Whose Tit is Tat? (Mirco 24) : Game Over

[N]

"Whose's"?

VOTE: maestro

[N]

Tochica, don't you know how to confirm?

[N]

Hang on, osrry. Misread post 0.

[N]

I didn't see the crossed out name next to yours and thought you were one of the two that didn't confirm and GNR was looking for replacements for.

That's embarrassing.

[N]

Fancy-Pants...N...numberQ...periodNQ...?!?

A Game of

Thrones

Alts

Wait, whose alt am I?

Am I one of the people who have not confirmed?

~Yes. And also one replaced. Sorry for the inconvience~

Awkward.

[N]

It's okay; there's plenty of me to go around.

[N]

There are wagons on Mestro and FancyPants too. What do you think of them?

[N]

Wait, are you actually serious about not liking someone voting the same as you?

[N]

FancyPants's vote on me seems like a legitimate RV to me. I don't see anything opportunistic about it any more than numberQ's vote on fancypants or peacanpie's vote on Maestro.

VOTE: ShadedMelee
Wakey wakey!

[N]

Do you think numberQ's vote on fancy-pants was opportunistic? How about Pieceofpecanpie's vote on Maestro? If yes/no, why?

Nope, because they are RVS. What I was saying (I think fancy-pants understood me) was that I don't think any of them are opportunistic.

Who here likes RQ's?

No one does. Ever. We don't need to do that shit; we're pretty much out of RVS now (although there's no serious votes yet) and there's actual discussion going on.

[N]

Cool. Your tone sounds a lot different from M4...care to explainz?

I guess I know what I'm doing now and I don't want to make the same mistakes I made in micro 4 in this game.

[N]

Huh? I made more than one mistake. I think I was on pretty much every lynch, and we lynched three or four townies; so there's three or four mistakes right there.

[N]

VOTE: Frog
for being an alt of another player

I'm really confused by all this alt talk.

the accusation of misreading is serious.

But I did misread?

[N]

Yes, you did, which is why his vote is half serious. See #58.

I did see #58 - I quoted it. I just don't see the seriousness in FP's vote. But I'm not the one that made the vote, so I'm going to stop talking about it and let FP answer for themselves.

Salamance20

Are you proposing a policy lynch on frog because they had the same avatar as Salamance? I know you were just in the Phineas and Ferb game, in which Sal mislynched in lylo; are you blacklisting him?

[N]

Frog, I feel like you can see an extra post none of the rest of us can see. Do you usually play like this? I understand you don't want to back down from this scum-read now, because you're in too deep, but if you're town you need to stop tunnelling.

Mod, can you please prod ShadedMelee?

I'm going to go check frog's other games to see if they're always like this.

[N]

Frog, is this the first game you've actually started in? Because it seems like you're a bit unfamiliar with how RVS works.

[N]

@N, I have only the limited understanding that I garnered from Newbie games. If there's an elephant in the room that I'm missing, please state it.

The "elephant" is that people made jokes.

Judging from your three games, you've only started in one game - Newbie 1255 - and replaced into the other two. In Newbie 1255 you were accused of bandwagonning with your RVS post, so that makes sense as to why you've called other people out on in this game. But it that game, you were town, so you obviously know that it's not a very good scum-tell. So why are you using a scum-hunting method that in your experience has proven to be unreliable?

[N]

@NumberQ Your #71 confused me, your #75 confused me and now with your #84... What on earth is going on? I'm not trying to open a jar of semantics on what's a joke and what isn't, but how many times do you want to contradict yourself?

My vote was semi-guided. The semi-guided part WAS the joke. Yes, it was a complete joke. That's what makes it semi-guided. When I say semi-guided, I don't mean the vote had any real weight behind. It just wasn't 100% random.

What. The. Hell?

I don't understand your confusion here. I don't mean to be answering for Q here, but I think this is a stupid line of questioning and want to shut it down. Q's vote was "semi-guided" because it was a joke. In order for a joke to make sense, there needs to be context surrounding it. If someone said "to get to the other side" with no context, I can understand there being confusion. But if before that, they had asked "why did the chicken cross the road?" it would be a perfectly legitimate joke. Yes, it wouldn't be a funny joke, but neither was numberQ's vote.

