Mini 659: The Neighborhood- Game over on Day 6

[Rashiminos]

We have a claim already? Scum!!!

Vote: iamausername

[Rashiminos]

^Darox's first vote shift above.

Apparently I forgot as well.

##Vote: iamausername

[Rashiminos]

Non random vote

##Vote: Rashiminos

I see what you did there.


I'm not exactly inclined to believe iamausername's claim at the moment since it appears to be lacking a certain flavor. Maybe he could remedy that.

[Rashiminos]

Looking to make an in-depth post later today or tomorrow, but I have a couple of brief comments.

iamausername replied with his role name as anticipated and I'm willing to accept the claim for now as a I have seen a couple of things from other players I wanted a closer look at. So I will unvote iamausername.

1)

Darox - In post 9, you subtley changed your vote to Username but provided no specific reasons for doing so. Was this on the basis of his claim? If so, why was the claim voteworthy? Oh, same goes for Rashiminos, though your post had less subtlety involved.

Maybe I'm misreading the question, but it appears that you're implying I changed my intended vote when I didn't. My initial vote was on iamausername, and I saw no reason to change it when gorckat reminded us the votes were not official. I would like to hear why Darox changed his vote then, and also why he said that his recent vote on me was non-random, yet he failed to present the reason for doing so.

[Rashiminos]

EBWOP:

##Unvote: iamausername

[Rashiminos]

Yargh... not a good day with the voting format.

@Elias

The lack of role name made iamausername worth looking at as compared to making another random vote. Most people still had yet to post.

EBWOP:

##Unvote: iamausername

[Rashiminos]

@Rash: You mentioned that you wanted to look at a couple of other players, but you never said who or why. Who? Why?

Perhaps if you had been reading closely you would have noticed this:

Looking to make an in-depth post later today or tomorrow, but I have a couple of brief comments.

I didn't propose names at the time because I wanted to double-check my notes with more recent activity, and I didn't have the time to do so for that post.

I'm currently looking at 4 people for several reasons.

Darox has delayed explaining the reasons for vote-changes until later posts. The first time (random vote phase) seemed innocuous, but he repeated this pattern in post 34.

crywolf20084 suggested the cop out himself or herself after testing sanity on iamausername. Her FoS in post 50 on Tony seems just as lousy to me as it did to Tony.

##unvote, vote tony

. His post is all over the map. He's trying to sow the seeds of doubt without having to take responsibility himself.

Yay for vague, unsubstantiated attacks.

I agree with Lowell, but not enough to put a third vote on your head yet.

All you seem to be doing is talking.

FOS Tony

Lowell said he believed in iamausername's claim 100% percent, which seems to be an unreasonable lack of doubt at this point. In post 47 he tries to convince more people to believe the claim, and suggests multiple scumgroups as a possible reason to believe the claim. Speculation on unknowns seems scummy IMO.

In addition:

There are so many people I want dead.

There's also Ythill...

@wolf: If I thought it was pro-town to discuss option (c) I would have done so. Why are you nudging me to reveal more information?

As crywolf brought up, Ythill mentioned there was a third possibility related to iamausername's claim. The possible implication in this quote that "option c" is not pro-town and Ythill stonewalling on the matter deserve more attention. Perhaps a vote will loosen his stiff lips.

So,

FoS: Lowell
##Vote: Ythill

[Rashiminos]

Ermm.. didn't Elias mean two millers in post 78?

[Rashiminos]

I don't get around the thread for awhile, and when I do, large posts come out.

@Tony- without looking back, IIRC your post in response to user's miller claim was something like "Well, I personally am inclined to agree. But everyone should make up his or her mind. If anyone wants to

VOTE

for

IAMAUSERNAME

I wouldn't be opposed to that

VOTE

on

IAMAUSERNAME

, even though I, personally, would never dream of

VOTE

ing for

IAMAUSERNAME

."

@all- as for my post about wanting a lot of people dead, let me explain. I said that because I want a lot of people dead. Not

everyone

, mind you, just... you know.... most people. All the scum, and some of the more useless townsfolk. Just me and maybe one or two others remaining. Is Britney Spears (circa 1999) in this game? She can stay.

Well, I guess it's kinda redundant, whether we imagine he was investigated or not.
We really just have to decide for ourself if we believe user is a miller. Personally, I think he is, but it's a sticky situation, seeing as there's no way to confirm it other than a lynch. Or, heaven forbid, someone counter-claims.

Truth be told, this is the first game I've heard of the role, had to look up the wiki to find out what a miller was, so I don't know how usual the role is. The more frequent milllers appear in games, the less likely it would be for user to be a scum. (ie, doesnt have much risk of a counterclaim)

Nonetheless, I think claiming initially was a good move, if for nothing else than to kick-start the game.

The flavor seemed plausible as well..

Here is the post. It's dumber than I remember. He suggests, at various times: lynching, counterclaiming, fake-claiming, metagaming, flavor-testing.

This post reeks of tony trying to bait someone else into opposing the claim.

You have utterly misrepresented post 46. Let me review what I think Tony said there:

A roles is found out when someone dies (in this case because of a lynch)
A second miller claim, as had been worked above, would seem unlikely, so if there was a counter-claim, we'd be most likely lynching one of the "millers." If iamausername is scum, he would be fake-claiming.

If you missed it, several other people have been involved in the metagame discussion of claiming miller day 1.

I asked about the role flavor since I thought that if iamausername was scum, he had a chance to screw up his claim by doing it wrong.

TM's post was a summary of the points discussed until TM's post on page 2 to which he added his opinion. Your attempt to twist it into a baiting trap is not well-founded.

What do you think the rest of the town sees from your actions thus far? Why do you suggest we lynch unhelpful townies?

In my opinion, you haven't been helpful. I've been leaning to the explanation that it's because you're scum since the post defending iamausername's claim with craplogic.

***

Onto other matters (I'm going through the posts in order).

Add to them the fact that wolf calls position changing a scumtell in #96 while she's doing it herself, as well as arguing that an FoS is not "pushing the wagon".

@wolf: If quickly changing stances is a known scumtell, why would you do it as town?

Mind telling me which part of 96 you think she calls a change of stance a scumtell?

##unvote, ##vote crywolf

. Bandwagoning. I don't think we'll get much of a read out of her unless she feels the pressure.

Bandwagonning on the other popular lynch candidate on the premise of getting a read when other people have cited crywolf's suggestion of the cop outting himself/herself and misrepresentations makes Lowell seem scummier to me.

May I ask if you (Lowell) suspect anyone else at the present?

@Tommy's94- iamausername claimed miller becuase he thought it was the right thing to do. When asked for flavor, he gave some. Generally speaking, those who at this point are STILL clamoring for more flavor are not doing the town any favors. More flavor only makes things easier for scum should they decide to fake-claim in the future. The way TM casually brought that up, implying he wanted to draw more out of the claim, is NOT pro-town.

For the record, who are you accusing of asking for more flavor after iamausername claimed Piano Teacher?

##Vote: Lowell

Haven't liked his play at the start and this attack on tony is starting to look more and more of a stretch.

I'm not a big fan of posts appearing to change in meaning unless you can provide some outside support for such an assertion.

IGMEOY: Darox

===========================

Alright, Ythill has still not talked about what "option c" is in relation to the iamausername claim. The rest of the players seem content with focusing on this wolf/lowell situation, and while some players seem a little fishy in their particular reasons for joining the voting lists, by-and-large I agree that one of wolf/Lowell is scum.

Furthermore, I think only one of the pair is scum, and the other would like the village idiot defense to come in and save them from taking responsibility for his/her posts. It usually doesn't make a whole lot of sense to me that the top two lynch candidates are both scum when the scum are given ample opportunity to not stick their necks out and also to bus associates suspected by the town, which may or may not be occurring by the present votes.

Lowell seems bent on asserting iamausername's claim to the rest of us, and then asserting Tony's reasonable doubt is baiting us into a trap. Lowell, if town, would seem to be deluding himself into trusting iamausername too much. If Lowell is scum, than he can be confident in his knowledge about iamausername, ie 100%.

I'm not liking the reasons on the wolf wagon (bandwagonning, the FoS on Tony, Ythill's voting before getting an answer to whether stance-change is a scumtell) with the exception of bionicchop's accusation of rolefishing.

My vote on Ythill was to get him to talk about "option C."

We can return to this at a later time.

##Unvote: Ythill
##Vote: Lowell

[Rashiminos]

@Rash: Thank you for dropping (c) until later. I will offer full disclosure when it is no longer harmful to the town.

Mind telling me which part of 96 you think she calls a change of stance a scumtell?

In looking it up, I have realized that "calls" is maybe a bit too much. She certainly eludes to it, suggesting (IMO) that she thinks it is. Which means the same thing in the context of my accusation. Anyway, here's the quote...

I perticually don't like this post, and you were also quick to defend Tony in post 90 as well, but in post 68 (sorry none of these are linked) you told Tony to shut the hell up. Why the change in heart?

I think crywolf should clarify why she asked Tommy about the "change in heart" even though it seems evident that her reason for doing so was a misunderstanding of what "QFT" meant.

You probably mean "allude" as opposed to "elude." Eluding is something criminals try to do when running from the police.

***

Side comment: Not all acronyms need to have profanity in them.

[Rashiminos]

My vote is still fine where it is in that it is on the person I find to be scummier.

My village idiot comment still holds...

[Rashiminos]

EBWOP: As long as I'm here, might as well suggest that Lowell should claim.

[Rashiminos]

##unvote

this wagon went way to fast for my liking, and lowell hasnt even got around to answering my initial questions. Lets just slow it down a bit, and look more carefully at everyone voting lowell.

Well he doesn't seem to be willing to respond to lots of things, but we're in no rush to lynch, lots of daylight left...

Well, it seems Lowell has decided not to talk and it also seems wolf is just content to vote the other guy. Do you have any suggestions for conversation to bring up?

Since Elias suggested we look at people voting Lowell, maybe he could go first.

[Rashiminos]

What do you think the rest of the town sees from your actions thus far? Why do you suggest we lynch unhelpful townies?

May I ask if you (Lowell) suspect anyone else at the present?

@Tommy's94- iamausername claimed miller becuase he thought it was the right thing to do. When asked for flavor, he gave some. Generally speaking, those who at this point are STILL clamoring for more flavor are not doing the town any favors. More flavor only makes things easier for scum should they decide to fake-claim in the future. The way TM casually brought that up, implying he wanted to draw more out of the claim, is NOT pro-town.

For the record, who are you accusing of asking for more flavor after iamausername claimed Piano Teacher?

These would be the 4 questions of mine you haven't answered, I'll look for more soon.

...by-and-large I agree that one of wolf/Lowell is scum.

Furthermore, I think only one of the pair is scum...

I don't like this line of thinking. Though I agree that it's unlikely both are scum, you've failed to consider that they could both be town. And if they are, what I've quoted above would be a smooth move from the real mafia.

Nothing to hang you over, but certainly worth noting.

I'm still more comfortable with wolf than Lowell but I'd rather have more than two choices before we lynch.

Just because I didn't mention it, it doesn't mean that I didn't consider it. Looking the other way and rewarding their bad play by overly casting doubt on legitimate suspicions is not what I'm about. Sorry if it seems harsh, but I was serious when I asked for a claim.

As for other people to look at, what do you feel makes the reasons for voting crywolf stronger than the reasons for voting Lowell?

##Vote: Lowell

Haven't liked his play at the start and this attack on tony is starting to look more and more of a stretch.

I'm not a big fan of posts appearing to change in meaning unless you can provide some outside support for such an assertion.

IGMEOY: Darox

Que?

"Appearing to change in meaning"?

It seemed that you said the attack was more of a stretch

now

, which would imply that you initially didn't see it as much of a stretch earlier, despite the attack remaining the same postwise.

Am I missing something?

[Rashiminos]

Questions Elias asked Lowell

Why you should believe iamausername's claim:

1) WIFOM notwithstanding, it's too risky for a scum to make this claim on PAGE 1

I don't see why. What makes it so risky? Isn't this claim more believable day 1 then any other time, thus making day 1 the only plausible time to make the claim as scum?

Why are you so blatantly exaggerating points and misrepresenting tony?

[Rashiminos]

Judging from the volume of games Lowell has played/replaced in and a sample of posts I'd say his somewhat erratic posting style is not really indicative of alignment here.

[Rashiminos]

However, from the standpoint of you as scum, adherence to this belief sets up two mislynches in a row. Do you understand what I found suspicious about your play there?

Perhaps I misworded what I posted earlier.

Anyways, my opinion on Lowell is that he's trying to manipulate opinions on iamausername by insisting that we should also believe iamausername is actually a miller. I assume a townie would be more hesitant in this situation due to a lack of role knowledge, but Lowell says he likes to not deal in shades of gray, or in my words, he deals in extremes. Then he makes a case on Tony because Tony is expressing doubt on the idea that iamausername is what he claims. For not going along with Lowell's insistence that iamausername is indeed a miller, Tony gets voted and Lowell makes his arguments on Tony's post. Perhaps this is a bit biased from my perspective, but I think Lowell is trying to manipulate the game in a certain direction which would tend to be advantageous for Lowell as scum regardless of iamausername's alignment, but with no real advantage if Lowell is a townie.

After having been disagreed with over his assessment of Tony's post, he openly bandwagons crywolf to "get a read" (instead of voting after getting a read), and then he voted me after I asked him to claim when he was at L-1. His lack of faith in his Tony case and his lack of quality scumhunting afterwards doesn't strike me as pro-town. Combined with the above, I'm heavily leaning towards the idea he is anti-town.

@Ythill's 165

I find those assessments to be generally reasonable. I'm going to check back in the thread for consistency at a later time.

2. Policy lynch on page 8. I knew you were a rash player but... wow.

You might have to take that back later.

I'm feeling some synergy coming from the one with bat wings...

Other Notes

I agree with post 157.

The poor behavior is not being defended, simply the poor behavior is not a scum tell. Being a bad townie is never a scum tell.

Sometimes it's hard to tell the difference, which is why it's poor behavior.

Oh, I just had an Idea: Mafia, I'm on your team now, feel free to PM me your names and we can all be friends. I swear. Maybe I'll PM you a place to meet and I'll come alone and not with the whole town ready to lynch you.

My quote miners are logging this for later.

Post 177 makes my neck hairs tingle.

Darox's remark in 178 referring to Lowell rolefishing is accurate (Lowell 1, Lowell 4).

5. L-1 Claim or die Lowell.

Fourthed (or was it Firsted?)

