things that makes me think there is a strong chance that John Locke is lying. For the record, though, I have already asked Mr. Grey if "random" means

truly

random, and he refused to give me an answer. But I don't see how a Something Else "turning" into a Non-Innocent is really a

bad

thing if it is also

announced to the Town

; all that would really do is tell us somebody who was already scum to begin with.

Put another way: I think that if there is an On Screen that is only bad on the contingency that the offer is made to a Townsperson, then that does not seem to be something that Mr. Grey can call

objectively "bad"

.

[MrJellyLee]

PJ Posting.

I keep noticing that practically nobody takes up my discussions about (i)

why

I think John Locke might very well be lying, and (ii)

why

Valentine is being so vague.

Currently, I am going to be On Screen tomorrow so I won't be around to shout about this tomorrow. I would be monstrously unhappy if nobody at least talked about this tomorrow because nobody bothers to think about it.

Valentine's latest post was the following:

I understand how you feel and why you feel that way, but I think the one thing you fail to take into account is that

I could have not, and did not, received as much information as Locke

. This why

I have chosen to stay quiet

because

I believe in what I was told

and I believe that Locke is telling the truth.

If he isn't, than it was truly brilliant play to get what he wanted

, but that doesn't help the rest of us and

I KNOW that the only person put in jeopardy when I drive is myself.

Seriously.

1. Valentine 'believes what [she] was told,' but 'did not receive as much information as Locke'. However, Valentine still hasn't bothered to

tell us

what she was told. This unequivocally asserts that Valentine was told

something

.

2. This post also kills the possible explanation of a "gag order" being in place, because Valentine has '

chosen

' to stay quiet. Why bother not telling the town what you were told? It certainly takes less time to type than constantly making posts that

do not

tell the town what you were told.

3. Valentine "believes that John Locke is telling the truth" but also concedes that his play is "brilliant" if he is lying to 'get what he wants' (i.e. Valentine to drive). By the way, this directly shoots down elmosaurian's theory that Valentine was simply told "John Locke's choice is the [bad] choice," or something to that effect. In fact, Valentine continually leaves open the possibility that

her

choice is, in fact, the [bad] choice by saying "I KNOW that the only person put in jeopardy when I drive is myself."

Valentine is going out of her way to be as vague as possible. Not only do I hate it when people are vague, but I find more and more that it is one of the most reliable scum-tells I have ever found, especially when a person continues to be vague when directly asked to explain.

~

elmosaurian, technical discussion are only

necessary

to a certain extent; they are not inherently pro-town. Focusing on discussion of mechanics is just a way to contribute without actually giving opinions on the players. Your complaint about being called an active lurker while spending "so much time on this damned game" also did not feel genuine to me; it did not have the 'ring' of being sincere.

Also, I agree with Talilan on at least one point: finish your sentence about Gaspar.

[MrJellyLee]

PJ Posting.

elmosaurian, I don't

care

that the odds of both Advocates being scum are theoretically "tiny." That's like me listing two people I think are scum, and being rebutted with "but the odds of

both

of them being scum are tiny."

I don't care about statistics. I care about whether I think somebody is scummy, and I think both John Locke and Valentine fit that bill. Period.

Edit: I see you have now finished your sentence about Gaspar, so I won’t bug you about that.

However, there clearly needs to be a new definition in mafia.

We have, in some rank:
Scummy
Anti-Town
Neutral/Null
Pro-Town
[Townish?]

I think mechanics discussion is necessary and generally ‘helps’ the town, but I do not think it makes a person who discusses mechanics any more

likely

to be town. So I suppose I would agree in a sense that it is neutral to “pro-town” in that it is necessary (as I said before) and needs to be done in order to avoid confusion at a critical moment.

I never claimed you did not eventually get to scum-hunting; I just very much did not like your implication that because you were discussing mechanics that you (and others who may have been acting similarly) were likely to be town. I guess you might have meant to only mean “pro-town” in the “necessary” sense and not in the “townish” sense, but that is certainly not how I read your post, and reading your post again it still seems like you meant “Townish.”

~

Bagel Eating Cowfrog, I am trying to make sure there is a conversation about the players On Screen right now because I am scheduled to be On Screen tomorrow and hence will not be able to make these arguments tomorrow unless I am stuntman'd down here. That is one reason why it is relevant (especially to me), and secondly I think people's opinions on the issue On Screen are helping me scumhunt Off-Screen. It is also directly relevant to the Talilan discussion: I think Talilan, Hewitt, and myself indeed had similar initial reactions, and I would also like Gaspar to explain why he is attacking Talilan with his reasoning, and Hewitt and myself less so.

Also, yes I see where Valentine says she was “meant” / “told” to drive, but John Locke was similarly “told by the island” to drive and yet has more information. I think Valentine’s posts definitely hint that she was told more than she is actually telling the town.

However, you

are

correct that we are approaching a deadline: I suppose that hasn’t really sunk in with me yet because I have just replaced in and I am trying to get settled, and I have not even gotten MBL to talk with me yet. I will try to adjust my play accordingly to be somewhat more focused Off-Screen.

[MrJellyLee]

PJ Posting.

