Mini 611 - Troy, Meet Helen (Game Over)

[Battousai]

CF Riot's post 71:

I'd also like to add that I'm eating the most delicious apple right now. So good.

I saw it as a doc breadcrumb, with apple being the trigger word, except for the fact that it makes no sense for a doc to breadcrumb whatsoever. From my (limited) experience as mafia, I have been tempted to drop fake breadcrumbs, before realizing that doc breadcrumbs make no sense.

What if he really was a doc and it was a real breadcrumb? Then if the scum wasn't observant you just outed a town power role. What do you think should happen if CF is found dead tomorrow as the doc?

[ShadowGirl]

CF Riot's post 71: I saw it as a doc breadcrumb, with apple being the trigger word.

Hahaha. Okay I actually laughed when I read this. Not because it's a dumb guess to make or anything, I can sort of see you just being really observant and trying to take everything under the microscope. But no, I really was eating an apple IRL when I posted that. Sorry, I never guessed it could be confused as game related, I'll try not to post anymore irrelevant information during this game.

Every single word in a post could have a double meaning - especially something as cryptic as that.

[Walnut]

[quote="CF Riot]This is my problem with you Walnut. Yes I agree his claim is not pro-town, but I don't think the other examples you give are scummy. He actually didn't vote without reading, he hasn't voted at all. I don't see any problem with proposing 2 suspects at once in his post either. I don't particularly like the fact that he hasn't done a full read, but he said his guess was based on recent posts, so his opinions aren't baseless. You say he's only a 6 on your scumdar, but that is high enough to be in lynch territory?

FoS: Walnut

[/quote]

You are right in that he has not voted. Neither, in fact, have I. I don't see any problem with proposing 2 suspects at once in his post either. For the rest, I would refer you back to post #143. The pressure was building on Hadhfang, and suddenly BB posted with a post that he openly says was intended to draw votes. Does this timing not strike you as suspicious?

[Walnut]

Curse that "Submit" instead of "Preview" pushing finger! In a slightly more readable format:

This is my problem with you Walnut. Yes I agree his claim is not pro-town, but I don't think the other examples you give are scummy. He actually didn't vote without reading, he hasn't voted at all. I don't see any problem with proposing 2 suspects at once in his post either. I don't particularly like the fact that he hasn't done a full read, but he said his guess was based on recent posts, so his opinions aren't baseless. You say he's only a 6 on your scumdar, but that is high enough to be in lynch territory?
FoS: Walnut

You are right in that he has not voted. Neither, in fact, have I. I don't see any problem with proposing 2 suspects at once in his post either. For the rest, I would refer you back to post #143. The pressure was building on Hadhfang, and suddenly BB posted with a post that he openly says was intended to draw votes. Does this timing not strike you as suspicious?

[charter]

CF Riot's post 71:

I'd also like to add that I'm eating the most delicious apple right now. So good.

I saw it as a doc breadcrumb, with apple being the trigger word, except for the fact that it makes no sense for a doc to breadcrumb whatsoever. From my (limited) experience as mafia, I have been tempted to drop fake breadcrumbs, before realizing that doc breadcrumbs make no sense.

What if he really was a doc and it was a real breadcrumb? Then if the scum wasn't observant you just outed a town power role. What do you think should happen if CF is found dead tomorrow as the doc?

Why are you asking other people what they think should happen if Riot is found dead tomorrow and is doc? Why don't you say what you think will happen? What good can you hope to gain from this question? I ask these because you seem unwilling to drop the Riot being doc thing, even after he explicitly said he wasn't dropping hints at his role.

[Battousai]

That was a question to Netlava, not everyone else.

[charter]

I think it's a scummy thing to do and I'm calling you out on it. It doesn't matter who it's directed to. Netlava is still free to answer it, I haven't given my opinion on the matter. I hesitate to say 'loaded question' but your question is very WIFOM with the what do you think should happen tomorrow.

I was actually wondering if you were going to say I was defending him. You didn't quite, but you still didn't answer my questions to you.

[CF Riot]

Walnut, I hadn't taken a close look at the timing of BB's post. In the context of what was going on, I can see that as being very "look at me" as a possible distraction from the Hadhfang wagon. However I personally don't know if I buy a Had/BB connection. The post where he admits his "claim" should've pulled votes he also puts in a fairly strong argument against Had's claim, saying it is textbook scum. I know this could also be seen as taking some of the heat from Had then turning on him to try to diffuse any ties, but if they actually were a scum pair that seems too risky as it's putting

both

of them in the spotlight on D1 and forcing them to gamble on proving fake-claims in every other day they want to be alive.

