SWN II: The Curse of the Nekomata (Game over!)

[Fishythefish]

I have a post restriction. Luckily, it shouldn't restrict me too much, though it may hurt everyone else's eyes.

I get a gut scum feeling from Kai's argument with Llama. Feels like Kai is arguing a POV generally held as protown at least partly for the sake of doing so.

Will my posts be easier to read if I write everything in bold, like this?

[Fishythefish]

Oh yeah, selecting text will help a lot.

Because, in my excitement that I remembered to close my color tags, I totally forgot.

vote: Kai

[Fishythefish]

@Fishy: So because I'm arguing from a perspective generally taken as pro-town I'm scummy. That's called the Too Townie fallacy. Try again.

That's not what I said. I get the feeling you are arguing from such a perspective in order to look protown. And trying hard to look protown is something I associate with scum (as opposed to just

looking protown

, which is what the TT fallacy covers).

[Fishythefish]

@Fishy: The problem being that there is no difference between what you say and what I say. By acknowledging that my stance is considered to be pro-town you are also acknowledging that by arguing it I appear pro-town.

Absolutely not. I think that policy lynches are generally considered antitown, and opposing them protown. However, here, it doesn't feel like you are opposing the idea for in-game reasons, but just for the sake of looking protown. Thus I think you are scum trying (and failing) to look protown.

The Too Townie fallacy covers cases where a person is suspected because their arguments are supposedly contrived with the purpose of appearing pro-town, which is another way of saying that the person in question is acting pro-town so they must be scum.

I don't know if this is true in the common usage, but it's flat out wrong. If someone doesn't drop any scumtells, that makes them more likely protown. But if I know that someone is deliberately going out of their way to avoid dropping scumtells, I think they are probably more likely scum.
I don't think your arguments are contrived to look protown because they look so protown; they look contrived. The TT fallacy is a red herring here.

[Fishythefish]

The info is there. At least read it before you continue to push a null tell.

Will do. Again: it's not the fact of your opposition to policy lynches I'm worried about, it's the reasons for you bringing it up.

We are really having different arguments. I am saying that if you know that the motivation for someone to take an action was because they thought it would look protown, they are scummy - and that is what I think is the case here (pending reading those links). You are saying that if someone does something protown, you can't tell what their motivation is, and it certainly isn't a scumtell.

I don't think any sensible version of the TT fallacy makes the statement "Kairyuu did this in order to look town, so he's likely scum" illogical. It's emphatically not the same sentence as "Kairyuu did this thing, it looks town, so he's scum trying to look town".

I'm not a miller.

[Fishythefish]

Having done a quick read through those links, they do nothing to reassure me. Both times, you were talking about a very specific policy lynch/vig (Mastin had claimed Death Miller, Nat SK [though in jest]). Here, you are just airing your opposition to policy lynches in general. I don't find this opposition unbelievable or scummy; I find it odd that you brought it up when you did.

[Fishythefish]

I do have a post restriction. I don't have one that isn't blindingly obvious (and indeed just blinding)

[Fishythefish]

Oh and if one of tubby/SSK are completely faking the PR, its tubby. Im thinking they both really have the PR though.

So no one (ace/fishy) can delay posting

Do you get modkilled if you break your PR?
Do you get a warning if you break your PR?
What is your role name?
What is the flavor behind your role?
Are there any limitations on quoting?

No mention
No mention
I think this question potentially reveals other aspects of my role, and I'm not going to answer it
I love pink
No mention, and I'm acting as if there aren't atm.

[Fishythefish]

What I got from fishy was:

Mod-

Whats your favorite color?

Fishy-

Pink, why?

Mod-

Ok, for this game, you can only write in pink. Have fun!

Fishy-

Sure, sounds cool!

Did you even bother asking if there was a punishment for not writing in pink?

I had no kind of control over the color. I haven't asked what the punishment is for not writing in pink. I was assuming that it was warning(s) followed eventually by modkill. I will ask, though.

[Fishythefish]

I asked the mod about warnings/modkills/quotations. In his reply, he didn't mention warnings, I get modkilled if I don't post in pink, no problem with quotes.