We apparently can't quote the mod rules, but go back and read through the rules for endgame again; it clearly says that the more "bad" choices are made, the harder the endgame will be on innocents. Since endgame is going to be 5 town 2 scum no matter what, I would assume he's not just talking about turning a town into scum on day 1; he's probably talking about some kind of rule or setup change that tilts that 7 player endgame setup towards one side or the other.

Well, then this adds a new layer. John Locke's choice, even if it does flip his alignment, might still be the "good" choice in that it helps the town in endgame.

In fact, now that I think it, that might be more thematic. Every good choice might be "bad" in the short-term (i.e. prior to endgame) but "good" in the long-term (i.e. at endgame) and vice-versa.

[MrJellyLee]

PJ Posting.

For the record, I don't think the elmosaurian sentence thing was tangential

at all

. It was basically:

I think Gaspar is scummy because

I think that's a fairly important omission worth questioning. He directly said that his suspicions about Gaspar were not meta-based, but were based on ------.

It may very well have been a brain-fart,

or

it may have been that he couldn't think of a legitimate reason to suspect you and forgot to edit out that part of his post,

or

it may have been that he simply changed his mind and forgot to edit it out. I think it was well worth questioning, certainly just as much as any "slip" (such as MafiaJin's alleged slip).

[MrJellyLee]

PJ Posting, and I expect my last until tomorrow:

Rawr Hydra, put short:

Originally I thought only John Locke was lying because I cannot see his offer being made to somebody who is scum, and I believe Advocates were chosen randomly. As a result, when Valentine got to the thread she, as scum, realized that she was probably better off saying practically nothing -- after all, even though she might have

thought

hers was the bad choice, it clearly paled in comparison to John Locke's claimed consequence.

Now, though, I really need to give thought about the possibility of consequences being good/bad in the short-term/long-term framework. If that is the case, then John Locke might be telling the truth (though the claimed randomness still disturbs me) but that his choice is actually meant to be the "good" choice; which again calls Valentine back into question.

Pre-Post Edit: Gaspar, I don't see why it matters that I just replaced into the game. If you think I am scummy, I expect you to attack me. It's not as though you gave everybody else a "grace period" when the game first started.

[MrJellyLee]

PJ Posting.

Quick morning post: from what I can tell, we have less than 24 hours before deadline. Given the apparently unavailability of zwetschenwasser, I say he should just post the picture to indicate that we do not trust KY Krew as soon as possible. There won't be a "later," so there is no point in "saving" a picture.

I will try to get on a computer later today to read these latest pages (and hopefully the entire game again) in more detail. I kind of doubt elmosaurian is getting lynched today, so I will try -- at the very least -- to parse out my Concordet list with less people at "equal value" if possible.

Notice

: I will be away for Labor Day Weekend (Friday evening to Monday) with unknown internet access.

[MrJellyLee]

PJ Posting.

Well, given the result of Scene One I will need to rethink my position on John Locke and Valentine. However, I want to hear from both curiuoskarmadog and Panzerjagger summaries of what they were told as Advocates now that they don’t have to role-play.

Though I admit I hate comments like the one I am about to give when they are made about me, I think people are giving Mighty Orbots a bit of a pass – people seem to have him listed as town in general, but when I try to think about what he has posted all that comes to mind is suggestions for songs, pictures, and the like to convey messages On Screen. Even his attack on zwetschenwasser (at least the attack that I recall) was concerned with zwetschenwasser’s speed in posting a picture. Yes, I’m sure he’s made other points, but I’ll wager if you boil his posts down to content there isn’t as much there as players seem to think there is. I will see if I can read him isolation later.

I had intended on reading over the entire thread in and revoting in case it made a difference in the lynch, but I don’t really feel the urgency now. If I get to reread before being tossed On Screen it will have to wait until tomorrow.

[MrJellyLee]

PJ Posting.

Quick morning post. I saw InHimShallIBe post elsewhere, so he should be available to post here. As such:

KY Krew

: Explain

in detail

what information you claimed to have had concerning Scene One. If you claim to have any information about the following Scenes, please claim that as well.

~

CKD's claim of full information seems believable enough. I had actually forgotten that Valentine's brother called himself "John Locke" (been a while since I've read those books), so I am now more persuaded that Mr. Grey's "random" was not, in fact, random.

I guess it would make sense that Scene One was straightforward only because CKD

allowed

it to be straightforward. Had CKD tried to argue that his was the good choice (which Mr. Grey obviously would have anticipated) then Panzerjagger would not have had very much to say in reply, except that she was "meant" to drive. Ultimately, I think Mr. Grey intended for Scene One to be along the lines of:

John Locke

: The island

told

me to drive.

Valentine

: But I was

meant

to drive.

And good luck to a town trying to figure out the better choice from

that

. I think it would be kinda difficult to lay real "blame" on either Advocate if we had chosen the "bad" choice, precisely because both Advocates would have basically said the same thing.

[MrJellyLee]

PJ Posting.

For those unfamiliar with the Monty Hall problem:

Our job in Scene Two is to initially choose the wrong door, which there is a 66% chance of happening if done at random. Of the two doors you did not choose, one will be revealed to be bad. At that point you just switch, and your chances of being right are (tada!) 66%.

