Mini #682: C9++ (Game Over!)

[Wall-E]

Is it? Time will tell. In the meantime, can you name a player you think is town? Can you name a player you have not attacked yet? Finally, can you name a player you think would vote along with you if you tried to wagon me?

[sekinj]

can you name a player you think is town?

I think germy, kair, and myk are town.

Can you name a player you have not attacked yet?

Yes. Germy. He softclaimed early and I beleived him. Other than that there is not another player I have not

been suspicious of

since I had no answers going in to this game, and can only judge players based on their actions. So far, the three above are the three I am most sure of.

Finally, can you name a player you think would vote along with you if you tried to wagon me?

I wouldn't pretend to know the minds of the other players or try to FORCE them in any direction. The best I can do is present cases on thsoe I suspect of beign scum. I would hope that many other players would be able to see the same scumminess that I see. and actually the more you respond in these ways the more scummy I think you look.

[Wall-E]

Thanks for answering.

Unvote

[germy]

Blast. There goes my theory.

Unvote: sekinj

I would much rather lynch Scigatt. Why are you focusing exclusively on the afatchic thing? On the one hand, I agree with you: I saw nothing particularly scummy with afatchic's few posts. However, the fact that you are addressing

nothing else

, and seem to think that people are still asking you about it when they are not, seems like you are misleading and avoiding.

Vote: Scigatt

(again).

[SilverPhoenix]

I forgot to mention that Scigatt is also on my scumlist. The most "active lurker" that I have ever seen. Seems to never be focused on the entire picture, never truly caught up. Avoids questions with "I'll do it later."
It is almost a policy lynch. Not quite though.

[Wall-E]

Blast. There goes my theory.

Which theory?

[CF Riot]

Wall-E:

So now that you're unvoting, do we get to hear the reason why you voted in the first place?
----

Germy:

If a townie says they are not going to reveal their reasoning right away, it's better not to push them.

Why do you think that given

If they're mafia, they won't say anything, anyway.

? Wouldn't following up on questions toward other players and forcing them out of a neutral position be a good way to root out scum? I would think if I ask a certain player about someone they are ignoring, if they refuse to talk about that player or say whether they think they're scum or not it would be a good indication of scumminess.

On the role fishing, I can see how it might look that way but that was not my intention. And to be clear, I didn't ask what they thought happened, just if it had any relation to who they were voting today. For example, I would be more inclined to vote you today than yesterday, because I would think you would be a likely target last night, yet you didn't die. I don't think the questions I'm asking are "silly" though.

Can you tell me why my "fishing" is more suspicious than SP's in post 466 or post 481? Is there a reason why you didn't mention this closer to page 19 when I asked?
----

Zade:

On Scigatt, there's really not any strong evidence that he is likely scum. He does have a tendency to vote along with popular wagons. The reason I call for the wagon is he hasn't been posting much, and most of his posts lack real content, or rehash old arguments that have pretty much been settled pages before. I think this in itself could be deliberate(scummy) or unintentional(innocent), but deserving of a closer look either way. I think right now, a

wagon

is appropriate. His response to that wagon would determine whether or not an actual

lynch

is appropriate.

Also,

I'm actively trying to hurt anybody's feelings.

I lol'd. I know it's a typo but still.
----

Wolf:

It's my only way to gauge scumminess. I don't know how to explain it any more than this is how I play. I have one strong suspect (Sek) and three likely townies (claimers) but no clear reads beyond that, so I'm sort of asking questions every which way to form more opinions.

[Wall-E]

Wall-E:

So now that you're unvoting, do we get to hear the reason why you voted in the first place?

Sure.

When I started my readthrough, he kept pinging on my scumdar. I started to build a case on him. I went to bed. I woke up. I read my case again. I wasn't quite sold. When I asked those questions I was judging his reactions as a kind of a final yes/no judgement. I think he's questioning, paying close attention to the thread, and generally doing very helpful things (assuming he's town, which I now do), so I'm happy to let him continue to ask questions and provide content for today.

Unfortunately, it means my top suspect is off my list for the time being, so I'll start a new case (as of five minutes ago).

[germy]

Wall-E - Your confidence in voting sekinj with so-called "reasons to explain later" implied that you knew with surety that sekinj was scum. Meaning: you are a Cop that investigated sekinj to get a mafia result, or you are a Roleblocker who blocked sekinj and resulting in no night kill. Since you unvoted, neither of these must be the case, and although I am still somewhat suspicious of sekinj, not as much so as I am of others.

I am actually more suspicious of you, now. In response to CF_Riot, you didn't actually answer his question. What "case" did you build, beside pinging scumdar? Again, what was your real reason for voting sekinj in the first place? And why did you feel the need to keep such reasoning secret?

