Crackers! Mafia -- Game Over. See page 50

[Korts]

Here's to a very good game. Here's to drinking the wine in front of us.

vote Korts

...too many games with you

Absolute scumtell? I guess, statistically, you're bound to catch Kortsscum this way, sure...

vote: Kison

Those sunglasses on the pimpcat--scary.

[Korts]

BM, you're making an awful lot of votes. Why not do a whole round?

[Korts]

unvote, vote: BM

For two consecutive posts without a vote. Shame on you.

[Korts]

Ah, BM, you make me giggle inside, of course, so does midget porn.

I'm pretty sure you're town at this point.

How solid a read do you have at this point?

[Korts]

Ah, BM, you make me giggle inside, of course, so does midget porn.

I'm pretty sure you're town at this point.

How solid a read do you have at this point?

What do you mean?

You know what, never mind.

That isnt conclusive unless somebody claims midget, and/or you can prove that midgets are scum.

Lolwut? Midgets are obvious pro-town.

[Korts]

right... :S

I just realized I was potentially rolefishing.

So how is defending them more scummy than abusing them?

Who's talking about abusing them?

[Korts]

right... :S

I just realized I was potentially rolefishing.

Can't have that!

Go on- if you have a question, shoot.

Nah. I wanted to ask whether you were joking when you said CKD was town or you did have an actual town read on him, but I realized that a) that's rolefishing to some extent, and b) you were probably joking anyway.

So how is defending them more scummy than abusing them?

Who's talking about abusing them?

I believe it was CKD.

BM

He only said something about enjoying midget porn. I don't think that's abuse. Heck, they're probably enjoying themselves.

rofl, the only thing you're leaving out is the new C9. Flipped doc. You just didn't stay all the way through. Will I always have to tell you this?

sorry, i'm gonna be V/LA for the next 17 hours.

BM

Quick, everyone start spamming! My goal is page forty by the time BM returns

[Korts]

Clearly I need to get rid of the cat.

What does this mean?

avatar change

rofl, your questions don't have much point to them. Why are you interested in hearing who DGB/vollkan think are

town

, when it's scum you're supposed to be looking for?

[Korts]

Why is it more interesting that Yos was on the list?

Nice catch. rofl, are you suggesting that Yos is particularly pro-town? Buddying up much?

[Korts]

What? I didn't even vote you.

[Korts]

What? I didn't even vote you.

You implied I was suspicious, saying that questions I asked didn't make sense.

no. rofl as in the player.

[Korts]

yeah i'm a person not an expression of mildly amused dismissal. though sometimes i'm that too.

You're being humble. Stop. It doesn't go with your shirt.

[Korts]

btw you want to reply?

[Korts]

Any particular reason you don't want to elaborate?

[Korts]

meanwhile, you can answer me. I don't see how it should effect vollkan's answer.

[Korts]

(make that affect instead of effect. same difference.)

[Korts]

Not particularly, just not usual (or appropriate) for the game state.

[Korts]

At this moment, I don't see anything in particular that interests me in a scumhunting sense.

CKD's was a random vote, and he found a slightly better place for it. I don't see anything with it. Why bring that up in particular?

What about you? Anything of interest to you?

[Korts]

ahem

[Korts]

CKD's vote seems to root in OMGUS. After you've justified your suspicion of rofl with "page 4 gut", why do you feel the need for rofl to justify his read on des?

If ckd is scum, is his vote still random?

What do you mean? Scum don't randomvote?

He didn't say why he voted for rofl either, so why say that was a better place for his vote?

He implied reasoning ("vote is boring... and I think lacking"). Are you implying I should be suspicious of CKD for that unvote?

I can understand asking rofl that question the first time. I don't see as much merit in persisting for an answer like you have, though. I'm not convinced that your play so far is pro-town, so I wonder about ckd leaving your wagon.

I like my questions answered. Avoidance of them, however minor or pointless they seem to be, is a scumtell and is done for a reason, therefore the more they're avoided, the more I want them answered.

Incidentally, rofl, you may now answer.

[Korts]

Korts, If ckd is scum he's going to be conscious of whether or not he's voting for someone who's on his team. He unvoted you and moved to rofl without giving much more reason than his first vote.

I still don't see how that's particularly scummy, placing multiple random votes.

You've said his vote is OMGUS, but he voted rofl before they started their exchange. ckd can't justify his vote retrospectively and you're ignoring this.