If this is hard to wrap your head around (I know it was for me the first time I heard this problem), then try picturing 100 doors. You pick one, then 98 bad doors are revealed automatically, leaving the door you chose and one other. At that point, you should switch. Why? Because the chances of you picking the right door to begin with is 1%.

Just thought I would post that since nobody seemed to really go into the details of why it works, and I don't really want to try and have this discussion On Screen.

[MrJellyLee]

[PJ Posting]

(Huzzuh, we picked the right door!)

A request:

please

do not put me On Screen again. That was seriously about the most boring two weeks ever. ._.

[MrJellyLee]

[PJ Posting]

Uh...

Gosh, the flavor makes it seem like there might be

scum

in this game!

For a game with a focus on acting, this is pretty terrible. I can hardly imagine anybody of

any

alignment posting this, quite frankly.

First, I simply have a hard time believing somebody could honestly doubt KY Krew was scum to a significant degree. I usually do not put people above a 60% chance of being scum, but with KY Krew, I was

seriously

at 99% certainty.

Second, we were told that roles are either going to be Innocent or [Something Else]. zwetschenwasser came up "Innocent." KY Krew came up "Scientologist." I think it is pretty clear that KY Krew is scum.

[MrJellyLee]

[PJ Posting]

Oh right, forgot about that. Checked back, CKD claimed to be offered a spot in the "Screen Mafia Guild."

This actually makes me wonder if elmosaurian is part of the SMG and was confused about KY Krew coming up Scientologist.

From what I understand, having multiple scum groups is not out of the question, since Mr. Grey has referenced a

"Primary"

Non-Innocent Alignment which would allow for "Secondary" Non-Innocent Alignments.

[MrJellyLee]

[PJ Posting]

elmosaurian, obviously your post 954 was not questioning whether or not there were scum in the game. My point was that I cannot see somebody

seriously

questioning whether KY Krew was scum. In fact, the most plausible explanation to me as to why somebody might claim to doubt KY Krew being scum is that they are scum of a different faction.

I don't really buy your explanation about KY Krew being town because you suspect Gaspar and myself.

I think if I

were

scum with KY Krew (WIFOM, I know, but shut your trap), I would have told him to act like a complete dunce in order to make sure the town gets zero information -- which is precisely what KY Krew did. The most KY Krew could do to hurt the town was to make the decision On Screen a coinflip, which I think KY Krew effectively did. What would be the purpose of KY Krew being "coordinated" / acting with a "detailed plan"?

Question: How often has Elmo (as opposed to Yosarian2) posted under your account? If the answer is anywhere along the lines of "very little," then I would like an explanation for that from

Elmo

for his failure. I would then like him to tell me whether he thinks he posts more as Town or as Scum.

[MrJellyLee]

[PJ Posting]

*cough-Elmo-post-cough*

I would like to see some substantiation behind your claim that I was avoiding commentary on the leading wagons, when my

second post in the game

upon replacing made it clear what I thought about pretty much everybody, seeing as I made a full concordet vote list. Not only that, but I explained myself more fully in my

fourth

post of the game when GoofballsandBaloons directly asked me about my list.

I will fully admit: I wanted the town to focus more than they were on curiouskarmadog and Panzerjagger, because I honestly thought both Advocates were probably lying and I was flabbergasted that nobody was really talking about them Off Screen (where the focus was instead MafiaJin, Talilan and Hewitt).

I will also mention that Talilan was not "a relevant wagon” that required commentary for most of Day One since she was

On Screen

for most of Day One. But even then, I made it clear that I did not really suspect Talilan for questioning curiouskarmadog – which seemed to the main case against her – since

my

initial reaction was

also

to question curiouskarmadog.

[MrJellyLee]

[PJ Posting]

The more I think about it, the more I think CKD is probably scum. I just can't get over the fact that the Advocates for Scene One were chosen "at random." Now, I am willing to say that the

characters

chosen were not random: Mr. Grey probably chose John Locke and Valentine ahead of time. But I still think that who got what role and what alignment would still be random.

Query:

If the Scientologists are a Cult, then why would Mr. Grey also allow the "Screen Mafia Guild" to get a recruit on Day One as well?

Even if there is an answer for that, what would have happened if a Scientologist got CKD's offer to become a member of the Screen Mafia Guild? I just can't see Mr. Grey allowing for that to actually be a possibility. I also think the same problem would arise if a member of SMG were given an offer to become a member of the SMG (which I have been talking about for forever and a day).

[MrJellyLee]

[PJ Posting]

Oh, goodie! For my dearest elmosaurian,

1.) When I first replaced in, I did not really understand how quickly the deadline was coming. This should have been made clear in Post 488. So sue me: I should have focused more on what was happening Off Screen. However, I certainly was not ignoring Off Screen.

2.) As I explained a number of times, I wanted to make sure people had my opinions of the players On Screen precisely because

I was going to be On Screen for Scene Two

, and I was not aware that the thread would not be locked in between Scenes. As such, I thought that would be my only real opportunity to say anything about them until Scene Three, assuming (i) I even lived that long and (ii) was not stuck back On Screen for Scene Three, etc.

3.)