[Rashiminos]

@crywolf 193 you should probably ask for a replacement if you haven't already (provided your condition precludes access to the thread)

Get well soon.

[Rashiminos]

Going through the thread and making some notes in order...

iamausername's post 197 had some good questions.

Ythill quotes something as if it had been typed by bionic, but was actually posted by iamausername. Probably a mistake, but I'll note it for future reference.

Darox needs to use clearer language to reduce these misunderstandings that provide legitimate reasons for why his posts are "misrepresented."

iamausername argues that lynching someone for anti-town behavior is not what we should be doing. Instead we should be lynching scum. I want to know what iamausername thinks the difference is in these two categories of lynch reasons.

Why should I have unvoted him?

Because when someone is at L-1, they are in imminent danger of being hammered. If you see that the person you are voting for is at L-1 and choose not to unvote, and then someone hammers, you are directly responsible for that lynch as much as the guy who placed the hammer vote. And if you're as uncertain about Lowell's alignment as you say, I wouldn't think you'd want to be in that position. Did the speed that the wagon on Lowell grew not give you any cause for concern?

As part of the "Lowell sould claim or die crowd," I disagree with this statement. L-1 and hammer are two different things. If iamausername thinks the speed of the wagon was a problem, then perhaps he should examine the reasons for voting Lowell and comment on how substantial they are in his opinion.

I find this phrasing interesting. Town are looking out for people who are actually acting scummy. Scum are looking out for townies who are making themselves look scummy.

---

You seem to believe that these two qualities don't overlap. Isn't it possible that someone "looks scummy" BECAUSE they are "acting scummy?"

How do you determine someone is actually acting?

[Rashiminos]

iamausername argues that lynching someone for anti-town behavior is not what we should be doing. Instead we should be lynching scum. I want to know what iamausername thinks the difference is in these two categories of lynch reasons.

I think you'll find I was actually arguing that we shouldn't be lynching someone because their play style is anti-town, which seemed to be what Darox was suggesting.

Okay, so now tell me what you think the difference between behavior and playstyle is in these circumstances.

If iamausername thinks the speed of the wagon was a problem, then perhaps he should examine the reasons for voting Lowell and comment on how substantial they are in his opinion.

Fairly certain I've already done this.

It would you seem to me that you have not. If you did, you need to do a better job. I request you give a thorough account of your opinions for the votes on Lowell starting with post 85, whether or not those votes are still in effect.

You seem to believe that these two qualities don't overlap. Isn't it possible that someone "looks scummy" BECAUSE they are "acting scummy?"

You're missing half the quote. It's the fact that he said "

making themselves

look scummy" that stuck out to me. That just doesn't seem like a town-minded wording; it sounds more like he's trying to find someone to pin some guilt on rather than honestly trying to find scum.

I'm curious... What's your reasoning/rationale for suggesting that a townie would not phrase someone's "scumminess" in that manner?

[Rashiminos]

EBWOP: Lowell has refused to claim. I support a hammering.

[Rashiminos]

Correction: Lowell has been at L-1 twice. The first time was when crywolf voted him, and then later Elias unvoted so that Oman was able to put him at L-1 again.

I sense a lot of people jumping wagons lately. My quote miners will be noting this.


I'm not currently understanding how the Darox votes based on his wanting to lynch Lowell for anti-town behavior (as Darox said, "neutral" between either obv scum or VI) necessarily implies Darox is trying to get a townie lynched. I'd like additional explanation on how Daroxtown would avoid this reasoning for voting Lowell, and how it benefits Daroxscum in terms of getting a mislynch while appearing to be legitimately scumhunting.

fhqwhgads vote is understandable, as someone "didn't know" where the Lowell vote count was, and tried to join in the unvoting festivities.

2 crywolf voters have defected to the Darox wagon: iamausername, Ythill

1 Lowell voter has defected: fhqwhgads

Does this mean anything?

Another note: 8 players have voted for Lowell throughout today, and instead of having him lynched, we currently have some people unvoting to "avoid the hammer."

Those players are: Tommy, Darox, Rashiminos, Oman, TonyMontana, Elias, crywolf, and fhqwhgads

I'm sensing some fishiness from the unvote brigade...

You skirt. No-one hammers these days cause they're too afraid to. Just like you're afraid of the hammer.

Pfft, well I ain't never scared to hammer. -.- Besides, I've seen the "woops, he was on L-1?" one too many times.

Yep, perfectly hammerphobic here.

[Rashiminos]

Asking for a claim while unvoting is barking without the threat of a bite.

[Rashiminos]

##unvote; ##vote:Lowell

My vote on Darox was obviously because I miscounted (still, IGMEOY). Lowell's not interested in playing along, and we're not getting anything more out of him while he's still alive.

I suggest we lynch.

I don't see where you miscounting has a bearing on your reason for voting Darox.

Here's your reason:

Woah! You keep on arguing about why you haven't retracted your vote, and now you try to slip under the radar and remove it quietly?

What difference does the number of votes on Lowell make?

IGMEOY

[Rashiminos]

A quick post at lunch today.

Rashiminos

voted Lowell in #131, placing him at five votes. This came at the end of a very long post, which is about half about Lowell. A lot of detail, but it's still kind of parroting Elias/Tommy, and I don't think this is a strong enough reason for Lowell to go from one vote to five in the space of a single page.

In what ways am I parroting Elias/Tommy, in your opinion?

That thorough enough for you?

That's a lot better, thank you. Now tell me who you think is the scum leading the wagon? Then tell me what you think this says about Lowell's alignment?

I don't think I could give any better explanation for this than I already have. Town are looking out for people who are actually acting scummy. Scum are looking out for townies who are making themselves look scummy.

Let me ask you a related question, how do you distinguish "acting scummy" from "making oneself look scummy"? (If I'm repeating myself, just type the post in which you answered this question).

2 crywolf voters have defected to the Darox wagon: iamausername, Ythill

1 Lowell voter has defected: fhqwhgads

Does this mean anything?

Well, in my case, it means I decided that Darox seemed more likely scum than crywolf. What do you think it means?

For some reason it seems important, I'm just not sure what that reason is at the moment. I was wondering if anyone else had something that might provide a clue.

[Rashiminos]

In what ways am I parroting Elias/Tommy, in your opinion?

Well, in the sense that your original reasoning for voting Lowell was much the same as theirs; you felt that he was misrepresenting Tony. You might have gone into more detail as to exactly which points were misrepresentation, but the base argument remains the same.

Perhaps you ought to read a little more carefully. My reason for voting Lowell in post 131 references a FoS in post 70.

Post 70:

Lowell said he believed in iamausername's claim 100% percent, which seems to be an unreasonable lack of doubt at this point. In post 47 he tries to convince more people to believe the claim, and suggests multiple scumgroups as a possible reason to believe the claim. Speculation on unknowns seems scummy IMO.

Post 131:

Lowell seems bent on asserting iamausername's claim to the rest of us, and then asserting Tony's reasonable doubt is baiting us into a trap. Lowell, if town, would seem to be deluding himself into trusting iamausername too much. If Lowell is scum, than he can be confident in his knowledge about iamausername, ie 100%.

[Rashiminos]

EBWOP: Something else came to mind right after I posted.

Let me ask you a related question, how do you distinguish "acting scummy" from "making oneself look scummy"? (If I'm repeating myself, just type the post in which you answered this question).

I think it's very difficult; that's why towns frequently mislynch. The point is that I think Darox's wording was an unconscious slip, because he's not looking at it from a town point of view.

Seems a bit of a stretch here. On the one hand you're assuming that townies can make themselves look scummy with the suggestion that hypothetical Daroxscum would take advantage of such townies. If this is the case, then we have this idea of townies who do "scummy" things, and probably do so unintentionally. In this case, how can we rule out hypothetical Daroxtown making himself look "scummy?" How can we get past this circular logic going on here?

Furthermore, on what basis would you give a "scummy-looking" townie a pass when it just might let a scum get away from some bad play?

[Rashiminos]

Overall I'm liking the general amount of :goodposting: that's going on, and only have one small addition before I start going over my notes again and piecing some things together.

It seems like you're still completely missing the point of why I found Darox's wording scummy, because these questions are very tangential to the original point, but I don't know how else I can explain it.

Let me help you by giving you somewhere to start... Why can't a town-aligned player say something equivalent to "that player is making himself/herself look scummy" and have it mean "acting scummy?"

[Rashiminos]

Responding to the prod in thread.

I still feel it's Lowell that needs to be lynched today.

I'm getting a townie feeling from iamausername due to his openness in answering my questions, although I disagree with his argument.

Ythill and fhq are looking scummy to me. One for his lines of questioning, and the other for bizarre voting patterns.

More on this in an upcoming post (setting a mental deadline of Wednesday morning, which will be the best time for me).

[Rashiminos]

EBWOP: Unless someone saw a claim I didn't, HAMMER!© this guy.

[Rashiminos]

Since Lowell has been hammered, I'm going to hold off on that post until day 2 starts so that I might work with or drop the connections info that I have.

[Rashiminos]

As Ythill has already answered my most eminent question and Lowell has come up town, I've had to throw out some notes and start over. Since there were few people who did not vote Lowell at some point yesterday, I'll think I will plan to look at them in an exercise to see how my attention to detail is functioning (and make improvements on the scumdar).

[Rashiminos]

I'll also want to hear more people's reactions to the lynch and NK actions before disclosing more.

When you made this comment, I thought you might actually be providing us with some information. You haven't done anything of the sort.

Usually discussion of the nightkill is too WIFOMy to be of any real use. Reactions along the lines of thinking some of the Lowell voters are scum while probably correct are often misleading since townies are mixed in the wagon.

I'm penciling in some time for a better post tonight.

I'm interesting in hearing if someone has a special comment on the failed attempt to make Darox the lynch yesterday, or on the "unvote to avoid hammer" theme of yesterday.

[Rashiminos]

Posting in response to the prod.

The former was being mildly evasive and now is simply annoyed with the nitpicking. The latter is the one who is stonewalling. Let's make this very simple...

You're calling someone out for stonewalling?

I remember yesterday and option C.

##Vote: Ythill

[Rashiminos]

Where? I think you just now made the idea up.
I was questioning why Rash felt the need to announce in twilight that he would "hold off on that post until day 2 starts so that I might work with or drop the connections info that I have." The promise of this post was EBWOP'ed with a call for a hammer.

I managed to convince myself that Lowell was scum at that point and hoping the info I had collected would lead to a scumpartner should Lowell have been groupscum. Lowell's actual role made most of that info useless.

@ Tommy

For being hypocritical about another player's withholding of information when he did it yesterday. Different context (wifom on user's role, vote reasons), but the idea is generally the same.

[Rashiminos]

@Ythill

I thought some of the points about lack of originality were good, but I don't recall anything that was outright plagiarism. If you have a quote that you think epitomizes this quality of her play in this game, I'd like to see you present it.

Some of the other points have possible outside-the-game explanations.

[Rashiminos]

@Rash: After wolf responds, I'd like you to share your outside-the-game explanations for the points I touched on in my conclusion (2 smoking guns and wolf's list).

Fair enough.

Let's look at your conclusion:

Conclusions

This is just what wolf has done as an individual. When I spoke of her earlier, I also mentioned a few things that others had done that implicated her. Together, these two types of information make her the obvious choice for today’s lynch.

In retrospect, I believe that her own actions are enough to hang her on. Particularly damning are the smoking guns I pointed out, the rarity of original opinions from her, and her mysterious list which probably doesn’t even exist. I am, of course, willing to entertain defenses but, from where I’m at right now, I doubt wolf will manage to clear herself.

Note that I am not advocating an immediate lynch. We have lots more info to gather. However, expect me to be pressuring her from here on out and, unless she somehow manages to clear herself IMO, expect me to be voting her when the day ends.

It's a bit wordy, but I think I can find your points:

-She has been implicated by the actions of

others

.
-She has exhibited several types of scumtells (according to Ythill).
-Smoking guns: lack of originality, mystery list
-We have a deadline, no reason to rush, since "we can get more info"
-Pressure her!

You cited wolf's list as a smoking gun, so they are the same here. People have time constraints which may limit their postings. Long, thorough posts are hard to schedule. As I said before, I agree (to some extent) with the lack of originality point, and I don't think that has as credible a RL reason to occur.

I have a question: How do the actions of

other

players with unknown alignment have a bearing on whether crywolf is scum?

Meanwhile... why is "outright plagiarism" scummier than standard aping? What I find suspicious about her copy-cat play is that she bases her stances on the existence of outside support rather than evidence or her own opinions about what is scummy play. I don't think the tell requires robot-like posting.

It's not robot-like when it happens. The defining characteristics are a separation of credit from the original user of the argument, and perhaps a change of target. Bonus points if it's from the same set of posts as the original. When it's just a matter of agreeing with others, it's something we all do to some extent. Plagiarism is scummier because it is taking an argument instead of making one, and using it in a different context (ie not the original one). Aping is a tendency towards weak play and needs some other substance to make it scummy.

Another question: The way you phrased "outside support rather than evidence" suggests to me that the support itself is not evidence in your opinion. What are you saying about the "outside support?"

Aha! So I'm not the only one that has noticed that. There has been several instences where you, Tommy have been either quick to defend, or quick to answer for Tony, and it hasn't been just recent. I have been keeping track of that for quiet some time now.

In this instance, wolf claims to have been tracking a behavior for some time but didn't say anything about it until someone else brought it up. In this case she may have been waiting for town support or, more likely, felt the need to pretend fore-knowledge when bionic brought up a possible link between two of her stated suspects.

Sort of WIFOMy. I don't have time to make all of my points, and I tend to try to use my better ones. Lesser things may go noticed but not commented on. I suppose something similar here. Your argument is not necessarily wrong, but it has no basis to assume scumminess, or exclude the above.

I find this phrasing interesting. Town are looking out for people who are actually acting scummy. Scum are looking out for townies who are making themselves look scummy.

I highly agree with this.

...and then, in the same post...

iamausername argues that lynching someone for anti-town behavior is not what we should be doing. Instead we should be lynching scum. I want to know what iamausername thinks the difference is in these two categories of lynch reasons.

I saw that too, but when I saw you posted it i didn't feel like quoteing it myself.

I do want to know what the difference. Yes sometimes town does give off scum vibes, but are those not the vibes you should follow to make sure that, ehem, you get the scum????

Here we have wolf citing agreement with two sides of an argument. On the surface, this suggests that she is waiting to lean whichever way the argument goes. However, having looked at a couple of points that suggest a relationship between she and Darox, this

could

be her way of discrediting his attacker while appearing to side with him. Either way, it is telling.