[N]

@N: Just because it didn't work in #1255 doesn't mean it doesn't work as a scumtell. You may have noticed that 1255 was an especially bad game for everyone involved. You can ask Maestro about this too. Just because a scumtell fails sometimes doesn't mean it is unreliable, otherwise scumtells wouldn't exist, plain and simple.

Can you provide me an example or two of where it has worked?

[N]

Peacanpie, from what I've seen of you in other games I've been reading, it isn't like you to be this cooperative.

[N]

I want every post to be a votecount! Then I can watch lots more WLIIA.

@N Let's make that a two-pronged "eh". Firstly, what elements of uncooperative play have you been reading in my games? Secondly, what do you find cooperative about my play here?

I didn't mean that you being cooperative is an alignment tell; if anything you're more likely town. I'm talking in particular about post 99 this game. Your play in Mini 1341 is a lot more aggressive, for instance.

[N]

Then again, who am I to argue.

YOU'RE DOING IT AGAIN!

Like I said, I don't know if it means anything in terms of your alignment, so it's really just an unimportant observation.

[N]

If you really think that post is scummy, go ahead and lynch me. Town will just be digging their own grave.

What the fuck? You've got two votes. This woe-is-me attitude isn't going to get you anywhere.

[N]

Thread read. Lots o' leads, lots o' caveats. When be deadline?

...Are you going to share your leads with the class? Also, your caveats, but I don't know what that means.

I don't think deadline's for a while yet.

Deadline is in

(expired on 2012-10-05 11:30:00)

[N]

UNVOTE: whoever I was voting for
VOTE: Agent Ireland

Right now, you're being a dead-weight. I don't mind that you've changed your opinion on pecanpie (it's early; whatever), but can you tell us why you now think he is town? Or who you think might be scum? Give us something!

[N]

I don't mean to be contrary, but what the hell have I done to a town-read?

[N]

to be a town-read

[N]

You're getting my vote once the next vote count is posted.

That's a pretty weak reason for not laying down a vote. The last votecount was on the last page, and the only thing that's changed since then was my vote.

Here, I make it easier for you:
UNVOTE: Agent Ireland
Now it's exactly the same as the last page.

(Oh man, if I didn't see a vote this is going to look pretty embarrassing.)

[N]

I don't mean to be contrary, but what the hell have I done to a town-read?

As I said, I just feel town, but this could possibly be a scum slip.

Frog, bring it!

Did you just say having me as a town-read is a scum-slip?

And I just took my vote off you too...

[N]

Want me to word it differently? I read his ISO once, scum read. I read it again, town read. Happy?

Third time lucky? Read it again!

[N]

I don't want to be a town-read for no reason; I don't see how that's controversial.

[N]

Psyche, are you happy with your vote still being on frog? Tell me more.

[N]

You could just as easily criticise Psyche for not knowing when deadline is.

Pretty sure I did the same thing when Psyche asked an easily-answerable question. Maybe I might have come across a bit harder on you, but you've been here all game and have been making lots of outlandish statements.

[N]

You could just as easily criticise Psyche for not knowing when deadline is.

Pretty sure I did the same thing when Psyche asked an easily-answerable question.

Maybe I might have come across a bit harder on you, but you've been here all game and have been making lots of outlandish statements.

Actually you didn't. What do you think of Psyche's allegation against you in #153?

Actually I did. I pointed out the answer, but I can see why you think that my response to you was harsher... (oh, I just said that in my last post - that you quoted!)

I don't think anything of Psyche's allegation. It's stupid, he knows it's stupid, and I don't know why you're pretending it's not stupid.

[N]

Town backup jailkeeper. Bring it bitches.

Did someone ask you to claim? I don't remember that.

Set-Up:

• 1 Mafia Back-up Jailkeeper
• 1 Mafia Role Cop
• 1 Town Jailkeeper
• 1 Town Back-up Role Cop
• 5 Vanilla Townies

Town doesn't even have a back-up jailkeeper.

[N]

I'm going to hammer once AI responds. (Unless that response is really towny, of course.)

[N]

I am willing to give an (admittedly small) out, so I'm not going to say that I will unconditionally hammer him. But in all honesty I'm more likely to hammer than not.