Sorry, I checked and I did say vote. I meant his

case

on rofl was rooted in OMGUS.

i think its in our best interest to reach a lynch in this game before deadline (well before deadline, ideally) to give scum less time to make an optimal kill or possibly catch them off guard and deprive them of a kill altogether.

I agree that we should keep as far away from deadline as possible, but let's not just quicklynch. Informed decisions and such.

rofl, the only thing you're leaving out is the new C9. Flipped doc. You just didn't stay all the way through. Will I always have to tell you this?

what? :S

It's just that that's been rofl's random vote justification (that I'm always scum if we play together) for the past two games, maybe, and he always leaves one game out where I was the doc (although he had to replace out). Not really important.

He's so town that it's blindingly obvious, yet it's also unexplainable because it's a gut read?

Unvote
Vote: roflcoptor

I'm after lunch, and I'm digesting, so it's hard to think for me. But this vote and justification seems off. I don't see a glaring contradiction. I'll be coming back to this later to see if I can put my finger on what's bothering me.

[Korts]

thats a nice excuse for selectively persecuting one person instead of another for doing the same thing. what makes me any less "zany" than dgb?

DGB has a bit more of a reputation than you, I'm guessing.

[Korts]

I dont really see your issue here. Certainly nothing that would warrant a 'hardcore FoS' (damn, dont see those words together often enough!)

Ftr, i was responding to a joke by DGB, in a similarly jokey fashion. I fail to see how you could be suspicious on me because i claimed scum in a really WIFOMy way.

Unvote, Vote: Destructor

That's a BS reason for voting. Not realizing something is a joke or not appreciating jokes about who your scumbuddy is is in no way a scummy thing.

[Korts]

DGB is trying desperately to play to a meta.

In fact, I'm starting to feel DGB is being an intentional distraction while scum-Yos lurks away.

Unvote, Vote: DGB

Seriously, BM, are you doing this purposely? This vote is even less justified.

[Korts]

He tried to place suspicion on me because of something that didnt warrant it. If my reason is BS, it's because it's a direct response to the original BS-which was his, btw.

BM

Well, if he didn't realize it was a joke in the first place, I don't see how it's BS.

[Korts]

He tried to place suspicion on me because of something that didnt warrant it. If my reason is BS, it's because it's a direct response to the original BS-which was his, btw.

BM

Well, if he didn't realize it was a joke in the first place, I don't see how it's BS.

How the hell could he not realise it was a joke? You have to be kidding me!

ű

I just don't see it as an action that inherently benefits scum and makes sense only from that viewpoint.

Also, would you mind not selectively quoting? It's not necessary atm, and makes me do more reading than i want to.

BM

Sure. It's just that we had a lot of fun in previous games with the super-sized quote pyramids.

[Korts]

(you were voting for me anyway)

I'm not even sure we were ever together in a game where I was scum...

[Korts]

DGB will be completely unreadable this game. Mark my words.

BM

The only way that will be a major problem is if she's the SK.

[Korts]

I can think of one, its ongoing, but i might be able to reference it if necessary. I'd need to check the rules again.

BM

Oh yeah. There's one, then.

[Korts]

Other than that, Korts is giving me a very bad vibe for some reason

Don't I always?

[Korts]

des, are you accusing me of not scumhunting?

He's so town that it's blindingly obvious, yet it's also unexplainable because it's a gut read?

Unvote
Vote: roflcoptor

I see what my beef with this is. a) rofl's "blindingly obvious" comment was a very clear hyperbole, and b) "blindingly obvious" doesn't even come close to contradicting the statement that it was a gut read on des. This is pure, unadulterated BS.

Kison is scum for casting aspersions on roflcopter's unblemished record as townie town town in this game.

Otherwise I feel DGB has been fairly pro-town, but this statement is openly buddying up to rofl.

In post 195, Guardian is glaringly obviously attempting to deflect attention from CKD. There is also the statement that self-voting is scummy. It may be anti-town, but it definitely isn't scummy, IMIO.

Reading over the thread again, there are two quick things I'd like to say.

If, after considering whether you truly think the case on CKD is good, you still think it is, keep going for it. I do not want us to waste time, but I just remembered the plethora of reasons I refuse to defend people -- I am not going to defend him by saying why I think the points against him are weak, that is up to him.

