Mini 692: Boost Mafia (Game Over!)

[sthar8]

Vote: Skillit

Die, scum, Die!

I have a theory about the setup that does not conform 100% with electra's, but it is close. If I'm right, early massclaim might be a game-breaking strategy for town. Unfortunately, while electra's post does support my idea, I don't have enough evidence to be sure, and I can't reveal the reasoning without showing the scum how to mitigate the damage.

So, I'd basically have to ask the town to trust me on a huge risk, which I'm not willing to do without more concrete evidence. What I'll do instead is ask everybody a question.

Do you feel that massclaim might be a viable strategy at this time?

[sthar8]

Fair enough, I just thought I'd get it out there and see what you all thought. Just in case I'm right, though, somebody remind me to explain the theory when we've either claimed or finished the game.

I'm with iLord's strategy: Normal play until we've got clear candidates for a boost.

Electra: How would you choose the second person to be boosted?

[sthar8]

@ skillit: You, of all people, should know you can trust me with something like that. But verifiability is always good, so I'll take your suggestion.

[sthar8]

Skillit, she just didn't differentiate between the two scum groups, and I can't frankly see a reason why we'd need to for any practical purpose. Whether a godfather starts off as one and gains an additional benefit from a boost or starts as a goon who becomes a godfather isn't really going to affect who we decide to boost. Electra just defined her sets a little differently than you did.

RR and eldarad-
After day1, when we have a little more background info about everybody, I'd be fine with boosting as we go. But for today, I'd like to develop a sense of who is scummy and who isn't before we boost anyone. (that's not to say we need a lynch first, though)

[sthar8]

I don't see how lynching before boosting gives us any more information - we won't learn the victim's alignment if we get a lynch majority before we've done the boosting thing. And we can't lynch Today without choosing two people to boost.
So I don't understand where you are going with this.

For one, it eliminates the chance that our best lynch turns out to be someone we've already boosted.

For another, waiting to boost until we've gotten some more information about each other will reduce the chances of us boosting scum.

We don't necessarily need to be certain of our lynch before we boost, but I think we should at least be closer, and that for today basing our boosts on our lynch wagons will be less risky than basing our lynch off our boostwagons.

I'm tempted to vote electra for her avatar, but I'd rather wait and see if we can keep the Skillit wagon going for a bit longer.

[sthar8]

What stage are you in?

Post-formal. How about you?

So are you considering a random vote or a serious wagon?

"Tempted" does not equal "considering." I was teasing electra based on her most recent post, and announcing that I see some value in the Skillit wagon. For the record, I consider my vote to still be random, but I also like the results of it sitting where it is. I don't see anything that merits a true nonrandom vote yet, although there are a couple promising leads.

[sthar8]

Incog: Wow...I hadn't even really noticed that I was doing that. And I HATE when people do that. I'm sorry

I'll pay more attention.

[sthar8]

I don't really buy you weren't noticing the stuff you wrote, this sorta panicky response looks like scum kicking himself for being suspected.

I was defending

my opinion

and I didn't stop to consider that the questions were directed at someone other than me, or that their primary objective might not be to understand the position I was taking. Would you prefer that I lied and came up with some bullshit reason to be answering other people's questions? The simple fact is that I wasn't paying enough attention to determine that I shouldn't have answered those questions at that time.

How does my response imply that I didn't know what I was writing? I know (and knew) exactly what I was saying, the only problem was that my timing should have been better.

I don't see how my response was panicky, or scummy. You're welcome to show me how admitting a mistake and promising to do better is indicative of alignment.

[sthar8]

Electra: I was under the impression that boosting works

exactly

like lynching. As in, once we reach a majority on a player, they are boosted and we don't get to take it back. If such a player were later to become the scummiest person or the strongest lynch, we would have wasted one of our boosts. It's not terribly likely, but such turnarounds can happen, especially if the day goes long.

Would you boost someone who had played a similar gambit to yours?

[sthar8]

Rough weekend. Sick. Will post more on monday.

[sthar8]

Sorry, guys. I spent most of yesterday doped up and sleeping, and I'm spending today doped up and working. I'll try to answer some of the more direct questions to avoid slowing down the town, but in-depth discussion is going to have to wait.

You have no problem with leaving a random vote on a bandwagon of 4 votes?

Not in this case, no. Should I?

sthar8: I'm wondering. Did you really think that a majority of people might be willing to go for an early Day 1 mass claim?

Not really. I thought it might help if we did, and electra had already done the first thing I thought of, so I figured I'd toss it out there. Worst case, I pick up some useful reactions, right?

I'd be willing to boost electra whenever we're ready to do that, but as I've already stated, my interpretation is that once someone has received a boost-majority, we are unlikely to be able to unboost them. This suggests that it would be pro-town to do the majority of our discussion before finalizing any boosts.

Sorry if I missed anything...

[sthar8]

First off, some stuff I forgot to mention last time.

I'll try and take it as a slight pro-town sign that you've called me of all people out on certain things when I've pretty much had absolutely nothing directed at me and have been finding myself trying to create my own content to get involved in.

This is manipulative and scummy.

In case anyone doesn't see what's going on here, in this quote Incog responds to lullaby's attack with "You're wrong to suspect me, but it's pro-town of you to pressure someone taking as little heat as I am." This isolates lullaby's view as minority and dismisses his attack by reminding everybody that no one is particularly suspicious of Incog otherwise. It also does some very subtle buddying, portraying Incog as a nonthreat or ally to lullaby, making him less likely to pursue Incog in the future, if it works. I've used this tactic to great effect as scum.

If this were representative of your total response to lullaby, I'd be voting for you.

"damn, made a mistake. Guess I'll apologize it away"

Not quite how I'd phrase it, but the sentiment is very close to accurate. How is this scummy?

Sthar8 knows me better than anyone on this site and i think he knew i was just kidding, even if nobody else did.

Yes, and yes.

the fact that he only spoke about the relevance of what i was saying, and never taking it either way (scum / town) seems like intentional aversion to the subject.

Partly. The other part is that my read on you is not strong yet, so I'm not going to do any defending for you.

its not at all like him to avoid topics of major discussion (which i think those from all camps can agree this was at least), so his doing so seems a little questionable.

Yes, and yes. There is a reason.

Now, let's talk about this:

I think sthar8, Electra, and to a lesser extent TDC should at least justify why they feel their votes are on the best wagon at this current time.

First, I will acknowledge that I know Skillit fairly well. His opening mentions on Electra are analogous to a vote for being his scumpartner in the last game. Without speaking to motive, I can clearly state from experience that the sections that have been referred to as accusations were intended as humor, evidenced by their wildly dramatic and vague nature, as well as the lack of true support. The discussion on Electra's theory, however, was genuine, though I doubt he intended to imply that what he saw as logical flaws make her scum. That being said, I do not have a solid read on Skillit at this time. His behavior so far has been non-indicative.

Unvote

My vote on Skillit remained not because I thought he was scummy, but because I felt that the information gained from the wagon was useful. I figured that Skillit would look like an easy wagon at this point, and that regardless of his alignment, we'd likely catch some scum tagging along. I was also entertaining a very slight hope that someone would forget about the unique lynching mechanics and drop a poorly reasoned false hammer, catching out scum on the first day.