[N]

FoS@ N for claiming intent to hammer.

If you look at my #154, you'll see I told him I wasn't voting because I didn't want a quicklynch this early in the game. The moment I vote and A_I's placed at L-1, he claims intent to hammer. Pretty scummy.

Are you serious right now frog? I claimed intent to hammer because AI had claimed a scum role.

There's no way we can lynch A_I without a counterclaim. If he is lying, there's no reason for the real backup to not CC.

A_I is scum and I don't think our real backup cop needs to claim.

This is ridiculously scummy. Granted, A_I was being terrible emotional and self-voted, but to want to lynch him without a counterclaim is silly.

Also you, fancy: are you also serious? Are you reading the thread? Like, seriously reading the thread, and not cherry-picking things to make others sound bad? Psyche literally just said

If no one counterclaims, we won't lynch you.

You guys are really frustrating me with your inability to read the fucking thread.

[N]

Is there anyone who hasn't posted since AI's (second) claim? I can see where Klick's coming from, but it will only work once - if there's a kill and the jailkeeper comes forward to claim their innocent, they (the jailkeeper) will probably be killed that night.
So if we do get a counterclaim, it would look like this:
d1: lynch AI - only one scum left
n1: remaining scum kill someone
d2: jailkeeper claims an innocent; lynch someone else
n2: if we mislynch, scum will kill the jailkeeper
d3 would esentially be 4v1 mountainous with an innocent child
While I was typing that, I realised that if the jailkeeper claimed in advance who they'd be jailing n2, we'd have another confirmed innocent. Yeah, this could work - providing there's a counterclaim; otherwise AI is confirmed town.

Also I want frog to come back and explain what the were drinking when they made their last few posts.

[N]

I did say it's only true if nobody counterclaims. If nobody does, you're probably going to be nightkilled.

[N]

Isn't that what I said?

Yeah, you're right; I wasn't too clear. I started writing that as a rebuttal, but as I wrote it it occurred to me it wasn't such a bad idea after all.

[N]

You're cool; I'm just not very good at expressing my thoughts. I was originally thinking that (only one), but I realised as I was typing. I figured I may as well show my working out.

Anyway, that all depends on a counterclaim, which doesn't look that likely.

[N]

Why wouldn't you start reading now? Why put it off?

I see you are unfamiliar with Kondi/Klick. He pulls the weirdest gambits no matter his alignment (see micro 32, for instance).

[N]

Are you serious right now frog? I claimed intent to hammer because AI had claimed a scum role.

First of all, he didn't claim a scum role. He claimed a role that isn't in the game. Secondly, I am serious. You claiming intent to hammer and giving him one chance to reply (which you said you probably wouldn't listen to anyway) was incredibly scummy. Especially as I'd only just said that quickhammers are bad.

Wow. Just wow. This is a whole lot of reaching.

He did claim a scum role. Back-up jailkeeper

is a scum role.

When he posted it, I thought he hadn't realised this was an open game and was claiming his role with "town" tacked on the front. Seeing as you claim I said I would hammer no matter what, let's take a look at my intent-to-hammer post:

I am willing to give an (admittedly small) out, so I'm not going to say that I will unconditionally hammer him. But in all honesty I'm more likely to hammer than not.

Oh, look at that! I say pretty clearly "I'm willing to give an out". I didn't say what that out would be, because then AI would obviously be able to use it. Can you guess what my hypothetical out was? Go on; it's easy. Okay, I'll tell you: he made a mistake and claimed the wrong back-up role and then didn't get counterclaimed. Guess what! That's what happened! So I didn't hammer! Fancy that, frog; fancy that.

VOTE: frog I'm sick of you pissing around calling people out for the stupid fucking things as though they're the biggest scum-tell ever. Should we make a list of all the stupid things you've said? Yes, let's!

• voting for the same person as me in RVS is scummy
  
• joke votes can't have context
  
• someone used this scumtell on me when I was town; I'm going to use it to find scum
  
• you're scummy for wanting to hammer a wagon I'd just voted for
  
• Maestro's computer broke down; he must be scum

[N]

No, no, reread his post. He claimed TOWN BACKUP JAILKEEPER. This role does not exist. This is not the same as claiming scum as you would have us believe.