Also, um, yes I think you have voted.

vote Hadhfang

Given you've unvoted since then, but I wasn't saying BB isn't voting ATM, I said he hasn't locked in a vote for anyone yet the entire game. Another interesting thing I noticed while I was checking to see where you unvoted:

C: I'm surprised I haven't gotten more votes on me. I was expecting me to claim that I have a kickass role to give me votes and only one person (charter) has voted me. The question is: is charter's behavior PRO-TOWN or ANTI-TOWN for voting someone that claims to have a kickass role. I don't know yet.

I took more note of you saying that you were feeling lazy and considering being replaced

. If that is the case, it is better for you to be replaced than

the town to be forced to lynch you

.

Here you're saying the claim didn't bother you much and don't mention anything about the timing either. Yet you were still having negative feelings towards BB because you don't like his level of commitment to the game, enough so that you propose lynching him anyways.

Charter, it is not a loaded question. Let Netlava answer and then if Batt tries twisting that answer around or tries to paint Netlava into an unwarranted position then do something about it. Batt brings up a good point that I can't believe I didn't pick up on myself. The fact that I'm not a power role doesn't erase the fact that Netlava exposed the possibility before he knew for sure, and I'm sort of bothered by the fact that when he sees a possible crumb, he cries scum instead of considering I really was doctor. This adds to the problem I have with Netlava holding on to the idea of a Hadhfang lynch when it has been generally accepted as a bad idea for D1. I hadn't mentioned this because Hadhfang still does look very scummy, and will stay that way unless he can prove his role tomorrow, so I understand suspecting him. But Netlava continues to support his lynch today before he has a chance to defend himself and show some worth, which I can't see as a being town-motivated.

[Netlava]

What if he really was a doc and it was a real breadcrumb? Then if the scum wasn't observant you just outed a town power role. What do you think should happen if CF is found dead tomorrow as the doc?

The difference between a doc and a goon dropping fake breadcrumbs is that the doc risks getting caught out and NK'd whereas scum do not. A doc has no reason to ever breadcrumb. Scum on the other hand can always use a breadcrumb later (if they want) when they fake a power role claim, but do not have to worry about getting NK'd. Plus, a townie who realizes that something is a breadcrumb would be hard-pressed to point it out on the off-chance that the breadcrumb is legit. All things considered, I decided that if CF Riot were the actual doc, then he would not have breadcrumbed. And if CF Riot happens to be the doc, then he shouldn't have breadcrumbed in the first place. Also note that his breadcrumb is a relatively strong one due to its sudden irrelevancy.

[Walnut]

@CFRiot: To give an extreme example, if someone never posts they get prodded. If they fail to pick up the prod the mod replaces them. If they pick up the prod but still never post from what I have seen the action differs from mod to mod. In one game I played the mod said that it was the town's business to deal with that issue. So eventually we were forced to lynch that player. It turned out he was mafia, but it still felt disappointing, like a hollow victory. It was a purely mechanical action with no game involvement. In general, I totally accept that people have real lives and can't post as much as they may want to, but if they are not posting much because they don't want to play, why are they playing? In this case BB had posted, but that may go some distance to explain my reaction to his admitted lack of interest.

I take your point about the timing and the riskiness of overexposure. Remember that they don't have to prove fake-claims every day that they are alive; ultimately, they just need to remain not the top candidate for lynching, which is a lot easier, especially when you have a non-specific claim to begin with.

[Macavenger]

You are right in that he has not voted. Neither, in fact, have I. I don't see any problem with proposing 2 suspects at once in his post either. For the rest, I would refer you back to post #143. The pressure was building on Hadhfang, and suddenly BB posted with a post that he openly says was intended to draw votes. Does this timing not strike you as suspicious?

Not particularly. One scum trying to get the heat off his buddy but grabbing it himself isn't really accomplishing much. The only way that does any good at all is if hadhfang is a hypothetical scum power role, and berry is not. Scum sacrificing one to protect their powered member is difficult at best and not a very good play most of the time, because usually you're probably just outing one of your members to buy one of them one more night action. Very rarely a good tradeoff.