I don't see any waffling that would be indicative of a partner deciding to bus, but Crazy's poorly justified and lately applied vote highlights his other behavior, which is a shining beacon of scumminess.

In his first substantial post, Crazy notes his own inactivity and blames it on a lack of interest in the game so far, which is a weak indicator of scum in my experience so far, since early day 1 is about as boring for scum as you can get. They have no major objective other than avoiding attention and getting closer to night, and since they have no need to create any serious content, their boredom often manifests as indifference and apathy to whatever is going on.

He continues on to express suspicion of

four

other players, without providing any reasoning on two of them. I cannot think of any reason for both variety

and

inconsistancy unless he's just looking for an easy wagon. Note that Crazy's vote does go to the wagon that is the largest at this point.

He then encourages us not to worry about boosting scum, expresses unsupported suspicions of two apparently unconnected players, and buddies up to eldarad before signing off.

Was there anything protown about that post?

Vote: Crazy

At the risk of being accused of OMGUS, I'd say that RR is my number two suspect. Leeching, buddying, and bullshitting the town, with the latter two demonstrated clearly in his last post. I'd like to point out that the first of his examples of an acceptable response is effectively identical to the one I provided, except in phrasing, and that the second would have involved lying to the town.

iLord is a distant third, due to a mechanics issue, but i'm going to withhold substantial judgement until we've got some more content from him. Nobody else is far behind iLord on my scumlist.

I'll break with personal pattern for this game and say that I think Electra is the most townie, because of the corroboration her gambit provided to my theories about the setup.

[sthar8]

EBWOP: Crossposting with Incog. Reading his stuff now.

[sthar8]

To apologize to another player somewhat suggests that the player being apologized to has some kind of authority over the other player

What?

An apology (in the sense that I offered one) is an acknowledgement of regret for violating a moral code, in this case the code that states that townies should do protown things. In no way does it imply an authoritative relationship.

And while it may seem that I directed my apology to you personally, it was intended for the town as a whole. You, personally, did not suffer from my lapse; you suffered as a member of the town-group (if you are town).

Town has less inclination bothh kick themselves for not looking pro town enough and make an active effort to not draw suspicion.

I'm kicking myself for interfering in the efforts of other townies to form a read on another player, not for some self-image paranoia. And where did you get the impression that I'm trying to avoid attention on this issue?

[sthar8]

A what?

Something he said made me think that he might not have the same kind of role pm that I got. Since mine is town, he could be scum. Very,

very

weak indicator, and as I said, I'm not going to do anything about it until we've got some more content from him.

[sthar8]

Working on a post, ran out of time at work. I'll try to get it up after beer and pizza.

[sthar8]

I'm enjoying this game immensely, even though I've been less active than I should.

SL,

you need to take a deep breath and back off for a bit. Maybe focus on somebody else for a while, then streamline and refine your case on Incog after you are both less emotionally invested. At this point, it's difficult to read your posts (both of you) and determine what is relevant and what is meaningless quibbling because you don't want to back down and lose theoretical territory.

Incog,

at the risk of starting an argument with you, I'll point out that you seem to be overly fond of ad hominem, ad lapidem and horse laugh arguments in SL's case. Whether you are justified or not, I know that my own reaction to being the target of such tactics would make their classification as "goads" more than acceptable. I'm omitting specific examples in the interest of brevity, and because this is not indicative of alignment, but if you'd like me to point out some instances in which you've been provocative, let me know.

I'm sure you've already realized this, but you misread my thoughts as well as Electra's regarding SL.

Jahudo:

I don't find anything odd about the timing of the vote since Crazy was supposedly away and got prodded. I also don't think he just jumped on the largest wagon because I don't see him trying to push it without anything new to show for it. Maybe that's indicative of something else, though.

The odd part is that he'd add the L-2 vote on page 4 with a case based on a single, page 1 action and

without

expressing any awareness that a hammer might not be a hammer at this point. As for his lack of pushing, why would scum want to skyline themselves so close to the perceived lynch? Any pushing he did would draw unwanted attention.

I think it's okay to suspect people like he did for TDC and RR, by not saying anything just yet. To me, it seems he's not as serious because it's not outlined. But using it as a preemption back by other people is another thing.

I agree, but what caught my eye is that he

didn't

maintain any consistency over all four of his suspicions. The way he treated Skillit and I was different from how he treated TDC and RR. I'm also a little suspicious of the fact that he basically announced that he wasn't paying very much attention, then tries to direct our attention to those

four

players. The quantity of suspicion combines with the explanation for the noncontribution and the inconsistent method to suggest mudslinging, in my opinion. It looks like crazy saying "Here's where I want you looking, town." And that's scummy.

Crazy:

I'd find this very scummy if I didn't already think he was town... crap.

Why, out of curiosity? Is it more or less scummy after I explained my reasoning for being vague on the Skillit thing?

sthar - What's your current opinion on massclaiming?

You know, ignoring everything I've said to you is not really the best way to convince me to cooperate with your questioning.

However, since others might like to know the answer to this question:
At this point, I wouldn't advocate massclaiming solely to test my setup theory. Part of the reason it might have worked was that scum would not have had an opportunity to gain any information from townie posts yet. There have been too many hints dropped in the meantime. Also, the initial reaction to the proposal gives me significant reason to doubt my guesses. The fact that no one had come up with the same theory as me suggests that I was either wrong, or that no one else was giving the setup as much thought as I was. I'm not going to gamble on the assumption that I was right where everyone else disagrees.

[sthar8]

My theory's different?

Does Electra's claim strengthen your theory?

Apparently, since I don't agree with :

I will note that if my theory about the set-up is correct, Electra would have to be scum. That being said, I don't really think said theory is correct, but we'll see soon enough.

In fact, her claim only really supports my theory if she is town.

[sthar8]

Another reason to avoid the massclaim for now, unless there's another reason to go for it. Plus, if you're scum, you confirm that there is enough info in-thread to counteract the effect of the claims.

[sthar8]

sthar8, where exactly did Crazy encourage anyone not to worry about boosting scum?

I don't see another sentiment that can be conveyed with the statement:

It's not like a boost is an automatic win, right?

This suggests that we shouldn't be too worried about granting scum extra powers, even though the mod himself warned us against doing so. I don't know about you, but I don't want to give scum

any

more advantages than they already have, no matter how insignificant Crazy imagines them to be. It is my opinion that Crazy was supporting Electra's bid because others were doing so at the time, and tossed in this sentiment to encourage it's like.

Furthermore, what would stop scum from doing the exact same thing Electra did? There is no great risk involved this early in the game, she could have claimed scum in her first post and it wouldn't have led to her lynch if she gave a halfway decent explanation. The worst thing that happens to her is that she simply

doesn't

get boosted, and has some minor suspicion on her.

Also the only way you could definitively say that Crazy "buddies up" to eldarad is if you know with great certainty that eldarad is town.