After trying to discredit CKD case, and a reply from rofl, he quickly retreats and basically allows rofl to follow the lead on CKD. I think he's trying too hard to stay uncommitted to any particular side.

unvote, vote: Guardian

I endorse DGB's post 212 (although the vollkan self-bussing idea is just silly).

Please cut out the garbage -- it is unhelpful and suspcious. Posting a lot of nothing can make you look like you are scum hunting, being active, thinking about the game, etc. when you aren't.

HEY! That's what you just did.

Especially this is so very true.

There's a very clear buddying up attempt again at the end of her post, though. I wonder if she'd be so open about it.

The Korts-ckd connection became more evident when Korts talked about ckd's motives with so much confidence

Korts, If ckd is scum he's going to be conscious of whether or not he's voting for someone who's on his team. He unvoted you and moved to rofl without giving much more reason than his first vote.

I still don't see how that's particularly scummy, placing multiple random votes.

Is this me talking about motives "with so much confidence"? Cos it was you that implied that CKD's second vote was pretty much another vote without real reason (i.e. a second random vote). I don't know why CKD decided his vote on me was lacking. The fact that I didn't do much constructive posting up 'til then does make his unvote raise my eyebrow, looking at it now, but I fail to see that as an associative tell (I would say that, though, wouldn't I).

He describes ckd's case on rofl as OMGUS, ignoring the fact that ckd voted rofl before this could have been a factor.

I think that ckd was threatened by rofl's vote and his following case against him seemed almost knee-jerk.

...

How is this not the same as me saying that CKD's case was rooted in OMGUS?

Why isn't Korts questioning the legitimacy of ckd's reasoning prior to his exchange with rofl?

Because "gut" is an acceptable though not very helpful reason for an early game state, while BS is always invalid.

I don't like Guardian's post 218 tirade that could've been summed up in a single sentence (and still be wrong).

I also want to point out that discussion on who and what is scummy is usually never a bad thing. I find the case on ckd unconvincing, and I find it a waste of space, but nevertheless it could lead to good things. I was wrong to say to stop it earlier.

More on the fence.

This is just silly. Self-voting is indicative of nothing at all, and vollkan did it to bus himself, as he is the SK

So does it indicate nothing or does it indicate that he is SK?

I don't know if Guardian genuinely doesn't realize that DGB is joking or he's really intent on refuting every single paragraph of DGB's post in a desperate attempt to defend himself.

I disagree. Mafia has an implicit social contract where we all put our thoughts about other people to be analyzed. When you don't self vote, you don't do that. It is like lurking. It robs the town of discussion and moves the discussion in a bad direction. At worst it can bring suspicion to yourself -- because it IS unhelpful to the town.

One way it is helpful is that it outs the opportunistic players who are all too eager to jump on an anti-town thell saying it's a scumtell. Remember, kids, anti-town=/=scummy. There may be overlaps, but it's a false conclusion to paint

every

anti-town action as scummy. And self-voting isn't scummy.

Why refuse to state who you are suspicious of and why? Why refuse to list the players and make comments? I want a firm stand from you on the players because right now you are my first (second if you count me misreading Korts) real suspect. I will explain further after you procure such a list or again explicitly refuse to.

Whoa, misrep! DGB is refusing to list those players she sees as

town

. She made it pretty clear who she thinks is scum, with added comments.

[Korts]

active lurking + only participating in order to self defend

yeah, elmo's probably scum here

I agree. Unless there's someone who's aware of Elmo doing these as town.

[Korts]

Guardian's hardcore fence sitting is much more implicating than Yos' lurking. I'm not even sure Yos is aware this game has started.

[Korts]

I don't follow your logic. He hasn't been prodded because it hasn't been 72 hours since the game started. I'll wait for the first prod to see whether his lurking is intentional.

[Korts]

I don't see why the mod would give Yos special treatment, though, regardless of her beliefs. I think he's the only offender, if you were asking me.

What I also don't see is why we're debating this. If Yos doesn't post even after he's prodded, I may consider pressuring him, until then, there's no proof he's following the game.

[Korts]

Uncommitted? My stance on the CKD case has not wavered, why are you saying it has?

Pardon. I just find an inherent contradiction between you not believing the CKD case and letting others pursue it when it is to your mind a dead end. I used the wrong term, possibly.

I don't know whether you generally believe we cannot analyze DGB because she is "joking" or whether you are spewing a line of bullshit. "DESPERATE" attempt to defend myself? Because DGB is attacking me for not posting content when I have posted content, and I have one vote?? And this makes me DESPERATE? I was trying to illustrate how bad DGB's attack was -- and now I find you agreeing with it .