Netlava, your ability and desire to tunnel three levels below what is probably really there in every posts never ceases to amaze me. I highly doubt that was a breadcrumb. If it was, Battousai is right, having that make CF Riot your top suspect is dumb, and pointing it out is worse. Breadcrumbing is useful to town power roles to back up their claims later every bit as much as scum, and I seriously doubt anyone else would have read that as a crumb. What you're suggesting is effectively that we lynch someone because they claimed at a weird time, only it's worse than that because that's a possible crumb, not a certain claim. You don't even know if it was really a crumb, and if it was, you don't know that it means CF Riot is scum. Do you see how silly this is?

[Mizzy]

Vote Count:

charter 3 (Lord Gurgi, Netlava, Macavenger)
Hadhfang 1 (ShadowGirl)
Lord Gurgi 1 (farside22)
Walnut 1 (Hadhfang)
farside22 1 (Battousai)
Blackberry 1 (charter)

Not Voting:

Blackberry, CF Riot, charter, Walnut

12 alive = 7 to lynch!

Blackberry has been prodded.

[farside22]

Hi I'm back and read what I missed.

@ Mac: I'm not sure whether had is scum. Currently, I think that he is being too complacent for someone who has just claimed, but I'll probably have to wait and see. You seem to be quite eager to believe his role claim.

I didn't see this at all. Mac just says that lynching a claimed cop D1 isn't the best thing at the moment. Also I agree that seeing what Had comes up with during D2 (if around) is a way to get a feel of his claim.
As for BB he is acting funny in a few games I'm in with him. It looks like he may be leaving MS shortly so I think he (a) may need to be replaced and (b) insane as in being weird in RL. Either untill BB is replaced or talks further without being weird can I back a BB lynch at the moment.
I would like to hear from charter who has yet to explain his setting up lynches comment.

unvote:
vote: charter

[Blackberry]

SCUM: Walnut

AND POSSIBLY: Macavenger

I forget why. Replace me though, I don't have enough effort to do these.

Very sorry mod.

[farside22]

I think it's a scummy thing to do and I'm calling you out on it. It doesn't matter who it's directed to. Netlava is still free to answer it, I haven't given my opinion on the matter. I hesitate to say 'loaded question' but your question is very WIFOM with the what do you think should happen tomorrow.

I was actually wondering if you were going to say I was defending him. You didn't quite, but you still didn't answer my questions to you.

I read this as follows:

Hey pot this is kettle.
What is up kettle.
Well I think I know what is up, but you did exactly as I did so what is up with that.
Really? (long pause)
Umm Kettle you think anyone will notice I did this first.
(no answer)

[Mizzy]

Going to look for a replacement for Blackberry, carry on without him for the moment.

[Lord Gurgi]

Farside? Are you drunk or just crazy? Regardless you're right.

[farside22]

Farside? Are you drunk or just crazy? Regardless you're right.

It's charter hypocrisy that just gets to me and the fact that he is just playing like he didn't commint the same act galls my intelligence.

[Lord Gurgi]

My vote has been on him for a while because he keeps doing it.

[Netlava]

Hm BB brings up a good point - I think Macavenger may be scum. I don't have anything concrete against him, but his tone is more passive this time around and he doesn't seem to be quite as resolute with what he's saying.

With CF Riot, I actually found him to be somewhat pro-town overall, even with his fake "breadcrumb" (which is why I didn't vote him yet). The breadcrumb itself can be questioned, though I still think it's a reasonably strong one. However his reaction strikes me a being scummy because his attempt at casting suspicion on set him up perfectly to jump on my bandwagon, if votes were to come my way. It was more of a "I am beginning to indicate my suspicions" post, but he never really comes out and says his suspicions directly.

Charter: Some of his comments are giant question marks, but I think he's town in this game because he seems to believe what he's saying.

Unvote, Vote: CF Riot

Walnut: Not sure about him, prodding inactives is good. But scum often try to get exploit this and get inactives lynched too. Probably a null tell. I couldn't tell if he was trying to get BB lynched or using it as a threat.

Batt: I thought his questions were suspicious because they I thought they were obvious points that I had considered. I also find his interaction with riot strange.

[Macavenger]

Hm BB brings up a good point - I think Macavenger may be scum. I don't have anything concrete against him, but his tone is more passive this time around and he doesn't seem to be quite as resolute with what he's saying.

Could be because you're being less amazingly scummy this game than you were last game.

I actually do think your suspicion of Riot over the "breadcrumb" is rather scummy, but it's so in character with your town play from last game that I don't know what to think of it now.