@other players with post restrictions, and everyone else:
In SWN I postgame, SC said he intended to save a modkill until night to give the illusion that a mafia faction was still killing. This may well point to SC being a little modkill-happy. I would be

extremely

careful to keep within your PR at all times, as I suspect in certain circumstances he will want an excuse, rather than a reason.

[Fishythefish]

The initial meta case from Anon is pretty strong for a meta case.

The defense that skye has tried to change his tactics is no defense at all. The defense that the sample size is small is more fair - so far we know that skye has played very similarly indeed to the way he did as SK once. I'd like more examples, but that still makes him more likely scum.

@skye: have you exhibited this caution over d1 reads in completed games as town?
You are currently making statements about your meta - like it's changing rapidly, it's the same as town and scum. We've got no reason to believe those statements. For anyone who has the time on their hands (maybe even me at some point), could you provide links to completed games you have started?

Soft PR claim from skye is fail, but not scummy.

Overall, I think this meta case, as it stands (pending being refuted with evidence by skye or having more added to it) would make a nice little cherry on top of a good case. It makes me marginally more suspicious of skye, but no more than that.

Anon's follow up case sucks. Responding to calls for opinions isn't scummy, overreacting isn't scummy, softclaiming isn't scummy. Fence-sitting at this stage of the game may be a tiny bit scummy, but no more than that. Imo, OMGUS isn't scummy either, but calling people on it and largely ignoring their post is.
@Anon: why did you only look at that game in constructing your case? If you didn't, how do skye's other games fit with your case?

vote:DocPotter

the worst wagoner on a bad wagon.

[Fishythefish]

unvote, vote: DocPotter

(forgot to unvote in 261)

[Fishythefish]

What is white knighting?

[Fishythefish]

@Anon: why did you only look at that game in constructing your case? If you didn't, how do skye's other games fit with your case?

The serial killer game was the last one he played and the first I found when doing my research. I did read some other games, the thing is that as sykedoc says the majority are all replacements games where he is forced to have a read already. Search is down now but if you can check his newbie where he IS definitely more liberal with his voting. He was town.

.......

Llama, can you concise your case on docpotter? What are the scumtells you are using to suspect him? What do you think of the bandwagon formed against him?

Thanks. Why did you address this question only to Llama?

Sorry for the recent lack of activity. I hope to do a bit of catching up tomorrow morning.

[Fishythefish]

Hello, sorry for recent inactivity

@ani: you ask whether I have a PR as well as a PR. I see no reason to answer you.

Amished. As someone here recently said, answering questions for other people is scummy. Also, I asked questions of the guy who started the fishing on the Post Restricted players.

Since there's a fair chance the whole lynch thing is going to happen while I'm either asleep or doing the whole fist day of school thing tommorow.

I DocPotter have yet to receive a scum role at all, in any game.
I've replaced into games into scummy spots hoping to get one but no luck.

Llama, are you going to answer my question about Ani and SSK? Are you going to comment on the fact that Ani could be scum, and with three obvious post restrictions his question about them is looking more and more suspicious? Especially given his claimed interaction with them?

Nope, because if Ani is scum then you look scummy for the way you have posed that statement "If SSK is scum then Ani is not". Combined with you shutting down any other questions about it, citing protection of Ani. Hello, he raised the topic in the first place.

My gut says that with three restrictions, Ani is scum. If Ani is scum then you are scummy for the way you have protected him. Reguardless, Llama deserves a very close look for trying to be the town leader.

If Ani is scum, and I believe that he is, then his RVS has to be looked at closely. Those that know him, is he the kind of person to thumb his nose at the town by RVS'ing a scum buddy?

Ray, is Ani the type of player to RVS a scum buddy like this?

Wolf needs close looking at for a different reason.
Wolf, you are pushing for my lynch in two games now. Do you really thnk I'm scum in both, or do you think that perhaps there is something about me and my style that rubs you the wrong way?

Summary: Llama, Ani scum. Wolf, scummy. Skyedoc. Still don't bloody know.

Since there are about 16 days to go until deadline, I'm going to concentrate on the lylo/mylo games for the next couple of days.

These reads don’t read very true to me. Ani scum for asking about PRs? That’s an odd view – PRs usually become very obvious very quickly, why would Ani-scum ask about them, potentially giving away his role? Trying to lead the town is emphatically not a scumtell. This doesn’t feel like a real post of reads.