For the record, I think DGB can be analyzed, but her statement that vollkan is self-bussing as an SK is an obvious joke because it doesn't make sense as either a scum, town or SK gambit and doesn't further any agenda other than an opposing faction's. Therefore you taking it (DGB's statement) seriously and thinking that there are

two

legitimate theories (self-voting indicates nothing and self-voting indicates SK self-bussing) either means that you didn't realize DGB's joke was that, or you are over-compensating in your self-defense for being scum.

I fundamentally agree that self-voting is not scummy, as I spent a whole post explaining. Not every anti-town action is scummy, but it is pretty damn close. I made this pic to help you understand:

<Venn-diagram>

Yeah, I know that (the Venn-diagram). My point was that the gist of your tirade against self-voting

was

that self-voting is scummy. Here, I'll quote.

Self voting is scummy -- it robs town of information

Now that may have been just a turn of phrase, but it doesn't change the fact that you did, in fact, say that.

That's exactly the thing -- she has not made it pretty clear who she thinks is scum; she's said at least 5 players I can recall are definitely scum. I want to hear her actual stance on everyone with reasons. If she doesn't want to give reasons for who is town, fine, but everyone she thinks is scummy I want reasons for.

She has made it clear that her suspects are the following: Guardian, Kison, CKD; vollkan as SK particularly.

Right. So you're saying DGB genuinely believes that the people she has named as scum are scum, and those she has named as town are town? I think not. She lies constantly, and unless she starts playing the game honestly, she is completely unreadable, because we cant use interactions or lies as scumtells, because they are all tongue in cheek. You cannot apply normal scumtells to DGB.

I digress. I think that every person DGB pinned as scum she did suspect, excluding the first couple which were obvious random jokes (Kison/Guardian/BM circle-bussing on page 2 or something). I support Guardian's stance on this (although I have faith enough in this particular town to say the hypothetical situation of DGB being unreadable and yet unlynchable won't happen).

[Korts]

What makes you read DGB as pro town?

The fact that she actively pursues her suspicions.

You make some good points about Guardian, but none of them seem like a good justification for a vote other than "staying on the fence about CKD", which I don't think is accurate. Do you consider any of the other points you're discussing with Guardian a scumtell?

The "staying on the fence about CKD" tell was the one thing that made me cast my vote; I turned out to be mistaken somewhat, and what I called being on the fence was actually a conflict of motives from Guardian's two statements, which isn't nearly as scummy. If my vote weren't already on him, I probably wouldn't vote, but I don't see any particular reason to unvote, either.

Here are the things I think are scumtells of the points against Guardian:

The conflict of projected motives; Guardian's "So does it indicate nothing or does it indicate that he is SK?" question, although to very minor degree; his implication that self-voting is inherently scummy.

[Korts]

What makes you read DGB as pro town?

The fact that she actively pursues her suspicions.

2 words. NULL. TELL.

BM

It's all about motives.

[Korts]

scum list:
ckd ✔
guardian

X

elmo

X

bm?

X

kison? ✔
korts? ✔
sensfan? ✔

Anything else?

[Korts]

Damn, BM. That's so much BS. Please consider the thought that rofl called SF out on what scummy thing he did

when

he did it.

[Korts]

Lol @ four-way multi-post

[Korts]

Let me clarify, then, BM. DGB's actions (other than the slight but very obvious buddying up to rofl and des) have been pro-town because she actively pursued her suspicions, which is something that I'd expect at this game state from a pro-town player trying to get a rise out of scum.

[Korts]

BM, stop living up to your title.

literally minutes ago you gave BM an X on my scum list, as in "you are incorrect about BM being scum."

If i'm a Jester, i'm not scum. But yes, i am a little curious as to how Elmo knows that me and Guardian are town.

BM

I'M a little curious to know how Elmo made

any

of his calls.

[Korts]

Let me clarify, then, BM. DGB's actions (other than the slight but very obvious buddying up to rofl and des) have been pro-town because she actively pursued her suspicions, which is something that I'd expect at this game state from a pro-town player trying to get a rise out of scum.

the alternative being? You think as scum, DGB would claim a list of scumbags and not pursue them?

BM

You want me to try and put a basically gut feel into any more words and my head will burst.