For fuck's sake. I explained why I thought he was claiming a scum role the very next sentence.

Let's look at your post, shall we?

I am willing

to give an (admittedly small) out,

so I'm not going to say that I will unconditionally hammer him.

But in all honesty I'm more likely to hammer than not

.

Oh, look at that! You said pretty clearly that's you'd only give a small out and that you were more likely to hammer. Not only this, but this post came before A_I had even had the chance to respond to two new votes on him, let alone a threat to hammer after his next post! Furthermore I posted on

very same page

that the reason I didn't vote was because I didn't want a quickhammer. And what do you do the moment someone's at L-1? Offer to quickhammer several days before Day 1 ends. Great play, N.

I don't think you read my whole post; just the first sentence from each paragraph. You seem to understand dot points, though; I'll use them again.

• 161: AI claimed a scum role
  
• 162: I called him out - notice I didn't vote
  
• 163: You vote for AI - no other content in this post
  
• 165: Psyche also vote for AI
  
• 167: I claim intent to hammer unless AI can clear things up
  
• 169: I clarify my intent to hammer
  
• 170/171: Fancy and Tochica agree AI should be hammered after he responds
  
• 172: Psyche unvotes to prevent AI self-hammering
  
• 173: AI clarifies
  
• 177: Maestro also claims intent to hammer
  
• 191: you make your weird post accusing everyone who intended to hammer
  a wagon you were on
  scummy
  
• From there on there is talk of a counterclaim, which isn't what we're talking about here.

And just to make it clear to you that my intent was conditional (if it wasn't conditional, why the fuck would I hold off?), I stated that I could see one way in which AI could prove himself. This was to claim the other back-up role, and then for nobody else to counterclaim him. Both of these condition have been met, and so I never hammered.

Mind refrained from biased statements such as 'fucking stupid'? Because your intent to hammer post was the fucking stupidest thing so far this game.

I'll stop calling your posts fucking stupid when they stop being fucking stupid.

Great job wordtwisting by the way. Let's go through the links in order: the first link doesn't actually have anything to do with your point, the second one deals with NumberQ and not about joke votes having no contexts, the third point is actually countered by

the very post you quote

, the fourth is dealt with in this post, and the last one is, again, proved false by the post you quote. Who's doing a lot of reaching now?

Oh, really? Can you tell me what the first link is about then? Why did you go ape-shit crazy at Fancy if not because he voted for the same person as you? The one about numberq I talked about in an earlier post and seeing as you dropped it after that I thought you might have read it. I disagree that the third one is countered, but that's difference of opinion on how useful you're being. The fourth "is dealt with in this post"? Bullshit; sure you're talking about it, but it's not dealing with shit. And how is the last one proved false by that post?

Oh, and nice OMGUS, by the way.

Vote: N

Oh, and nice OMGUS, by the way.

Vote: N

Oh, and nice OMGUS, by the way.

Vote: N

(Just in case you don't understand what I'm doing here; I'm pointing out the hypocrisy in this statement.)

[N]

Frog, if you want to repeat yourself, that's up to you; but I'm not going answer the same question over and over.

One thing I want to check, though: do you still think numberQ/Psyche is scummy? If you do, I'm willing to let that point slide; obviously you do believe that bandwagoning in RVS is scummy. But if you don't then we have just proved that it's not a very good scum-tell and you should probably stop using it.

[N]

I can tell you I think frog is scum, if you hadn't already figured out I thought that?

Personally, I don't think being on the AI wagon is scummy nor towny. I think pretty much everyone (including AI himself) has either voted for or shown intent to vote for him at some stage, so it's a pretty horrible tell if you want to use it on its own.

[N]

If frog hadn't started calling other people on the AI wagon scummy, I wouldn't have thought anything of it. But the way he did it really annoyed me - they voted without saying anything, and then as soon as AI calls them scummy for "jumping on the easy wagon", frog quickly unvoted and tried to move the suspicions onto me (and to a lesser extent, Maestro).

[N]

I find it particularly distressing that he's trying to force me into a scumread on Psyche.