Note that in the last quote wolf again claims to have seen something previously but has refrained from talking about it.

This a much better quote to use. She contradicts herself by agreeing with both sides of the argument. If she highly agreed with iamausername, then she should have had her own answer to my question aimed at iamausername. Her equivocation is a sign of backpedaling, which is scummy for the reasons you presented in addition to the "changing my opinion to suit the town" scumtell. Townies tend to avoid contradicting themselves, and townie mistakes are separate from scum vibes.


In the light of that last quote, I'm going to reconsider my vote for now.

##Unvote: Ythill

[Rashiminos]

Stopping in to say hello and to commit myself to make a post later tonight before I go bed.

[Rashiminos]

I had a feeling something like that was going to happen with the case on crywolf, a darned-good feeling. Sigh...

I blame myself. I wasn't here enough to stop unholy "scumhunting" directions.

Anyways, I'm not too intent on lynching the claimed doc today. My vote will not be there at deadline.

[Rashiminos]

I'm not liking m4yhem's initial posting. It smacks of joining some popular wagons (wolf, darox) and misses the fact that Lowell was lynched yesterday, which should explain where Lowell was on players' suspicion poles..

Did I? The two smoking guns I remember were (1) wolf saying she's comfortable with her OMGUS vote on Lowell and (2) wolf re-voting Lowell for the same tells she'd cleared him for with her meta read. These are the two I was refering to in my conclusion.

You didn't mention those clearly in your conclusion. Instead, you mentioned this:

Particularly damning are the smoking guns I pointed out, the rarity of original opinions from her, and her mysterious list which probably doesn’t even exist.

Make your crucial points more clear. Not all of us have the time to it takes to thoroughly check your entire post and notice some important points lost in the wall of text.

How do the actions of

other

players with unknown alignment have a bearing on whether crywolf is scum?

I'll just point you to the last paragraph of #407 where I explained this in a little more detail. If you have further questions I will answer them.

I do:

How did players (who found wolf to be somewhat scummy) that joined the Lowell wagon make wolf look scummier?
How does wolf (while having her actions downplayed) having been an alternative to Lowell make wolf look scummier?
How did "suspicious" players choosing to lynch Lowell over wolf make wolf look scummier?

Furthermore,

possible

townie motivation for an action is just as assumptive as

possible

scummy motivation. The difference here is that the sheer number of serious tells suggests that scummy motivation is more likley.

Assuming both possibilities keeps the bigger picture in mind. Your "sheer number" of "scum" tells suggests your criteria isn't strong enough. Some of the scumtells you proposed assume scumminess to 'prove' the validity of the tell. Your "smoking gun" of OMGUS is explained by a common newbie mistake. I'm not aware of sufficient meta to suppose differently.

PS: more to come in a little bit...

[Rashiminos]

Don't much like Rash but don't have any cocrete reasons why; I'll pay attention to him from now on.

I'd venture to guess my day 2 absenteeism that you no doubt will be stumbling upon soon will not help that.

*Furthermore:

I'm going to take into consideration that you found your previous incarnation to be highly suspect.

Usually discussion of the nightkill is too WIFOMy to be of any real use. Reactions along the lines of thinking some of the Lowell voters are scum while probably correct are often misleading since townies are mixed in the wagon.

I find this unhelpful.
Some of his reasons are also wrong- ‘justifying the nightkill’ for example, seems false; trying to work out why someone was killed is a helpful thing to do, because it can point us to possible suspects.

You just jumped straight to my FoS list with this set of comments.

Speculation on the nightkill is nigh universally WIFOM, simply because scum will play mind games with the people that think that way.

FoS:m4yhem

I had a feeling something like that was going to happen with the case on crywolf, a darned-good feeling. Sigh...

Please expand on this.

crywolf has been giving off newbie tells all game (hello OMGUS, lack of explanations, etc). It's part of the reason I didn't vote her during day 1. The none-too-subtle call to the cop and tells mentioned by other players have also occurred. The doc claim is more believable to me at the moment.

Let's Lynch Darox. It's not like it's out of nowhere, he was nearly lynched yesterday and for good reason. He's only gotten scummier since then. If everyone who reads the thread votes for Darox, we could get him strung up by deadline.

Except you're here bandwagonning in a hurry off a claimed doc to another popular candidate. I smell a rat.

How many of you were born and raised in the Neighborhood?

Of course... Someone's rolefishing...

[Rashiminos]

All of these actions have the possibility of ulterior motives from anyone who knew Lowell was town and wolf is scum. We know that a few players did know wolf's alignment and Lowell's in those instances. Therefore it seems supsicious to me that so many individuals treated her that way. Some were certainly mistaken townies. Some were most likely coniving scum.

Reality check: The only people who knew on day 1 that Lowell was town and knew wolf's alignment were the scum. If anything, you should be hunting those people, should you be able to prove who actually knew. I take it that since you're not taking the opportunity to scumhunt where you "know"

suspicious

players are, you're not interested in finding the scum. If you're town, bad move. If you're scum, congrats. You've just re-earned my vote.

It's hard to tell who was who without a card flip, but the general suggestion seems to be that wolf is scum.

The general suggestion is that wolf is a lynch target, but of course you're assuming that since she was a popular choice, she must have been scum to not have been lynched yesterday.

There's a simpler explanation: Many of the people who voted Lowell yesterday thought he was scummier than crywolf. They did not know his role, else he would not have been lynched. If some of them were scum, they know both roles, but that doesn't necessarily mean wolf is scum. They could also be trying to set up another mislynch. There are credible reasons for both sides of the wolf's alignment argument, which means the argument must also justify why one possibility is more likely than other. The justification you have provided is insufficient.

Your "sheer number" of "scum" tells suggests your criteria isn't strong enough.

You want certain proof that just isn't possible in the game of mafia. When someone makes a few moves that seem scummy, I'm a lot more willing to buy the explanations. When they have a convenient townie reasoning for 100 different things that seem like scum behavior to me? Those excuses start to wear thin.

At least one of the tells you listed is not a scum tell. I'd be willing to guess that out of those "100" things, 95 or more are null-tells that you've decided to read one way and found things that weren't there. Meanwhile, you use the actions of "suspicious" players to justify your vote. Who is suspicious? Why is that person suspicious? Why is that person not suspicious enough to vote on?

Not that wolf has raised such excuses. You're the only one defending her.

No, your argument is wrong. Benefit of the doubt is enough to discount the validity of most of your scumtells.

How many of you were born and raised in the Neighborhood?

Of course... Someone's rolefishing...

Whatever. If bionic is right that all townies are from the Neighborhood, then my question puts the scum in a tough spot. If they tell the truth, they risk being easily identified after we lynch one of them. If they lie, wolf is suddenly obvscum. It's a win-win for town...

if

bionic is right.

I think it's a great question. And I wonder why you avoided it rather than answering it.

You're asking for a semi-massclaim assuming scum can't fake their way through. If we were to actually accept your suggestion, the scum's night job would be a lot easier. I'm against giving the scum unnecessary information. If wolf is scum, the other scum (should they exist) will not out themselves to save her. If wolf is town, the scum pretending to be from the Neighborhood may get her mislynched. (Better yet, the scum might actually be from the Neighborhood as well, gogo setup speculation)

The second case obviously helps the scum, but let's look at the first case. Everyone would have to provide some justification-a little flavor, to actually make a good case that s/he was from "the Neighborhood." To err on the side of caution, I assume this would be enough information to hint at a role. If claiming to be "from the Neighborhood" trades one scum for the cheat sheet on the town, it would be worth it to the scum.

The town only benefits if wolf is scum, and loses a power role if wolf is lynched as doc.

This is scummy. For suggesting it, you are likely to be scum.

##Vote: Ythill

[Rashiminos]

I am hunting where I see the

most

suspicious player. Doubting my accuracy is no good reason to vote me.

The other players make crywolf look like X tell points to the other players, not crywolf.

So let me get this straight. I am scummy for thinking that wolf is scum even though I've stated a reasonable case against her. Yet everyone is forgiven for mislynching Lowell because they thought he was scummier even though some of their cases were extremely empty? You make no sense, Rash.

I've not been direct enough I see. Your unreasonable case is CRAP, just like those empty cases you mentioned.

THAT'S NOT THE BIGGEST REASON WHY YOU ARE SCUMMY THOUGH. It's this scummy plan about asking who's from "The Neighborhood."

The OMGUS is not a smoking gun because it's a newbie mistake, not a scumtell. Your other smoking gun has some merit, but have you some other bad arguments, such as the interactions of other players voting wolf/not wolf. The originality argument is weak at the moment.

There are plenty of reasons I think wolf is the play, but I see that you have cherrypicked a couple and now say that they invalidate the whole case. What's your motive?

I chose the examine the ones you chose to make significant analysis of in your conclusion. Don't like it? Make a better conclusion.

The justification you have provided is insufficient.

So don't vote wolf. Obviously, all of the people attacking cannot be not scum, so some must have been convinced either by my arguments or her own actions. Sufficiency is a matter of function.

Consensus on who is scummy does not make all of your arguments valid by default.

Meanwhile, you use the actions of "suspicious" players to justify your vote. Who is suspicious? Why is that person suspicious? Why is that person not suspicious enough to vote on?

Go back and read for yourself. A lot if the "actions of others" I cited were pointed out by me and others as they happened. I'll be more specific when I am attacking them. Like I said, I'm voting who I find

most

suspicious.

Sure. Your lack of cooperation is duly noted.

Benefit of the doubt is enough to discount the validity of most of your scumtells.

Benefit of the doubt only stretches so far. That's what I was saying.

I didn't have to stretch it.

If wolf is scum, the other scum (should they exist) will not out themselves to save her.

Precicely why this plan will work to confirm or deny her role.

Nope, it just gets a player who claimed lynched, and then gorckat can confirm the role for us. Naturally if wolf comes up doc at that point, you'd be my policy lynch.

If wolf is town, the scum pretending to be from the Neighborhood may get her mislynched.

It would be a pretty serious coincidence if wolf was the only townie from outside the Neighborhood. And bionic has now made

two

reasonable arguments for townies being locals. I think that it's a reasonable risk.

It's a normal mini, the room for the mod to screw with your head is tight. Duly noting the setup speculation as well. We have a person who claimed to not be from town, that is all.

Everyone would have to provide some justification-a little flavor, to actually make a good case that s/he was from "the Neighborhood."

Absolutely false. With simple yes/no answers, we have all the info we need. I would hope that people would not give more info.

Fine, everyone answers yes. It's now just an exercise whose only point is to get wolf lynched. If someone else says they're not from town, you're a still my vote.

The town only benefits if wolf is scum, and loses a power role if wolf is lynched as doc.

That's a big if. This method has a reasonable chance of clearing her if she is the doc. Of course you could just keep stalling and making silly arguments so that it does no good at all.

I'm trying to wait at least one night before I decide to lynch a claimed power role. What are you and bionic up to?

This is scummy. For suggesting it, you are likely to be scum.

That's one (flawed) explanation. Where's that benefit of the doubt you claim to love so much?

See the last couple of paragraphs in my previous post. I've already discussed how this plan suits scum much better than it suits the town.

[Rashiminos]

That's L-1 if I'm not mistaken. Any inclination to claim now, Darox?

Wolf never unvoted from the other convenient wagon she hopped on in her haste to lynch anybody who wasn't her without actually making an effort to scum hunt. Oh the glories of claiming a power role and the immunity from being held to townie standards.

It's more of an injunction, really...

[Rashiminos]

Also, do you really think the fact she claims doc should make no difference to my read on Crywolf?

It probably does.

I'm not sure what you mean about Lowell, clarify.

You made a comment about fhq's voting yesterday that seemed out of place.

***

I am trying to lynch who I think is scum instead of blindly believing a claim.

It's a matter of letting the scum decide whether the doc should be killed if she is doc. If she survives to the next day, that would be somewhat more convincing of scumminess. What's the point in having someone claim if the result won't affect the vote?

***

I think he's being unfairly stiched up.

I'll be looking for an explanation of this when you get around to it.

***

@Rash: Seriously dude, what's with the smokescreen? You don't seem scummy to me, and I thought your initial questions about my case on wolf were fair enough, but is this argument really helping the town one day from deadline?

The other options being proposed are the Darox/Tony disputes, and I'm not feeling that some of the leapers from the wolf wagon have last minute scumkilling in mind.

You think wolf is telling the truth?

Could be, worth one night.

You think I'm scummy for trying to figure out whether she's being honest or not?

You're not figuring anything out. At best your exercise is pointless. Most likely it is scummy.

I'm trying to wait at least one night before I decide to lynch a claimed power role. What are you and bionic up to?

Your tacit suggestion is that I'm trying to lynch a claimed power role. Note that 99% of my attacks against wolf came pre-claim. Note that it was me who asked her to claim while we still had time. Note that, after her claim, in #638, I posted my thoughts about the claim which were pretty reasonable, and I sought more information.

Your support of the neighborhood question was post-claim. The insinuation is that since townies are likely from the neighborhood, the scum are not. The likely result of people answering the question is that crywolf is singled out again, and demonized some more. If this exercise serves a purpose, IT IS TO LYNCH A CLAIMED POWER ROLE.

Now, for the last two days, I've been arguing about how a case against the claimed-doc is valid instead of looking for the best alternative lynch. Why? Because I've been defending against your attacks on that case. So if I'm endangering the claimed-doc then so are you.

The general case may be valid. I've said, repeatedly, that your case is not. There's a difference. I'm not endangering crywolf because I am neither voting her, nor am I asking everyone a question about his or her role.


//////////////////////////

I'm currently reading my literature on Darox and Tony. Leaning on Tony at the moment, but I may change my mind.

[Rashiminos]

Hmm..., Darox is terse, but I'm simply baffled at how many people missed Darox's focus on Tony "defending the scumkill" in his questioning of Tony. Obviously, this is part of his case.

Tony has made a potent mix of evasiveness (as noticed by Darox and Oman), discrediting his attacker, and resorting to to ad hominem. His basic answer to Darox's questions was "Darox is obvscum."

I'll go back and find some choice quotes, but I know which one of them I'm going to vote since there's not enough momentum in the Ythill direction.

##Unvote: Ythill

##Vote: TonyMontana

[Rashiminos]

Tony:

I still feel like his initial vote was a little suspect. The unvote @ L-1 + revote @ L-2 was null. However, what I find most suspicious afterwards was the way Tony stopped looking at other people. His posts after that vote were all defense or side-comment until the end-of-day IGMEO Oman. This while serious discussion about the Lowell lynch was taking place.