[Korts]

Tunnel vision much?

wouldn't that require me to be voting you and not voicing my suspicions of a number of other players concurrently? do you think before you accuse me of things?

It wouldnt. You're tunnel-visioning me in the sense that you have the aforementioned preconception that i will behave (and have already behaved) in a scummy fashion. It smells like you are planning to set me up at a later stage. Either that, or you are tunnel-visioning me now.

BM

This is so much BS. Why would it be a preconception to think you have already behaved in a scummy fashion? For that matter, I don't gather how you decided rofl was assuming you were gonna be scummy instead of having already seen you be scummy.

[Korts]

Huh. Exactly the opposite was fairly clear to me.

[Korts]

Huh, no posting for 12 hours. Unprecedented in this game.

What makes you read DGB as pro town?

The fact that she actively pursues her suspicions.

2 words. NULL. TELL.

BM

It's all about motives.

please continue.

BM

Ok, let me elaborate on that gut feel after all. DGBscum doesn't have any motive to be elbows deep in shit while she mimes scumhunting. DGB's actions so far have been pro-town, therefore I have no reason to suspect her. Why are you trying to dig any deeper when what we're discussing is a

town

read on someone? I'm thinking rofl has a point here; you are either trying to dissuade me from my read on DGB because you don't like town eliminating other town as suspects, or the other possibility, you are trying to figure out how to appear more pro-town in my eyes (although this second possibility assumes that you give a shit about my opinion).

<snip>

you seem to be the one who is panicking, chainsaw defending sens against a suspicion that didn't even come with a vote attached.

Apparently the suspicion came without a suspicion attached. lol

Votes are over-rated.

Unvote, Vote: Roflcopter

What is your point here saying "suspicion came without a suspicion attached"? Are you implying that suspicion should always draw your vote? If so, do you think that's a valid method of scumhunting?

BM, stop living up to your title.

literally minutes ago you gave BM an X on my scum list, as in "you are incorrect about BM being scum."

I didn't get the feel Elmo was giving BM leeway for scummyposting here with the implication that he's town, rather giving BM leeway regardless of alignment.

If i'm a Jester, i'm not scum. But yes, i am a little curious as to how Elmo knows that me and Guardian are town.

You are making your connection to Guardian more obvious. Please, continue.

(I'm coming from a perspective which is very skeptical of "town tells" in general. Basically, scum has every motivation to appear protown, such that it shouldn't be at all surprising that scum do a good job at "scumhunting". Town, in contrast, has no motivation to appear scummy (subject to my "optimum, non-zero point above"), which makes scumtells (however much we may debate what is a scumtell and what is not) on more solid a footing.)

Do you agree that there are certain actions that inherently are inherently pro-town in the sense that they further the game towards the town win condition? If you do agree with this, don't you agree that people who consecutively perform these actions are less likely than average to be scum?

He's so town that it's blindingly obvious, yet it's also unexplainable because it's a gut read?

Unvote
Vote: roflcoptor

I see what my beef with this is. a) rofl's "blindingly obvious" comment was a very clear hyperbole, and b) "blindingly obvious" doesn't even come close to contradicting the statement that it was a gut read on des. This is pure, unadulterated BS.

a) Probably true.
b) Not true. If something is obvious"it means that it is readily apparent. If something is based on gut then, by definition, the player cannot point to a basis for their assertion. Thus, it isn't obvious.

If a) is probably true, as you concede, and des being "blindingly obvious" town is a hyperbole that, in fact, probably means that "I think that des is town", then I don't see how there is a contradiction. The gut feel cannot be proven, but since "obvious" was presumably a hyperbole, your point to b) is, for practical matters, invalid.

That's not correct. Guardian begins to defend CKD, and then stops (not "retreats") because he has an objection to defending (which I suspect I disagree with, but now is not the place for that argument). He doesn't say anything which could be construed as expressing a neutral opinion - he just refuses to involve himself in CKD's defence. The implicit point here is that he disagrees with the case (is committed to disagreement, you might say) but doesn't want to involve himself in the debate.

Yes. I concede the point that he's not fence-sitting as I first saw it. But if he disagrees with the CKD-case, he obviously has a problem with the points against him, and if that's the case I don't see why he doesn't raise these problems with the case. The conflict of projected motives is evident.