CF_Riot - There is a difference between someone voting for no reason, and someone voting for a reason that they won't reveal. Pressuring scum that simply provides no reason can be enlightening, based on their reaction. But a player that claims to have a reason, but won't reveal, whether townie or scum, will have the exact same reaction: "I'll provide it later," or "I have my reasons."

I didn't "mention it earlier" because I'm forgiving of one or two instances. It's the repetition of what I see as fishing that looks scummy. And why moreso that SilverPhoenix? Because this "fishing" represents a much higher percentage of your posts.

[Scheherazade]

Rereading Scigatt's posts, the only downright scummy thing that struck me is his insistence on bringing up the case against me (individual posts 10, 14-16). His posts superficially find in my favour, but the fact that he raises an investigation that had been settled before without adding any new content to it while saying things like "I may have missed some arument of yours, though, so do not hesitate to mention any gaps" strikes me as a strategy to cast suspicion on a player he knows already has strong accusers.

In the meantime, his only suspicions have been...

I'm no gonna throw around my vote like you apparently want me to do...for some reasonFoS germy. However, sekinj, from what glances I've seen of his posts and cases against him, looks interesting at least. I'll look at him later today.

He never follows up with germy and never follows up with sekinj. The "some reason" that comes to my mind when reading this is the vote germy has placed on Scigatt.

While I was looking at sekinj, I took another look at this post. (Maybe someone spotted this before, I'm not sure.)

Right, I'm not particularly enjoying the new turn of the discussion and wouldn't be unhappy if you guys would just leave the setup alone. It's no fun and I think scum have brains too.

Germy, I still think you're most probably town, but you're starting to push it.
What's the point of hunting for scum reaction when you make evident what you are doing?

I dislike mykonian's last post a lot, I don't see any point in it. Myko, would you care to explain what purpose it served?

I'd like to see more from afatchic and all people who have no vote placed on someone.

First of all, I don't see how talking about the setup for a few posts, as opposed to roleclaiming, can hurt the town. The scum will discuss this among themselves anyways at night, and I don't how this could be town move.

Vote:springlullaby

On the heels of his "I'm not going to throw my vote around" remark, he votes for springlullaby because she objected to discussion of the set-up. I'm not sure that springlullaby defended herself well, dismissing his reason as "lame," but he completely ignores mykonian's question: "Scigatt, since when is talking about talking about the setup a scumtell? This is ridiculous."


My point to all this is that he's devoted most of his energy to vindicating someone he thinks is town when that person couldn't really use his help while his suspects seem to have been found through reaction. Just as a break down of posts, it seems that he's spent more posts discussing me/afatchic than his two suspects combined. That makes me think that I'm his real target, and the indirect way he's targeted me says scum to me.

[mykonian]

unvote vote Scigatt

Finally, just because your predecessor didn't do it doesn't make it any less scummy for you to make up for lost time.

Making up time is scummy?

I don't have the time to do a reread of everything he says now, but I clearly remember this, and this is placing things out of context. I don't like it.

WHAT?
You can't read the thread, but since he's trying to, you find him scummy for that? That's just low....

No, I clearly remember what this was about: Zade mentioned a few times that he was town, when people reacted on that, his excuse was: "afat didn't do it for a long time, so that's why I do it a bit often". The sentence Scigatt picked out was the response.

Zade made a slight scumtell (posting a few times that he was town), so this sentence applied. You don't say it anyway, and when you do it a few times, no matter what your predescessor did, you act scummy.

By putting this sentence just bare, it seems very wrong IF IT IS ABOUT TOWN THINGS. Scigatt didn't post that it was about a scumtell.

[Kairyuu]

@Scigatt:

Looking at the and the posts they refer to, it seems to me you have overstated your case. Reading Afat's first post after Germy's claim I see no implorations for others to claim, not even millers. Personally, I think you were reading way too much into the text than was there.

I overstated my case? Just because I say it alot doesn't mean that it is overstated. Hell, I'd shut right up about it if people would move their votes over. I can't lynch someone with only myko voting with me. So I will continue to point out every little scummy thing I see (and have most of them explained and drop the points).

I'm wondering what would you have accepted as an explanation. Also, whether you think that a player's actions violate the spirit of the game has nothing to do with whether they are scum or town.

Afatchic never actually responded, so I can't say what I would have accepted, but silence was not it.

And I believe that you are wrong about your second bit. Generally speaking, scum are more likely to lurk than town are. Since lurking goes against the spirit of the game, then it

does

actually provide itself to be a way to find the scum.

Making up time is scummy?

This point is moot by now, but I will explain my reasoning for making the statement.

I called Zade out for saying "I'm town," which I see as somewhat scummy. I thought that he had said it several times, and he responded by saying that afatchic hadn't said it at all, and therefore he was just making up for lost time. Since the action in and of itself I find scummy, giving the explanation that you are doing it because a predecessor didn't does not change the fact that the act is scummy.