Again

, while many people were discussing 1/3 of the players On Screen (MafiaJin, Talilan, and Hewitt), practically nobody was discussing CKD or Panzerjagger. I found this a rather appalling omission and wanted to make sure there was commentary on that matter. Obviously discussion of On Screen players was not taboo.

4.) I think I commented on the Off Screen events about as much as I would expect any replacement in the game could. I did talk about zwet (see: my fourth post in response to GoofballsandBaloons), I was not going to talk about Gaspar (since I generally do not like listing why I think people are likely to be Town: the only two people besides myself in that category were, in fact,

Gaspar

and GoofballsandBaloons), and I

did

talk about Talilan (specifically to say that I was not a fan of the case against her because I feel I would have acted similarly if I had been On Screen).

Simply because I don’t denote a giant heading of “I Hereby Proclaim My Thoughts On X” does not mean I am ignoring them or not talking about them. It just is not necessary to devote detailed analyses to everybody.

There's all three of your "wagons."

Furthermore, I very much

disagree

that you were not likely to be lynched. Gaspar was never a lynch target

at all

until after Talilan replaced in the game; at that point I think he had

zero

(or at most one) votes while you constantly had

one

that was from me. The fact that you did not

end up

acquiring a larger wagon means nothing.

Commentary should not be restricted to whoever happens to have the most votes. I do not play that way, and I in fact will often turn my eye to places where I think the town is playing with a blind spot (for example, when I cautioned the town against assuming Mighty Orbots is town, as I think he focused far too much on photos / musical tracks).

5.) My argument about you on “vague theoretical issues” was precisely because all of your posting seemed to

centered

on theoretical issues. I did not find things really

wrong

with your “logic,” but I felt you were trying to make logical assertions about the set-up whilst ignoring making commentary on players. How am I really supposed to present a case about that? I think the best I might have been able to do would have been something like Mighty Orbots' Post 266, which I think gets across what

I

was seeing in your posts fairly eloquently, despite the fact that you clearly dislike that post.

Blamma-lamma.

~

Pre-Post Edit:

But I'll ask PJ straight up:
What do you think Elmosaurian's alignment is?
What do you think CKD's alignment is?

Reasons for both, please. <3

I am personally not convinced there are two scum groups to begin with. I think all that matters is that I think both Elmosaurian and CKD have a good chance of being scum. I don’t see why it matters what type of scum they are if our job is simply to lynch down to 2 [Something Else]’s.

[MrJellyLee]

[PJ Posting]

No, I don't think it's relevant because I sincerely doubt that we would think somebody is scum and yet

not

lynch them in the hopes that they are scum but

not

the "primary" [Something Else]. All I really care about is lynching scum.

Here is as good as you're going to get:

~ If CKD is a Scientologist, then there probably is no Screen Mafia Guild to begin with, which would make elmosaurian also a Scientologist.

~ If CKD is a Screen Mafia Guild, then elmosaurian is probably also a Screen Mafia Guild, precisely because of his confusion of "do you think KY Krew was scum?" upon seeing a revealed Scientologist.

Whether or not I think there are 2 different scum groups is largely contingent on CKD's alignment.

~

Also, I am going to point this out. The lack of a nightkill on Night One tells me very little about whether there is a Mafia Group in this game. Please see Verbose Mafia 2, where each member of the mafia was given one kill individually, and as a result, the Mafia largely saved their kills until endgame and then used them all on the same night to clinch the win. If this doesn't make it clear, I am not convincd there is a Cult to begin with.

[MrJellyLee]

[PJ Posting]

Criminintly. You are complaining that my position on zwetschenwasser was "on the fence"? I'm terribly sorry, but that is precisely because my position on zwetschewasser

was

on the fence. I basically considered him to be lurker that gave me nothing to work off of to determine whether he was scum or town. Simply because you

want

me to have a definite leaning one way or the other is not going to

make

me have a definite leaning. As you can see from my Concordet:

Vote: elmosaurian, Thok, [Bagel Eating Cowfrog, KY Krew, Mighty Orbots, Rawr Hydra, Shadow Lurker, zwetschenwasser], Gaspar, GoofballsAndBaloons, No Lynch, Mr. Grey, MrJellyLee

... zwetschenwasser was put with a fairly long list of people who I had little or nothing to say about, and who I did not really have a leaning on. If you are going to complain about my lack of a leaning on zwetschenwasser, then why aren't you complaining about my lack of a leaning on BEC, KY Krew, Mighty Orbots, Rawr Hydra, and ShadowLurker? Is your sole criteria the fact that he was a "wagon"? Why should that even matter to me?

As far as I understand it, whether or not I was officially voting for you would not have really mattered precisely because we are playing under a Concordet system, and hence my vote would still be counted according to the order of the players in my list in the case where we do not hit a majority (which in fact turned out to be the case).

~

Pre-Post Edit:

If you're telling me that you'd play a setup with Mafia/SK the same way you'd play a game with Mafia/Cult, I will seriously go to Mississippi (It's Mississippi, right?) and throttle you.

For this particular game

, that

may

be the ideal play. All we are playing for is the 7-player endgame.

I personally think if we continue to hit scum at a reasonable pace, and continue to get [Good] results On Screen, we will be in a very nice position by the time we get to Endgame. If any kinds of [Something Else] count for the [Something Else] trigger, then I just want to focus on killing scum. If worse comes to worse, all we

really

have to do is make sure we keep 6 townspeople alive.

