Mini 611 - Troy, Meet Helen (Game Over)

[Lord Gurgi]

SG, how prepared are you to go with your gut? Would you go to a no lynch at the deadline rather than switch your vote to Tinsley? I put the same question out to LG, CF, Mac, and Walnut. We need to know where we stand.

Never. Ever. No lynch. Ever.

Though I would like Mac to get what he deserves, a short drop and a quick stop.

[Thesp]

Never. Ever. No lynch. Ever.

Strictly speaking, this is wrong. There are a number of easily identifiable situations where no-lynching is the ideal play, as there are some more uncertain situations where it is best. (This is by no means a situation where we should no-lynch, though.)

[Macavenger]

Tinsley what made you decide Charter was more likely scum than Mac? Since Tinsley started the Mac wagon, Mac's decided the likely scum in this game are

everyone voting him

and Walnut. The usefulness of wagons has proven itself.

Nice try. Let's look at the actual facts here, instead of trying to paint what I said to look as scummy as possible. Prior to Fark's claim and the wagon forming on me, I was suspicious of Walnut, LG, <gap>, Fark, Shadowgirl, CF Riot, approximately. I had made arguments against both you and Shadowgirl long before you climbed on my wagon; that you were not in the top three does not mean I no longer found you suspicious.

Fark's claim pretty much cleared him in my view, kicking him off my list, and you and Shadowgirl into something of a tie for third, rather distantly behind LG. After this, my wagon forms, with LG, Tinsley, Riot, Shadowgirl. Hey, 3 of my top four suspects jumped on my wagon. What a surprise that I called it out as scumpowered.

I'm actually less suspicious (at least relatively) of LG after jumping on my wagon. I don't see anything scummy about the way he jumped on my wagon, particularly given that he started it. I'm suspicious of him strictly for his prior play and possible Walnut links.

The really, really shoddy reasoning you used behind moving your vote is what caused me to zero in on you specifically. I can't recall you saying anything serious against me the entire game up to this point, and suddenly when Tinsley posts a small case, you agree with his conclusions and put me as number 1. Or at least, so you say - you don't actually agree with his conclusions. In the post right after you vote me, you say that "Tinsley has given me both a reason to doubt Walnut, and a reason to suspect you." But you're not doubting Walnut - he's still on your list right behind me. This is really fishy, because a big part of Tinsley's case (weak as it is) is based on the idea that I've supposedly been misleading the town into thinking Walnut is scum. You're clearly rejecting this idea, but voting me anyway. Basically, you're making yourself look ridiculous, and scummy.

Shadowgirl's situation is kind of similar, but to a lesser extent - Apparently because of Tinsely's arguments, she moves from not very interested in me as scum, to a top suspect. She does at least seem to be taking all of Tinsley's argument seriously, though.

Mac, look at all the posting between me and Netlava before I voted him. If it was my sinister plan to get him wagoned why would I have waited that long?

WIFOM? Because you thought he'd be lynched without you getting your hands dirty? How should I know?

Secondly, what's all this about hiding my vote on you while Tinsley got lynched? I wasn't one of the people bailing off the Fark wagon. My vote had been on Walnut. So if my goal was to just stay underground while Tinsley took the fall, why would I have switched my vote to you?

Because by this point, the Walnut wagon is clearly going nowhere. See for example what I said about Shadowgirl at the beginning of Day 2, in reference to her vote being uselessly on Battousai. Leaving a vote on Walnut today would look pretty similar. Hopping on my wagon would accomplish a few things. Beyond the obvious of not being tied to a townie lynch (if I'm right about Tinsley), hopping on my wagon would be a good way to avoid that kind of accusation, since it did appear to be traveling. Moreover, if scum were actually able to shift the wagon and get me lynched, that's probably a bonus, considering that getting rid of analytical townies is usually good for scum. Either way, it gives you something to be visible and fight for, rather than just looking like you're lurking out the day trying to avoid being tied to anything.

Mac, he's just... The whole perfect townie thing.

Too Townie
What information would you be expecting to pull from my lynch? Why do you see Tinsley as necessarily linked to LG? What does the "perfect townie" thing have to do with your reason for voting me, since that's been true since long before the case Tinsely presented that appears to have caused you to jump on my wagon?

