Mafia 88- Return to New Catania- Game Over!

[Shanba]

Vote: Sir Tornado

Gah, I realise you're probably mocking BM, but please. Stop. Doing. That.

[Shanba]

Vote: Sir Tornado

Gah, I realise you're probably mocking BM, but please. Stop. Doing. That.

I think he's getting pissy because im not calling him by his actual username. :D

Ooi, do you think it is acceptable to 'mock' me?

BM

Of course it's acceptable! It's just that upside down quoting thing, well, you have little idea how much that annoyed me.

I don't need to be reminded.

[Shanba]

Oddly enough, I agree with BM. GC undermined his own argument in the process of writing it.

Yeah, but is that actually scummy?

[Shanba]

Quick random voting stage ftw.

Because I hate the "I'm going to do something scummy so I can jump on the first person who calls me on it to "encourage conversatin"" gambit. I've seen town people do it too often lately to really consider it a scumtell anymore, so I'm notgoing to vote you for it, but it never accomplishes anything and just makes day 1 muddy.

Honestly, I really doubt this was the gambit he was pulling. Most likely, he was just random voting and decided to pick no lynch.

Stranger things have happened.

Otoh, I completely agree with you about Seraphim. Not that his vote was legitimate, as such, but I dislike his reactions to the whole thing. He just seems uncomfortable, and it's definitely scummy that he bowed to BM's pressure so easily.

Vote: Seraphim

OGML: again, I read it differently to you. I don't see at all how that equates to Ectomancer coaching him to use the newb card.

[Shanba]

Guys, why are we not lynching seraphim?

Especially you, Sir T: what's up with the weak little FoS? Yos2 too.

I dont agree with Yos2's fos on Seraphim, or Shanba's vote on him. The way I read it, he voted Hoopla for first trying to generate discussion, then slamming down a vote on the first player to disagree with the move. At this point, when votes are used more as statements, or for pressure, than to actually lynch someone, I would have been more suspicious if he didn't unvote.

But nothing actually changed about the situation he was addressing: he only unvoted when BM called him on it. I don't see how you would have been more suspicious of him for

not

bowing to BM's pressure. I don't see what this has to do with statements and the purpose of votes at all. But perhaps I'm missing something?

Am I expected to read all your posts, BM?

Farside: I can offer a counter example. Ironically, it wasn't a gambit, as such, but the concept is the same: [url=http://www.mafiascum.net/forum/viewtopi ... &start=300]

The two people who attacked me over my insignificant little lie were both mafia.

[Shanba]

Unvote, Vote: Sir Tornado

I like your style.

Unvote Vote: Sir Tornado

But I completely disagree with BM.

[Shanba]

C'est la vie.

On another note, I like OGML's vote for Sir T, and am interested to see how Sir T responds.

Why are you still not voting anyone, Yos?

[Shanba]

Why do you think Yos should be voting? Since I first played mafia on another site I have always thought that a person's vote is extremely important; I find it weird that you would take an interest in why Yos is not voting. Why do you take an interest in Yos's vote?

A vote is a tool, and, as town, there is no reason not to use it to the greatest extent possible - even if you are not certain someone is scum, you can use it for pressure, you can vote to see how people respond. A vote is too important

not

to be used.

@Yos: Lurkerhunt? I know it's your style, but egh. I can't get enthusiastic about lurker hunts till at least day 2.

The tubbywagon is meh. I prefer a Sir t/Seraphim wagon.

[Shanba]

Ok, so I feel like I've been kinda floundering at the edges of this game, so I'm making a concerted effort here to drag myself back in.

Immediately, a number of things hit me. First off - I don't know about anyone else, but when I'm random voting, I really am random voting - sometimes, I pick a name off a list, sometimes I just do it to make a joke, whatever. When reading Hoopla's vote, then, that was the conclusion I came to - that he was, indeed, random voting, and it was simply a coincidence that he landed on no lynch. But Hoopla's posts say this is not true, so, I guess I'm wrong here. I really don't know what to make of this, as I simply don't understand such a mindset - I guess that's why I never get games started. (As a sidenote - Sensfan, I simply don't understand how that is even possible. I could see the transition period from random voting to real game being fruitful... but I don't see how you could catch scum in the random voting stage. It's too... well, random.)