No, actually. I'm trying to force you to admit it's a stupid scum-tell you tried to use.

N, on the other hand, has offered little throughout the game, came close to hammering a power role, and I have completely disproved his case on me.

You haven't disproved shit, frog. When I claimed intent to hammer it was four posts after you actually voted for him. At this stage, I had as much information as you did; I don't understand how your vote is somehow super-extra-obvious-clearly-protown when you were acting on the same information I was.

[N]

omfg where is that counterclaim!?

I think everyone's had a chance to counter-claim now, except for the Tochica slot. Looks as though AI is practically confirmed.

You're going to have to do some actual scum hunting now!

[N]

So I take it you're not counterclaiming? I'm not going to quote your post, but you seem to put a lot of stock into "fake scumhunting" - I think you accused everybody of it at one stage or another. I don't know why you think every post has to contain scumhunting, but your over-reliance on that as a scum-tell is disconcerting.

I know it was a replace-in post and by the end of making one of them you can be exhausted, but you seemed to say "everything is null! both frog and N are null!" and then two paragraphs later you say "frog is my strongest scum-read". I see what pecanpie means about lack of consistency.

[N]

UNVOTE: frog Damn you, Murphy's law!

We've got three days to deadline. I obviously don't agree to an N lynch. I think Psyche and pecanpie are town. Kondi is like reading a wall; Maestro hasn't done anything either way. I'm thinking Ankamius right now, but I don't even remember who else is playing, so I'll look at them.

Oh, it's just Fancy I missed. I think Ankamius or maybe Fancy today.

[N]

Did I miss something? Why is frog's claim bad?

[N]

That claim...

VOTE: frog

There's our scum. Maestro is a likely buddy.

How you reconcile the first part of your post with the second I can only guess angrily.

UNVOTE:

Wait, need to think about this.

Wow...this exchange...is hilarious.
I'm down with pecanpie but N is still a possibility IMO.

I thought Psyche was referring to Fancy's post.

Frog is scum. The timing of his claim is all wrong. It makes no sense for him to claim when he's not even close to being lynched if he's our strongest PR. This, combined with his scummy play in the early stages of the game makes me almost certain he's scum. Don't think we need a CC.

Psyche is semi-town because of numberQ's initial play and his case on Frog. He looked a bit scummy for wanting to lynch A_I without a claim, but that's forgivable.

Fancy says that we should lynch frog without waiting for a counterclaim, but later says Psyche is scummy for saying the same thing about AI.

Correct me if I'm wrong, though, Psyche. (Then I can claim pointing out Fancy's hypocrisy as my own!)

[N]

VOTE: frog

[N]

You already hammered, Kondi. Claiming target would be useful, though, so if there's a death tonight (and frog flips scum) we have a confirmed innocent.

[N]

Current Vote Count 1.04

frog - 3 (Maestro, Agent_Ireland, N) (L-2)

N - 2 (Fancy-Pants, frog) (L-3)
Agnt_Ireland - 1 (Tochica) (L-4)

Not Voting: pieceofpecanpie, klick, Pyshce

UNVOTE: frog

/vote Frog

VOTE: frog

UNVOTE:

VOTE: frog

VOTE: frog

Unless I missed something, frog is already hammered.

[N]

I'm not accusing you of doing it wrong deliberately. I just went back to check (because I thought I might be the one that was wrong), and I thought I may as well share my work.

[N]

How about that frog-wine, eh, Maestro?

[N]

What the hell, Maestro. Aren't you like 15?

This looks like it will be my first win! (Hopefully)

I'm not voting yet, pending fancy claiming their target for tonight just in case.

[N]

Maybe I'm getting you confused with Mehdi. I did so much research on you both for in micro 4 (and still fucked it up) you must have blurred together.

[N]

I understand it could be a gambit, but it makes little sense. With two power roles still alive, the confirmed innocents are starting to pile up. There are eight players left and three of them are currently confirmed (AI, Fancy and Maestro). Even if you do flip town, tomorrow there will be more confirmed town, no matter if there's an overnight death or not. If no death: AI, Fancy, Maestro and whoever AI cops; if AI dies: Fancy, Maestro and whoever Fancy jails; if Fancy (or anyone else) dies: AI, Fancy, Maestro, whoever AI cops, and whoever Fancy jails.