SG, how prepared are you to go with your gut? Would you go to a no lynch at the deadline rather than switch your vote to Tinsley? I put the same question out to LG, CF, Mac, and Walnut. We need to know where we stand.

This is the part where Mac's face turns all red and stuff.

So it turns out that I normally kind of skim past vote counts, as I have a good memory and generally keep a pretty good handle on who's voting for whom without needing a reminder. As such, at the time of my last post, I was actually unaware that a deadline had been implemented.

Having now seen that there is one, I'm willing to vote for Tinsley at deadline. While I think he's more likely to be town, his wagon doesn't look scumpowered to me, and would be superior to a no lynch.

I still support Walnut or CF Riot, or possibly LG or Shadowgirl as superior alternatives. For the moment

unvote; vote: CF Riot

since I think he's the best chance at an alternative lynch to Tinsley. I won't vote Tinsley until either much closer to deadline, or he's finished saying what he wants to say. I will do so to prevent a no lynch.

[Lord Gurgi]

Never. Ever. No lynch. Ever.

Strictly speaking, this is wrong. There are a number of easily identifiable situations where no-lynching is the ideal play, as there are some more uncertain situations where it is best. (This is by no means a situation where we should no-lynch, though.)

Meh, I think if you get to those situations in forum mafia, you've done a good job of messing up already, why break the streak?

[camn]

thats twice someone has used "Too Townie" to defend Mac.

That is not what we are saying.

It's not that Mac is Too PRO-TOWN... its that he is too PERFECT.

Only Scum know who all the townies are.

Real Townies make mistakes. They OMGUS. They WIFOM. They Lynch innocents.
Mac's "perfect play" was more like . . the opposite of that..

SO keep your wiki to yourself.

c

[Walnut]

SG, how prepared are you to go with your gut? Would you go to a no lynch at the deadline rather than switch your vote to Tinsley? I put the same question out to LG, CF, Mac, and Walnut. We need to know where we stand.

Were you were talking about a vote of "no lynch" as opposed to a tied result at the deadline? In this game the latter is not a problem- see post #44. By default, if no one moves their votes, I believe it is Tinsley at the deadline. I can't see any reason to hurry it, as I am liking the conversations that have come up around Tinsley and Mac being under pressure. I have had suspicions of Mac, and could vote for him, but if I do that now Tinsley would hop on and I suspect someone like Camn (based on her last post) would hammer. So, I am ok with my vote where it is at the moment on Charter.

[Farkshinsoup]

By default, if no one moves their votes, I believe it is Tinsley at the deadline.

Should have gone back to check the rules before I shot my mouth off. Thanks walnut.

6. Deadlines may be implemented if I feel that discussion is lagging. At deadline, the person with the most votes will be lynched. In the case of a tie, the person who was voted for first is lynched.

[Farkshinsoup]

In other news, I like Mac's argument for CF. I'm looking forward to hearing his response.

[Tinsley]

So it turns out that I normally kind of skim past vote counts, as I have a good memory and generally keep a pretty good handle on who's voting for whom without needing a reminder. As such, at the time of my last post, I was actually unaware that a deadline had been implemented.

You weren't the only one to miss the deadline.

Tinsley what do you mean the Mac wagon wasn't going anywhere? He got 4 votes pretty quick. And also, why would you vote me before Walnut?

I have had suspicions of Mac, and could vote for him, but if I do that now Tinsley would hop on and I suspect someone like Camn (based on her last post) would hammer.

Riot - Yes the Mac wagon picked up steam quickly...then stalled while I was sitting there at L-1. I didn't see it happening, so I decided to try charter instead. I'd be willing to lynch you over Walnut, because as I was rereading through Mac and charter's cases, I started to suspect you could be working with them.

Walnut - If you're concerned about me jumping onto the Mac wagon after you vote him, of course I would. I'm not going to let myself be lynched. I appreciate you taking your vote off of me so I could post my thoughts. I'll switch my vote to Mac, and leave it up to you and camn (since it appears the two of you are my only hope).

Unvote: charter

Vote: Macavenger

Still planning on getting to a Riot reread later today.

[Lord Gurgi]

thats twice someone has used "Too Townie" to defend Mac.

That is not what we are saying.

It's not that Mac is Too PRO-TOWN... its that he is too PERFECT.