Second, BM is wrong about just about everything. Well, that's kinda harsh. Call it a radical difference in perspective - I disagree with BM about just about everything.

Now, more importantly than either of these two things is Seraphim. The more I read those posts discussing with BM, the less I like them. There's a number of things that strike me:
-First off, is what Yos said. That is, that the fact that he is worried enough about BM's FoS to unvote indicates a guilty mindset. This is further evidenced by the fact that he is worried about a trap. This second post, however, also reads bewildered townie to me, which is a effect I could honestly see BM's posts having .

Then, there's the way BM seems to invoke a boogeyman when arguing with sobeahero. I really *hate* the way he says "But what if I'm a power role?" It's incredibly heavy handed, and frankly, just scummy.

On lurker hunts, in general: I feel they're kinda a waste of time. A lot of lurkers will drop off the face of the earth entirely. Others will start contributing. Some will be legitimately trying to slip under the radar - those are the ones to watch for (

FoS Der Hammer

) but any wide scale lurker hunt is a distraction from focusing on the meat of the game - that is, the content, timing, tone etc. of players' posts.

But it's Sir T I want to lynch. Well, want to wagon, anyway. The more I read his posts, the scummier he seems.

Finally: BM, can you please stop posting for a while? You're dominating this game, and many voices are being squashed under your massive weight of post.

[Shanba]

Yes, but...

I don't want the info to be only about BM. He's not the only player we have to read in this game.

BM, I think that's possibly a bit dramatic. If you could, say, limit yourself to posting thoughts on at most one thing per page for a bit?

[Shanba]

Also, Shanba, while I'm not going to let BM get away with lurking, I also am wondering why you were pushing him in that direction. I don't buy the whole "BM posting means we get less info about everyone else" bit; if anything, I think BM's activity and agressivness has pushed everyone else to be more active and to post more then they would in a "normal" mafiascum game.

I respectfully disagree.

In my experience, it's much more difficult to contribute to a game which is dominated by one player or one argument. You know those situations where two players are going at it hammer and tongs, posting ever longer lists of refutations and accusations at each other? Those make it very difficult for other players, as there's a tendency to sit back and watch the show.

Similarly, BM's posting dominating the thread makes it hard for other players to rise to the forefront. I believe his discussions about Hoopla, for example, have reduced the amount of information we would have received should Hoople have had to present the information his/herself.

Furthermore, it hurts the game going forwards, too - the larger the weight of information, the harder it is for players to catch up, to replace in or to reread the thread. And besides, when there's all this extraneous information about one player, other stuff about other players may get lost in the mass of BM's posts.

You say that people are contributing more than normal. Look at your list of lurkers above. That seems larger than normal. Other players are not contributing much - I fall into that category, as sobeahero pointed out below, as does Der Hammer.

[Shanba]

In the early days of his playing career, BM was famous for quoting upside down: that is, putting the text above the quote. Sir T was doing this, (presumably to mock or otherwise take the mickey out of BM), and I noted that it was incredibly annoying.

[Shanba]

Puta Puta is a better lynch than tubby.

[Shanba]

Wait, you're blaming yoru lack of contributing on someone else talking alot? There was nothing stopping you from voicing an opinion on what was going on. Nothing. I refuse to accept hiding behind something like that as a legitamite excuse.

Unvote
Vote: Shanba

[/quote]

You misunderstand. No one is to blame for my own failure to contribute to this game (though I would also dispute the idea that I have not contributed much to this game anyway). However, BM's posts, by making the game less enjoyable in their sheer volume and size make it so that I have less

desire

to contribute to the game.

(Sidenote - I'm pleased to note that BM has found a middle way)

As for why tubby is a worse wagon that Puta - frankly, I detest the way that Puta is ready to lynch someone for the same offences he himself has committed, and at the same time refusing to learn from the chastisements of the rest of the town towards tubby. Subsequent events have reinforced my impression that tubby is a "meh" lynch.

(As a sidenote, I am not on tubby's analysis at all. I'm not listed there as scum, neutral or town. So what does that make me?)

The proper solution was to not triple post everytime you visit this thread.

Irony?

Puta is a decent but not brilliant wagon for today. I have no qualms with getting him to claim now.

[Shanba]

No no no no no no no no no no no no no! Stop it! Please!