[Blackberry]

Since I have yet to be replaced.

I just wanted to note that I was correct on my accusations last game. So maybe yall should follow my accusations this game.

Or atleast pressure Walnut and Macavenger !

[charter]

You brought it up. Why? Do you really think the scum will be thinking in those terms?

Yes I did. Obviously or I would have kept it to myself if I didn't think that everyone in this game wouldn't have thought of it too. I think it would be an extremely obvious/easy scum play to let Had live (since most likely the doc would protect him anyway) and then push for his lynch tomorrow if he doesn't hit one of them tonight. I honestly can't believe that everyone else in here didn't come to this exact same conclusion. I know there's a million other things that can happen, but whenever someone claims cop D1, this always goes through everyone's head.

If you now say that I'm further directing people, I'm going to explode. I'm not telling anyone to do anything, just explaining what I assumed obvious and that everyone thought.

[CF Riot]

Ok, I'm going to try and do a break down of Netlava's play so far, because recent posts started to just seem wrong to me. Further investigation has made me feel they are not simply wrong, they are manipulating and scummy.

Post 29: Votes me for my stat. I'll admit to many others having a problem with it. (This post later contradicts post 169, although I can understand it as being so far water-under-the-bridge that this may be a slip instead of a flat out lie.)

Post 46: Misquotes LG's post, adding my name when no reference to me had been made. (First disregarded it as a mistake, now examining it closer.)
Here he switches his vote to Charter for the self contradiction. However no questions are directed to Charter himself.

Post 86: Still accusing me for stat, now adding the grounds of Mac explaining before I explained for myself. Actually good reasoning here, nothing wrong with his approach at my play. Asks questions that apply to other players, but still directed at me.

Post 106:

Well, I think the standard procedure is to leave had alive and watch him closely.

Agrees that Had should be left alive D1. Later contradicted.
Still questioning me, now about other players actions instead of my own. Makes a short comment on Charter voting for BB, but does not question him. (Remember, since post 46 Netlava had been voting Charter, not me. This is the first post since then that he even addresses Charter directly.)

Post 113: Questions my posts about Battousai. Refers to me as Batt's "partner in crime".

Post 115: Still has problems in regards to the way I talk to Batt. Says I am "at the

top

of my(Netlava's) list of suspicion," but his vote is still on Charter at this time.

Post 133: Suggest lynching Hadhfang. Says "worst case scenario is losing an unknown sanity cop, which isn't that bad, is it?" This contradicts post 106. (This is the first post Netlava makes without my name in it since

page 2

.)

Post 144: Comments on Macavenger for being against a Hadhfang lynch.
Comments on me for being against a BB lynch.

Post 147: Introduces breadcrumb theory in response of me being at the top of his list of suspicion.

Post 158: Explanation of why he sees a Doc crumb as more likely scum than doc. Seemed like good logic to me at first, but I now have this question, which I would like you to answer Netlava. If there is no scenario or reason for a REAL doc to ever breadcrumb, why then would that be a tactic a scum would try? It seems like breadcrumbing as a doc must be a legitimate play in order for faking it as scum to also be legit. On top of this, it was NOT a breadcrumb, nor was it intended to appear so.

Post 169: Suspicion for Mac based on play shift from the last game.
Claims to have seen me as protown before this point. (This contradicts post 115.) Reasoning for his suspicion is me starting to indicate my suspicion of him. Although the tone is calm and calculating, this seems like OMGUS to me. Now switches his vote from Charter to me, claiming Charter is town because he appears to believe in his scummy play.
Considers suspicion of Batt based partially on interaction with me.

This brings us to the present. All things considered, I see only two possibilities. Either Netlava is scum trying very hard to make me appear scummy and push my lynch, or he has the worst case of tunnel vision I have ever seen. I see the first as being far more likely.

Vote: Netlava

The length on this post is gigantic, but that's because there is good insight in there. Please don't just skim over it because it is a lot to read. I'm sorry I didn't address any other people's play here but this post took several rereads of the entire game and I've been in the reply box for over an hour now. My list of suspicion at the moment is:

1. Netlava
2. Hadhfang (on hold pending D2 actions)
3. Walnut/BlackBerry

I will give more in depth reasoning for that list when more time permits.

[Lord Gurgi]

Hmm, I really want Netlava to defend himself first. He might be continuing on a suspicion from the last game. (I have suspicions about a number of players doing this) Did he hound you last game?