Only Scum know who all the townies are.

Real Townies make mistakes. They OMGUS. They WIFOM. They Lynch innocents.
Mac's "perfect play" was more like . . the opposite of that..

SO keep your wiki to yourself.

c

It's not like charter hasn't been defended by 'too scum'.

[Thesp]

thats twice someone has used "Too Townie" to defend Mac.

That is not what we are saying.

It's not that Mac is Too PRO-TOWN... its that he is too PERFECT.

Only Scum know who all the townies are.

Real Townies make mistakes. They OMGUS. They WIFOM. They Lynch innocents.
Mac's "perfect play" was more like . . the opposite of that..

Based on this presumption, who would you guess his scum partners are?

[charter]

In other news, I like Mac's argument for CF. I'm looking forward to hearing his response.

I do too.

Still planning on getting to a Riot reread later today.

Please don't quote every post of his. Just quote ones that are scummy and then explain why they are scummy.

It's not like charter hasn't been defended by 'too scum'.

Hey, LG is still breathing. Damn. I see that there's a possible Mac and Fark vote for LG, anyone else? Tinsley?

[Macavenger]

So, since I have remarkably little interest in letting Walnutscum lynch me by hopping aboard my wagon at deadline, self-defense

Unvote; Vote: Tinsley

. More thoughts later today.

[Tinsley]

I was planning on trying to post all of my Riot analysis at once, but since I'm back at L-1, I'm going to post it as I go along. Here's the first 10 pages analysis:

Riot started with the day with the probability of Had getting a scum role two days in a row. Many of his early posts are spent discussing it. It doesn’t need to be discussed further. I think someone mentioned it’s a null tell either way, and probably is.

Post 52 – Generates more discussion of roles by asking about other 3rd party roles besides SK.

Post 64 – More role speculation.

Post 71:

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

Fake breadcrumb or not? I'll get back to this later.

Post 78 – More discussion on his stat.

Post 80:

Wow thanks. I didn't think of protown roles accidentally appearing 3rd party. That makes sense. *standing corrected*

Ok Walnut so far no real vote input from you. Any suspects whatsoever?

More 3rd party role discussion. This is the first time that anyone has called Walnut out for no real input, and yet at this point Riot has called Batt shifty and that’s about it.

Post 99 – Finally he provides an opinion on Had’s vote on charter, 48 hours after it occurred (he made three posts before giving an opinion – after hadhfang reached 5 votes and claimed cop). He claims he interpreted as Had voting charter for bringing up SK speculation and [Riot] is confused because LG clearly brought up SK speculation first. Riot – Why didn’t you ask him to clarify the statement then?

Post 111 – Defends charter in regards to his triple post about the statistic. Also questions why we would lynch BB after charter votes him for his semi-claim.

Post 139 – He’s much more vocal here about not lynching BB after Walnut mentions that he might vote BB if he doesn’t get a replacement.

Post 149 - FOS’s Walnut for his suspicion of BB.

Post 157 – Continues his suspicion of Walnut. Also suspicious of Netlava for suggesting lynching a claimed cop.

Post 173 – After Netlava votes Riot in post 169, Riot does an investigation on Netlava resulting in a vote for him (OMGUS?):

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.)

Riot also made a short comment on charter voting BB, but doesn’t question him either. I know you didn’t have a vote on charter at the time, but you chose not to question charter on voting BB for his claim, but did question Walnut for considering voting BB.

Regarding the “apple comment”:

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.

We’ve now seen a case where a doc did breadcrumb. I don’t know whether your apple comment was just joke, or if it was a possible fake breadcrumb, but Netlava’s case here doesn’t seem so farfetched anymore.

Post 243 - Disappears for a week (to be fair that was 7/1 – 7/8 so I somewhat see why he wasn’t around, but why no V/LA warning?). Calls out Netlava for waiting so long to respond to Riot’s post (already been mentioned by LG and Batt). States that he’s still suspicious of Walnut.

In regards to why Netlava couldn’t be a tunnel-visioned townie:

The just the fact that he has, but the way he has singled me out along with his other actions make me think it's far more likely he is scum.

That’s a little vague. How was the manner in which he singled you out scummy? Also defends Mac in this post.