I felt BM's posting was raising the noise:signal ratio. That, I admit, is debatable, and I accept that others believe differently to me. But posts like that, skitzer, are indisputably useless. Guess what? We already

know

what happened in this game. Please, I have no qualms with you gathering that information, but store it in your notes somewhere. Keep the thread for information that's actually useful to share with the town, or at least somewhat illuminating to read.

[Shanba]

The plan outlined by Sir Tornado here:

I'm really, really trying hard to convince myself to unvote Puta Puta in case he/she/it is a real cop.

So far it's not working.

Xylthixlm, the key to this is, what happens if he/she/it is a scum masquerading as a cop? We still have him/her on the rack. You can't hope to go a long way in a large game by claiming cop on D1. If Puta Puta is scum, it doesn't matter when we get rid of her, it just matters whether we do; but in case she is a cop, we don't want to lynch her right now. It's not as if we are in a LyLo or something right now.

is very strong. Especially as I suspect that opinions on Puta Puta are being distorted by terrible play from him, play which may or may not be evidence of scumminess. I note natirasha's comment but am not convinced.

As for skitzer: I stand by what I said, and I thank skitzer for his apology. I'd like to apologise myself for the way I phrased it, but my point still stands. I don't know abut anyone else, but there's a limit to how much information I can process. A post which is just a summary of game events is roughly equivalent to a spampost - it does not bring anything we don't already know to the table. The signal:noise ratio, in other words, is adversely affected. Long posts with

some

analysis or showing of thoughts in them are fine, like tubby's post.

[Shanba]

Skitzer: I tried to make it clear that it's not PBPA's I have a problem with - it's game recaps.

[Shanba]

Having players in the game whose play can't be analyzed for scumminess gives the scum an extra place to hide. I don't like giving the scum places to hide.

I am completely convinced that it's rational to vote lurkers in many situations even if lurking is not a scumtell for the player in question.

I don't think it's impossible to analyse lurkers.

-first, set it in context. Are they V/LA, are they posting in other games etc.

-second, analyse any posts they

have

made.

-third, if this is not enough to get a read on them, check your reads on the other players in the game. In many games I have played most of the active players in the game seem scummy - in this case, I tend to think the lurkers are likely town. OTOH, many other games all the active players have felt town and so we've lynched the lurkers. That seems to be a good way of going about it, to me.

The thing is, there's no such thing as an absolute lurker. Someone who never posts will be replaced, someone who doesn't post very much will always leave a certain amount of content, and the very fact that they're lurking may be significant in the context of the game - for example, only lurking when under pressure. I realise this needs time, but for that reason I'm OK with leaving lurkers alive for a few days. Besides, vigs might kill 'em anyway. And in Puta Puta's case, he has claimed a power role. It might simple be atrocious cop play - I want to see how his replacement handles it.

[Shanba]

OGML's reasons for voting Sir T do not accurately correspond to my reasons for being suspicious of him. I'm losing interest in the seraphim wagon (only one post of his really sticks out as being scummy, the rest give me a fairly decent impression. So,

Unvote

.

I dislike the Tubbywagon, and I don't really want to push Sir T yet (partially because I'm somewhat lazy, partially because I don't think I have a strong enough read yet and partially because I want to see what he does next before pushing another attack on him and distracting him into playing defence.)

In the interests of exploring new, and possibly fresher pastures,

Vote: Natirasha

pending meta investigation of his playstyle.

[Shanba]

I am against tubby fullclaiming. I do not believe he is danger of a lynch yet. And, to be frank, I can see the softclaim as equally characteristic of poor power-role play. OGML, I am surprised that you would try and pressure tubby into claiming before gaining the consensus of the town. Why did you do so?

Tubby, he's not fishing. Fishing implies subtly trying to get you to reveal your role; i.e, not out and out asking you to claim.

And I don't think the attack on Sir T is productive.

[Shanba]

I am against tubby fullclaiming. I do not believe he is danger of a lynch yet. And, to be frank, I can see the softclaim as equally characteristic of poor power-role play. OGML, I am surprised that you would try and pressure tubby into claiming before gaining the consensus of the town. Why did you do so?

I believe it would be beneficial for him to do so before this game goes to night.

Sure, you're perfectly ok to believe that, it's just the impression I got was that you were trying to push it through on a demonstrably weak player before the rest of the town weighed in.

And I don't think the attack on Sir T is productive.