This accusation is ridiculous and baseless. At no point have I claimed certainty about anyone's alignment, and I don't see any reason that we can't speculate based on our opinions, especially when other support is provided. If you're waiting for hard evidence, you'd better hope we've got multiple sane cops, or you're in for a rough game. In addition, Crazy agreed

unconditionally

with

everything

eldarad had said up to that point. Since crazy didn't point out any specific issues, the only purpose that could serve is either to indicate that he felt that eldarad was exceptionally protown, or to influence eldarad's opinion. Given Crazy's professed disinterest in the thread, I doubt that he was aware of eldarads opinions and the surrounding context to merit that level of support, which leaves potential buddying. Also note, crazy's support of eldarad is yet another instance in which he has followed the crowd.

I'm not really familiar with the term "horse laugh"

I learned it as the horse laugh, but a more common term might be an "appeal to ridicule"

Do you think that attention was diverted from his L-2 vote reasoning because he also suspected those 3 other people in his post? In other words, does suspecting other people decrease the seriousness of what he did?

Interesting notion, and not one I'd considered before. Very possibly correct, however. Slinging mud at three other players might have been intended to distract from the L-2 vote.

In addition to what I already answered, turning it into a moral issue which sthar as a good townie felt he was compelled to apologize for takes the matter of him being scum out of the equation.

Not to beat a dead horse, since this issue appears to be resolved, but harming the town would not violate any moral contract as scum, since scum should be expected to do everything they can to win.

The wagon was on four votes for a pretty long time, yet none of the voters seemed really interested to push it any further.

We've had other things to discuss in the meantime, and crazy hasn't shown up to give us any more support for his case. I've said my bit, and I'm trying to answer questions as best I can. Crazy has not given a real response to anything said against him, so continuing on the same points devolves to needless repetition. Tunnel vision from any of us is not good play.

My suspects are still crazy, RR, iLord, in that order. iLord is narrowing the gap, which I'll explain further tonight or tomorrow.

[sthar8]

I guess some people need to be reminded of what the word "commitment" means...

Welcome, mana_ku.

Hi guardian, welcome to the game.

Jahudo: My opinion is already on the record, but I think the final outburst was almost entirely unprovoked. The whole thing makes me nervous about Incog because I've manipulated people's emotions before as scum, but I've also seen scum react this way to perceived slights (Muerrto reacting to Elmo in the last game Incog modded), and this kind of over-invested firestorm confuses reads on everyone involved, while I've got three better suspects.

Now, let's talk about iLord:

1. He continually pushed RR to back off from his attack on me (Do I need defending? How are you so sure of my alignment?), but once RR admitted that his read has changed, iLord started pushing him for changing his mind. While it would be reasonable to continue pushing based on your original points, attacking someone for

cooperating

seems really odd.

2. I really didn't like how he attempted to discredit Electra's opinions with an ad hominem attack aimed at her experience. I especially didn't like how vague he was in describing these tells, combined with his remarks to RR, Electra and Incog about how tells cannot be blindly and uniformly applied.

3. His setup theory is obviously based on a significantly different starting premise than mine. One solid explanation for this is that his alignment is different from mine.

4. He's been very soft on Crazy, especially considering his strong pushes elsewhere. I would not be surprised if Crazy and iLord are partners.

As you can see, none of these points are particularly strong, and two of them hinge on testable hypotheses. I'm not willing to lynch iLord at this time, especially since the case on Crazy is so much stronger, but I'm definitely keeping an eye on him.

We need more from Electra, TDC, and FL.

[sthar8]

Cooperating is something any alignment can do.

Exactly. So why attack him for it?

They were vague, and I can't really explain it, but a lot of Electra's overview posts give me huge newb reads.

But why bring that up, if not to discredit her opinions? It's not like how new she is to the game will affect how likely we are to lynch her.

Guardian:

eldarad and incognito are linked.

I'm interested. Can you elaborate?

I don't really see why everyone has been so cautious to boost.

My caution, at least, has been from a desire to see that no one achieves a boost majority too quickly. I felt that it was best to be more cautious earlier, since some players might not attach the same significance to boosting as to voting, and might not be as careful as they would if the action was likely to result in a death. For the record, I'd be comfortable picking our boosts and lynching Crazy at this point, though we should probably give his replacement a chance to defend himself first.

Elmo: can we get a boost/vote count please?

[sthar8]

I don’t believe I’ve discredited her opinions. I just haven’t found them noteworthy.

This is not a sufficient answer to the question I asked you.

I wish things were this simple. There isn't one scum course of action, it depends on a multidute of factors that are very hard to define and evaluate.

What changed?

TDC: Do you have any opinions to share? Who do you think is scum? What do you think about Crazy's following the town? Who do you think we should boost?

I see a lot of questions from you, which is good, but not a whole lot of scumhunting, which is bad. You're not expressing many opinions, which makes you very hard to read. You're still sitting on the vote you made in your second serious post, with no explanation or push since then. If you have any specific questions about the Crazy case, I'd be glad to answer them, but "please explain everything" isn't going to get you anywhere, as I've already tried to explain the best I can.

I'd rather you hadn't mentioned it, but meh.

Why?

I am reevaluating whether their connection is really two-ways or is rather one way.

Note that early on the questions I was answering were directed at iLord, not myself. I don't believe there is a significant link on my part after that, and I had not intended to defend him. This may have encouraged him to create a link to me, but I'm not sure whether the motivation is more likely scum or town.

What do you think of Crazy?

Electra: Who do you suspect, beside crazy?

Need more from Mana_Ku and FL.

Top three are Crazy, iLord, RR, in that order. RR and iLord are close.

Note that anyone should feel free to answer the questions posed to TDC, but I'd especially like his views.

[sthar8]

sthar8: What do you think of Guardian's linking of you to iLord?

I definitely see it. As I pointed out, it started with me (inadvertently) connecting myself to iLord, which is rather funny since he was one of my top suspects then, and still is. Since then, I think the connection is mostly one-sided on his part, with him defending me and attacking my attacker, while never directly challenging me and frequently referring to me as townie. This could be buddying, but I'm not sure since my behavior was so similar. I'm not going to push a case against him, because one of my major reasons for suspecting him is based on nonpublic information and another is based on speculation about someone else's alignment. Town would be foolish to trust these points. He remains in my top three, though.

TDC: Thanks for the answers. That's exactly what I was looking for.

I know it probably doesn't help you much on Skillit, but I can say without doubt that his early play is very typical of him. I am certain that his attack on Electra was meant as a joke, and I know that he never intended it otherwise. This all comes from a strong familiarity with his personality that I acquired when he and I worked together in meatworld, before he moved away to go back to college. I can also say, because I have a limited knowledge of his schedule, that his flaking was likely the result of overcommitment near the end of the semester.

None of this is indicative of alignment, however. I can point you to several examples of his scum play, but Skillit has only once received a town PM to my knowledge. I'm eager to hear Mana_Ku's opinions on the game as well.

What do you think I will learn from a Crazy-meta? My time is limited and I'd like to focus the search if possible.

As for his "following the crowd," Crazy's vote, his support of eldarad, support of Electra, and support of Incog over SL all tag along with the majority of opinions expressed before him. I think this is happening too often for coincidence.