I dislike Starbuck’s case on skyedoc. Basically, everything in it is a nulltell or a pretty weak scumtell (particularly: AtE, overreaction, lack of reads d1, defensiveness, PR softclaim, emotions of all kinds). He makes one good point, that skye hasn’t said much about the dp wagon – although this was more by way of a counter-counter-attack, and feels very much like an afterthought that fitted.
A large portion of Starbuck’s posts are about the kind of things that people often think are scumtells, but actually don’t fit well into a coherent picture of scum (basically, all of the above plus rolefishing-by-asking-people-to-claim [starbuck’s first post]). For me, this makes him likely scum.

[Fishythefish]

I dislike Starbuck’s case on skyedoc. Basically, everything in it is a nulltell or a pretty weak scumtell (particularly: AtE, overreaction, lack of reads d1, defensiveness, PR softclaim, emotions of all kinds). He makes one good point, that skye hasn’t said much about the dp wagon – although this was more by way of a counter-counter-attack, and feels very much like an afterthought that fitted.
A large portion of Starbuck’s posts are about the kind of things that people often think are scumtells, but actually don’t fit well into a coherent picture of scum (basically, all of the above plus rolefishing-by-asking-people-to-claim [starbuck’s first post]). For me, this makes him likely scum.

What about my case SPECIFICALLY don't you like? Do you care to provide specific examples?

What's with your defense of sykedoc when he has already committed so many scummy actions?

What defense of sykedoc? The above is an attack on your case on him.

I dislike virtually every point in your case. As soon as I have time (next day or so), I'll do a massive wall of your points, with my comments - almost all of which will be "not actually a scumtell".

[Fishythefish]

I’m going to go through votes for sykedoc – first I’m going to do a bit of a wall on Starbuck, then I’m going to do a sensible sized post on the people following him. I think his wagon is very misguided.

Catch Up to Page 9

On sykedoc

If its absolutely necessary I can give you first day reads. But I've found that often, peoples reads on day 1 lead to villagers getting killed for stupid reasons.

Excuses, excuses.

Many players have only weak reads on day 1. At best, its a very weak scumtell. The phrase "excuses, excuses" implies to me that syke has done something blatantly scummy, and is now flailing around trying to explain it - just not the case.

It will not end well if you crusade against me.

And now you are going to threaten people?

This is just a standard "I'm town!" cry from syke. I don't think this is a scumtell.

I find it stupid reasoning to vote for someone because their policies do not agree with yours.

And yeah, I can have zero reads. It depends on your definition of a read.
I believe a read is a valid suspicion. I have none to this point. Anything I do have is based off something i do not consider substantial.

If you can't live with that you can try to lynch me but again. It won't end well.

Wow! AtEs and overreactions much?

He's not voting you due to disagreeing with your policies. He's voting for you because you aren't contributing to scumhunting.

AtE - townie players play emotionally as well. AtE is something to be disregarded, but it is not scummy. Overreactions similarly - noone wants to be lynched, and every played acts differently when attacked. I don't think scum particularly react more than townies.

The problem here is just about everything is scummy on D1.

Care to elaborate on this please?

LlamaFluff- White Knighting, can go either way.

Provide examples of Llame white knighting.

Llama had been blatantly leading the town.

Page 9 to Page 12

The bolding she is referring to is in a post of his that she quoted: "If you show me something substantial and solid, I'm quite likely to vote with you."

It feels like he just admitting to the fact that he will ride coattails.

Nothing wrong with a good coattail. His clarification is clearly saying that while he will look for good scumtells day 1, if other people find them he will vote with them - not a particularly scummy attitude. It feels to me just like he knows he isn't very good at d1 scumhunting.

This seems a bit overdefensive to me. Why are you so afraid of your meta?

I think everyone's goal is to remain the same from game to game regardless of role. Unfortunately, most people do not based on if they are scum or town. That's how people who play together a lot are able to tell almost automatically if that person is scum or town.