Thats a very strange turnaround for someone who was willing to follow me into voting Sir T with no voiced basis whatsoever.

Please. Don't sit there insinuating at me, voice it outright if you want to accuse me of being scummy. But more to the point, I've already explained that I do not agree with your reasons for attacking Sir T: I do not agree with Xyl's reasons either. Yet I still find him suspicious, some of the reasons for which I have articulated (well, ok one of the reasons for which).

[Shanba]

Please. Don't sit there insinuating at me, voice it outright if you want to accuse me of being scummy. But more to the point, I've already explained that I do not agree with your reasons for attacking Sir T: I do not agree with Xyl's reasons either. Yet I still find him suspicious, some of the reasons for which I have articulated (well, ok one of the reasons for which).

I was not insinuating anything, I was remarking that it was a strange stance to take for someone who voices agreement on at least a general level of Sir T being scummy to think pressure against Sir T is unproductive.

Unvote, Vote: tubby216

Firstly, "odd" and "strange" and all the synonyms of those words are loaded in the game of mafia, because we are looking for players who are not playing like everyone else, who have an agenda - i.e, players who are strange. Obviously, strange play does not necessarily equate to scummy play, but calling someone's play strange is a backdoor accusation.

Secondly, all pressure is not born equal. Imagine a scenario where you are suspicious of a player called Quentin. All of a sudden, someone starts attacking him because his name begins with "q". You know this pressure will be unproductive. In this case, I would attack the logic of the player attacking Quentin whilst still being suspicious of Quentin. The same applies here.

unvote tubby216

Maybe I'm underestimating scum-tubby, but that reaction feels townish to me.

I've been calling him townish this whole time, but I completely agree with you. I am absolutely against a tubbywagon.

On that note, the whole "mod confirmation" thing is probably a red herring and I will not be taking it into account in my play.

Tubby, he's not fishing. Fishing implies subtly trying to get you to reveal your role; i.e, not out and out asking you to claim.

I disagree with your definition. Considering the real life analogy, fishing can be done subtly or by setting off explosives under the water. Likewise, fishing in terms of trying to find out rolebased information, can be done subtly or by straight out asking.

BM

I disagree on the grounds that the analogy is poor (that is fishing to rolefishing - I realise that that is where it got its name from, but it is outdated.)

Unvote Vote: Yos.

I have read some of Natirasha's other games. Terse and angry seems pretty normal.

[Shanba]

Yos:

In the interests of exploring new, and possibly fresher pastures, Vote: Natirasha pending meta investigation of his playstyle.

Natirasha's play struck me as possibly scummy depending on whether or not he always played like this. Checking, he is often concise, sarcastic and does not necessarily comment on everything.

And I agree that Yos is not distracting from the issue, because I have yet to raise the issue, mostly because it's gut. I'm working on articulating what it was that made my gut go off, but it may take some time. Consider this a placeholder until then.

[Shanba]

shanb's vote on yos

I'm trying. Please bear with me.

Here's what I think pinged me so far. Mostly it's about his attack on tubby: it was reading those posts that gave me the bad gut feeling, so I'm trying to analyse what about these posts are scummy.

Firstly is the fact that I strongly disagree (in parts) with his analysis of tubby's play. Particularly, I disagree that this reaction:

so if i shut up and say nothing i get wagoned, then i speak up try to help ,, present a case and i still get voted ,, i love this ,,,this game is awesome

sounds like frustrated scum: it just sounds frustrated to me. I don't really get what's scummy about it.

Then there's the fact that his vote feels off to me, timing wise. Can't really place it. I think it just looks a touch opportunistic: Yos' vote was on the crest (or just before) of the wagon, if you will.

And then there's the fact that his play towards BM and his play towards tubby seem somewhat inconsistent: BM's power role hint-threat, despite coming from a vastly more experienced player who knows the ins and outs, who should be better than that, whereas tubby's comes from a newbie who seems almost incoherent at times...

And then there's just the fact that I think tubby's attempts to scumhunt have, at least, looked fairly town which Yos just seems to ignore.

All this is my attempt to understand my gut read. Proof that it can be done, and not doing it is just lazy.

[Shanba]

Unvote

I like Yos' response, it makes a decent amount of sense.

That being said, his attacks on Oh God My Life just seem really scummy to me, as I explained. Do you really think that make him "look fairly town" to you?

