Mini 579 - The Plagues of Egypt Mafia - Over

[lord_hur]

If falsely pretending to be a Cop isn't doesn't make you Scum in your eyes, then what the hell would? [Don't bother answering this, it's just that I am astonished by your last post.If you think that the chances of a player who pretends to be a Cop with a guilty result on an innocent player is only 10%, then I want to be Scum in the next game we play together.]

In general, I'd agree. But Guardian basically uncovered himself and didn't even really try to get SlySly lynched. I cannot see scum doing that, but a miller who doesn't care so much about getting lynched, yes. He did globally give this impression when I reread him too. Good job about this (and ultra-terrible play otherwise) if he's scum.

[lord_hur]

Hmm I maybe also came across an interesting thing when rereading Guardian. In post 101 he says this :

'the

other

scum'? explain the use of the word other, please.

He was refering to this :

Could we get a prod on SlySly please?

Unvote: Stoofer
Vote: Guardian

How can SlySly be the other scum when he hasn't posted yet?

Same reference to 2 scums than Mr Stoofer recently. Very strange.

[Mr Stoofer]

I did

not

reference 2 scums. I said this:

I am not confident that I can pick out who

is

his buddy, though.

That sentence does not imply only 2 Scum. (Think about it this way: If I had said "who are his buddies" than would imply 3+ Scum, which is probably why I did not use that form of wording.)

[Mr Stoofer]

EWBOP: Look at my post 434 too.

[lord_hur]

A slip is a slip, no need for it to be consistent.

And you actually noted down that post in case I would raise the point again ? I can't really picture someone rereading themselves for that unless they really felt the menace was real the first time I said it. Seems I've hit something^^

[lord_hur]

That sentence does not imply only 2 Scum. (Think about it this way: If I had said "who are his buddies" than would imply 3+ Scum, which is probably why I did not use that form of wording.)

3 is the logical number for 12 players, so everyone but you and HH always correctly used the plural, because only you two knew from the start that there are only 2 scums. That's my argument.

[stark]

Hey Stoofer, I think you should claim.

I'm also liking LH's argument alot.

[HackerHuck]

My top two are Stark and Stoofer, but I'm doubtful they both are scum. I am also of the belief that Guardian was scum.


Lord_Hur - think about this situation. There are four players left - three are town and you are the final scum. Would you rather have:

Three vanilla (no masons alive)
Two vanilla and one confirmed mason
One vanilla and two masons (they're ultimately confirmed because if they were both scum then the game would be over)

Change it to five remaining - four town + one scum. What happens if you end up with two vanilla and two unconfirmed masons? If a vanilla is lynched, your only choice is to kill a mason otherwise they will join up to vote you out. At that point, the the mason is confirmed so you're left trying to convince the surviving mason that the other townie is the scum. It's obviously better off for scum when no one confirmed is alive at endgame.

[HackerHuck]

Lord_Hur, look at post 102 for my explanation of that comment.

Stark, please look at post 103 for where Guardian hints at being a cop or other investigative role.

and yeah, slysly is a hunch. or something.

[stark]

"A hunch or something" is quite a stretch, IMO. Is that it?

[Mr Stoofer]

Err... what are you on stark? Are you saying that Guardian wasn't pretending to be a Cop?

[stark]

Maybe I'm not as observant as you all, but was that singular comment the basis of the "Guardian is pretending to be cop" theory?

[HackerHuck]

Stark, you've been playing the game long enough to have seen cops pull that kind of comment on more than one occaision. I'm not saying I was convinced at the time, but it was definitely a possiblity that ran through my mind.

[stark]

Ok, I can buy it then.

I guess what I'm thinking more along the lines of was that Guardian wasn't scum, but rather really badly playing miller.

[lord_hur]

Lord_Hur, look at post 102 for my explanation of that comment.

Of course I read it, and no I don't find it satisfactory. You said "the other scum", which can only refer to the number of scums in the game, and not to the number of suspects.

Unless your wording was really really off. You didn't say "You can't also suspect Slysly because...".

No. You said "THE other scum". It cannot be any more clear.

[HackerHuck]

Lord_Hur, look at post 102 for my explanation of that comment.

Of course I read it, and no I don't find it satisfactory. You said "the other scum", which can only refer to the number of scums in the game, and not to the number of suspects.

Unless your wording was really really off. You didn't say "You can't also suspect Slysly because...".

No. You said "THE other scum". It cannot be any more clear.

Well sure it could be more clear. It's not as if I said THE

only

other scum. If you look at the context of that discussion, Guardian mentions two suspects. When referring to two people, it's common in English to use "one and the other". Would it have been clearer had I appended the word "suspect" to the end of my statement?

Basically your argument boils down to the fact that you believe Guardian is really town and Mr Stoofer and I would be the two scum. How is it that you know there are really only two scum? That would imply that you have some knowledge that Guardian is certainly town.

[Mr Stoofer]

stark: please read post 322. There was a lot more to Guardian's pretence than just post 103.

[stark]

Ah, ok, that was straightfoward.

[stark]

DOUBLEPOST:


Hey Mod, can we have some prods on hascow and SM?

[hasdgfas]

Hey Stoofer, I think you should claim.

I'm also liking LH's argument alot.

I'm curious, stark, as to why you thought a claim would be a good idea in this situation, when stoofer was still doing things to defend himself.

[stark]

Well, he is at -2.

And I think he's scum.

[lord_hur]

Also, I think it is probably safe now to say that if both Mr Stoofer and HackerHuck were innocent, we would have already lost the game.

HackerHuck earned a good 15% extra scum rating in my eyes, with that vote. Very risky for town to do, but of course, not at all for scum.

[lord_hur]

And that's not even taking into account the fact that his vote post does not even show one hint of a reason.

[lord_hur]

Though I must add that I still think Mr Stoofer is more scummy than HH, if I had to choose between the two.

[SeraphicMirth]

On very quick rereads, my general feel is Stoofer could be scum. While he says he has contributed the most - his major contribution being that he outed Guardian as a not-cop, and we have no proof whether Guardian was scum or not. Yes, it's likely that scum would lie about being a cop but I could see a person who is not sure how to play their role (of miller I guess) doing the same thing. Anyway, it just seems interesting that you cling to this so much when we have no proof that Guardian is scum - something which I think the scum likely have control over (the masking of identities, that is.) The point isn't whether you pointed out scum or not but that you are using this particular case which happens to have a convoluted ending as your shining shield of defense.


The other contribution was the mess that was the Musher lynch. While I understand it takes more than one person to lynch, I think that Stoofer contributed a lot to that. I think that I presented that piece about Musher's defense well and that it almost proved Musher wasn't scum. I think Stoofer is smart and would clearly be able to see the logic behind that and support it. He unvotes, sure, but leaves it up to everyone else about the lynch

Unofficial Votecount

Musher333 - 3 (hasdgfas, HackerHuck, Singing Librarian)
lord_hur - 3 (SeraphicMirth, strife220, Mr Stoofer)
HackerHuck - 2 (lord_hur, springlullaby)

Not voting

: Musher333

This means that if the deadline hits, no-one will be lynched; but strife220 has promised to vote for Musher (or just unvote) to ensure that that does no happen.

I think this kind of tells of a confidence that those on the musher wagon will stay (maybe some scumbuddies up in there) and that things would fall so that strife would have to stick to his promise, thusly lynching Musher without getting scum involved in a hammer.

I'd place a vote but this is my last chance with access until Monday, and I'd hate to leave it at -1 like that. So, I'll see how things are on Monday but don't wait on me either.

I have recently asked to be replaced, FYI, but since I haven't been yet, I will contribute as I can.