However, I will say this: the best argument for the presence of a Cult seems to be the fact that Mr. Grey should have taken into account the possibility that the town will No Lynch every single day. Even if there were a

seven

player mafia (I use this number because it strikes me as absurd and to make a point) with a kill every night (I assume seven nights?), they could only get the town down to 6 players.

At the very least, I do not think that if there is a Cult it is the

only

scum-group. That would essentially require the Cult to have started the game with 4 players.

Why?

Assume the game starts with a 3 player Cult as the [Something Else] and that's it. Now assume the town lynches a Cult Member on Day One. This would automatically trigger the best end-game for the Town.

[Side Note that is Not Game Relevant: I am sorely tempted to say I would play the same just so you would actually come down to see me (since you did not even come to see me in Kansas City despite my being there on the same weekend as you for Flayming Man... sigh). I think even a throttling might be worth it.]

[MrJellyLee]

[PJ Posting]

No, I still fail to see why you expect commentary on everybody who might be lynched. I picked out four people I thought had a good chance of being scum -- for your convenience, they were: CKD, Panzerjagger, elmosaurian, and Thok -- and posted accordingly. Unfortunately, two of the four people I thought most likely to be scum were On Screen, and not only that, but nobody was talking about them.

When I think four people are likely scum, that does not leave much room for the other players in the game. Unless I think they are Town (which only happened with Gaspar and GoofballsandBaloons), I am probably not going to have much of an opinion on the other players until I see some dead bodies.

That said, I like how you try to paint me as being disinterested in the Day One lynch because I did not move to a position beyond thinking zwetschenwasser was a lurker who I could not read (or to give charity to your argument, the list of people in my Concordet). I'm afraid I don't magically get feelings on people solely on account of them being a likely lynch, and I cannot force myself to get feelings on people. I had tried near the end of Day One to read over the entire game so that I could adjust my Concordet as Day One came to a close, but KY Krew ended Day One before that could happen.

[MrJellyLee]

[PJ Posting]

Going to bed as well (partly because I'm being booted out of the school library). I hope I can get MBL's opinion on you, since (for whatever reason) he thought you were town based on your On Screen posting.

[MrJellyLee]

[PJ Posting]

I request to

not

be the Stuntman. To my knowledge, MBL has not yet had the opportunity to read anything Off-Screen (which made trying to explain things to him rather difficult On Screen... it took me a while before I realized he didn't even know we were playing for the 7-person endgame), and as such I don't want to be forced to Stuntman ourselves back On Screen.

[MrJellyLee]

[PJ Posting]

Before I forget, I'm not sure if anybody has asked about this yet:

Your ignoring a win condition.

MafiaJin, please explain what you meant when you said this. If you have already explained, please link us to that explanation.

[MrJellyLee]

[PJ Posting]

Been doing some thinking (surprise) and here is what I end up with:

CKD only claimed to be offered a position specifically with the "Screen Mafia Guild"

after Scene One was completed

-- i.e., after it was dreadfully clear that KY Krew was going to be lynched. If the Scientologists are a Cult, then I now doubt CKD is part of the Cult.

Why?

Because unless he was actually telling the truth (which I would doubt if he is a Scientologist -- why would mith seriously give him the opportunity to switch to a different scum group?), then he would necessarily be making up a name for the Mafia. And if there

is

a Mafia (which I presume CKD would have no reason to know), then the Mafia would know CKD was lying scum -- unless their name just

happened

to be the Screen Mafia Guild.

What I come down to: It's difficult to see why a Scientologist would make up a name for a Mafia Group risking that there might be an actual mafia group who would pretty much know him to be lying.

That said, I can still see reasons for such a lie -- for example, if the Scientologists know they are the only scum group and want to spread confusion (such that a town Vigilante, for example, might be seen as the Mafia, etc.).

But at the same time, if the Scientologists are a Cult, I just plain do not understand why KY Krew would hype the existence of a Cult.

I think it is clear that KY Krew was a Scientologist on Day One, presumably before any recruiting could have occurred. But he was not denoted to be the "Leader" or any such thing. This makes me doubt that the Scientologists recruit, or in the alternative, there must have been multiple Scientologists in the Cult at the beginning of the game. I don't think Mr. Grey would balance a game like this (where the Town is trying to lynch down to 2 [Something Else]'s) with a Cult in mind while allowing for that Cult to be completely extracted on Day One.

/ end rambling

Pre-Post Edit:

Actually, the more I think about it, it

might

be a semi-smart idea to put as many pro-town people On Screen as possible. I can only imagine that it would be very easy to pick out scum if they are forced to manufacture mislynches largely by themselves.

Unless I'm the one lynched, of course. Then, by God, there will be Hell to pay.

/ end subsequent rambling

[MrJellyLee]

[PJ Posting]

Actually, no, that's stupid. I stick by original thought: try to keep On Screen and Off Screen as a good mix. I think we might as well try to get the best result in both threads.

[MrJellyLee]

[PJ Posting]

I think Pooky ought to stay Off Screen. To put him back On Screen just excuses him from contributing. What good is a teddy bear if you can't squeeze it?