Not especially, I admit. But the whole vibe I get from him is new player rather than scummy player.


@BM: Defending the player with the biggest wagon on him is defending a player who is widely regarded as town?

And I don't respond to votes with no reasoning as a matter of course. What's the point? If you feel like elaborating, I'm sure you will, in due course. If you don't, then there's nothing to respond to - and I'm hardly like to make you change your mind.

Finally, I've been defending or at least generally pro-tubby for a while now.

[Shanba]

Confused
I don't see, though, why you would cast even a gut vote in such a weird way. You said nothing related to Yos all post, give no preface to the vote, and don't even say "For gut reasons I am going to vote Yosarian2".

You're right, it is a little odd. But I don't feel it's counter-productive. It's the end of a chain of thought I've been mulling over for a while, which I may as well outline here.

Basically, neither scum nor town have all the information available in a setup. For town, fixing this information deficiency is the aim of the game. However, they don't necessarily want to reveal all the information they hold in a setup, as that would be counter-productive. In other words, day 1 massclaim gives too many advantages to the scum compared to the disadvantages it imposes on them. This information being public knowledge is harmful to the town.

So there is such a thing, in mafia, of "bad" information, of data that hurts the town more than helps it by being public knowledge. But why should "bad" information only be roleclaims? Indeed, some people believe that talking about who you believe is town is harmful to the town. The distinction between "good" and "bad" information is not very clear, to me.

So I began to think about why provide reasons for a vote. From my perspective, it's irrelevant: whether my vote is well founded or not well founded is independent of whether I decide to share my information with the town. So, why do I give reasons? Well, to let people judge me. Perhaps because a strong case increases the pressure. Because I want to get him lynched, so I need to convince other people to vote with me.

Then the question must be asked: are there any reasons to hold off? Yes, is what I believe the answer to be. It might be that what you've spotted is a possible pattern of behaviour, and you don't want to disrupt it too much while still letting people know you are suspicious of them. Reasonless votes (and votes with weak cases) tend to draw out defences from scumpartners more often. Furthermore, a reasonless vote is a somewhat different kind of pressure for a scum: how do they react? Laugh it off? Attack the player who voted them?

Furthermore, you don't lose the more direct pressure a stronger case would give, nor the opportunity for other player's to judge you/your reasoning, as you can always give the reasoning later. But a vote without the reasons supplied can be beneficial.

I'm still feeling out when such a vote is beneficial and when it is not. I suspect that when my case is at any rate gut, I may as well test my ideas. And I got, at least from the timing perspective, an interesting reaction from BM. I'm certainly considering a him/Yos partnership, now - but until more evidence comes up, I'm not going to pursue it further.

Vote: Der Hammer

This is a wagon which I finally can support. Puta Puta was a fool, tubby's not reading scum to me, Sir T I want more time to get a more accurate read on. Der Hammer has contributed nothing, sat in the background ad doesn't look to be about to start being helpful to the town if we give him more time.

Xyl: I've already provided my reasoning, and Yos has responded.

[Shanba]

am by no means fond of his vote (no explanation as to why you should be lynched), but you're not exactly in any position to be throwing accusations around about. It is unacceptable that you would play so atrociously at this stage of the game (to the point of advocating your own lynch), and then snap at your attackers

What utter rot. He's not allowed to attack players because he is scummy? Basically, that's an ad hominem, and I know that in mafia the player himself does have an impact on whether the case is valid or not (you wouldn't lynch based on the case of a confirmed scum, for example) but presenting a case is not a privilege that must be earnt by acting town. How the hell else is he supposed to dig his way out of the mess he's in except by presenting attacks on others? Defending himself? From what? His own accusations?

Unvote Vote: Sir T

Too many odd looking moves on the der hammer wagon for my liking. TBH, him now contributing means the main reason for my vote is now worthless.

[Shanba]

OGML and Shanba…your thoughts on Sera?

Seraphim is an equally good lynch (probably slightly better than, even) to Sir Tornado. But Sir T has a wagon on him, and we've spent too much time pursuing claims and not enough voting to lynch, so my vote on Sir T is with intention to lynch.

[Shanba]

Sir Tornado:

Especially you, Sir T: what's up with the weak little FoS? Yos2 too.