Defensiveness - another thing that isn't actually a scumtell. RE: Starbuck's meta: meta cases on you are extremely annoying, particularly if founded on bad meta. Because there's basically no defense. I see absolutely nothing scummy about syke's defense - even if I sometimes disagree with it.

Admission of a PR? This early in the game? Why would you do such a thing?

Yeah, this was a silly move by syke. I'd say claiming early is a towntell though

I like how you avoid that I fence sat in plenty of other games. Its just a bad habit, its not a scumtell.

I don't like this assumption.

What? What kind of response is that? What assumption? Why not question him further as to where he fence sat? If you are taking into account the meta attacks on him (which are that he fence sat as scum, once), why do you dismiss his very relevant meta defense?

The softclaim has a lot to do with the fact that I don't care if I die.

You don't care? Dude, you've been whining about how you shouldn't be killed for like 5 pages at this point.

Yeah, that's probably fair. Doesn't point to scum-syke, though

Why don't you disprove [my claims]? Show where you did the same thing as town, rather than ranting and raving.
Claiming they are weak, without backup, is scummy.

This is absolutely fine. If syke is claiming he does the same thing as scum, he should be able to back that up

So out of the other 23 people (excluding yourself and Anon), there's ABSOLUTELY NO ONE ELSE that you find scummy? You are just going to attack the person that's attacking you and vote them. My dear, that's THE DEFINITION of OMGUS.

Yeah, syke was a bit OMGUSy here. Which is very natural, as any alignment, when you've just had a massive post posted against you

Ad hom like

3) Would you like me to give you my role so you two can look like idiots?

Ad hom is the practise of attacking a player to weaken his/her arguments, while ignoring the validity of the arguments themselves. Using the word "idiots" does not constitute an ad hom.

Also continuing threats like

Do not attempt to use this against me as it doesn't apply to my D1 tactics specifically.

What? He's saying an argument against him doesn't apply here, and giving a reason. How is this a threat?

Star then quotes some AtE, which is indeed AtE.

So, how about you stop all this overemotional whatever the hell you have going on and actually scumhunt? There's like 5 pages of you whining and overreacting about being hammered when you only have 5 votes in a day when it takes 13 to lynch.

This paragraph pretty well sums up the problem here. It's pretty much what I'd have liked syke to do at that point as well. But the issues it addresses don't point to him being scum.

The one point I like in these posts is that syke has refused to provide examples of his fence-sitting town play.

Or here's something else. Why have YOU BARELY COMMENTED on the DocPotter wagon? Kinda hypocritical given the fact that you are all over my ass about that very thing.

This is a good point. syke’s failure to comment on the other serious wagon of the day for a long time is notable

You are clearly intent on forming a case on me. You don't seem to care about the others.

This is just reaching now.

I reposted Saint and Nul's posts to show just how non-contributory they both have been.

And with DocPotter, yes it's an odd way to back off a wagon, but that one action does not make him autoscum.

I don't think this is reaching in the slightest. Read your own catchup posts - by the end of them, it's quite clear it has changed from a rounded catchup to a case on syke

I still believe he's scummy, but I believe there is a smarter scum, and I'd rather get rid of a smarter scum who I believe will do more damage if left alive.

How does this make sense? You BELIEVE he's scummy and you see that the wagon is in his favor, but you aren't voting for him?

Another good point. I can’t really imagine thinking I’ve found scum, but not voting because I think I can find a better scum, which is what syke seems to be saying.

[Fishythefish]

Wait, wait, wait.

I want the people who are saying sykedoc's case is crap and such, to explain why you dont think he is scummy after:

- Blatant fence-sitting. Typical scum behavior trying to survive only pushing when necessary. (Sykedoc has already behaved like this as scum).

- Refusing to give opinions but when pressured by Llama, ta-dá, a full list of opinions magically emerge of notepad. Guess you didnt want to get fluff angry.

- Overreacting to 5 votes. Really?

- Also, I dont buy the softclaim OH YOU ARE GOING TO BE SO WRONG WHEN YOU LYNCH A POWER ROLE.

Power roles that are at 5 votes and are not even threatened to lynch DONT start screaming they are power roles because that paints a huge target on their asses. Most likely this is a scum appeal to emotion that its even terribly implemented.

The meta case I found is just confirmation of something sykedoc has already done as scum.