I think we can safely call it a town win from here.

[N]

I think we can safely call it a town win from here.

I'm inclined to agree, if not today, then tomorrow it should come. But there is always a slim chance and one that shouldn't be ignored. Jail the wrong player, scum gets the kill, investigate the wrong player that same night and two nights later we're left without PR's and a slippery scum.

It's not ideal for scum, but neither would taking out a PR last night have been. They'd still be stuck with the same number of conf town the next day, ie. me as an addition, and with such a small pool PR's don't play a massive role. The power is all in the lynch.

Nah. Today we have 3 confirmed town out of 8; tomorrow (if you flip town) we'll have 3 or 4 confirmed town out of 6 or 7. So we should just lynch from within the unconfirmed.

[N]

You're not just "one of the unconfirmed", you're the

most

unconfirmed. Yes, I admit scum no-killing last night would be a good plan for them in the short term (i.e., they get you lynched), but it would be a horrible plan for them in the long run, as the pool of unconfirmeds gets smaller and smaller.

[N]

Now that Fancy has checked in:
VOTE: pecanpie

you're the

most

unconfirmed.

Clarify this.

Also I'm no mafia wizz, but you talking about the pool of unconfirmed getting smaller and smaller would happen regardless.

And I'm no maths wizz, but starting the Day as scum in a pool of 5 is more favourable to starting within a pool of 4. Especially with a mislynch already lined up.

I meant that you're the most likely scum out of the unconfirmed. I don't know how else to put it, but I figured it made sense in context.

A pool of five is all well and good, but there's still two PRs about that can shrink the pool faster than just lynching on its own can.

[N]

I'm confused. Was pecanpie scum or not?

In case he wasn't:

Spoiler: no kill tonight

Confirmed

Agent_Ireland
Maestro
Fancy-Pants
whoever AI investigates

Unconfirmed

(minus whoever AI investigates)
Ankamius
N
Klick
Psyche

4 confirmed (2 PRs) - 3 unconfirmed

Spoiler: Fancy death

Confirmed

Agent_Ireland
Maestro
Klick
whoever AI investigates

Unconfirmed

(minus whoever AI investigates)
Ankamius
N
Psyche

4 confirmed (1 PR) - 2 unconfirmed

Spoiler: AI death

Confirmed

Fancy-Pants
Maestro
Klick

Unconfirmed

Ankamius
N
Psyche

3 confirmed (1 PR) - 3 unconfirmed

Spoiler: Maestro death

Confirmed

(minus whoever died)
Agent_Ireland
Fancy-Pants
whoever AI investigates
Klick

Unconfirmed

(minus whoever died)
Ankamius
N
Psyche

4 confirmed (2 PRs) - 2 unconfirmed

Spoiler: Ank/Psyche/N death

Confirmed

Agent_Ireland
Fancy-Pants
whoever AI investigates
Klick
Maestro

Unconfirmed

(minus whoever AI investigates and who died)
Ankamius
N
Psyche

5 confirmed (2 PRs) - 1 unconfirmed

AI finds a guilty

(regardless of who dies as long as it's not him)
Yay! We lynch them and we win!

Fancy already said they'd jail Klick tonight.
I don't think AI should claim who he's going to rolecop.

I think this is pretty much in the bag, guys. Don't even worry about it.

[N]

So where's the catch?

[N]

According to the maths I just did, the worst that can happen (in terms of confirmed/unconfirmed) is AI's death. But we'd still have the jailkeeper left, so we'd lynch out of the three unconfirmeds. Assuming that's also a mislynch, going into night we'd have three confirmed and two unconfirmed - Fancy would jail one of the two unconfirmed. If there's a death that night (night 3), we'd lynch the last unconfirmed; if there isn't we'd lynch whoever was jailkept. If that's still a mislynch, Fancy would jail the last unconfirmed and we'd be able to lynch the the following day (day 5).

[N]

I've really overthought this, haven't I?

I'm just really excited for my first win.

[N]

I thought cop couldn't do his thing if he's jailed?

[N]

Yay! I won a game!