Boost: TDC

Guardian:
119 gives my initial thoughts on Crazy and Skillit. 205 and 253 contain relevant answers to questions asked about my suspicions.

I would like everyone to let the group know what they think about

Incognito's dismissive-ness of arguments against him in general

My recent points against Incognito

Incognito in general

The jury is still out on Incog. Overall, his posts seem like they are looking for the kind of information I want as town, but I've seen a few examples of fallacy or emotional and strategic manipulation that make good sense for scum. I don't like his attack on SL/guardian, partly because I'm not convinced that SL would have seen enough suspicion to warrant "preemptive OMGUS" in the vague questioning that Incog was doing at the time. I definitely see goads and dismissiveness in some of his posts, but I'm not convinced that they are being used to scummy purpose.

Side note: I was considering an Incog-SL scum team a bit ago, but I dismissed the idea when what I read as possible bussing became too personal. I could see an Incog- iLord connection, but I'd need more evidence to pursue.

iLord:

I must be missing something then - I believe you asked why was I discrediting her opinions?

No, I asked :

But why bring that up, if not to discredit her opinions?

Everybody: I know that there is something I wanted to talk about that I missed, but I'm pressed for time at the moment. I'm packing tonight to go camping tomorrow, I'll be out of town until sometime monday, when I'll figure out what I've forgotten.

[sthar8]

I was mentioning my view - I didn't read her as scummy or town, but as a new player.

Why

? Not "how," not "what." I already know the answers to those questions.

Hmm, sthar8, didn't realize you actually knew Skillit off MS.

When he first started playing here we had to clear it with Mr Flay, and we couldn't play in the same games until after he moved.

Do you happen to have a link to the one game where he's been town?

I'll dig it up, but I don't think it'll help much. If I recall correctly, he replaced in halfway through a day for a claimed doc, helped lynch the obvious scum and was nightkilled. Here's the link to Skillit's first post in that game.

(Because in themselves they are pretty similar to mine, so I guess your point here is the timing, right?)

Yeah. Although I did check you out when I decided to move my vote off Skillit's wagon. Your opinions seemed to contain genuine and original reasoning, where Crazy was just agreeing with the majority.

sthar8, you mentioned that you initially thought springlullaby and I could have been distancing scum buddies early on due to our back and forths. What do you think of the iLord <-> Raging Rabbit exchange?

It could go either way. If they are distancing, I think it's not likely to be the same kind of "safe" distancing I suspected you of, where you could create a heated but ultimately meaningless argument. If they are partners, I'd expect that iLord felt that RR was going to take more heat than he has for his vote on me, and decided to do some bussing while he didn't need to manufacture a reason. iLord could also be scum without RR, and be seeing an easy wagon. Or I could be wrong about iLord and he might be dead on with RR, though RR is starting to look more and more protown to me.

My first impressions make me suspicious of Electra, iLord, eldarad, sthar8 and springlullaby/Guardian although this may change when I've delved deeper.

I hope you're wrong, otherwise we're in LYLO

Seriously, though, if you had to vote/boost, who would it be for?

I just think that sometimes a defense has to hold up in the game it's brought up in and meta's are only a manipulating factor in reading how a player is behaving for a particular event in another to explain away something in this one.

QFT. Self-aware meta, and particularly self-presented meta, can only ever be a null tell and is often scummy. There is no reason for town to trust someone when they announce that they are behaving like they "always do." It's a simple matter to go mining for games that support your position, as town or scum.

Jahudo, you asked me about some of Incog's rhetorical tendencies. That turned into a rather lengthy post, so I'll put it up seperately as soon as it's finished.

Top three are: Huntress, iLord, RR in that order.

Welcome, gem!

Mana_Ku, Electra: Thoughts?

[sthar8]

Mana_Ku:

This gives me the impression that he has chosen to boost Electra (as he says second)

Your impression is wrong. Obviously Electra would prefer that she be the first one boosted, I wanted to know what criteria she would apply to the second.

Why did you want to know this?

To help determine the motive behind Electra's opening post. I thought it possible that the goal of her strategy was not to get boosted.

Should this matter?

Is this question relevant to anything?

Something iLord said gives you the impression that you have different kind of roles. Why mention this with iLord, but not with Electra?

The answer to this should be blindingly obvious.

How do you know?

I hope this is a joke...

[sthar8]

If Raging Rabbit is beginning to look more and more pro-town to you, why is he still number three in your order of suspicions?

Because he

was

number two and "more protown" than number two is number three? I'm not sure what you're getting at here.

I think Incog's attitude is nonindicative. I feel like the case against him boils down to "I don't like his method of attacking SL, :. scum." While I could see many of his behaviors coming from scum, I don't see anything that points definitively to him

being

scum.

I think that the case against SL/Guardian is exceptionally weak. I see that SL was overemotional. I see that her case was poor, but she kept pushing it. I also understand that some of you feel that the frustration was false, but I can't understand why SL-scum would take such a big risk so early in the game, nor how any of the other points make her scummy, as opposed to frustrated and wrong.

Anybody who expected an unbiased perspective from Guardian must have been suffering from some kind of delusion, and I fail to see how the intrusion of reality onto that dreamworld makes guardian scummy. (no offense, Guardian)

We need to hear more from RR, Electra, Mana, Gem, and Huntress.

I am

so

happy with my vote right now.

Boost: TDC

[sthar8]

EBWOP: Apparently, I was already boosting TDC. My bad.

[sthar8]

If he's looking more and more pro-town to you as of late, what is it exactly that's keeping him on your list of suspicions at all?

This is a fallacious assumption. Why would RR's falling place on my scumlist necessitate his removal from my suspect list?

[sthar8]

Your mentioning that RR is looking more and more pro-town to you did not lead me to believe that he was merely moving a spot down along your list; it lead me to believe that you were beginning to think he was likely town, period.

Then you are attaching connotation to my words that wasn't intended. Whatever arbitrary "implied" meaning you choose to find is irrelevant. What I said makes no mention of RR actually being town, just that his more recent actions were seeming more like town than his previous ones.

Let's try a (heavily simplified) graphical approach:
Here's a continuum of scumminess, with confirmed scum at the beginning, and confirmed town at the end:
scum<----1--2---3---------4----------------------5--------------------------------------------->town

Persons at 1, 2, and 3 are clearly the scummiest, and would make up my suspect list. If Person 2 started to sound like town, he might drop to position 4. Assuming that no player falls on the line between positions 3 and 4, then the suspect list only changes by one place, even though the person at 4 is much less suspicious than the person at 3. That person is still far more suspicious than someone at position 5, and I wouldn't call them "likely town" unless they sat somewhere between 5 and the town end.

[sthar8]

We need to hear more from

RR

, Electra, Mana, Gem, and Huntress.

Thanks, RR.

Mod: can we get a prod on Mana_ku?

I still think electra is likely town, but the evidence for that is about as solid as the evidence for iLord being scum, so I'm not willing to boost her unless we get some more contribution.

Huntress has done nothing to change the read I had of Crazy, so I'm still very happy with my vote.