We have scum here people.

Fence-sitting, this early in the game, is a weak scumtell. It remains weak at least for all of day 1.
Giving reads when asked is not a scumtell, even if you haven’t done so previously. syke’s explanation is that he had tentative reads, and on questioning published these – I see no reason to disbelieve him.
Overreaction is not a scumtell, it varies far to much from player to player.
Unnecessary softclaims are bad. They are not scumtells.

DN’s case is very simple – fence sitting.

MafiaSSK has not backed his vote up at all (which, I believe, is unsurprising for him).

RF quotes one of Starbuck’s better points when voting syke, and goes on to make some AtE type points, together with accusations of syke giving up on his anon case under pressure – which I really, really don’t see in the game.

Unvote
Vote: Sykedoc

Namely 507; where he takes a position that he thinks that everything he does, the rest of the players will think as scummy. Because he can't see the townie side of anything, he didn't do anything until pressured. This signals to me that he's not a townie as he can't even think that him continuing to play like "normal" would absolve him, especially with the low amount of pressure that was really applied to him at the time.

I don't even care that he's softclaimed a power role earlier, scum get them too. His actions say scum.

Yeah, I can see where you’re coming from here. However, I tend to think that townies who get repeatedly lynched or wagonned for their playstyles may also have this attitude.

Rifka’s vote is based on AtE etc, plus a lack of “pro town activity”. I think lack of scumhunting is a horrible accusation to throw at someone who has had to defend themselves all day. Yes, in a perfect world syke would have scumhunted as well. In my experience though, it’s rare you have the energy after defending yourself from this sort of wagon.

Pom’s been on and off the syke wagon – early on, this was based largely on meta. Her case is now not based on meta, but it’s at all clear to me what it is based on.

Richard’s vote is a self-declared OMGUS vote. Having to post drunk is no excuse for acting stupidly.

Damn. I'm totally out of time to post the conclusion (which is that syke is not scum). Stay tuned...

[Fishythefish]

So, to recap: here are the points about sykedoc I find good:
- Failure to point to the town games where he has fence sat, which he claims exists – he really should have done so.
- Failure to comment on DP wagon (most relevant if DP flips scum)
- Then, again on DP, his “I think he’s scum but can catch a better scum” post. He clarifies this to “DP was scummy in an obvious way, Anon was scummier”, which I can’t decide whether to believe. Again, only really relevant if DP is scum.

These aren’t terrible points, and in other circumstances could be a decent case (and there’s certainly a DP-syke connection). But the thing is, my impression of syke is of a player who isn’t a good scumhunter (at least d1), reacts badly to pressure – particularly over things he sees as issues with his playstyle - is emotional and doesn’t think his posts through hard enough before posting. I view these as fairly alignment neutral things (at least without meta on the individual concerned). On top of this, he’s played the whole game under attack, and talked about himself a huge amount (voluntarily and otherwise). On a player like syke, under these conditions, I would expect a much, much better case by now. Instead we have some moderately good points floating in a sea of attacks on his playstyle.

On a gut level, I also find his emotional play convincing, and I associate those strong emotions with town.

I think this is the day 1 antitown-player default mislynch in this game, and that we need to stop it.

This concludes part one of Operation: Stop the Mislynch! In part two, which will follow as soon as possible, I work out who the scum are.

[Fishythefish]

ITT fishy attempts derail on docsyke case

QFT.
Sorry, short on time atm. Access will be better tomorrow.

[Fishythefish]

Right now, the good wagons are the ones building steam - Bogre and Parama. Particularly the latter. Parama reads as a player who wants to keep his options open - in particular, I don't believe there has been a single decent sized wagon in the game which he hasn't expressed willingness to join. I was going to write "except for his own", but actually he Fossed himself . This smacks of scum wanting to keep his options open, whether in gaining a mislynch or safely bussing. Llama also gives examples of him doing this while not even committing to a read. This guy is scum.

[Fishythefish]

Again with the forgetting to vote.

unvote, vote: Parama

[Fishythefish]

This was at the point where he was being asked by multiple people to give his reads, and he kept making excuses (as implied by "excuses, excuses") as to why he could not post them.