@Tony: Why did you stop hunting?

How do you know whether I'm "looking at other people"? I'm just not the instigator type..

Dodged the question.

Vote Count

(6 to lynch)

TonyMontana:

Darox

Not voting (9):

Elias, Rashiminos, Oman, TonyMontana, crywolf, bionic, Tommy, Ythill, fhqwhgads

There is something wrong with this picture.

I'll give you a hint.
There are exactly 9 things wrong with this picture.

Dude, if you got something to say, say it. Insinuating that you have some kind of special knowledge is not gonna make everyone follow you blindly, and it's a scummy trait, so you're not doing yourself any favours.

Darox is referring to the lack of votes. Tony throws suspicion on Darox for no good reason.

Tommy, Darox is explaining his vote on lowell, instead of explaining the more relevant, reasonless vote on me.

Darox was asked to explain his vote on Lowell by Tommy in post 443.

[Rashiminos]

Can you please explain to me what prompted you to defend the mafia nightkill choice?

Uhh.. the discussion that was going on about the nightkill.

Merely states there was NK discussion. Does not mention why Tony is involved, or what Tony hopes to do as a result of the discussion.

For instance, Tony could have tried to provide justification that Darox wanted user dead, but Tony just says there was discussion.

Why are you continuing to defend the mafia nightkill choice? Why do you feel the need to justify the decision?

Again, we were discussing the nightkills, and I was providing viewpoints on possible motives. And what does "defending" NK even mean? Defending to who?

Begs these questions: Why is it productive to discuss motives for the NK? Who had the motive to commit the NK?

Defending the scum is obviously what Darox meant by "defending the nightkill."

How does your answer link up to what the question is asking? Why did you feel compelled to give a weaselly non-answer to Ythill's questioning?
(Incidentally, Ythill, why did you call him out for his slippery answers the first time but not the second time?)

It linked up, and Ythill understood the context, and I don't believe it went over your head either, so bring some real inquiries please.

Ad hominem and discrediting Darox.

Where did I insinuate that I had special knowledge? Why are you seemingly trying to pull a claim from me here?
(In case anyone couldn't figure it out, I was complaining that no one was voting period, not that no one was voting for Tony.)

You vote for me, saying nothing else than "This vote has reasons"
Several people go "whatever" and ask you to bring forth reasons if you got em.
You say nothing, then make the votecount comment, which could not have been interpreted as anything else than a wish for people to follow your lead.
After several requests for an explanation, you now attempt to construct some arguments against me, and is still not adressing the question.

Ockham's Razor: Vote count comment was to entice people to vote, not necessarily for Tony. Lack of votes = lull in game. Darox's arguments referred to pre-vote information.

[Rashiminos]

If everyone else is from the Neighborhood, it singles her out because it suggests heavily that she is lying about her flavor. If this excercise serves a purpose, it is to lynch a fake-claiming mafioso.

Wake up call: Just because

you

and

bionic

think that aspect of crywolf's claim is inconsistent with the townie flavors in the game, doesn't mean it is true. Stop deluding yourself in believing unproven speculation about the setup.

How can you

know

that she is likely to be singled out and still believe she is telling the truth?

I'm guessing scum would answer yes just to be safe. What's worse is that there may be some other town role that's not from the Neighborhood should happen to say "no" as well. I don't necessarily believe she's telling the truth. I think it's proper strategy to wait through ONE night for a CLAIMED power role when it's not lylo.


Last words of the night:

I do not equate claimed power roles to being proven power roles.

I'm simply baffled at how many people missed Darox's focus on Tony "defending the scumkill" in his questioning of Tony.

How do you know they missed it? I, for one, found it to be a reach. Lots of us were talking about the NK, stating some reasons why it could have been the choice isn't defending it.[/quote] It's part of Darox's argument, not mine. I know they missed it because they keep asking Darox what his reasons are.

[Rashiminos]

I'm simply baffled at how many people missed Darox's focus on Tony "defending the scumkill" in his questioning of Tony.

How do you know they missed it? I, for one, found it to be a reach. Lots of us were talking about the NK, stating some reasons why it could have been the choice isn't defending it.

It's part of Darox's argument, not mine. I know they missed it because they keep asking Darox what his reasons are.

EBWOP: fixed quote.

[Rashiminos]

It seems that we have a vigilante, or perhaps a serial killer.

[Rashiminos]

At least we won't have another nonsense case on Darox today.

[Rashiminos]

This one's for Pooky:

Sell: Oman, bionic

Hold: fhqwhgads, m4yhem

Buy: Ythill, TonyMontana, crywolf

[Rashiminos]

I protected Rash again. I felt that his day play in D2 was even better than it was on D1.

I don't find this to be credible. Anyone paying attention to the prods and my day 2 commentary knew there was a period that I was out of touch with the game. Since there were 2 deaths, neither of which practiced medicine, I'm leaning with cynicism that someone is a quack.\

As for my sell, hold, buy lists... you should be able to figure out what's going on. If not, start re-reading the game thread posthaste, and go slower this time.

[Rashiminos]

EBWOP: Waiting on someone's commentary before making my mind up on the popcorn...

[Rashiminos]

My reasons for massclaim are out weighing those against, so pop the corn.

@fhq

Four days ago in my re-reading I found the case on Darox to be fundamentally bankrupt. I did not drop the hammer because the arguments were awful.

[Rashiminos]

Does this make Ythill more town or scum in anyones eyes?

Probably somewhat scummier, it's a relation among PEG (dead pro-town), Ythill, and a lynch target yesterday. It's more of a knee-jerk reaction than something I credit.

[Rashiminos]

How are they assumptive?

I haven't heard why.

[Rashiminos]

You certainly have. I've explained my reasoning in each case except this last one. I didn't actually use the word "assumptive" because it's obvious that a tell is assumptive when both town and scum motivations exist for an action and you stick to the scummier possibility.

You can't borrow from my play book without knowing how to execute it. As for when both sets of motivations exist, you must provide explanation for why one set is more likely than the other, especially with additional evidence. Questioning you is fruitless. Perhaps some analysis in a later post when I have time.

Let's take, for instance, my call for a partial-flavor claim yesterday. I think it was a damn good idea. I still think it's a good idea and will certainly consider the info after our popcorn. You think it was likely to bring us to a false conclusion while providing too much info to the scum. Our disagreement is a difference in our views of theory and strategy.

Our disagreement is over the premise with which you called for the partial flavor claim yesterday. It is flawed because it's metagaming the mod. Flawed premises lead to bad logic.

You did this even though a number of people seemed to see things my way and nobody explicitly agreed with your view.

Tony told you to drop it in post 654.

You know, maybe you're right about the play itself. I don't think so. But, no matter who is right, the disagreement says nothing about my alignment. It only seems to because of your own assumptions.

The "not from town" flavor to scum relation is not proven. Basing a lynch on it is risky business. There is far more reliable material out there. Disagree at your peril.

Does that answer your question or do I need to touch on more examples?

Feel free to continue trying to discredit me and failing to answer my questions.

Does this make Ythill more town or scum in anyones eyes?

Probably somewhat scummier, it's a relation among PEG (dead pro-town), Ythill, and a lynch target yesterday. It's more of a knee-jerk reaction than something I credit.

I had the same reaction.

I can't seem scummier due to Tommy selecting me as his mason buddy, because that was his choice.

I don't recall suggesting that.

]If anything, it demonstrates that he probably thought I was town.

He

thought

being the operative words. Probably so...

I can't seem scummier from what Tommy and Peg said to me, because those were their thoughts. It's pro-town to share all information that will not hurt the town, so me sharing what I know can't be scummy.

Those were their thoughts according to

you

. I've been intrigued by your peculiar notion of mentioning the existence of town-hurting info that you choose not to share. It's an odd phrasing, but so be it.

Rash even said I was suspicious for playing something close to my chest earlier. So I am scummy for keeping secrets and scummy for not keeping secrets?

I did suspect you for withholding information. The fact that you decided to reveal the messages from Tommy/PEG have nothing to do with my knee-jerk reaction on it. The important words to note are "dead" and "lynch target." Infer properly please.

You have no reason to believe that I lied about being Tommy's choice, because nobody else has claimed that he picked them. You have no reason to believe that I am lying about what they said. I mean, look back at their actions: it's pretty obvious that I was sharing their actual opinions.

I don't have a reason to believe you are not Tommy's choice, nor did I suggest that I did. You could be lying about the contents of the notes, but not necessarily. What's obvious to you is not necessarily so obvious to others.

So what about this says anything about my alignment? Nothing.

The above imagined arguments against you were neither stated nor implied by me.

Hell, the only reason I even brought up the info is because I thought a deeper understanding of the setup might assist y'all in separating the truth from the bullshit once the claims are out.

It may be. We had a miller and a neighbor. There's a confirmed second killer, and possibly a doc. Who knows what may be unearthed underneath the kernels?

***

Crywolf, bring the Orville Redenbacher

[Rashiminos]

I must provide no such thing. It is not a defendant's place to argue liklihood. I can only explain what I have actually done and why I have done it. As persecutor, it is your place to convince others that your theories are more plausible than my explanations.

I have. As I have also been repeatedly saying, you had not (with your arguments against crywolf).

But when I say that your suspicions are assumptive, I am not speaking only of your arguments, but also of the perceptions they are based on.

When I saw you ask for "who's not from town," I saw a couple of possibilities:

A) Someone else is not from town. It is possible here that a scum would not out himself/herself when someone is making the case that "not from town" means scum. So this additional person is possibly town, which invalidates your argument that the original "not from town" person is more likely to be scum.

B) No one else is not from town. Crywolf's flavor is unique as far as we know. Still does not answer the scum/doc question. It just makes a convenient excuse for you to push the "she's a fakeclaiming liar" under the guise that you think you know what the setup is..

In case B, the result is a wash so far. In case A, there's some additional information revealed about someone else's role. A plausible alternative hypothesis, at the time your proposed the question, was that "not from town" could be linked to power roles in general. Case A could lead to scum getting damaging information and hurting the town. Thus, asking who's "not from town" is scummy overall.

Our disagreement is over the premise with which you called for the partial flavor claim yesterday. It is flawed because it's metagaming the mod.

It is more an exercise in human nature and statistics than metagaming. We have a few possible scenarios. The least likely, I believe, is that we have stumbled upon and voted to claim the one player who is from out of town, who just happens to be the doc. Was the claim plan 100% sure-fire? No. But the lilihood of getting a unanimous "I'm from town" and still mislynching the doc was small enough to be worth the risk.

It's a sign that you WIFOMed yourself into believing something about the setup which is not necessarily true. Crywolf not being from town does not imply she is more likely to be scum than doc. As long as you continue holding this point, you'll still be at the top of my list, Ytscum.

I don't see how these words explain your reaction. A dead townie said to me that the guy he was voting for was his prefered target. I didn't make him suspect Tony, I didn't make him tell me, I didn't make it up. I don't even agree with him. How does any of this reflect on my alignment?

PEG talks to

you

about Tony, and winds up dead. I said there's a relation among PEG, you, and Tony. It's not a reasoned argument as much as a gut feeling.

What's obvious to you is not necessarily so obvious to others

Which is why I suggested rereading. We know Peg was town and we all can see who he voted at the end of the day, so I think it's pretty obvious that he suspected Tony. Like I said, my main reason for bringing this whole subject up was to give the info about Peg's role. Sharing what I'd learned at night was simply full disclosure.

Imagine for a moment that the rest of us think you could be either scum or town. Is there a way a possible scum Ythill could still repeat this info, or just make stuff up? I think so. Does this sharing of info mean Ythill is scum, not necessarily.

The above imagined arguments against you were neither stated nor implied by me.

I never intended to suggest that they were. What I meant to do was to answer the two-player "knee-jerk" with a broad argument since no specific accusation was made. I wasn't going to address it at all until it was QFTed.

I'm not sure what your defending against phantom arguments signifies, but I suggest you have some re-reading of the game to do.

[Rashiminos]

EBWOP:

I have the salt and butter, but no popcorn.

[Rashiminos]

I'm the Crossing Guard. I've been keeping ungrateful kids from meeting high-speed cars as long as I can remember.

In my spare time I also contribute my responsible voting skills to the community (vanilla).

Next up is Tony.

[Rashiminos]

EBWOP:

@ m4yhem

any word on what Elias decided to do night 1?

[Rashiminos]

crywolf: big city doc
m4yhem: florist/vig
Rashiminos: crossing guard / vanilla

next up to claim: tony

left to claim:oman, bionic, ythill, fhqwhgads

[Rashiminos]

Ice Cream Man, tracker. I didn't understand the flavor until right now. Apparantly, I'm a little obsessive about what the kids do with my ice cream, so I follow them to make sure they don't leave it in the freezer.

Next up:

Oman

Who did you track and why?

[Rashiminos]

Can we wait until later to do targets we may out something we don't need to.

I would rather not wait, obviously.

Strikes on Oman and Tony for obstructing justice.

[Rashiminos]

Revealed special roles: Miller, Neighbor
Claimed special roles: Doctor, Vigilante, Tracker, Watcher
Vanilla count: 2 dead + 4 claimed

6 and 6, hmmm...

Seems special heavy to me...

Special people I think are particularly scummy: Tony for reasons I mentioned yesterday, Crywolf for still being alive and failing to protect one of two players who were killed last night, and Oman for various cop-hinting transgressions that I will soon detail:

On day 1 Oman repeated several times the idea that the presence of a miller tends to suggest a cop when it had already been said well in advance of his replacing into the game.

On day 2, Oman defends Ythill without much substance, and adamantly states Darox is town:

Can I quickly state that I doubt Ythill to be scum right now.

Can I again ask you to expand?

He's acting as I would expect town to and not how I would expect scum to. He's prolly town.

Daroxclaim is not a good idea because daroxscum does not exist.

Guess whose drunk!>!>!

Darox is totally town, dropt his shit.

Also, Crywolf totally has scumtraits, but could be town. He seems to be stumbling more than leading the town in bad directions, so I'll put him down to porkens.

These tweo wagons are bogus.

In addition, Oman was hesitant to reveal his target until after the popcorn, which fits the "I don't want to screw up my claim" aspect involved in mass-claiming. Of course, I tend to believe pro-town players are not so hesitant.

Alternatively special people I think are scummy: Ythill (duh)

I have no compunction against lynching a claimed power role today as opposed to yesterday.