[CF Riot]

Prior to Fark's claim and the wagon forming on me, I was suspicious of Walnut, LG, <gap>, Fark, Shadowgirl, CF Riot, approximately. I had made arguments against both you and Shadowgirl long before you climbed on my wagon.

Ok, but my point is you don't even mention my name today, and the only "argument" you had against SG is this, but as soon as we end up on your wagon, you're voting me and threatening to vote SG if she picks up some heat. What happened to liking Walnut and LG for today? For some reason, LG who was number 2 on your list and voted you first after hopping off Fark gets no attention. I who was number 4 on your list and wasn't leaving a mislynch wagon get thrown to the top and grab a vote?

I think if you were town you'd try to convince me (and others) why you thought the case against you was weak and go back to pushing Walnut. (Look at what Tinsley is doing for examples.) I think you weren't ready for a wagon like that so you panicked. The only thing that mildly surprises me is that you didn't decide to hammer Tinsley, but it's clear from your previous posts that would be a contradiction and the sudden hammer would have you done for by tomorrow. I see now that it comes down to the wire you

are

voting him. You had to get votes off you quick and I've already said I wouldn't vote LG so my guess is you abandon that and start grasping for straws, and I was the easiest target.

This is what I think, and your quick and broad OMGUSing makes me glad I switched. Just to clear up the rest of your case though, I'll go ahead and comment.

I'm actually less suspicious (at least relatively) of LG after jumping on my wagon. I don't see anything scummy about the way he jumped on my wagon, particularly given that he started it. I'm suspicious of him strictly for his

prior play

and possible Walnut links.

You thought LG was scum all day, so he keeps playing the same way he has been and you become less suspicious. Doesn't make sense. His "prior play" had pointed out suspicion of you, but now when he acts on it he's less scummy?

Suddenly when Tinsley posts a small case, you agree with his conclusions and put me as number 1.

I didn't see it as a "small" case. It used a lot of good logic, and it was coming from someone I held as a very protown player.

You're not doubting Walnut - he's still on your list right behind me. This is really fishy, because a big part of Tinsley's case (weak as it is) is based on the idea that I've supposedly been misleading the town into thinking Walnut is scum. You're clearly rejecting this idea, but voting me anyway.

He has been my number 1 all day and now moved to number 2. That is me doubting Walnut. I didn't say he cleared Walnut, just that he put out some ideas that could prove me wrong. I said I don't think you mislead me, because I had said Walnut is super non-committal part way through D1. That's not to say that you aren't agreeing with this idea to pull support from others or using my ideas to hide your support behind.

Because by this point, the Walnut wagon is clearly going nowhere. See for example what I said about Shadowgirl at the beginning of Day 2, in reference to her vote being uselessly on Battousai. Leaving a vote on Walnut today would look pretty similar.

You are the only one who thought her doing that was suspicious. I highly doubt anyone would think it odd for me to vote for someone I've been pushing all day, and I'm also pretty sure no one sees me as lurking. I think Charter is actually getting tired of how much I post.

This took a while and I've only just now seen Tinsley's post. Give me a bit and I'll respond to that too.

[Mizzy]

Vote Count:

*Tinsley 5 (camn, Thesp, Farkshinsoup, charter, Macavenger)*

Macavenger 4 (Lord Gurgi, CF Riot, ShadowGir, Tinsleyl)
charter 1 (Walnut)

Not Voting:

None.

10 Alive = 6 to lynch!

Deadline: August 23rd at 12 Midnight EST
Bolded person gets killed at deadline.

[CF Riot]

Ok, trying to stay in order. Questions to Tinsley will be marked bold, but don't confuse that as a vote. A lot of the quotes have been shortened for space as you can easily look back at what Tinsley said if you need clarification.

About role speculation, all I can say is I didn't start it. I guess I sort of added to it, but most people did.

Post 71:

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

Fake breadcrumb or not? I'll get back to this later.

I swear to whatever deity you like, I physically ate a real apple at my house that day. That is the one and only reason I ever made that comment.

Post 80: This is the first time that anyone has called Walnut out for no real input, and yet at this point Riot has called Batt shifty and that’s about it.

Tinsley:

Why is this a scum tell and not a town tell? I'm pointing out that Walnut is completely neutral on everyone, which is anti-town.

Post 99: Riot – Why didn’t you ask him to clarify the statement then?