@Zade: Sorry I didn't respond to this earlier, (Still V/LA) so here it is now.

So I was asking about what use you saw in examining the lie in the manner that you did. You assumed it was a lie, therefore you couldn't take the statements I made as part of it at face-value, right? But it seems like you did, partly, when you said "The fact that you would be going after sekinj even if SL was scum seems to indicate that you already knew the result of the cardflip." I'm not trying to wrestle you in to a black or white position--i.e. either it's a lie and none of it can be trusted or it isn't a lie and can therefore be used against me--I'm trying to figure out what that grey margin you saw was.

I see you as a good, logical player, that much is certain. When I read that reason, I saw "I'm saying that the cardflip of SL will affect whether I continue to push for a sekinj lynch, but I still plan to pursue it either way." I saw this because you

said

that you would base your decision off of the cardflip, and you

seemed to imply

that your case would still be there either way. This would mean that you were lying about the first statement, which would in turn mean that you knew SL's alignment to be town, and that you were scum.

The grey area was really whether or not I was misinterpreting your implications (hence why I asked if that was what you actually meant). The fact that you did not say that I was wrong, but rather defended your position told me that I was right in my interpretation, and therefore, more likely to be right about the assumptions that followed from that interpretation.

If that doesn't answer your question then I am apparently still misunderstanding it.

@Recent developments: I'm still sold on a Zade lynch, (but you guys no that already) but I would not say no to a Scigatt wagon/lynch for today (because the math says that we have up to 3 mislynches based on the No Kill last night, and it is always difficult to tell with lurkers). People have brought up some good points, and from my experience, lynching a lurker before LyLo more often then not nails scum (in LyLo it's usually the scum pushing the lurker lynch; see Newbie 588 for examples of both cases, and 661 for the scum-lurker case).

[iamausername]

Votecount #22!

Scigatt (2) - mykonian, germy
Scheherazade (1) - Kairyuu
sekinj (1) - CF Riot
Artem (1) - SilverPhoenix

Not voting (6) - Scheherazade, Artem, Wall-E, Scigatt, wolframnhart, sekinj

6 to lynch.

[mykonian]

I unvoted and voted Scigatt in post 539

Corrected.

[iamausername]

-=Shanba replaces Artem=-

[Wall-E]

Wall-E - Your confidence in voting sekinj with so-called "reasons to explain later" implied that you knew with surety that sekinj was scum. Meaning: you are a Cop that investigated sekinj to get a mafia result, or you are a Roleblocker who blocked sekinj and resulting in no night kill. Since you unvoted, neither of these must be the case, and although I am still somewhat suspicious of sekinj, not as much so as I am of others.

I am actually more suspicious of you, now. In response to CF_Riot, you didn't actually answer his question. What "case" did you build, beside pinging scumdar? Again, what was your real reason for voting sekinj in the first place? And why did you feel the need to keep such reasoning secret?

Better to be overconfident and wrong, so as to grow, than to be underconfident and turn out to have been right.

It's possible my wording is effecting your read of my posts? That has been a problem of mine before.

I'm a simple man, and I post simply.

[Shanba]

Hi.

I've only read the first few pages so far, so until I go any further, I'd like some feedback:

should I give all my thoughts as a running stream as I read the thread, or would you rather I presented only my conclusions/the things that interested me?

[Wall-E]

Let's keep things as short and sweet as possible.

[sekinj]

My vote: definitely conclusions, not running stream

[mykonian]

I'd like a short running stream, if you pick out the most important things, I'd be happy.

[wolframnhart]

i would say conclusions personally.

[Shanba]

Alright, I'll post my conclusions when I've finished reading.

[CF Riot]

Pressuring scum that simply provides no reason can be enlightening, based on their reaction. But a player that claims to have a reason, but won't reveal, whether townie or scum, will have the exact same reaction: "I'll provide it later," or "I have my reasons."

I didn't do the second. No one I've asked questions to so far have said they have reasons that can't/won't be revealed.

I didn't "mention it earlier" because I'm forgiving of one or two instances. It's the repetition of what I see as fishing that looks scummy.

It was only 1 string of questions, it just had to be repeated twice because people seemed to miss/ignore the original post. They never said, "I have an answer, but I'm holding it," none of them made any comment at all, which made me think they just didn't see it.

Also, I asked 3 people, and SP asked 3 people. That's not post percentage, but you get the point.
----
The Sekinj wagon feels suddenly lonely. Zade, Shanba, or Scigatt should come keep me company.

[Wall-E]

What's your hurry, CF Riot?

[germy]

Wall-E - you still never answered CF_Riot's question. Why did you vote sekinj? (Besides "he pinged my scumdar"). You specifically said you had a reason, and built a case.

And you didn't answer my question. If sekinj just "felt scummy" to you, why did you need to keep this to yourself when you voted?