A) We have possible lylo.
B) After massclaiming it stands to give us more information than lynching a vanilla.
C) I have more suspects that are not claimed vanillas than are claimed vanillas.

All that's left is to doublecheck my reasons to believe bionic and fhq are not so scummy (forthright discussion such as consistently answering questions and making unprovoked analysis on the part of the former, lack of direction on the part of the latter), and to decide who gained the most (as scum) from not hammering yesterday.

[Rashiminos]

EBWOP: As long as we're speculating about how the 4 remaining roles fit together, I'd add that with a second killer taking things into his own hands, a doc can also make sense. WIFOM, naturally.

[Rashiminos]

After a little consideration of post 838 (by fhq), I've changed my mind somewhat on whether or not we should lynch 'nilla today.

Gaming the claims would go like this:

doc protects vig, watcher watches vig, tracker tracks doc, and if the vig shoots at all, then the vig shoots vanilla claims...

-If the vig dies, lynch crywolf

-If the tracker and watcher have inconsistent information, choose one of them to lynch

-if more than one power role dies, lynch the vig

If you think this makes good sense, say so...

If not, explain why...


If we decide to follow this, I'd be more interested in lynching a vanilla today.

[Rashiminos]

These people have not voted for anybody or given any suspicions for today's lynch:

M4yhem
fhqwhgads
Rashiminos
Tony
Oman

Have a gander at post 809.


@Tony

Could I get a summary of your reasons for voting bionic (or the #'s of posts I should look at)?


Since there does not seem to be a particularly strong objection to the proposed night activities, I'm going to

##Vote: Ythill

[Rashiminos]

I think if m4yhem was not being replaced, I would be a more likely target from looking at post 721, but it looks like we'll have a different vigilante

[Rashiminos]

Is it just me, or has trust in the vig claim dropped somewhat since the telling of the one-shot aspect was delayed?

[Rashiminos]

Since we can't seem to get aboard a vanilla wagon, follow through with a no-lynch, or count on one-shot vigs saying they are one-shot vigs, I'm going to revive my other vote from yesterday.

##Unvote: Ythill
##Vote: TonyMontana

[Rashiminos]

crywolf seems to be following my vote around...

[Rashiminos]

Link/quote them to refresh my memory...

[Rashiminos]

Interesting...

Now I shall propose something new:

Lynching wolfscum.

crywolf's vote in 803 follows bionic's vote in 799, along with tacit acceptance of the lynch "vanilla" idea.

There's still that same hard to believe "I protected Rash twice" stuff. Scarce mention of bionic or Ythill, and a

vague

reference to some thing in fhq's previous two posts (what? why?)

Vote on Tony is a little better, but then there's post 878, with more vague remarks about fhq's sketchiness (how? why?)

Then out of nowhere, she votes Ythill (conveniently after I did). Ythill is just another "vanilla," after all.

Oh wait, Rash voted Tony. Quick Quick, vote change!

I agree.

##Unvote: TonyMontana
##Vote: crywolf20084

[Rashiminos]

I kNOw ExacTly wHat you mEaN. Got It?

[Rashiminos]

I point this out because I found his vote for wolf and doing such as voting for 'wolfscum' after not voting for her any other day. I just find it odd because her patterns today match her patterns every other day - even the day she was forced to claim (Rash was not a part of that wagon). Now all of a sudden when the game is on the line he feels confident enough to vote her?

Crywolf claimed yesterday, and she is still among us, hence the presence in the buy (scum) portion of my list earlier today. Yes, I feel confident about it now, as opposed to yesterday, when I wasn't.

[Rashiminos]

I've got the feeling my life means one of two things: wrong about suspects, or prime lynchee...

[Rashiminos]

EBWOP:


Proven:
Miller, Neighbor, Tracker

Likely Scum:
3

"Power" - roles remaining:
3

Town power roles to scum "power" roles ratio:

? : ?

[Rashiminos]

Does anyone who thinks DR is scum have some ideas for who his scumpartners are and why?

[Rashiminos]

Does anyone who thinks DR is scum have some ideas for who his scumpartners are and why?

This question raises my hackles a little bit. Would you mind explaining why you asked?

Surely you have players in mind that you'd be comfortable voting with and others you want to DIAF. Having put some thought into this might help be more sure about your vote.

From the looks of it, any scum that is lurking is counting on the same general apathy that has plagued us the last two days and win it from 2 days ago. Contemplating vote between Ythill and Dead (lol) Rikimaru along the line of reasoning contributed in post 1086 by fhq.

[Rashiminos]

Oh wait, this is obvious. Ythill unvoted in LYLO.

You can either join me, or work on getting the other guy with one less player.

Confirm
##Vote: Ythill

[Rashiminos]

Some unexpected work came along between yesterday and today, and I don't anticipate being able to manage to catch up and post before late tonight/tomorrow.

[Rashiminos]

I'm asking why you want to know people's theories on potential DR-scum connections, not why I should have already considered it.

The way things have been going, it doesn't seem like we're going to have anyone but DR lynched today, so I'm wondering who's being an opportunist and who has a more informed and developed opinion. Your vote-switching looks like the former.

I've got the feeling my life means one of two things: wrong about suspects, or prime lynchee...

Yet nobody has pushed you and here you are pursuing your same suspects. What changed your mind about this? What does your "life mean" now?

And then someone made a vote in LYLO which didn't quickly lead to a loss. At that point it became a matter of deciding between the voter and the votee. LYLO is not the time for pressure votes (vote to lynch instead). You unvoting seems overly bold for your prior stance of trying "not to hurt the town." If crywolf voting with you is a problem, then you weren't sure enough of your vote, and had no business making it (finger of suspicion exists for a reason).

Oh wait, this is obvious. Ythill unvoted in LYLO.

Ythill removed a pressure vote when wolf-scum followed him onto the wagon. What difference does LYLO make in this scenario? Explain how I would benefit from my action as scum.

First part is answered above. Second part should be obvious.

Here are some questions for you. Do you believe there is a mafia RB? If so, why? If not, can you explain how it is that Tony died?

I'm seriously questioning my town read on you. For days now you have been ignoring and pooh-poohing evidence against obv-wolf while pushing suspicion on me (her primary attacker) and DR (her counterclaim). I've been chalking this up to tunnel-vision but, as the evidence mounts, I am starting to wonder.

Um, no. There has not been any indication of a roleblocking ability this game, let alone one working towards scummy ends. I imagine our special claims would have made more noise in that case. Tony's death is a matter of two things: Scum chose to kill him, crywolf chose to protect

elias

(with bionic as a runner-up choice and Tony way back in 3rd or worse).

Many of the attacks on crywolf have been scummy, and have cast legitimate doubt between the two parties for me. As for ignoring the case against her, you forgot that I voted her yesterday and we decided to not lynch (again) instead.

This post of Ythill's that I quoted seems to be bordering on misrepresentation.

***

I am quite interested in why Rash threw a vote on Ythill. I understand if he thinks he is scummy, but he seems unphased by the fact we were supposed to have 2 roles which could protect the tracker, yet the tracker has turned up dead and nobody has a good explanation for it.

See above for the vote. It should not be surprising that a power role died when the doc was not protecting that role.

For that vote/unvote stunt:

IGMEOY: bionic

Ythill's latest vote change only increases my confidence. I'll also echo the sentiment that "personal DR-needs-to-post deadlines" as a reason to vote DR is utterly absurd. Lurkiness =/= scumminess.

[Rashiminos]

LYLO is not the time for pressure votes...

Matter of opinion. I think there's no time a pressure vote is more effective. I was online and checking regularly for safety's sake, and unvoted the moment someone scummy jumped aboard.

Two hours is not the moment. You fail +1.

Tony's death is a matter of two things: Scum chose to kill him, crywolf chose to protect elias (with bionic as a runner-up choice and Tony way back in 3rd or worse).

Tony was the only person who could prove or disprove wolf. He was the

obvious

NK target. Might as well have been a confirmed cop. You're asking us to swallow that not only did wolf not protect him, but the mafia somehow knew wolf would not protect him? It is unfathomable.

Tony was not the only unknown capable of proving wolf night 3. Your vote on DR does not change that fact. Obvious is "a matter of opinion" as you would say it. I'm not asking you to swallow wolf's choice. I leave that task to post 1050 Nor am I asking you to swallow that the mafia may (or may not) have known what crywolf was doing for some reason. I merely stated what happened. Scum killed Tony, crywolf claimed a protect on Elias, end of story. Start analyzing what I said, not the slanted and disordered mess you seem to be working with.

I even set a little WIFOM trap out there, naming Tony as a likely kill. They

both

ignored it?

You admit trying to encourage people to WIFOM so you can trap them?

Ythill's latest vote change only increases my confidence.

So I am scummy for initially pressure voting DR.

Never said that.

And for unvoting him when there was a sign of foul play.

You were a) late, and b)Leaving an opening for "foul play" (lylo scumwagon).

And for revoting him when he revealed his own alignment.

I don't recall the post that DR said "I am scum." So now you're putting words in his mouth,

I'm damned, in your opinion, no matter what I do. You've been making assumptive attacks on me for days, ever since I figured out wolf's alignment. I can't believe you expect to be taken seriously.

Early voting in LYLO tends to do that. Especially when you go for second best (DR) instead of your top suspect (crywolf) for "pressure" while putting the game on the line, and not having everyone's solid backing to do so. Your unvoting removed all considerable doubt. You misused associative tells (read: find a scum before using them) to mistakenly reach a conclusion about wolf's alignment, and have been padding that weak foundation. I don't trust you, and your actions today have strengthened that assessment.

I'll also echo the sentiment that "personal DR-needs-to-post deadlines" as a reason to vote DR is utterly absurd. Lurkiness =/= scumminess.

I

never

claimed that lurkiness equated to scumminess.

That statement was made generally. Individual applicability varies.

I've said that withholding info in this spot is scummy. That posting excuses and waiting until the last minute (or never) to give information cannot serve the purposes of town, but only serves the purposes of scum.

Withholding information doesn't help fakeclaimed scum either.

Wolf has been the obv-lynch since D1.

Nope that was Lowell. You might have a case for day 2, but obv-lynches aren't necessarily the best lynches.

DR has been obv since he replaced in. The

only

question in my mind is whether it is reasonable that they are scum together, but I've gotten over that. I'm just grateful that one is voting the other so that we can hang DR in spite of Rash's "blindness."

You lament the fact that DR is the only one we'll be able to lynch as if you aren't the cause of that predicament. I'd

love

to hang wolf but, though he's claimed he would, DR isn't voting her. And neither are you. Maybe you're scum and it doesn't matter who you're voting for, but if you are town and voting for me, the only way we can win this game is if we act quickly enough to utilize wolf's distancing to our advantage.

Newsflash, 6 of 7 players don't know your role (or are pretending), even if they have thoughts about such. Same goes for wolf. wolf's "distancing" has limited applicability here. Now, please explain how I have

caused

this predicament.

[Rashiminos]

Sure, if DR is a watcher

and

wolf is a doctor, he

could

have guessed her target, watched that target, and cleared her. That's pretty far fetched. Tony was the only role capable of automatically busting her as scum or clearing her as town. Stating the ridiculous is no way to gain ground in an argument.

Hmm, 3 other "power roles" is not too hard to guess from. The watcher only had to do one of the following: watch a target live, see crywolf having targeted that person, or watch a target die, having seen whoever did the deed. If crywolf claims to have protected someone DR knows she didn't target, then she's scum. Prior to start of day 4, Tony's role was unknown. Perhaps you're trying to distinguish who was better suited to finding out wolf's alignment? As of night 3, DR's and Tony's claims were both viable in that regard.

I even set a little WIFOM trap out there, naming Tony as a likely kill. They both ignored it?

You admit trying to encourage people to WIFOM so you can trap them?

I set the WIFOM trap to entice the mafia into killing someone else unless wolf was one of them.

So are there no reasons for Tony to be killed except those where wolf is scum?

Ythill's latest vote change only increases my confidence.

So I am scummy for initially pressure voting DR.

Never said that.

You claimed it was anti-town while voting me.

Nope. Anti-town is right, but a mistake being scummy isn't necessarily so. You

unvoted

when you had a safe vote (no scumwagoning) in lylo. The evident lack of consideration earned my vote.

I'll also echo the sentiment that "personal DR-needs-to-post deadlines" as a reason to vote DR is utterly absurd.

Lurkiness =/= scumminess.

I never claimed that lurkiness equated to scumminess.

That statement was made generally.

Bullshit. Read the part I bolded. Who else made that move?

Crywolf.

I've said that withholding info in this spot is scummy. That posting excuses and waiting until the last minute (or never) to give information cannot serve the purposes of town, but only serves the purposes of scum.

Withholding information doesn't help fakeclaimed scum either.

BS again. We're at LYLO. All the scum need to do is sew enough confusion to force no lynch at deadline. An easy task from a claimed watcher.

What DR does can't force what the 4 townies do unless DR is a townie.

wolf's "distancing" has limited applicability here.

I know, which is why I was hesitant when she first voted for DR. But I can't account for poor judgment on her part. All I can do is call the evidence as I see it, and I no longer believe in a world where one of them is town.

Exposing the game to two possible wagons by your indecisiveness, poor judgement or scummy? (One of the main reasons I can't vote either is that some of the would-be lyncher's are exceedingly scummy-looking themselves).

Now, please explain how I have caused this predicament.

Your lamenting the situation is your representation of townieness. So, assuming that you are town, your stubborn vote on me means that we have to catch scum distancing to win.

I'm concerned that the same people who were wrong on Darox are trying to set up a lynch with the same poor standards...

Your second sentence is flawed. It assumes we know you're town, which is an illegitimate assumption. bionic, crywolf, dead rikumaru, elias, fhq, and myself should not be discounting you from possible scumitude yet. We may still have to lynch you, so claiming that my vote on you prevents a win is shortsighted and an invalid argument.

A clear majority finds both DR and wolf scummy. The only hold-up has been people waiting for DR's info.

Even if I was scum

, your insistance would be unlikely to lead to my lynch. But, if you are town, your vote is needed to hang scum... unless they are being very ballsy, like wolf is doing with DR.

The majority has been wrong often enough, and bionic dropped the ball instead of the hammer yesterday, so I'm not without rationale for declining this wagon. Letting this circus continue would make it even less likely that you'd be lynched.

[Rashiminos]

EBWOP:

Ythill has been making the argument that my vote on him loses the game since

townies

are needed to hang scum. He has also been arguing as if we knew he was town. In that case I could argue that the scum could win merely by wagoning him.