[MrJellyLee]

[PJ Posting]

Yossy, I am just plain having trouble thinking about your numbers.

You say you are 90% sure that Gaspar is scum.
How sure were you that KY Krew was scum?

If you were exaggering with your 90%, then please correct yourself. I don't care for false assertions about how convinced people are about something.

I personally cannot off-hand think of a single game I have ever played (forum or otherwise) where I was

so

sure somebody was scum without the help of investigation / logic from public information (i.e. set-up has a Cop, two people claim, one dies as Town) as I have been about KY Krew. Without external help, I rarely can bump anything in my mind beyond 60% on a given player. So what makes you 90% sure that Gaspar is scum?

Also, for VP Baltar, I'm afraid you'll have to live with my long posts. I have truly tried to play games where I keep my posts short, but I always have a tendency to revert to my standard posting style.

[MrJellyLee]

[PJ Posting]

I guess we disagree then. I am not convinced Yos is scum, but I do have definite problems with him. I'm largely trying to decide if he actually thought or could reasonably think what he

claims

to have thought. I have been in plenty of situations where I second-guess people proclaimed to be "obvscum" (even when I claim somebody is obvscum), but I really think KY Krew was such a unique situation that I am having trouble understanding how somebody could seriously doubt it.

I basically view a large portion of this back and forth coming from people simply wanting to be right.

It's funny you say that, because I actually hope I am wrong about Yos and that he convinces me he is town. *shrug*

[MrJellyLee]

Oops.. [mbl] didn't realize this thread was here. I was wondering why Grey was dawdling with the set and cameras for so long...

First off, Pooky, you're off-stage. Hiding behind a character's no longer acceptable in here, nor is it flavor-accurate. Unless you're Allen Iverson starring as Kobe Bryant.

Second, CKD's suspicions post is possibly the most tone-deaf I've ever read in a mafia game. And I got that from skimming it and this thread. More in detail after I get down to the nitty-gritty with it. I also thought the way he talked about the Valentine vs. Locke choice D1 seemed bizarre.

Elmo's attack on Gaspar rubs me super-funky, like a wool thong on a summer day. Either they're scum together, or Elmo's flailing scum, or Elmo's a cop with a guilty on Gaspar (not likely, but if that's the case, Gasparscum surely suspects it after these bizarre rants so I do no disservice to Elmo by pointing it out.)

Talilan continues to strike me as town, primarily for tone. I haven't gotten heavily into game logic yet at this point.. I'm more making calls based on who seems distractive and who seems to be asking the right questions. Some people are a little more defense-oriented than I'd expect, but meh.

In general, PJ and I will try to synch up before posting so we don't leave you all with a healthy dose of "he said she said". We won't always reach consensus but we'll try to. Right now, I can't reach him and I want to post in case this thread gets closed before I have the chance.

I don't mind being on-stage at all. I think there are head-games to be played with any scum that end up out there, and I'd love to play them.

I don't think Elmo's choice of Door Two means a thing, nor do I particularly see anyone's choice of Door One as town-confirmatory. A dandy scumstrategy would be to be first out of the gate with a confident "Door One" stance, which wins regardless of what the town does. Same applies to all future choices. Perhaps in endgame we'll know what the results of the choices were and can retroactively read more into certain people's gentle pushes on various days.

I think one of our goals is to continue to force the scum to help us make the correct decisions each day. I suggested to PJ that one way we can do that is to take the scummiest players in town and have them make the big choice, and lynch them the next day if they're wrong. We don't even have to follow their call.. for this idea to work we'd just have to follow through on the lynch if their vote was incorrect.

As for the cult vs. mafia debate, it's only interesting to me right now insomuch as the more dirtbags talk about the setup the more likely it is that they leak/lean accidentally. Before I reread, my gut tells me that CKD's early mention of a cult is suspicious--it hints at foreknowledge of a Scientological flavor.

[MrJellyLee]

ps.

Was KYCrew inHim and raj? That's sad.. I didn't even get to say hi.

"he said she said"

oops.. either this becomes "he said, he said," or PJ gets to be the chick in this Hydra.

[MrJellyLee]

now please explain to me now

this

isnt spreading misinformation and why

this

isnt scummy.

Scum don't intentionally make blatantly false statements they know will be easily caught. I find it difficult to believe anyone'd find that memory error on my part points to me as manipulative, lying scum.

Regardless, as I take the time to reread I'll correct the record and let you know how I REALLY feel about you.

[MrJellyLee]

[PJ Posting: for the record, Post 1139 was from MBL]

Whoa, whoa, whoa. I could just be reading this completely wrong or forgetting, but CKD, before MBL ever posted Off-Screen, you posted:

MrJellyLee (MrBuddyLee/petroleumjelly), replacing Seraphim S1----scum

MBL then said just today, in his first post Off-Screen:

Before I reread, my gut tells me that CKD's early mention of a cult is suspicious--it hints at foreknowledge of a Scientological flavor.

Then you said:

where was my "early mention of a cult"....

this is why I find Mr. JellyLee scummy, putting out misinformation as fact

.....sure sure, once he "rereads" and finds that Ky was actually the first person to mention a cult, and I FOUND THAT odd and questioned him about it, Lee will say he just misread....