So why did you completely miscontrue what I said? Blatant misrepresentation is scummy.

His "excuses" were that he didn't have any reads. Which isn't a scumtell. Am I missing something here? I see your "excuses, excuses" as exactly an attack on his lack of reads.

Re: white knighting. My point here is that Llama was so obviously white knighting that SD's lack of explanation was not suspicious.

Re: coattailing. No, of course I'm not advocating giving someone a free ride. If someone spends a whole day coattailing, particularly on cases I don't think are that good, that's horrible. But on the other hand, if someone else makes a good case, that's a good reason to vote someone. Attacking coattailing always, without looking at the cases involved or whether you believe the read, is a recipe for good bandwagons dieing because people don't follow good cases. And it's much better to point to a good case and say that's your reason than paraphrase it badly.

Also, there almost must have been a huge amount of coattailing in this game (at some point, I'll go and check this). Simply by the size, and the fact that we've had two large bandwagons. You haven't called anyone else on it, all game. Why?

Re: SD's assumption that Anon didn't read his other games (I think I misunderstood you on this in the last post). Since Anon only referred to or quoted from one game, this seems a good assumption to me.

OK. You could describe that as Ad hom. But the reason ad hom is a bad argument is it illegitimately undermines valid arguments. I think that in this context, it's clear that syke wasn't intending to do that. He was just saying that if he claimed, the people attacking him would feel and look stupid - it's a simply softclaim of a serious role, not an attempt to discredit their arguments.

This is what I see:

Star: rounded catchup post
Star: 2nd catchup post, focussed on SD
SD: "You are clearly intent in forming a case on me. You don't care about others"
Star: that's reaching

My point isn't that your catchup style was wrong, bad or scummy. It's that saying that SD is reaching by accusing you of focusing on him is unfair - for whatver reason, you were extremely focussed on SD by the end of your catchup.

[Fishythefish]

FFFF accidentally (presumably) posted 680 in english initially. The mod has fixed this.

[Fishythefish]

Fish trying to deflate said case is very scummy too.

Maybe AtE aint the best tell. Maybe overreaction aint the best tell. Maybe fence-sitting aint the best tell. Maybe "readless" aint the best tell... But DAMMIT, he's got all of them simultaneously.

Also, if you tell me it's your meta to play like that Syke... well it's anti-town and scummy, fix it.

I see all those "tells" (inverted commas because I see no evidence that any of them is even a weak scumtell) as consistent with a player who isn't strong day 1 and is overly emotional about the game. My strong impression of syke is that this is just how he plays.

I agree that, if I'm right, syke has an anti-town meta. But having a scummy meta is literally impossible.

[Fishythefish]

I actively believe him to be town. Within the playstyle he has, he seems to be genuine.

Anti-town is a nuisance. But I firmly believe the way to deal with that nuisance is not by lynching people who I don't think are scum. He'll die at some point (for one thing, he's softclaimed a power role - he's not going to be in the endgame), and he's certainly not unreadable. We can achieve a much better chance of a scumlynch today than SD.

The worst case scenario for every player is that we let them live until endgame, then they turn out to be scum. You've said nothing that makes this scenario either more likely or more scary in SD's case.

[Fishythefish]

It's a post restriction. I recommend highlighting the test

[Fishythefish]

So basically what you are telling me here is to not scumhunt. I felt he was scummy, therefore I formed a case on him. Where did I say that he was reaching because he was accusing me of focusing on him?

I'm not in the slightest telling you not to scumhunt. That's a completely wrong interpretation of my words. I specifically said I have no problem with the way you replaced in. What I am saying is that the quote at the bottom of this post is an unfair accusation of reaching.

Here's where you accused him of reaching:

You are clearly intent on forming a case on me. You don't seem to care about the others.

This is just reaching now.

[Fishythefish]

But you are in some way trying to link that to the way I catch up when I replace in, I'm not really following, and this back and forth has turned into you basically saying that you don't like how I replace in.

That's absolutely not what I've intended to say, and I really don't think it's what I've said. I'm criticising that particular point quoted in my last post, and nothing else. I think the thing you call "reaching" - SD's quote about you focusing on him - is nothing of the sort.
All I disagree with (here) is a very minor point in your case. If you still don't get what I'm trying to say, I'm happy to drop it.