Mana_ku's vagary and seeming fixation on irrelevant points makes me very nervous.

I'm happy boosting TDC, and I'd have to reread to see who I'd be willing to switch to, or who I'd boost if Electra doesn't come through.

[sthar8]

are you still happy with your vote on Huntress (Crazy)? What's your opinion on the Guardian/Incog cases now that you can read them in one handy post?

Oh, yeah. Nothing Huntress has done has contradicted my read on Crazy, and her lack of contribution is making my theory look really good.

As for Incog/Guardian, I think that the case reads as too sincere on both sides for them both to be scum. They are each trying too hard to see the other dead in the absence of any real danger to either of them for this to be a good example of bussing or distancing.

I could definitely see one of them being scum, but the major points that each side is convinced are proof of scum strike me as plausible and likely reactions to the situation. Incog does have a good and (possibly) valid point about guardian's "dirty" reads, but guardian has a good and (possibly) valid point about Incog's provocative behavior. I'm really not comfortable lynching either of them today.

I could also see either one as iLord's buddy.

Top suspects are now Huntress, iLord. Yes, I've removed the third spot. RR's recent actions are giving me a perspective that makes his previous ones appear less scummy. I'm trying to decide who is the next most suspicious.

[sthar8]

Rereading eldarad. The sudden push on him seems odd to me, because I was reading him as protown less than four pages ago, but the number of accusers would warrant a closer look even if I thought that all the points against him were garbage (which I don't).

Also looking at Jahudo.

Assuming no major upsets, I'd be comfortable voting for Huntress, iLord, and Mana_Ku. Note that mana hasn't done anything particularly scummy, but her lack of real contribution even when she's not lurking terribly means that her lynch is not a bad one, even if it is a little sub-par.

Huntress continues to look like a fine catch of fresh scum. She may not be leeching or following the crowd like crazy was, but her entrance named nearly half the town as possible suspects, which is suspicious for the reasons that Incog has already enumerated in guardian's case. Furthermore, the only specifics we have from her are a case against electra, a claimed info role,

after she was boosted

. Now, I'm not going to say we should treat electra as confirmed town (my straw men wouldn't be that obvious ) but this seems suspiciously like scum trying to eliminate a dangerous role without using up their NK. Given the information in-thread, I can't think of any situation short of mod-confirming electra as scum (Patrick, not elmo) that could possibly make electra the best lynch today, before we've gained any info from her claim or fake-claim. Assuming the absolute best about huntress, this is still a waste of her time, and the town's, especially so close to deadline.

[sthar8]

it does seem rather pointless for someone to focus so much attention on a person like Electra who was, at the time, almost assuredly going to be boosted

Not "was going to be boosted." When Huntress presented her case, electra had

already been boost-hammered

. This is a [i[huge[/i] difference. Where guardian was arguing against electra's boost (which may be intensely protown), huntress is either attempting to engineer electra's lynch today or preemptively discredit her information tomorrow.

what do you think about your being boosted so much, and people's timing and reasons for boosting you?

I'm at B-1, right?

Well, I'm glad we're getting the boost out of the way, and I'm glad that I'm playing well enough to be trusted with a boost. I think that everyone is feeling the imminence of deadline, and I think that I might be seen as the "safe" boost, as far as expressing opinions go, and a good compromise for those who are more worried about reaching consensus. I'm not sure that I'm the most advantageous boost today, for various reasons that I don't want made public. My preferred boost is still TDC, but I'm not going to complain too much if it's me.

what makes you think mana_ku is intentionally lurking rather than being inactive?

The fact that her game posts have been devoid of meaningful content. Even if she is only inactive, I'm not sure I care too much. I'd rather rid the town of a noncontributing player than support a lynch I find to be questionable, especially on Day 1. Of course, if the mod is going to replace her, there is no longer a reason to lynch her, as we should let her replacement get up to speed.

I think that suspicion of Electra is a healthy thing and am not sure why that is a point against Huntress. Sharing opinions about the alignments of other players is never a waste of time, even if it is sure that they are not going to be lynched today.

Under normal circumstances, I'd agree wholeheartedly about being transparent with one's opinions (at least about scum). However, some opinions are of greater value than others, and Huntress has been giving us the information that is

least

valuable to the town. While the rest of us are scrambling to find an acceptable lynch before deadline, Huntress is busily making vague noises, announcing that she is contributing, and only giving us specific opinions on the

one

person whose lynch is

guaranteed

bad play for the town. Earlier in the day, discussion for the sake of discussion, even aimed at the goals of another day, is fine. But once the deadline is

already in place

real townies realize that we need to buckle down and pick someone to kill. Anything else is actively anti-town, and the only players with incentive to act against the town are scum.

I'd like to reiterate again that your actions, while similar, are fundamentally and significantly different from Huntress's.

[sthar8]

sthar8, you're opinion on Eldarad after looking at his past few posts?

I don't see it. I think his attack based on your boost of electra over guardian is garbage, as I think it's clear what you were trying to accomplish. However, he has a really good point about your suspicions being backed by summary rather than reasoning. "Pushing one bad point, :. scum" is not a valid standalone reason for a lynch, as we have seen in the cases of RR, Incog, SL, Skillit, and yourself.

As you said earlier, the few poor points in his last couple of posts do not outweigh his protown contributions from earlier.

Eldarad: You seem to have undergone a quite radical shift of opinion on Incog. Is there any cause for this apart from your scumteam theory?

So it's scummy to mention that as many as five players had given me reason to look closer at them from a quick initial read? Considering there are likely to be around threeish scum I don't think five is excessive. Neither do I think that Incog's comments re: Guardian apply here.

It could be. As Incog pointed out, scum have more incentive to accuse a greater number of people: since they are looking for easy lynches, they want to be free to move their vote (or opinions) around without looking suspicious. Normally this argument is very weak when applied to a replacement, because a new perspective in the game may be at least a little more paranoid than others. Under such circumstances, the argument that you are simply vomiting forth any useful information might hold some water. However, in this game, we are required by a game mechanic to publicize our opinions on who is town as well. You failed to mention who had given you the most boostable impressions, leaving me to wonder why you chose to release one type of information without the other. I conclude that you were either very intent on helping us find scum, or you were trying to keep "avenues of suspicion" open for later exploitation. Given the information that has resulted from your "deeper look" I find it much more likely that you simply didn't want to commit to calling anyone protown.

I started with Electra because she was the first to catch my attention. I was doing my read on her and getting my thoughts together before she was boosted. What would have been the point of not posting it? I still had questions I wanted answered. Please don't forget that I'm still catching up and didn't have the opportunity to raise these points at the time they originally came up. Remember, there's also the possibility I might not be alive tomorrow. Would you rather my thoughts on her remained hidden?

I don't care about your questions and probing before the deadline, or before the boost. Once we had boosted electra, especially under a deadline, a townie would have evaluated how useful her information would be to the town. You might still have posted it, but I would expect at least some effort to

find lynchable scum

instead of what we got, which was, "I'm posting!"