It is looking to me like you just made up a reason for your claimed “suspicion” from Post 1075 after the fact. If you suspected me for reasons prior to MBL being factually wrong just now -- which is very simple to point out -- then I want to see those reasons.

I

[PJ] have never claimed to suspect you for “mentioning a Cult,” or anything of the like. I suspect you because I find it difficult to believe Mr. Grey would give a

random

player an offer to turn scum – precisely because such an offer might go to somebody who is already scum in that group, or in the alternative, they might be scum in a different group.

Now: quote where I have been “putting out misinformation as fact.” If I’ve been doing it, it should not be difficult for you to quote it. Is the only instance what MBL did just now, are do you actually have something else in mind?

[MrJellyLee]

[PJ Posting]

Question at large

: For those of you think the Scientologists and Screen Mafia Guild are "one and the same," then suppose CKD is telling the truth and was recruited to the Screen Mafia Guild. When he dies, would he be revealed as "Screen Mafia Guild" or "Scientologist"?

Also, I would like to point out that for those of you who believe CKD's claim and his being town, then you basically accept that had we chosen CKD to drive on Scene One, then not

only

would that be bad for the

endgame

(as per the rules), but it would

also

be bad in-game because the town would automatically lose a member and the scum would also gain a member.

I don't see a compelling reason for Mr. Grey to force us to choose between an option that is "doubly bad" and a decision that is apparently only "singly good."

[MrJellyLee]

[PJ Posting]

CKD, if you addressing me in particular please use PJ; if you are addressing MBL in particular, use MBL.

If you are addressing:

1.) I already am pushing for your lynch. I seem to recall doing this pretty much since Day One.

2.) I am not discounting the possibility of multiple scum-groups. I just doubt Mr. Grey would offer a random player the chance to become a part of a scum-group on Day One of a game.

3.) I don't care if you push the right On Screen decision

every

day: the scum still get their best endgame if they manage to get the town down to 5 players. I consider getting good choices On Screen is secondary to lynching. If I think the Town takes a turn for the worse Off Screen, then I might change my tune, but for now On Screen is just a safety net.

4.) Fact: When something is an obviously provable fact -- for example, whether or not you speculated about Cult early -- there really is not a reason to claim the contrary unless you make an honest mistake. There are naturally exceptions -- such as claiming deadline is in 10 days when deadline is 1 day (since this obviously has an impact on the game) -- but statements made by MBL in-between Day Two and Day Three (read: is not going to influence votes right now), while at the same time saying he has to reread the thread (read: he told you straight up that he needs to reread to make sure what he said was correct to begin with), is pretty obviously just a mistake.

So: Do you MBL took something he knew to be a fact and said just the opposite in order to paint you? Or do you think MBL just got the fact wrong?

5.) "Gut" isn't good enough. Your post leaves the impression that I have "put out misinformation as fact" multiple times. If the only time you can substantiate this is solely because of MBL's catching-up post, then I am far from impressed.

~

Not really concerned with the rest of your post. You just go ahead and keep threatening about what happens when such-and-such happens. In case you are not familiar, I already played a "just wait one more day for scum-X to show up!" game in Verbose 2 Mafia, and I'm not keen to play it again.

For reference: In Verbose 2, Fiasco claimed (and pretty early to boot) that he was searching for a "scum pope," and fairly early in the game. He survived until the end of the game. No scum popes were ever revealed. And in fact, there were no scum popes at all, or popes at all in the game. Fiasco was just lying scum trying to confuse the town, which he did very successfully.

So excuse me for not taking your claim that there is a "Screen Guild Mafia" at face value, or your constant threats about what will happen "when we lynch a Screen Guild Mafia."

[MrJellyLee]

[PJ Posting]

does your opinion change if a SMG is lynched? why or why not?

Honestly? No.

Here's where I'm at with you.

A.) If a SMG is lynched, then you're probably not a Scientologist. Why would Mr. Grey give a Scientologist an offer to turn SMG? He wouldn't: that's just stupid.

Now we come back full circle to the thing I've been ranting about since the very beginning.

Mr. Grey specifically told us that the Advocates for Scene One were chosen

randomly

(although the characters were probably not chosen randomly). Thus, if I were to believe your claim, Mr. Grey could have randomly given your "offer" to a Scientologist, or a member of the SMG. And here's what I think: Mr. Grey wouldn't do that, because that's just stupid.

To believe you, I essentially have to believe that Mr. Grey explicitly lied when he said Advocates were chosen at random. So in essence, I feel my my decision is down to: do I think you, a player, lied? Or do I think Mr. Grey, the moderator, lied?

I think the far more likely situation is that you are the one lying.

B.) If no SMG is lynched (presumably because they don't exist), then that just makes you lying scum (Scientologist, presumably) anyways.

So I just plain think you're scum.

[MrJellyLee]

[PJ Posting]

Mr. Grey specifically told us that the Advocates for Scene One were chosen

randomly

(although the characters were probably not chosen randomly).

Please read the parenthetical.