Is my starting point. Yours was especially bad, because you unvoted at the same time. The impression I got was that you were unwilling to get your hands dirty. I mean, I understand your response, it's just I don't wee why there should be any threshold at all on the level of scumminess required for a vote on page 4, just after the random voting stage. Especially given that earlier, he

had

voted Hoopla seriously for a nl vote - a vote that was weak enough for him to retract fairly quickly. One explanation that I can envisage is that he did not see Seraphim's post as being as scummy as I did, but in that case I don't really see why he FoSsed at all.

And then, he never commits. It takes him ages to actually come to any conclusions about who he does want dead. He seems like he does not want to be noticed, and that always makes me want to look closer.

That said. As I reread his posts, there is a bit more stuff I agree with, a bit more stuff that looks pro-town, and I'm a bit less anxious to lynch him.

Sir Tornado: I like how you request replacement and then post 12 times in 3 days

I find it ironic that Sir T is far more active now than at any point since the beginning of the game.

[Shanba]

Hrm.

Unvote vote: Seraphim

[Shanba]

Why do all my scum suspects suddenly go and start acting all townie? I want to note that my vote was not simply because of the deadline, it was more a dissatisfaction with the Sir T wagon and a hop to my next on the list. In fact,

unvote vote: Der Hammer

If it's a question of Seraphim vs Der Hammer, then I'll take Der Hammer after that post.

[Shanba]

Elmo:
Der Hammer lurked like a mofo then claimed miller and self-voted. He then backed off the selfvote before speculating on cults.

Seraphim reacted oddly to a weird bit of play by BM before disappearing off the face of the Earth. He then returned only when under pressure to say that he suspected Der Hammer.

That's a deliberate oversimplification and overstatement of their scumminess, but if you're looking for reasons to vote them I tihnk those are the main ones.

Sir T, my opinion of you

has

changed but not because you requested replacement: more because your recent posts have been full of town and win. That said, I don't really agree with you about Hoopla. I don't see it as inconsistency - perhaps it's a bit scummy to want to play both sides of the argument (actually quite a bit scummy) but, tbh, I don't mind people sheeping so long as they come up with some original stuff as well, so I don't see her vote on you as suspicious.

[Shanba]

Elmo, Sera's last post was his bow out post, what more are you expecting from him?

Some kind of direct response to a direct question that might decide where my vote goes, preferably.

DH's join date is the only thing keeping me from happily drinking the WIFOM a la Yos2. But yeah, it does not seem very faked to me. Real question is, is Sepaph scum?

Xyl is an experienced player, so a policy vote purely on claim like this makes me suspicious of him.

Yeah, I noticed this too, I don't like it much. In fact, I'm pretty sure that XylTown would be dealing with anything as WIFOM as a miller claim in the proper fashion, e.g. by playing the nash equilibrium. That basically means you view it as scummy to the degree it benefits scum, which I would imagine is quite far from going all the way to a policy lynch. That seems contradictory to me. Although I can understand how he came up with the argument (and indeed he figures out my objection in 723) it seems less natural than just doing what should be familiar to him by now.

My experience with xyl is that he lives by his metas. So far, I know that he definitely plays by these metas:

Lynch all lurkers
Lynch all self-voters
(anti-town play is scummy)
Do not bus scum partners

It really wouldn't surprise me if he had one about miller claims too, or if he tried to formulate one. I don't think this is a valid attack on him.

Elmo is right. However... DH is now at 7 votes. Do I see 5 votes coming on him before deadline, given the current volume of activity in the game? Frankly, no. I'm not even sure Seraph will be lynched - he's 3 off, elmo would make 2 and I'm not sure where the others are coming from. So, against my better judgement,

Unvote Vote: Seraphim

.

Well, it's not that bad, I guess. Seraphim is still a decent lynch, just DH would be better.

[Shanba]

The thing is, though, that it makes perfect sense to me that a payer who plays staunchly by metas

would

try and formulate one for a given scenario.

[Shanba]

Vote: Curiouskarmadog

Haven't you reread this game enough?

Furthermore, reading your posts in isolation: what happened to your vote on Sensfan? The vote, that is, that was accompanied thusly:

confirm vote sensfan

I hope you realize I haven't even finished reading the thread yet...

you address BM's post After my vote and question of you...you address my request for you acknowledge my vote and questions..but you refuse to answer my questions which have nothing to do with a reread...

first scum found.

getting funnier..

good with my vote.