Your statement about not being alive tomorrow is ridiculous. In fact, I'd be glad if scum killed someone who isn't contributing anything relevant to town discussion, and killing scummy townies would be a welcome assistance.

I still have a lingering doubt from the impression I had of him when I did my initial read of the whole thread.

In other words, "I don't want to call him scum, but I'd like to be on record against him in case his wagon becomes convenient." This further validates my suspicion of your list of suspects.

And his current scramble to divert attention from Elderad back to me combined with his desire to supress discussion of my other top suspect obviously doesn't help.

"But look at these other undesirable things he's doing, that should make his points less valid." And do we

really

need to discuss why electra should live until tomorrow?

The reason I haven't been saying much about others is that almost all of it has already been said,

Bull. This view is incompatible with your stated reasons for uselessly pushing electra.

Contrary to what you are saying, I haven't been spending my time on Electra; I've barely looked at her since writing post 458.

Apart from one or two of her more recent posts she seems to be just responding to questions, not asking them. The observing is a possible scum-tell but I would have to do a meta on Electra before deciding if it's actually scummy for her or not.

Elderad and Electra are my top suspects at the moment [...] I'm still waiting for Electra's response to my comments in post 458.

@ Electra: As I said above I'm still waiting for a response to post 458.

And, of course, the first 2/3 of your last post, which I'm sure everyone can find.

And the point isn't that you've ignored everyone else, it's that we don't have a solid or reasoned opinion on

anyone

else. The most specific you've gotten (aside from your recent ad hom against me) is:

iLord, Jahudo, sthar8, fuzzylightning/RandomGem and TDC are looking town-like so far.

Electra: Huntress's play reminds me a good deal of me in a certain mini normal. Can you confirm this impression?

Guardian's arguing against Electra's boost can also be seen as intensely scummy if Electra is actually who she says she is.

True, but I'd really prefer to base any cases on observations we can make

now

, or at least test the testable information before we jump to conclusions. Huntress's play is scummy if electra is scum and scummier if she is town, which is why I'm comfortable with killing her.

sth, to put it bluntly, how many of the people who consensus-boosted you in the past few pages do you think are likely to be scum?

To be blunt right back: At least one. What I was getting at: How do we know which are boosting me to be "safe," (scum) and who is attempting to reach consensus (town)?

I know that there is more for me to respond to, but due to a family emergency, I'm going to need to put it off. I'm also out of town this weekend (I think that makes every weekend since this game has started- I should probably just put that in my sig) so I may not get back to this before monday.

[sthar8]

I'm getting a little tired of reiterating the explanation for my summaries. They are just a summary - an organizer. My reasoning follows after questions or cases.

That's fine, because I don't think anyone misunderstands your intentions in that post at this point. I happen to think it is very scummy to provide suspicions without reasoning, and I feel that it is very probable that scum would provide some kind of summary or notes to flesh out the post without giving the town any info we can use.

Before I start, I just want to disown Skillit's weird "illogical" argument against Electra that occupied the first few pages of his posts. It was dumb (to be frank), flawed and pointless.

I, for one, don't have enough read on skillit of mana to hold anything they've done against you. I'd also like to point out that I have reliable meta info that that argument was intended as a joke.

putting him in a booster seat

Do those make sense to anyone but me?

Yup.

I thought Huntress was more cautious not to exempt Electra from scrutiny just because she’s been boosted.

I could be wrong, but I don't think

anyone

is exempting electra from suspicion. It's just demonstrably antitown to do anything about it right now.

When I did my initial read I wasn't thinking about who to boost, just looking for possible scum.

So you chose to ignore a significant game mechanic and barrier to lynching during your first read? Like I said, given the quality of information that we have recieved, I don't believe you.

You imply that I'm not making any effort to find lynchable scum and yet, in the same sentence, you quote a couple of words from a post that reports the progress of my continuing individual reads, my read on iLord to be precise.

I'm not sure how I could have been more explicit with that statement. And your "progress report" gives us exactly

zero

information, which is basically my whole point.

I note that you address the second to last sentence of that quote but not the last one.

Ok, I'l do it now.

That last sentence is a manipulative strategy using a fallacy known as a "straw man" in which you assume the weakest and least relevant argument possible on my side in order to make my argument appear less valid. I'm pretty sure everybody saw it, categorized it correctly, and ignored it, because it bears no relevance to the discussion.

So why are you raising the subject?

Um, you accused me of attempting to "suppress discussion" on this topic. So, you brought it up. So, what's your point here?

Come to think of it, is that an admission that you are trying to divert attention from Elderad?

Loaded question? And entirely baseless, since I've commented on the Eldarad issue and added my opinions to the discussion.

The points I was raising with Electra were things I couldn't find answers to in the thread. I had questions about others but all that I wanted to ask had already been asked and answered in the thread and I didn't see the point in repeating them. If I should want clarification on anything you can be sure I will raise it when I need to.

So all that stuff about how important it is for you to express your opinion on every subject no matter how irrelevant to the current discussion fits into this how?

None of them required any additional research. So what is your point here?

My point is that since I can't watch you play the game in person, the only gauge I have for your comparative effort on a particular player is the amount of attention you give them in thread. Since electra remains your most discussed topic, as well as one of your "top suspects," I see evidence that you are giving her more attention than

anyone else

.

I guess you must have completely overlooked post 545, which I posted nine hours before you posted this, and which contains my case against Eldarad.

Actually, that post was typed mostly before your post, but due to the family emergency I didn't have enough time to revise as I would have liked. Regardless, what are you trying to say with that "nine hours" nonsense?

I still maintain that you've given Electra's case far more attention than the (more relevant) eldarad case.

And what ad hom do you mean?

And his current scramble to divert attention from Elderad back to me combined with his desire to supress discussion of my other top suspect obviously doesn't help.

This is pretty much a textbook example of attacking someone to decrease the value of their arguments. It may not be as personal as some of the examples we've already had in this thread, but that doesn't make it any less fallacious.

You have a point, but why isn't lynching him the right move? If she claims a guilty investigation result on scum she's either bussing or town.

Wait, lynching who?

Again, it's sthar who felt he comitted a scumtell

No, I did something antitown. Not even close to the same thing.
That said, I understand what you're trying to say here.

RG really needs to start posting.

Pretty much.

Not as such, but it can be when combined with other factors.

Ooh, mysterious.

Your statement that Crazy agreed with EVERYTHING you said consistently up until post 166 is blatantly false.

Massive QFT to everything that eldarad has said so far.

I don't know where he got the number 166, but your emphasis is clearly in the wrong place.

Overall I did not find Crazy suspicious. What is the case on him?

I'll summarize it (again ) a little later.


Portland was... wet. I also gave notice at my job today. Last day of work is the 29th, which may or may not affect posting.

Not done rereading Jahudo yet, sorry

[sthar8]

sth if you want to just link to the crazy case next time you post that would be helpful. I'll try and find it.

I actually think it'll help if I reiterate and summarize. I'm working on it, don't worry, but in the absence of a deadline, I need to finish my reread on Jahudo first.

I disagree with what Incognito has said and you have said about finding multiple players suspicious to be scummy.