I consider characters here much like the characters in Smalltown games. Everybody is given a character which has no bearing on alignment -- and so Mr. Grey could have made his scenes to go with those characters, such as Scene One. However, the underlying alignments of those characters I take to be random, and so when Mr. Grey says he chose the Advocates randomly, I presume he is referring to the underlying actors, and not necessarily the characters.

Reading is tech.

[MrJellyLee]

[PJ Posting]

so it was random..are you saying that Mr grey didnt plan for a town role to be in one of the two position? seems to me like you are making assumptions by leap and bounds....

Last post of the night. I need to get back to reading. So let me make this as clear as I can within the limits of the tagging rules:

I do not think that assuming the mod is not going to lie to me is an assumption by leaps and bounds, and that is in fact an assumption I play under in every single game of mafia I have ever played.

If I have to accept that Mr. Grey lied when he said Scene One advocates were random, then I have have to accept that Mr. Grey can lie about

anything

, all the way up to my win condition. If that is the case, then I frankly will not play in another mith/Mr. Grey game again, because I will flatly refuse to play in a game with a mod that lies to the players, because mafia is about using the information you have. If you are lied to about that information, then there is no point in playing.

And just in case you try this rebuttal: I do not think Mr. Grey can seriously argue "I chose Advocate #1 position randomly from the list of townspeople." This is precisely because that involves removing players from the get-go. It is not a real "choosing-names-from-a-hat" scenario if you decide to take out some specific names beforehand.

[MrJellyLee]

Two CKD topics: Cults and Door #2.

The reason I had you and cult together in my mind is because you reacted like a rocket had gone off when KY Krew mentioned a cult:

I'm convinced this means the cult's door is still in the running.

Cult? Who said anything about a cult? You must have been told more than that if you mention a cult. Fisher tell us everything that you know.

Why did you mention a cult? Seemed random to me.

Why assume a cult over other things?

why did you assume cult over so many other things?

No other player besides Godwin seemed to question the mention of a cult:

Carrie didn't give a straight answer to half the questions he was asked today, and brought up talks of cults when that seemed unlikely.

I don't understand why a Scientologist mafioso/cultist would go berserk and draw attention to the mention of a cult. Unless it's a super-sloppy intentional distancing set up in a quicktopic:

dude ill say cult and you jump on it they'll never guess were both thetans

ok im on that shit like ellen degeneres on a bagel if u no what i mean

Regardless, that's why you+cult came together like peanut butter and chocolate in my little brain.


CKD also went over the top about Door #2, which apparently was a VERY BAD DOOR but we didn't know that at the time.. only scum did:

I also find it interesting that so many people are so willingly to chose Door 2. Based on what? Based on what you might have discussed before we arrived here with Monty? Interesting....

Here are the only references to Door #2 after Monty posed us the 1/2 choice:

I do want to hear what you think. We have to make a choice here, Carrie, between #1 and #2.

“As things stand, logic dictates that we should switch to Door #2 if we assume our decision is wholly random. However, given the high likelihood of collusion between Mr. Hall and Ms. Fisher – as Mr. Hall had apparently ‘already made his choice’ whilst asking for volunteers – it seems that, at least for today, logic may safely be called flapdoodle.

“In other words: It seems that the human element in this case calls into question the basic assumptions of logic. Our decision is contingent on how much information Ms. Fisher is working from, which I currently do not trust her truthfully reveal."

(essentially, saying don't trust the logic of the solution to the Hall dilemma)

All things being equal, we should pick Door 2. But... he glances at Carrie all things aren't equal, are they?

Basically saying the same thing PJ did.

The fact that CKD jumped down the throats of three players for innocuous mentions of Door #2, the VERY BAD DOOR, is remarkable. It really looks to me like CKD knew ahead of time that door was totally VBD. One piece of evidence potentially pointing to CKD = scum.

[MrJellyLee]

Did we mislynch, Elmosaurian?

[MrJellyLee]

[PJ Posting]

Morning post. I will say that I actually think a somewhat "high" number of scum in this game is likely, for a few reasons. (1) Mr. Grey is obviously not anticipating that we actually lynch all the scum in seven days. We need to remember that this game is all about the endgame. Thus, I think there are probably more scum than the average game. (2) I think Mr. Grey has considered that if all the scum are stacked up in one thread (say, Off Screen) then that would leave mostly town in the other thread. (3) I don't think Mr. Grey would let the town get into their best endgame simply for lynching one or two players.

Overall, I would wager there are probably 5 or 6 scum. I think asking the town to lynch correctly 3-4 times out of 7 tries is about what I would expect. But since doing that brings the town into the best endgame possible, I am actually fairly inclined to think there are 6 scum (minus one, as KY Krew is dead).

If the scum have some sort of restricted nightkill -- which I think is somewhat likely, then 6 scum is probably the case. If they have a more liberal nightkill (by which I mean: they can't kill once or twice, but they can still get off 4-6 kills) then there are probably 5 scum.

That said, I don't think elmosaurian's warning is as dire as he makes it to be: we only have one dead townsperson. We are better off right now than we were at the beginning of Scene Two since at least we know have a dead scum. If elmosaurian seriously thinks that a mislynch on Scene One puts the town in a drastically perilous situation, then I have to call shenanigans. If we think the scum are dominating lynches, then put them On Screen and lynch them one by one Off Screen.