[Fishythefish]

Also, my case is made and it's on sykedoc. The reason for the walls was Fishy trying to derail my case (which is not meta based). She's been chainsaw defending him for awhile now, if people just highlighted her posts to see what she wrote then you would all know this by now.

A chainsaw defense is attacking the attacker. It is a scummy thing. My defense is attacking the

case

. At no point have I called you or anyone else attacking SD scummy (I believe - if I have, it was certainly not the main drive of my post). If you think it is a bad defense, then you can call it scummy, but don't use buzzwords that don't apply here.

I encourage people to read my walls. Star's case isn't meta based, but it is based off a whole lot of cruddy tells.

Incidentally, I'm a he.

I believe SD is town basically on gut (but strong gut). His posts come across to me as a genuine reflection of his thoughts, and that makes me think he is town.

[Fishythefish]

Parama is a good lynch. SD is a bad lynch. DP I'm uncertain about - the pattern of his wagon has felt a bit odd. Deadline is getting close, and we need to get wagons going to get claims in. I think in this size game, we are at the stage where there is no excuse not to be on one of the three main wagons.

[Fishythefish]

Flavour specifics, please.
My vote stays, because claiming cop is a good scumtell and because lynching cops in a bastard game isn't disastrous.

[Fishythefish]

Bleh. Looks like Parama lynch isn't happening. Shame, seeing as Parama is scum.

I mean, really. Think about it. How many scum would you guess are in this game? About 6? How many cops? 2 seems lots. How many of those scum would claim cop? I'd say at least 2. So, if we wagon a random player, and they claim cop, what chance they are scum? At least 50% - and I've been generous to the scum in my numbers. 50%!!!! That's a

huge

improvement over randomness. And if we lynch a cop, then so what? It's a bastard game, he was probably a pretty useless cop anyway. Cop claims make very, very good lynches.

That's enough ranting. Parama is an awesome lynch here.

As for other lynches, if we can't lynch the OBVIOUS SCUM I would take a DP lynch over an SD lynch over a NL. I haven't read anon, but if Llama's magical powers get a wagon going I will.

This isn't my last post before deadline.

[Fishythefish]

If he claimed just cop I would of lynched him. Greek Cop sounds real to me, if later only one faction is revealed we lynch him then.

Seriously? In a bastard game? If he really is a Greek Cop, three very real possibilities:
1. No Greek Mafia
2. Only Greek Mafia
3. Multiple mafiates, including Greek
Assuming that a real Greek Cop implies the third option is very wrong.

If he's mafia, he's probably Greek Mafia. I don't think that added flavour does anything to improve his claim.

[Fishythefish]

RBT's wagon is a good wagon. His contradiction/content ratio is spectacular. I'm also not at all a fan of trying to get other cops to "counterclaim", when in fact there is no reason to assume we don't have multiple cops, and another cop claiming would do little to affect the likelihood of Params telling the truth (which he isn't, BTW).

vote: RBT

[Fishythefish]

Thanks Llama.

*Beats himself over the head with the unvoting stick*

unvote, vote: RBT

[Fishythefish]

Llama? Why on earth did I read "StrangerCoug" as "LlamaFluff"?

unvote, vote: Riceballtail

I really think I got it that time!

[Fishythefish]

I don't see the point of an agreement not to lynch each other when there is no way for the voting block to actually agree on someone else to vote.

Also, Anon is far too likely scum.

[Fishythefish]

Oh, you're not one of my major scumreads. But you don't belong in The Unbreakable Alliance.

I'll say more if and when becomes time to lynch you.

[Fishythefish]

ani: are you claiming that if RBT doesn't die now, that makes him town?

We've got a while. I'm feeling wagontastic, but why are we voting CSL again?

[Fishythefish]

(Aside from Parama) I don't know who is scum, and I don't have the time to find out. I will do so asap - probably during the night, or early day 2 (unless this gets dragged out until deadline). CSL is useless, and may be scum, but I currently have no way of reading him. If he is VT, there are much worse things that could happen on day one.

vote: CSL

[Fishythefish]

Day three was simply amazing. Spyrex played a superb game all round.