Maybe it's a bit clearer if I say that the scummy part is maintaining vague suspicion on a large number of players? Being skeptical is protown, refusing to commit and keeping avenues of attack open to avoid drawing attention later is scummy. It's not the "I don't consider anyone to be probable town," it's "I think half the town is scummy enough to mention, but I'm not going to vote for anyone or provide a useful case until I have to."

My summaries do not give the rest of the town a lot of info to use. However, if you ask me why I put someone somewhere, then I'll explain my reasoning.

See, this is exactly the problem I have with that post. You state who you find to be the scummiest, then you try to put the burden on the town to figure out why, or to question you more closely. Not explaining why someone is town is fine, and might actually be protown at this point, but you didn't give any reasons for your scumreads. It's more helpful for us to know what you're thinking when you make your list, not what you're thinking a week later when someone gets around to asking you about it.

Yay?

Probably. I'll miss the $$$, but the 19-hour days were starting to get to me.

Yes but I think that suspicious on boosted people should be suspicion without votes until day 2 at the earliest to avoid being counter-productive.

That is exactly what I'm saying.

[sthar8]

I believe I stated that I was in the process of acting upon my scumreads. Like my Jahudo case that came a little bit afterword.

The simple fact is that you voted without reasoning, then presented your case six days and (more importantly) two pages later. And nowhere in your summary post do you mention upcoming cases. This seems really scummy to me.

[sthar8]

EBWOP: Whoops, forgot my quote tags. That first bit is by iLord.

[sthar8]

Sorry, weekend was significantly longer than expected. I'll have something up soon.

[sthar8]

OK, here goes...

Jahudo's early play was characterized by lack of explicit opinions except in the case of Incog-SL, which makes me nervous. It seems that he avoids committing to anything until pressed to do so. By contrast, he's agreed with many of my opinions, and his questions seem to be heading in generally protown directions. At first, I assumed that the bias in his questions indicated his opinion on each issue, but some of the implied opinions seem contradictory to me. I think that agreeing with his opinions on some issues, most notably iLord and Crazy, might be biasing me in his favor, especially since the rest of my read on him is decidedly neutral.

I can't find anything in the last few pages that contradicts this read or suggests another reason to lynch him. I really don't like how fast this wagon grew. That said, I will support a Jahudo lynch over a no lynch, but only under extreme time crunch.

While I agree with guardian that it is unfair to attack him for improving his play, I'm concerned by the fact that he was willing to push cases based on poor or nonexistant reads.

I'll be back later today with more on Huntress.

[sthar8]

Part two of three, wherein I address some things specifically directed at me since my last real post.

So telling you that a player I originally thought possible scum now gives me a townie feel after a more focused read is giving you zero information is it?

Perhaps I was a bit harsh. What I meant is that telling us that your read has changed, without substantiating the original read

or

the new one, gives us no information useful to our most important current objective of lynching scum. Excepting, of course, the information that you are playing in an anti-town fashion and are therefore likely scum yourself.

If you wanted me to expand on it you only had to ask. And if you had rather I hadn't said it at all ...

Are you a corn farmer?

I've already addressed in iLord's case why it is anti-town to attempt to place the burden of requesting information on the town.

Waaay to take things out of context! Go back and look at the original posts. I'd quote them here but I realised that would be falling for your diversion tactics.

What? You made the case on electra, you were the one trying to get her killed. You brought all of that up, not me. And I don't see what I've taken out of context.

By the way, what "diversion tactics"? What am I "diverting," from what, and onto what?

I'm pretty sure thats a buzzword appeal to paranoia, an indirect way of saying "you can't trust his arguments, he's screwing with your mind!" I'm also pretty sure that any halfway decent mafia player is going to consider arguments on merit and content independant of source, since scum occaisionally tell the truth to look more townie. Accusing me of being scum as an ad hom is a fallacy; the merits of an argument may be indicative of alignment, but the reverse is not true.

Pardon?

You had stated that part of your reasoning for wasting time on the electra case was to make sure that the town saw your opinions, but here you say that you aren't going to give us your opinion on others because whatever you wanted to say had already been said. That leaves town with no clues as to your opinions on those players, which is directly contradictory to your other stated policies. This kind of double standard is highly indicative of scum who fabricate explanations to fit their other agenda.

I think 'ad hom' is a misnomer here

Then you are misdefining ad hom. An ad hominem attack does not have to be

personal

, it has to be against the

person

. The set of all ad hom strategies does include ad personam attacks, but the set spaces are not equal.

The fact is that since I began attacking you, you've been attempting to portray my actions as scummy in a vague and nonspecific way, without committing to any accusation. If you don't find me scummy, then why are you trying to cast doubt on my motives? And if you do, which seems to be the case based on the logical fallacies you've directed at me, then why haven't you pointed the finger or made a case? Why are you benig so vague?

The emphasis was Eldarad's, not mine.

And I'm saying that Crazy actually did say at one point that he agreed with EVERYTHING eldarad had said.

Why is voting and then promising a case later scummy?

Because it allows you to gauge responses before committing to the case. Because it requires the town to guess about your reasoning and motives. Because it could be an attempt to shift attention, in the same way I believe Crazy's "coughpressure" was intended to. Because it might bait a townie into making their own case that you can leech off of.

We are in an extreme time crunch.

sthar8, your vote to Jahudo if you will.

Electra, yours as well.

Jahudo's at L-2 right now.

Wow, you're scummy.

28 hours is plenty of time, and huntress is at L-3 to Jahudo's L-2.


Part 3 to come.

[sthar8]

I think that the best use of my role is to claim now and alleviate any suspicions that my new power might be a kill.

If you recall, yesterday I noted that I did not believe I was the best boost for the day. This was because I had narrowed my potential powers down to two options, and I didn't think either of them is particularly helpful to us in the early game, except as a way to potentially confirm me.

I'm a double voter. I have a second, secret vote that I PM to elmo in order to use. From the wording of my boost PM, I believe that once I use this vote, I will not retain the power into the following days. If there are no objections, I'd like to use this today in order to confirm myself. I'd also like to get it out of the way, because it could potentially be devastatingly swingy in a LYLO situation, and I don't want the pressure should it come to that.

Electra, do you have a question that you'd like to ask?

Huntress is still far and away the scummiest, even after her claim. What is the general consensus on her claim? Do we give her another chance to confirm it?

Number two and number three spots are open, I'm looking into Jahudo interactions now.

I'm still fine with

boost: TDC

[sthar8]

How so, Incog? We haven't actually had anything from him yet.

[sthar8]

sthar's claim is surprising, I figured his early massclaim speculation meant he had extra info about the game due to having some sort of PR.

I do have a power role...

It was the structure and wording of my PM that led me to believe that massclaim might be a viable option. I believe electra may be about to ask me a question along those lines, so I won't steal her thunder by elaborating.

You might also want to review how electra's "townie, vaguely described power when boosted" claim made me think she was town.

The type of claim

really

shouldn't be surprising.

Also, sthar, you're saying you're basically vanilla that gets double vote if boosted, right?

I'm a double voter. I have a second, secret vote that I PM to elmo in order to use.