You then back down:

unvote

before I head out of town

And then Sens is pretty much off the hook and you can lay down a case on Seraphim instead. I don't have any real issues with that case, tbh. But I don't like the "I'm still sure Seraphim is scum" thing after the lynch (that was why I just read your posts in isolation.) It's indicative of an attempt to renege responsibility: it's Seraphim's fault, not yours.

[Shanba]

Yeah, the depth of bullshit in that sentiment was already clearly expressed by Yosarian.

Elmo, could you please explain the xyl case to me? I don't get it.

[Shanba]

Thanks for answering my question, Elmo...

Where the hell

is

BM? There is such a thing as a happy medium, you know! GAH!

Guys, why are we not lynching CKD? Hell, why has no one even responded to my case on him? The only guy who's even mentioned it is someone who was voting CKD for other reasons! Yosarian, your reason for not pushing a case is disturbingly wrong. Waiting for the cop before springing into action is not helpful. Hell, how do you know he has a guilty? He may have an innocent, for all you know, and just claimed that way to get reactions.

I dislike the case on Xyl. It seems to be a case by consensus: A thinks xyl is scummy, says so, B agrees, C mentions a scummy post, suddenly there's a wagon. Yet, I don't read him as scummy at all, so this whole thing bemuses me. So tell me. What is the case on Xyl?

[Shanba]

I apologise, I read the first page and it hadn't been updated. Is Elmo sticking around, then? I have no qualms with him doing that, if all parties concerned are happy with it.

[Shanba]

Cases are boring. I think wagons of consensus are win though, ^5 OGML.

I agree with Elmo. ^5

Shanba, do you think I am player A, B or C in your description of the budding Xyl wagon?

A, B and C were not based on real people. I have no fricking clue which one you choose to interpret yourself as.

Xyl: did you read my attack on ckd? Read his posts in isolation, too.

Elmo: Ok, fine, that's your prerogative, but in that case I can only conclude that the whole thing is bullshit.

TBH, I was more suspicious of him for

not

requesting replacement in this game (though in a vague, pretty subtle kind of under the radar way). I'm sorry, I'm not at my most lucid right now.

[Shanba]

I've seen Sens do this before as town, fwiw.

By itself that means nothing.

I'd love to hear the explanation for this.

[Shanba]

Doing it before that point is at best pointless, and at worst a major distraction.

Eh.

TBH, I don't really agree here. I know that if they turn up town, it's not helpful, but if they turn up scum and you get nightkilled, having those sorts of thoughts on the table is useful for town. Furthermore, seeing a possible connection between two people is a viable way of scumhunting. If you start pressuring someone and someone else starts defending him until the wagon starts building steam, at which point he changes direction, it could be used as evidence against both players. Weak evidence, sure, but discarding any evidence on a pre set basis is a good way to lose useful stuff.

That wasn't the greatest example, but I hope you understood what it meant - if, for example, you had two players who you viewed as equally scummy, but one of them seemed to a few other players and the other you couldn't possibly fathom who would be scum with them, then surely the former is more likely to be scum?

I want to hear Claus' result now (if it's a guilty, obviously keep it under wraps if it's an innocent).

[Shanba]

Vote: natirasha

[Shanba]

Why does it always rain on me?
Can't seem to make it past day three

((bah))

[Shanba]

The worst thing about being town is when you identify a scum, build a case on him, get nightkilled before you have the opportunity to get him lynched and then see that scum win the game.

:(

Well played Yos2 and Adel. From the moment Adel replaced in, town were basically screwed.

[Shanba]

This game, I think, proves how powerful it is to get to kill anyone who is on your tracks. There were no shortage of people who called out Yosscum in particular. They just had an unfortunate habit of dying, one way or another.

[Shanba]

I can only remember Claus saying YosScum. Considering how long ago, this may be memory rather than actual lack of people, but still. (I can't find anything that looks like a case apart from 673)

Hrm. I must be remembering it badly, but I thought especially days 1 and 2 that Yos came under a lot of pressure.

I also thought that there was some backlash against him later on, when he was lynching Sens

[Shanba]

It wasn't just an investigation we lost, it was an active and motivated pro-town player with good scum reads actively pursuing those reads. But yeah.