[Rashiminos]

A guess between three is as accurate as a guarentee of getting info by selecting a single target? Listen to what you're saying. A truthful DR unveiling the truth of wolf's claim might have been viable, but a truthful Tony was guarenteed to succeed. And the mafia knew, yesterday, who among them was telling the truth.

That's nice and all, but this is what you said previously:

Tony was the only person who could prove or disprove wolf.

This statement is patently false for the reasons I gave in a previous post. You've backpedaled from there.

Either wolf is scum or she is a doc. If she is a doc, the scum are using her as the next mislynch and Tony clearing her destroys all of the work they have done. If she is scum, Tony catching her is was the town's best chance of securing the win. DR

may

have revealed her alignment. Tony

would

have. The scum

needed

him to die.

Maybe wolf-doc could have missed this detail (though I find it unlikley) but I seriously doubt that an entire scum team (one that's managed to reach LYLO in spite of two no lynches) would have. Nor do I believe they would have risked a no kill unless they had a good reason to believe that it wouldn't happen. Ergo: mafia RB or wolf-scum.

You've managed to convince yourself that wolf is scum, but you're voting DR instead?

Your case on crywolf at this point seems to hinge on crywolf meeting your minimum expected standards for doc play (ie: protecting who you think should be protected). At the time she had to make the decision (if she made it at all) Tony's alignment was unknown. Tonyscum was still possible, and there was another role which had a far more convincing case for being pro-town. That would be our vig, who has made a shot, and whose role is apparent, if not as potentially as useful as you wished Tony's to be. Prior to day 4, deciding between likely-confirmed vig and murky tracker was not as clear of a choice as you pretend it is...

Now the scum could have thought about this too and took a guess, but perhaps if we're arguing over kills which are guaranteed for scum, why not the doc? You've pretty much answered that already, but now it's a question whether you actually know the minds of scum...

So are there no reasons for Tony to be killed except those where wolf is scum?

Obviously no (see above). Noting how you edited my word-twisting accusation out of the quote, and how you are continuing to twist my words.

There's no twisting involved. You said that you set a WIFOM trap for the mafia. If Tony dies after that post, you do one thing. If he doesn't, you do another. You just set that post out as bait (it's a trap, you said so yourself) so that you can return to it later (day 4) and speculate on the night's kill. Trying to WIFOM trap the mafia is the same as encouraging people (in this case the mafia and yourself) to WIFOM. You are in denial about things you have said yourself. I can't help you with that, but to say "DIE SCUM!"

Bionic pressured wolf into agreeing that Tony had demonstrated that he was town. I vaguely discussed likley NKs, naming only Tony. The idea was to make it clear that Tony was a very good protect for wolf, and to make sure tha mafia saw this information.

What I read here is a description about leading the doc. How shall I distinguish this from leading the doc?

The "trap" part is simple. If wolf is the doc, the mafia are pretty likley to let her be cleared rather than risk the no-kill. In fact, if I was scum and we were still in that unthinkable wolf-as-doc world, I would have killed wolf, realizing that she had outlived her usefulness. What would you have done?

Hypothetically, it's likely that I would have killed the doc (guaranteed) and then set up a mislynch between Tony and DR as they became less likely to both be protown. If wolf was my scumpartner in this hypothetical situation, I'd probably have hit a vanilla and still be setting up the same mislynch, with the fallback of bussing crywolf.

What DR does can't force what the 4 townies do unless DR is a townie.

So if we are ready to hang wolf and then DR comes in two hours before deadline to say that he saw her target Elias, that wouldn't force a no lynch?

Your noose has been made...

Or if you manage to get everyone convinced to hang me and then DR comes in just before deadline to say that he saw you kill Tony, that won't create enough division to force no lynch?

I can't stop people from unvoting, but there is a difference in trusting me as opposed to trusting DR as far as votes have gone.

Exposing the game to two possible wagons by your indecisiveness, poor judgement or scummy?

Neither. I am simply confidant in my reads.

A little too confident for one who does not want to talk about scumpartners. How about it? DR, crywolf, and who?

Your second sentence is flawed. It assumes we know you're town, which is an illegitimate assumption.

It doesn't assume anything. I'm not talking about perceptions, I'm talking about facts. If you are town, we cannot acheive a scum-lynch while you are voting me. Whether or not you choose to believe that is up to you.

For you, your alignment is a fact. For most of us, it is a perception. In this case, perceptions matter. We can achieve a scum-lynch with me on you. You could (and I definitely think so) be scum. Since your alignment isn't known to US, arguments based on such fail.

The majority has been wrong often enough...

Wrong or right, a majority is

required

to lynch and we

need

to lynch to win. Playing renegade here is futile. It's much better for town if you find the scummiest of the popular lynches and argue it over the one you find most likley to be a mislynch. I, for one, think it doesn't matter much which we hang.

Care must be take to distinguish between "a majority" and "The majority." As we can see in hindsight from day 2, the scum had a hand in contriving two wrong "popular" lynches (Darox and Tony) with which to lead us astray. Popularity and quality are not equivalent, although hopefully the latter leads to the former. Your indifference to lynching crywolf or DR seems out of place.

Ythill has been making the argument that my vote on him loses the game since townies are needed to hang scum. He has also been arguing as if we knew he was town.

Did you forget about the part where I explain how your renegade vote and stated refusal to change votes is detrimental to town interests even if I am scum?

I don't recall it, so I must have forgotten, please remind me.

In that case I could argue that the scum could win merely by wagoning him.

We've been through this. Scum

can

win the game by quicklynching me, but they don't

have to

. Think of the risks. Two jump on and scare you into unvoting, or Elias is lying and the town has a 2:1 kill ratio with all three scum revealed. These risks are mitigated by the fact that

your vote

hands them the no lynch and therefore the win. All they

have to

do is nothing.

Honestly, I'm flattered you like arguing from the "Ythill and Rash are both town" perspective, but it would be silly for the rest of the town to be as confident as you seem to be about someone else being town.

[Rashiminos]

I didn't backpedal. I just neglected to insert the word "automatically" into my original sentence. As in, Tony was the only person who could

automatically

prove or disprove wolf. In context, my point was clear. The DR-was-just-as-good-a-target was your strawman, and now you are arguing in circles.

It wasn't in your original sentence. The context was not clear. It's a backpedal. Denial +2 (If you feel like you're going in circles, maybe you need to lie down).

I never said anything about DR being a target. That's misrepresentation. Your original argument was "who could prove wolf's alignment," and DR was a valid answer to that in addition to Tony, contingent on them not being lying scum (in hindsight Tony was not).

You've managed to convince yourself that wolf is scum, but you're voting DR instead?

They're both obv-scum. I've said that 2361231239512312365 times.

No, you pressure-voted DR. There was no need to unvote and switch if you felt both were obv-scum and one voted the other.

Your unvote after crywolf voted for DR contradicts the assertion that DR is obv-scum.

Your case on crywolf at this point seems to hinge on crywolf meeting your minimum expected standards for doc play...

If by "case" you mean

new points introduced today

then I'll concede. I've been bringing evidence against wolf for days and it adds up to a hell of a lot more than that.

A lot of your "evidence" is speculation about the setup and involves divining wolf's alignment from the actions of others and forces links that aren't necessarily true. This means your case is craplogic.

Trying to WIFOM trap the mafia is the same as encouraging people (in this case the mafia and yourself) to WIFOM.

Why is it bad to add extra protection to an important role by convincing the mafia to WIFOM and therefore not kill him? Why is it bad to set up a situation that helps to prove that my PE#1 is scum, when applied to the most likely scenario that leaves her alignment otherwise unrevealed?

Simple, so someone can make the argument that Ythill's PE #1 is scum. You added no extra protection if the mafia already thought about this "detail" (sounds like one of your prior arguments), and they decided they could get away with heat going on crywolf. You act as if this trap could not be used to frame crywolf instead, and that's where the problem is.

You are in denial about things you have said yourself.

Lies. I stated simply that something was a WIFOM trap, you twisted that to suggest I was encouraging the

town

to WIFOM.

Here's what I said:

I even set a little WIFOM trap out there, naming Tony as a likely kill. They

both

ignored it?

You admit trying to encourage people to WIFOM so you can trap them?

Note that I said people. This means that mafia are included, and it's not just the town. You set a trap where the mafia (who are people) WIFOMS when they kill (from your day 4 argument perspective) and you WIFOM about the kill when you wake up in the morning.

I explained how what I meant was different than what you said, and you twisted my words, trying to suggest that I said wolf-as-scum was the only reason anyone would target Tony. I knew exactly what I meant all along. You are the one trying to paint it in a scummy light.

I'll let your past self speak here:

I even set a little WIFOM trap out there, naming Tony as a likely kill. They both ignored it?

You admit trying to encourage people to WIFOM so you can trap them?

Like twisting words, huh?

I set the WIFOM trap to entice the mafia into killing someone else unless wolf was one of them. Same thing bionic did when he backed her into a corner about Tony's alignment. The outcome heavily suggests that wolf is scum.

Am I twisting words? (No.) You have been suggesting that this was the case: "wolf is scum because Tony was killed."

***

More to come...

[Rashiminos]

What I read here is a description about leading the doc. How shall I distinguish this from leading the doc?

Well, it would help your theory if we had a doc.

The "idea was to make it clear that Tony was a good protect" doesn't make sense unless we potentially had a doc on day 3:

Bionic pressured wolf into agreeing that Tony had demonstrated that he was town. I vaguely discussed likley NKs, naming only Tony. The idea was to make it clear that Tony was a very good protect for wolf, and to make sure tha mafia saw this information.

What I read here is a description about leading the doc. How shall I distinguish this from leading the doc?

You've since concluded from the NK (in addition to all of that other craplogic, spare me) that wolf is scum, so she is not doc. This is not an applicable explanation for a prior day 3 event. Your reason for the "idea" came before that statement, not afterwards. Let's hear it.

Seriously though, I am scum for trying to lead the doc to my own NK choice?

No, you're using the doc/NK interplay to make fallacious arguments.

Yes, I was leading the doc. No, it doesn't mean I am scum.

You shouldn't be leading the doc to conclude the "doc" is scum.

Considering the kill identity, it suggests that I am town.

Explain this.

For you, your alignment is a fact. For most of us, it is a perception.

Facts are facts are facts.

Except when they are not.

Those who agree that DR and wolf are obv-scum, those who see you trying to lynch me instead, because I had the audacity to switch my vote between the two obv-scum roles, will realize whether or not this chicken has nipples, and will therefore follow the arguments I laid out.

Can only townies "agree" that DR/wolf are obv-scum? Can only townies follow your arguments and prop them up? Does the following of your arguments make your arguments sound? Why does it matter if "obv-scum busses obv-scum?"

You act as if I am trying to assert my townieness in order to put forth the conclusion that I am town. I have done no such thing. I've asserted it in two arguments...

Yes you have, which renders those arguments invalid.

To refute the

scum could bandwagon Ythill-town for victory

argument which, incidentally, hypothetically assumes that

both you and I are town

on its own.

That assumption was given in the argument to show an example how us both being town need not be true for our current situation in the light of the arguments of where a) You assert that you are a townie to make arguments, and b) where the scum let the town nolynch (If the town nolynches, then the town deserves to lose.) The assumption can be contradicted as I have shown.

And (2) to refute the

woe is us because we are forced to lynch DR

appeal you made, which is applicable whether I am scum or town.

I didn't say forced. How does you asserting your townieness help an argument where you could be scum or town? Also, stop using words like "woe", "lament", etc. I'm not crying.

What DR does can't force what the 4 townies do unless DR is a townie.

So if we are ready to hang wolf and then DR comes in two hours before deadline to say that he saw her target Elias, that wouldn't force a no lynch?

Your noose has been made...

Or if you manage to get everyone convinced to hang me and then DR comes in just before deadline to say that he saw you kill Tony, that won't create enough division to force no lynch?

I can't stop people from unvoting, but there is a difference in trusting me as opposed to trusting DR as far as votes have gone.

Cute. But you're straying from the subject. Do you see the possible scummy

intentions

in delaying this info? Do you see matching townie intentions?

I regard the delays in DR's posts as a null-tell. He's had internet problems and time constraints. Neither are conducive to the type of post he wants to make. You're trying to make something look scummy when it isn't.

That goes for bionic and crywolf too.

A little too confident for one who does not want to talk about scumpartners.

Like I said before, I answered your question. I added that I don't like to

base conclusions

on unconfirmed alignments.

Then stop asserting your townieness. Your alignment is unconfirmed.

I also questioned your motives for asking, because I saw potential scum motives for that question. But I did answer you. Calling me "one who does not want to talk about" it is a fabrication.

I missed that when I posted. Must have been the "hackles rising "section. You're still too confident.

Popularity and quality are not equivalent, although hopefully the latter leads to the former.

Popularity and viability

are

equivalent with a 4:3 ratio.

As popular and viable as a Lowell vote, I'm sure.

Did you forget about the part where I explain how your renegade vote and stated refusal to change votes is detrimental to town interests even if I am scum?

I don't recall it, so I must have forgotten, please remind me.

Jesus man, really? You quoted it! Grumble. It's the last paragraph of #1151.

You mean this?

Now, please explain how I have caused this predicament.

It should be obvious. Oh, wait... that's how you answer questions...

Your lamenting the situation is your representation of townieness. So, assuming that you are town, your stubborn vote on me means that we have to catch scum distancing to win.

A clear majority finds both DR and wolf scummy. The only hold-up has been people waiting for DR's info.

Even if I was scum

, your insistance would be unlikely to lead to my lynch. But, if you are town, your vote is needed to hang scum... unless they are being very ballsy, like wolf is doing with DR.

Saying that "a majority" is dead set on lynching DR does not equate to a representation of my townieness. Assuming me as town is not valid (but thanks for the flattery). Even with the assumption, "your stubborn vote on me" is false in the possible event that Ythill is scum, so again your argument is not valid. The clear majority may not be right, and my continued effort on you obviously has the intention of persuading them that you are a better lynch. Just because you deem the consensus (remember that scum can consent too) to be against me, it doesn't mean my actions are worthless. If they don't like the cup of tea I'm offering, then they can make 4 with 6 as I said. I consider my vote to be on scum and in the process of hanging scum, thank you very much.

Honestly, I'm flattered you like arguing from the "Ythill and Rash are both town" perspective, but it would be silly for the rest of the town to be as confident as you seem to be about someone else being town.