I don't know how to be more explicit.

Incog: Is your reply going to be based on Huntress's response?

Everyone: Is there any reason I should save the second vote, or can I just go ahead and demonstrate, to prove my claim?

[sthar8]

If you're a one shot double voter anyways (which isn't much of a power role, btw), what effect did the boost have on you?

since it doesn't confirm his alignment, only that he is being truthful about the effect of the boost.

The thing is, it clears me of being the second kill, which I got the impression some people were worried about. It also increases my probability of being town, because a double-voting scum is

very

powerful, and I don't think it fits with what we've seen of the setup.

Electra's information is not quite what I expected, but is certainly helpful.

Eldarad: how could we test electra's information reliably?

[sthar8]

EBWOP: Happy birthday, eldarad.

[sthar8]

Which implies you're a double voter regardless of being boosted.

Only if you take that quote entirely out of context. You need to read

all

the words, otherwise you aren't going to get the whole message.

So if you're saying you only got a double vote because you were boosted, how are you a power role?

Maybe we define power roles differently. I define them as having an ability above and beyond the standard town mechanics for a game. How do you define it?

Also, If I'd had a double vote yesterday, don't you think I would have killed Huntress?

Electra: I'm not sure how any of the information you gave would catch me out if I were lying. Could you elaborate on this?

I'd like to hear more from iceman and GC, and get suspicions from everybody.

I'll save my second vote until I need to use it, but I still want to

vote: Huntress

[sthar8]

You could've just answered "yeah", y'know.

I hate having to repeat myself because someone didn't bother to read my post. Besides, I was bored.

And everyone gets "an ability above and beyond the standard town mechanics for a game" when boosted, so no, that's not a PR (well, according to electra's info it's not everyone, but I still assume most people do and you didn't have that info before anyways).

Um, you can have a game in which every player has a PR. Most smalltown games are run this way, I believe. Every player just has some special ability that goes beyond the town mechanics. I could tell that I had one from my PM because it's pretty obvious that not everyone recieved same one as I did, even if they were all the same type.

What about the structure of your PM made you think massclaiming would be good?

My role PM gave nonspecific qualities of my character, and implied that boosting me would amplify these charactersitics into a power. Scum would likely not know this, and if they did their qualities would necessarily be different from town ones. An early claim would force scum to commit to "vanilla," "vanilla with boost," or "normal PR." If they claim vanilla, and no townie has a "vanilla without boost" role, then they are caught. If we have true vanilla townies, we narrow the pool significantly, and know who our safe lynches are right away. If they claim "vanilla with boost," they are forced to lie, and making scum lie is the easiest way to catch them, especially since they have no standard example of how "vanilla with boost" works for town. I would not have discounted scum assuming that "boostees" would be explicitly informed of their powers, before electra elaborated on her claim. If they claim "normal PR," they are stuck in whatever role they chose, we gain information if they continue to live, and we might catch scum through counterclaim. I originally thought that there would be no traditional power roles in this game, obviously that assumption was wrong, and the strategy is weakened considerably. I guessed that if my speculation was correct, other players might come to the same conclusion and support the idea of massclaim, giving us a good chance of catching at least one scum on D1.

[sthar8]

sthar8, according to your sig you've completed 5 games of forum Mafia on here. How much forum experience do you have outside of MS? How many games have you read just for the heck of it? In how many of your games on here and outside of here have you seen Day 1's where exactly both of the competing lynch wagons happened to be on scum?

This seems to be largely irrelevant and mainly fallacious to me, but I'll answer anyway.

I have played no forum mafia outside of MS. I have read

many

games for fun. I cannot recall any games where there were exactly two viable wagons on day 1 and both of them lead to scum. Do you have a logically valid point?

Also, I might as well reveal why I'm suspicious of sthar8's claim. Judging by Guardian's reveal as Doctor and judging by my own role, I really don't think true town power roles need to be boosted in order to gain their abilities.

You based your alleged NK on such speculation and killed a doctor. I based one of my suspicions yesterday on such speculation and he flipped townie. Does this not tell you something?

We could boost someone 3 times.
Now, I recognise that the presence of potential roles like, say, a roleblocker (boostblocker?) could distort this, as could us boosting a scum 3 times...as they would lie to confirm Electrascum's information.
But then if we boost someone else 3 times and they still have the power activated then we've just caught two scum.

In addition, since our boosts are public information, electra-scum could just kill the boostee after the second time. This wastes a significant amount of time for no probable gain. I'm not saying I disbelieve electra, or think her any more scummy than I did yesterday, but I don't think this information is very confirmable at all.

That does not in any way imply that ordinary "inhabitants of the town" gain no benefit from being boosted.

No, but the fact that my role PM was different suggests to me that my power is above and beyond the standard town mechanics for a game, in the same way that cop, doc, and bulletproof townie are above and beyond a normal vanilla PM.

For one, sthar, I'd like to know how you "narrowed down your potential powers to two options"

I considered the flavor of the hints in my PM, and compared it to a list of roles in the wiki. Two seemed to fit more than others.

why you think proving your double vote will in any way confirm you?

Why are you so intent on quote mining my posts?

For the record, in my personal (irrelevant) opinion, proving that I am a double voter should increase the probability that I am town, as I believe that double voting is a very powerful scum ability that doesn't appear to fit well with what we know of the setup. In support of this, my second vote is anonymous, which means that the drawback of accountability is removed from any mislynch engineered using the vote. Without accountability, the ability is no longer restricted to only being useful in LYLO. As I have claimed my vote, the potential for abuse goes down significantly.

given Huntress' claim we should at the very least give her some more time.

To do what, exactly?

eldarad is looking much worse than I remembered.

I still don't see this, and it keeps coming up. Can you elaborate?

Having a double vote today doesn't necassarily prove he didn't get an extra boost kill

Wait, what? Are you suggesting that it'd be plausible for me to be double-voting, extra-killing scum, in a mini? Damn, you caught me. I'm also bulletproof, investigation-proof, and I've got three roleblocks per night.

I think we're wasting time right now.

I'm not sure what to think about Incog's claim. It is exceptionally plausible that he would have vigged guardian, but I'm very wary of an SK false claim. Also, vig powers seem to be very swingy, and I'm not really inclined to trust Incog after he vigged guardian for what was very clearly just poor play. Scum frequently try to disguise a case against poor play as genuine suspicion, especially early day 1, and Incog's attacks on SL fit the bill perfectly. Furthermore, Incog's support seems to always coincide with a player reducing their suspicion of him, and his major arguments always seem to have an element of "and this player doesn't like my play." Would it be viable to boost Incog in order to have him suicide before LYLO?

Unless someone can come up with a plan to test huntress's alignment, she is a very good lynch.

Iceman is also a definite possibility, but inactivity over the holiday is nonindicative, so I'll wait for him to come back and provide some content.

[sthar8]

EBWOP: missed Incog's post.

I really don't see what the difference is between electra's role and mine, except that she gains information while I gain a power.

And since neither you nor RR can be bothered to expand on your vague suspicions, I guess I'll just wait until I have something to respond to, rather than arguing on gut.