If you reread my response, I said I was confused at first, but Hadh's new post clarified for me, so I didn't need to ask him anything. I didn't see anything wrong with Hadh's vote at first, then when questioned about it I took a closer look at all the context and decided it was strange, but by then he had claimed cop.

Tinsley

: I understand why this would be scummy at the time, but why do you still see it as scummy now that Thesp is nearly cleared?

Posts 111, 139, 149, 157, why all scummy?

Post 173 – After Netlava votes Riot in post 169, Riot does an investigation on Netlava resulting in a vote for him (OMGUS?):

I can see how that could appear OMGUS. However, if you look at what happened before Netlava voted me, he had been on my case all day without voting me, then when I say that this is suspicious, he puts in his vote. I take a closer look,

present a coherent case

, and then decide to place my own. I think given the context, if anyone OMGUS'd, it was Netlava.

Riot also made a short comment on charter voting BB, but doesn’t question him either. I know you didn’t have a vote on charter at the time, but you chose not to question charter on voting BB for his claim, but did question Walnut for considering voting BB.

Valid point. I'll take this as a personal mistake and a true scumtell against me. My reason is I was suspicious of Walnut at the time and not Charter. I should've treated them equally.

Post 243 - Disappears for a week (to be fair that was 7/1 – 7/8 so I somewhat see why he wasn’t around, but why no V/LA warning?).

Sorry. To be fair, I only missed a total of 2.5 pages and didn't ignore any of the activity from those pages. I can't believe I wasn't prodded.

In regards to why Netlava couldn’t be a tunnel-visioned townie:

Not just the fact that he has, but the way he has singled me out along with his other actions make me think it's far more likely he is scum.

That’s a little vague. How was the manner in which he singled you out scummy? Also defends Mac in this post.

I had been pointing out why it was scummy several times up to this point. He leaves his vote on Charter, yet doesn't address 90% of the activity Charter makes. Netlava spends almost all of his effort saying why the things I'm doing are scummy, while hiding his vote on Charter, and then switches

after

I say I've noticed this. At the time it looked like he was trying to raise suspicion about me from others so he could add his vote in the middle and not get the blame for starting the wagon.

[Farkshinsoup]

Mod: Mac is currently voting for Tinsley.

[CF Riot]

It's in my sig but so you all will know, the fall semester starts for me tomorrow so my posting during weekdays will probably slow down from now on. This isn't really a V/LA or anything, because I hope to keep a regular posting schedule. However it may be less frequent than what it had been in the past.

[Mizzy]

Thanks guys, fixed, sorry about that.

[ShadowGirl]

A little late, but:

Having now seen that there is one, I'm willing to vote for Tinsley at deadline. While I think he's more likely to be town, his wagon doesn't look scumpowered to me, and would be superior to a no lynch.

How sure are you that he is town?

I'll get to your other questions once my computer starts working faster then the snail's pace that it's at. Ugh, at least when I had spyware my computer worked fairly fast.

[Walnut]

So, since I have remarkably little interest in letting Walnutscum lynch me by hopping aboard my wagon at deadline, self-defense

Unvote; Vote: Tinsley

. More thoughts later today.

"Walnutscum" is pretty much the last straw for me. Mac has been zeroed in on me for the best part of two days now. I know I am town, so I can safely say that either he is scum or his judgement is poor and his play is hurting the town, so

unvote, vote Macavenger

is a good call.

[Tinsley]

Ok, we're deadlocked at 5 votes apiece here, so let me throw this out there. Is there anyone voting me that would even consider changing their vote to Mac (I'm looking at you camn). If not I'll save everyone a couple days and self hammer, unless anyone has any objections. I'm not sure I'll have the time to finish an analysis on Riot, and frankly, I'm having a hard time staying focused reading through all of those long posts.

I'd post a summary of why I think Mac, charter, and Riot are scum before I drop the hammer. Let me know what you guys think, and we can probably have this excruciatingly drawn out day done within 12 hours.

[charter]

I don't want a self hammer, but I think you're bluffing. Regardless, I don't buy Tinsley's reasoning since he thinks I'm scum.

Thesp, please make your investigation count tonight...

[Tinsley]

What would I have to gain by bluffing? As it stands right now I'll be lynched unless something changes in the next couple days. I can save everyone some time.