This is too much. The Rash-town arguments were responses to

your own points

where

you

inferred your townieness. I was endulging your own hypotheticals to refute you. I listed the arguments in the chicken-nipples bit above, so I'm not going to type them again.

I didn't infer that, you did. You're reading into the lines (adding things without cause).

I am certainly

not

convinced you are town.

Then stop arguing about my "renegade vote" as if you were convinced. The next time you do so, you will be scum for knowing my role.

[Rashiminos]

Haven't had the time to post between yesterday afternoon and this moment. This is going to be short post.

I am aware of DR's "info" and the time I have tonight will be spent on reading DR/Oman versus fhq, and comparing to what I have on Ythill, and feel is realistically possible under the circumstances. If that means a vote change tomorrow (seems unlikely atm), then I will tell you then.

[Rashiminos]

I'm well aware of the deadline, thank you.

[Rashiminos]

fhq + ythill + rash = scum

I was musing over bionic's statement here and thinking about how 3 of the 4 living vanillas being scum does not seem to fit how this game has played out in my experience. This led me to think about the groups of voters we have at the present.

DR and fhq are voting each other based on DR's night "evidence." At least one of them is scum for obvious reasons.

bionic and Ythill are have placed their votes among DR and fhq. More on this in just a little bit.

This leaves crywolf, Elias, and myself who are not voting for one of DR/fhq. Now if 2 of us are scum, then it would seem that the townie of the trio would not be able to force a lynch, hence we would have lost already. For the sake of not having bionic/Ythill second-guess themselves, I think we can discount that 2 of us are scum, which means it would be practical to consider that at most one of us is scum, and therefore at least 1 of bionic/Ythill is scum, excepting the unlikely circumstance that DR is bussing his partner.

Simplified:

1 scum in {Dead Rikimaru, fhqwhgads}
1 scum in {bionic, Ythill}
1 scum in {crywolf20084, Elias the Thief, Rashiminos}

That should flesh out some of the relations we'll be looking at when we lynch scum today. Now for some more reading.

[Rashiminos]

A look at fhq:

Post 0: (That other game went swimmingly didn't it?)
Post 1: Cites wolf's "cop"-logic error. (save) IGMEOYs the miller
2: Comment to miller about the miller (null)
3: Ignorance (?) about the miller
4: Uses miller quote to FoS wolf (that's interesting, or bandwagony), then votes Lowell
5: Accuses Lowell of being too macho, but unvotes Lowell
6: Chaos happens because wolf did not understand "QFT"
7: crywolf is new, Lowell has a poor meta
8: asks Lowell a question about wolf
9: Lowell's meta still poor, wolf needs to explain herself
10: Non-serious comment
11: likes Oman, Lowell must claim, crywolf lurks, response to Ythill
12: Darox conundrum is null, Lowell is scummy despite meta
13: Lowell's votes suck
14: asks Darox about Lowell's scumminess or poor meta
15: Darox's unvote (as opposed to others?) is fishy
16:

The case against me is highly amusing.

Does anyone have something other than that I don't want to see Lowell dead right away but I do want him to say more?

Was that the case?

I thought the case was that you seemed to think his play style is scummy, yet refused to remove your vote at L-1.

Now that he is at L-1 again, you suddenly do remove the vote, contradicting your previous argument of 'what is wrong with being at L-1'?

Also, this isn't the first time in this game that Lowell is it L-1. What makes you think the strategy is going to make him talk this time?

Funny how fhq's post 16 outclasses the day 2 cases against Darox.
17: Darox unvote is still scummy
18: Lowell is uncooperative
19: Rash called out fhq for not explaining fhq's reaction to Darox well enough, fhq admitted it was lacking (Ythill should remember this)
20: Lowell's meta is no longer an excuse, Darox defense is a joke, Lowell Lynch supporter
21: lynch better than no-lynch (yep, look at day 3 too), talks about majority voting (Rashiminos reminds himself to make a comment.)
22:

No, it is scummy to support a lynch because you think it's the only one that will be supported.

Nice piece of statement twisting there yourself. I believe I have made my point (by the way, my 'statement twisting' question was just a question. I never implied that is what you meant. I just asked it to illustrate why I made the point at all).

Deja vu +2.

23: Meta is no excuse (I'd have to disagree, but that's a thread topic by itself.)
24: votes Darox since Lowell is quiet, Darox is still a joke
25: Darox wanted Lowell to claim, but dismissed the lynch threat behind it, this oddity makes Darox scummy
26: pro-semantics, esp. "Claim or Die" [:)]
27: I'd be lynching Lowell if he were here, but Darox is fine.
28: Lowell must claim, or die.
29: ditto
30: Lack of claim means dead Lowell (Good work).
31: Dang, didn't hammer.

So ends day 1.

There are connections to wolf, and not so much to other living players. Some minor things in both directions, nothing to base a decision on.

As for following the majority versus reaching a majority, I feel it's better if everyone can find a separate reason to believe someone is scummy, rather than throwing their vote to someone else's cause, trusting that someone else. Better that all roads lead to the scum's front door rather than for everyone to follow one scumtrail to a dead end.

An installment of Oman's shorter day 1 is upcoming.

[Rashiminos]

Westbrook said practically nothing.

So Oman is key, because while DR and Oman might have different playstyles, a common factor of scumminess or townieness would still permeate their posts.

0: miller talk, Ythill is a liar!, makes some jokes
1: talks with Ythill again
2: wolf's cop direct is well-intentioned (?), commends Ythill, claims should not be taken for granted, Lowell is an OMGUSy hypocritical liar: VOTE!!!!!, bionic: be more emotional please
3: I'm lurking (heh...)
4: explains well-intentioned comment, more banter with Ythill, gloats at bionic, calls Tony a coward, Tommy is too trusting, cases on Darox suck
5: Lowell must die, or claim.
6: Fun.
7: Tony is still a coward, Oman is still a jerk, tommy/lowell aren't scumpartners (Hmmm..., scummy?), IGMEOY fhq, iamausername finds me scummy, hammers are good, Ythill is wagon-dodging, Darox needs to be more serious, Lowell is a village idiot, case on darox is weak, more gloating at bionic, crywolf "scumtells" are also newbishness
8: kill lowell
9: kill lowell, save wolf for another day
10: wolf's voting is wishy-washy, @Darox: let lowell catch his breath, then kill him
11: (Too lazy to look up context).
12: Lowell's TLDR post is scummy, KILL HIM!
13: OMG GUYZ, I'M LYNCHER, UNFUNNY JOKE HERE!
14: duh
15: tony's igmeoy on rash is bad
16: Tony's excuses are lame
17: Use better reasoning, Tony
18: still grilling tony

So ends day 1.

There are connections with wolf, ythill, and bionic, and a couple of comments are worth a closer look (post 7, later defense of Darox).

[Rashiminos]

EBWOP: Most of day 1 is conveniently irrelevant to the present, and can remain buried, but the revisit and remembrance certainly has me looking at DR for Oman's sake.

[Rashiminos]

Yeah, and I feel like we should have a cop with a miller. This mod is tricky.

The

why not

is important because you're hinging an awful lot on set-up speculation...

and basing that speculation on beliefs that you have not expounded upon.

Someone is covering his rear...

[Rashiminos]

Rash is currently trying to work out how the bionic non-vote on crywolf yesterday relates to the DR-fhq stuff today, and trying to clarify the flaw he thinks he sees throws a moneky-wrench into an otherwise obvious action.

[Rashiminos]

Alright, if crywolf is town, then bionic and Elias are not scum (or missed a chance to win D3), leaving DR or a vanilla to be the 4th townie.
If crywolf is scum, then DR's information could barely hold less water.

The hiccup comes down to two things. A) Is there a practical reason to believe fhq-scum had a purpose to targetting wolf-scum with DR watching as town? B) Is DR-scum gambitting with fhq-scum as bait? (Just vote DR, duh).

If crywolf-is town, then bionic-town punctures the 3/4 vanilla are scum argument for 3 players, and elias is the game decider, since the vanillas would just vote DR. If wolf is scum, then the 3/4 vanilla argument is toast.

Conclusion: Outside of a fhq/wolf scumming it up interaction, DR's story is just wrong. Kill DR.

Now if only people decided to argue these points and not who killed Tony for what WIFOM.

##Unvote: Ythill
##Vote: Dead Rikimaru

[Rashiminos]

EBWOP: bionic found a shorter way of saying it

[Rashiminos]

^
|

Crywolf's first post of the day. It's vague. It discusses her waiting. It includes a hammer wrapped in a package with a cute little bow. It gives me goosebumps, that is all.

[Rashiminos]

EBWOP: Today being the 20th of November in that statement.

[Rashiminos]

I'm just glad you didn't live up to my expectations, Rash.

There's still tomorrow to continue disappointing you.

[Rashiminos]

wow. the hammer already. No celebrating from anybody yet, so maybe he was in fact scum.

(Feeds post to quote miners.)

[Rashiminos]

It's not just you...

[Rashiminos]

It seems we have to pick a poison:

A) Crywolf is scum, and one of bionic, Ythill, and fhq is her partner (and the explanation of why Rash is not scum in this case will follow soon..)

B) Crywolf is doc, bionic is vanilla, and 2 of Rash, Ythill, and fhq are scum

C) There still (despite lack of reason to believe so) are 2

unaligned

scum, in which case any 2 players could be scum.

Why Rash is not scum in case A:

If you want to assume crywolf and myself are partners in crime, explain why we did not win by lynching fhq yesterday.

The whole Elias is now dead and consequently was not adequately protected last night despite being the remaining power role thing heavily suggests B is wrong, but I am going to ignore my gut for now.

Elias being dead also took out the main contender for a non-mafia scumbag.

So I guess the first question I'll ask today is this: Who did crywolf protect, and why was this person chosen over Elias?

[Rashiminos]

EBWOP: It also occurs to me that Ythill is not likely to be crywolf's scumpartner for a similar reason.

[Rashiminos]

EBWOP^2: It just occurred to me that mafia spy wasn't what I thought it was, which undercuts some of the validity of the above arguments. Since the other mafiosos wouldn't be sure that DR was actually pro-mafia, the bionic didn't lynch crywolf/ Rash and crywolf didn't lynch fhq arguments fall kind of flat.

(I thought mafia spy was just a role cop for some reason, didn't get the traitor aspect).

[Rashiminos]

We probably were in LYLO yesterday, but I don't think the scum were all too sure they could win by quicklynching...

[Rashiminos]

If you want to assume crywolf and myself are partners in crime, explain why we did not win by lynching fhq yesterday.

As you said later, the same thing could be said of myself and wolf, but I think the assertion of innocence here is premature and WIFOMy. Cold feet is enough of an explanation to shed reasonable doubt.

I'm sure the guarantee of an instant win (which assumed the scum knew DR was scum when the argument was made, I have since realized that this is not necessariily true) would have overcome "cold feet." Your accusation of WIFOM here and the cold feet provides for reasonable doubt are somewhat shocking considering the sort of cases you have put forth.

[Rashiminos]

So I guess the first question I'll ask today is this: Who did crywolf protect, and why was this person chosen over Elias?

Bionic. I didn't want to see him gone seeing as how he's been the most helpful in finding the damned scum, even though he wasn't on DR's kill.

I'm not satisfied with this answer yet for two reasons: Elias's role was substantiated by a second kill night 2, whereas bionic is mostly unconfirmed, so it was clear that Elias had very little chance of being mafia, and more likely to be town than a serial killer. The second reason is that bionic wasn't on DR yesterday, and DR was the only scum that we have found, so I don't see how wolf can conclude that bionic has been the most helpful in finding scum despite what went on during twilight 3.

I'll rephrase the second part of my previous question: How was bionic more helpful than Elias in finding scum?

[Rashiminos]

I see a lack of wolf posting, I'm going to check some things and possibly come back with something.

[Rashiminos]

Yep. That does it.

##Vote: crywolf20084

[Rashiminos]

I swear to god everytime I went to post in any of my games something else came up and this just got shoved to the back burner.

@fhq:

The above quote seems true for this game, but not so much for others.

[Rashiminos]

I'm sure the guarantee of an instant win (which assumed the scum knew DR was scum when the argument was made, I have since realized that this is not necessariily true) would have overcome "cold feet."

The "guarentee of an instant win" also assumes that the spy counted toward victory, that the scum knew he counted, and that the scum knew Elias was not lying about being one-shot.

The spy is pro-mafia, and counts toward victory of the mafia. If the scum thought he was mafia, then they knew he counted, and if a townie was lynched yesterday, then any shot the mafia thought Elias might have had at the time was worthless. If 3 scum and 3 townies go to night 4, then a 1-1 trade results in a 4-player day 5, and the scum stop any lynches. The Elias aspect might count for something among the nolynch approach, however. Yet if there was a nolynch yesterday, the non-voters would have stood out and would have been obvious vig targets. Ergo, if the mafia were worried about possible vigging, they would have voted to lynch yesterday.

Your accusation of WIFOM here and the cold feet provides for reasonable doubt are somewhat shocking considering the sort of cases you have put forth.

Great. First I am wrong for assuming my own alignment as town, now I am wrong for bringing it up when you do the same.

No, I concluded that I was town if two assumptions were true (crywolf is scum, scum knew DR was pro-mafia). This is a difference between a premise and a conclusion.

Fact is, we do not know what the scum knew. We do not know what they were thinking.

I'm going to just quote some posts from yesterday where you pretty much assume you do:

What's with the rhymes?

I don't know that I'm prepared to believe anything our power-roles say, but I agree that they should spill their beans.

I refrained from taling about it too much yesterday,

but Tony-town was the obv-choice for NK.

The move protects wolf is she is scum and keeps the heat on her if she is town. Question is, if she's town, why didn't she protect him?

We're @ LYLO with a two week deadline. I want to see

everyone

active.

Tony's death is a matter of two things: Scum chose to kill him, crywolf chose to protect elias (with bionic as a runner-up choice and Tony way back in 3rd or worse).

Tony was the only person who could prove or disprove wolf. He was the

obvious

NK target. Might as well have been a confirmed cop.

You're asking us to swallow that not only did wolf not protect him, but the mafia somehow knew wolf would not protect him? It is unfathomable.

Either wolf is scum or she is a doc. If she is a doc, the scum are using her as the next mislynch and Tony clearing her destroys all of the work they have done. If she is scum, Tony catching her is was the town's best chance of securing the win. DR

may

have revealed her alignment. Tony

would

have. The scum

needed

him to die.

Maybe wolf-doc could have missed this detail (though I find it unlikley) but I seriously doubt that an entire scum team (one that's managed to reach LYLO in spite of two no lynches) would have.

Nor do I believe they would have risked a no kill unless they had a good reason to believe that it wouldn't happen. Ergo: mafia RB or wolf-scum.

*Headdesk*

My original argument was that Tony was the obvious NK choice b/c he was the only one who could [automatically] clear or condemn wolf.

You argued that other people could have cleared him. If you were not arguing my conclusion, then why even bother?

You set a trap where the mafia (who are people) WIFOMS when they kill (from your day 4 argument perspective) and you WIFOM about the kill when you wake up in the morning.

Very generally, yes, though the WIFOM today is pretty mild.

I cannot fathom that mafia would target Tony after that trap without knowing the kill was safe.

You're nightkill speculation of yesterday is contrary to the assertion of not knowing what the scum has been thinking.

What we know is... Elias was town, which probably put our end of day wagoneers @ 3:3, which means that someone was scum voting for scum. One possible explanation is that both fhq and DR are scum but I don't know that it's very likley in the situation they were in. Another explanation is that the team didn't know who their spy was, but with the doughnut-sized-breadcrumb and the fhq vs. DR day-ender (which proves that at least one of them was scum), I don't believe this is likely either. It's all very mysterious, and I don't know that we'll be able to figure out exactly what happened, but we can probably figure out who DR's buddies were by rereading him.

:goodposting:

A quick skim shows that he buddied to myself, bionic, Darox, and wolf; and to a lesser extent to Rash, user, and Elias. His main targets were confirmed town (Lowell and Tony), but he made smaller attacks against a good number of people. When Oman buddied to wolf, it was differently worded. Whereas he simply called others "town," he usually refered to wolf as scummy-seeming but excusably so.

This seems accurate, but I would appreciate some relevant post numbers.

The above suggests that wolf is scum. I believe Rash, as the only unknown among the minor-buddies, is cleared a little by his inclusion, but I wouldn't say he's off the hook entirely.

Only if you can show I was both scum and unaware (or unable to take advantage) of a very possible winning opportunity.

DR didin't do much. He voted wolf, but also defended her the next day. He FoSed me for OMGUS ...

You did vote him in a most-likely LYLO situation. If he hadn't been trying to make a grand action claim, his natural vote should have been you.

[Rashiminos]

Yes it is true. One game was easy quick posts _{that's in a stalling pattern}, and I was working on one other, and then this one and two others have just been put on the back burner because my life has been anything but normal, and thank god, it's getting back to normal.

I can't help it if you are in 5+ games and don't have time to make posts in most of them when something comes up. I would suggest playing less games simultaneously and putting more effort into each one, but that's not too relevant to this game either.

What you could have done was to also make a quick post in this game. Now, you answered more about bionic, but you completely dodged my question. Here's some help, compare the scumhunting of

Elias

to the scumhunting of bionic, and then tell us why that latter is better than the former was. There is a little more than to their general play than day 4.

[Rashiminos]

re Spy counts as Mafia: You are basing this on personal knowledge we don't know the scum shared. The wiki is unclear and we don't know what the PMs said. I assume you are correct, but I do not know that the scum assumed the same thing.

The wiki is clear. Traitors and their variations (Mafia spy for instance) are "pro-mafia."

re Premise vs. Conclusion: Fair enough, but your train of thought is still WIFOM. I'm going to let it pass for now though.

How is saying the mafia would choose to win given the clear chance WIFOM?

re Knowing what the scum are thinking: This is my main point of contention with your post. Every quote you gave was me using

common knowledge

to deduce what the scum were thinking.

It's not common knowledge, but I don't think you're going to accept that this game.

[quote="Re No Relevant numbers from DR reread: Sorry, it was a skim and I didn't take detailed notes. I could go reread again if you want to argue the specific points but, since you don't disagree, I'd rather not take the time.[/quote] Okay, I'll bear that in mind.

Everything seems to be settled, now two of you need to vote.

[Rashiminos]

EBWOP: Should be:

Re No Relevant numbers from DR reread: Sorry, it was a skim and I didn't take detailed notes. I could go reread again if you want to argue the specific points but, since you don't disagree, I'd rather not take the time.

Okay, I'll bear that in mind.

[Rashiminos]

The wiki is clear. Traitors and their variations (Mafia spy for instance) are "pro-mafia."

Right. Which means he wins when the mafia wins. Meaning that he will

not

be counted toward the town total. But it is vague on whether he is counted toward the scum total. Example: 3 townies + 3 scum =/= 3 townies + 2 scum + spy for the win.

It really depends on the wording of the scum role PM... whether it is "majority" or "equal numbers" that the scum must attain to win.

Or if nothing can prevent the same, ie mafia-aligned traitor prevents town lynch.

How is saying the mafia would choose to win given the clear chance WIFOM?

Because apparently they didn't "choose to win".

Whether you decide you want to delude yourself or not, the mafia don't throw away victory chances that readily. If the mafia have an clear (can arrange intervals to chain-vote, have a townie voting wrong, know they will have majority through the night) opportunity, then they quicklynch and win. The only exception to this is incompetence. So if crywolf and 1 of {Ythill, Rashiminos} are scum, and they knew DR was scum, then quicklynching fhq would have been the play, and there had been ample opportunity to do so. Coldfeet is a bullshit excuse. There was the "townie" (bionic voting fhq), spy counts as pro-mafia, and the only doubt is whether at least one scum knew (If known prior to day 4, both scum knew) DR was mafia. If scum knew DR was scum, then neither of {Ythill, Rashiminos} are competent scum. One of them might be incompetent, or they are both town.

It's not common knowledge, but I don't think you're going to accept that this game.

Either Tony was scum or he was a tracker = knowledge common to the players of this game.

Either wolf is scum or a doc = knoweldge common to the players of this game.

"Tony was the obv-NK" =/= common knowledge

[Rashiminos]

meh. I was going to come in and vote fhq anyway. Not sure why you guys didn't just win it yesterday. You already had a town vote on fhq.

"Cold feet," obviously. If it wasn't for the above, I probably would not have found so many excuses to lay off of Ythill. I was right before I was wrong.

[Rashiminos]

EBWOP: I knew I smelled a rat day 2.

[Rashiminos]

Should have won two days ago...

[Rashiminos]

Rash is a loose cannon. He's the smartest of the bunch, and a slippery debator. If there's one person I can count on to be a thorn in my side, it's Rash. He now seems convinced that I am town, but I don't know if I can count on him to stick to that view. Of all the players, he's the one who has been most likley to change his mind at the last minute to do the right thing.

My main concern is that, if I kill Rash, bionic may take this as evidence of me-as-scum b/c Rash attacked me so much in the past. This factor was about to make my decision for me when I realized that (1) the argument is WIFOM so long as I can pin the same motives on bionic (2) Rash has implied that bionic is the obvious choice for final scum. I should be able to use these tidbits to form reasonable doubts in fhq's mind, and that should be all I need to win.

So... yeah... sorry Rash. You're too good an opponant to keep alive.

kill: Rashiminos

This is full of win. I also liked the part where I was a potentially a cop, although perhaps for the wrong reasons...

[Rashiminos]

Then Rash-town, who was supposedly going to vote for fhq, came in and voted for DR.

I'm not sure if Ythill was just saying this for effect, but I'll comment anyways. Crywolf, Ythill, and DR (actually for what Oman did) were high on my list for day 4, and fhq was 4th in the queue. While I was disturbed by the lack of "results," I was more convinced that Ythill's voting was anti-town. DR's claims naturally provided two clearer choices, and voting fhq was reliant on DR's claim being plausible enough, which it wasn't. This is just a long way of saying that I wasn't likely to have voted fhq in that situation.

[Rashiminos]

Rash, I hope to see you in another game some day. You have keen vision and getting out of your spotlight is like escaping a jaw-trap. I thought I was going to have to chew my leg off.

The problem is that the "jaw-trap" can be miscalibrated and latch onto a townie if I don't restrain myself (I think something similar to this effect happened between Darox and Tony), so in this game it was slower and I tried to conceptualize my complaints on poor reasoning of the target rather than scumtells, while waiting for the opportune moment to spring it. If the moment doesn't come along, then hopefully I straightened a townie out a little bit. Unfortunately, between a nolynch and a massclaim, the opportunity was lost in the confusion.

Even though it's clear in the mafia-chat, I'll explain that D4 debacle. I was checking in constantly, waiting for wolf to vote fhq so that I could hammer. I'd been rallying so hard against DR that it was too risky for me to be the third vote on fhq. If bionic checked in before wolf, it might have cost us the game.

I'll try to be more considerate of scum missing quicklynches in the future

Then, on D5, when I was arguing with Rash, I realized that it had the ring of defending the mafia's actions. I thought for sure that Rash or bionic would catch that. It all ended well though. Still undefeated as scum. Woot!

I think I was hovering around that idea, but the argument I was spouting clouded the issue, and crywolf just HAD to be lynched at that point. Had I not been preoccupied with defending myself, I may have pushed the day longer to bring up scumpartner issues, but I probably would have argued bionic/fhq prior to my death.

Wolf, your performance was truly astonishing. I don't know how you lived as long as you did, but I've got to tip my hat to you. That "annoying fly" strategy worked

very

well. I think you've been my most useful buddy ever.

Day 1: Lowell was a distraction (understatement).
Day 2: Doc claim usually buys a day (night was another issue...)
Day 3: "MYLO" leads to massclaim, and town tries unsuccessfully to rig game with roles while nolynching for "comfort." We nearly lynched scum, then in twilight we tried to lynch another scum despite the passing of the deadline.
Day 4: DR's claim is somewhat contradictory for a pro-town player. End result: DR is lynched.
Day 5: Last powerrole dies, so the "doc" has to go.

Day 1 could have been avoided if we ignored Lowell's tells at that time, as one scum suggested, but then he's a scapegoat for any day thereafter if his play continues. Day 2 would have been very risky from a pro-town perspective: Mislynch and take all kinds of flak, or hammer scum and fend off bussing arguments. Day 3, someone had to argue more firmly against nolynching, which can be plausible. Days 4 and 5 were automatic given claims.

I think the standard pro-nolynch argument goes something like: we have a greater chance to hit scum the next day.

I recall reading a game that came to 4-players and had a similar issue. The convention was to nolynch. However, Glork argued against it. IIRC, his remarks were something to the effect of:

"You have to convince two townies as opposed to one to be wrong on another townie, which is more difficult for the mafia to do."

-there was also probably a point made where the mafia would use the kill to distort the game further
-Also, if a lynch can't be agreed upon with either a) scum lynched, or b) mislynch with 2 townies wrong, then you have c) A nolynch by deadline, as opposed to overly conservative play.

Instead of directly opposing the nolynch (and in part because I wasn't too against it), on day 3 I changed my vote several times and caught crywolf following me around. Day 4 started with me thinking in that direction.

[Rashiminos]

I was hoping that name claims might leave people thinking the Crossing Guard was some kind of Roleblocker.

For a moment I thought I was a cop when I saw the PM.

[Rashiminos]

Turns out the game was Mafia 60 with Glork, MGM, MBL, and Patrick in a 4-person scenario.

[Rashiminos]

When you have a night investigation role, it just seems silly to not give that role an opportunity for information. It just turns out this game had the fewest power roles of any mini I had played, so we didn't have the backup of the 'watcher' catching whoever killed the tracker as a backup. In hindsight, it is easy to say Wolf should have been lynched (same as I could say "I told you so" for wanting to lynch despite the doc claim on day 2) but it is not a productive thought process. If wolf had turned out to be doctor, then you can't rationalize a mislynch when she could have been confirmed at night.

I didn't say the nolynch argument was bad. The reasons you give here are valid, but I thought I had reason to believe that one or more claims were fake. Relying on claimed roles can be dicey. The last part of your statement here is reflective of what the town did on day 2, which I recall you were unhappy with at the time. Day 3 and beyond she was fair game for one reason or another.

Rash - I think part of what Ythill is commending you for was one of your flaws this game. Props for deciding properly on DR and suspecting Ythill for most of the game - not taking anything away from that. The only issue is that the quote war got too diluted. There has to be a way to condense an argument and cut it off if it goes on too long. I try to read all posts in fair detail, but I will admit to ending up just skimming when you two were going back and forth.

Here's a situation: Suppose you're trying to push a lynch on Z when everyone else wants to look at X, or maybe Y, and Z is oppositionally related to X and Y. You're the only really pushing at Z, and Z actively attempts to deflect criticism of this sort. Sure, you can attempt to be brief, concise, and maybe even terse. However, it's also easier for Z to deflect short, weak, and substance lacking arguments.

There comes a point where trying to condense an argument leads to weakening it and leaving gaps in reasoning or points discussed.

Those points took me awhile to make, and trying to condense them for easy reading would lead to either leaving out substance

(and getting backfire for it)

or take substantially more time.

Perhaps I could have condensed my arguments, but I think doing so would have hurt my arguments more than it would have increased their readership (at least at the time I made them).

The other thing is that I leave more commentary to refer back to for later use. Either I have said more, and can be judged accordingly, or the target of my scorn has had to be more active, and can be judged accordingly.

***

All of this being said, I do try to use white space, bolding, italics, underlines, symbols, CAPITALIZATION, etc to make stronger points stand out for the skimming minded.

***

As did Ythill, at times.

[Rashiminos]

EBWOP: Here's a condensed version:

I made longer arguments because I felt my shorter ones were not strong enough and I was concerned about leaving out important details. If I had to re-explain what seems like a stretch or crap-logic later, it would have counted against me. There's also the risk of my argument not being a viewed seriously due to a lack of effort/presence.

Better 1 or better 2?

[Rashiminos]

Your 2nd explanation was much clearer.

For the sake of curiousity, could you describe what elements of my first explanation you found to be less clear or unnecessary?

I give myself 3 "volleys" to debate one topic (yes I break this unintentionally). If somebody else hasn't seen my point by then, they won't.

Perhaps I'm too hopeful, or perhaps I think stewing something in someone's mind might help them remember more.

I know many people have a lower tolerance for excessive reading than I do and even I got worn down by your debate.

Maybe it's just me, but I tend to think "excessive" reading is a better problem than a lack of things to read, or a lack of people keeping up with the game. Unfortunately, reality intervenes in one way or another.

[Rashiminos]

Perhaps I'm too hopeful, or perhaps I think stewing something in someone's mind might help them remember more,

EBWOP: and get the connection I was trying to express.