How is BM criticising an attack scummy?

because he wasn't just criticising it, he was mischaracterizing it as a lurkerhunt, which makes it sound like it doesn't have any basis in sens' actions. but if you'll do as i suggested with the quote right above this you'll see that it does in fact have a basis in sens' actions, and i was on his case when they were happening.

Calling it "mischaracterising" is a bit rich.

You said:

oh, also add

sensfan?

to the bottom of that list. i almost forgot he was even in the game he's added so little

Nothing you say there at all exlpains why you suspect Sens, other than your mention of inactivity (which is not a legitimiate basis for suspicion)

This makes me sad. rofl had explained what scummy thing SensFan did

when

he did it. Considering rofl's posting, why did you expect it any other way?

i should also point out that you appear to have the preconception that i am going to do scummy things. I find it hard to believe that an open minded townie would have that approach.

BM

This still irks me. Nowhere was future scumminess implied in the following quote, only present:

BM seems meta-townish.

define meta-townish. because it sounds mostly like an excuse for you to ignore whatever scummy things bm does.

i should also point out that you appear to have the preconception that i am going to do scummy things. I find it hard to believe that an open minded townie would have that approach.

BM

you are really good at framing your statements in such a way that they sound really damning without having actually proven anything.

i had no preconceptions about you or anyone else coming into this game. i am observing in the process of doing scummy things here.

then why have you assumed that i will behave in a scummy way? Tunnel vision much?

BM

This post is ignoring in its entirety what rofl wrote in reply to BM's accusation.

unvote, vote: Battle Mage

What???? BM is still alive?

See? What's DGB if not pro-town?

[Korts]

The reason im criticising your town read of DGB, is that i'm trying to use my meta experience with DGB in order to assess what is protown and scummy for her. She does this alot (although i cant recall a game as mafia to use as a balance example).

I think you may have disproved your point there...

Firstly, stop trying to be like DGB. 1 is more than enough. Secondly, tying players to each other is not only scummy in itself, but if done by a townie, is easily exploitable by scum.

Firstly, I didn't know how else to phrase it. Secondly, it was you who were implying you knew Guardian was town. Since there are no pro-town linked roles on the front page, this doesn't sit well with me, particularly because you didn't outright state that you thought Guardian was town, but tried to plant the thought of Guardiantown with a passing comment. I'd have had no problem with you stating that you have a town read on Guardian, what I do have a problem with is you trying to pass it as almost a suggestion.

I don't know how better to phrase it, but I'm sure there are better words for this. Anyway...

In an instant, the future can become the present. 'Does' can be used in the future tense.

Fair enough. Your native language, not mine.

Why are you talking in the 3rd person? It wouldnt be because, rather than talk to me, you've already made your mind up, and want to seek support, would it?

It was your damn signature at the end of the quote, probably... I dunno.

What???? BM is still alive?

See? What's DGB if not pro-town?

Your mom?

Nice comeback I'd give a 3.8 out of 5.

[Korts]

Sorry guys, this game's on backburner until the weekend. I'll try to answer any questions directly at me, but my attention is due elsewhere at the moment.

[Korts]

I'm not exactly comfortable with Elmo implying in post 331 that the posts up to that point were mostly spam. Null arguments aren't the same as spam.

Why is it more interesting that Yos was on the list?

Nice catch. rofl, are you suggesting that Yos is particularly pro-town? Buddying up much?

This is a fairly obviously bad post. Yos hadn't posted yet, so it's rather difficult to believe rofl is suggesting that. You're assigning suspicion that wasn't there in Des's post, too; this looks like you're trying to slide in-between two townies, playing them off against each other. I don't mind reaching in the random stage generally, but this looks the scummy kind. Town wants to find something kinda suspicious as a springboard, but hopefully accurate.. this just looks scummy. The fact that you're basically feeding off someone else's reasoning instead of contributing your own, that you've ignored all rofl's other behaviour in terms of coming up with a read, and that you seem more inclined to push Des into a lynch than prod at rofl and actually read his reactions are, y'know, scummy.

Fair enough.

BM is scummy. But it seems slightly closer to the scummy where he was actually town before. BM is always scummy. Unless he moves back towards scum-scummy, then I don't really want to lynch him today. Obviously, I don't have a strong read on him.

I don't really understand the distinction between town-scummy and scum-scummy here. Any reason for being wishy-washy?

Kison is kind of scummy. But I don't know if that's just him. Kison, are you scum?

Again, why so wishy-washy? What do you hope to achieve by a direct question?

Yes. I concede the point that he's not fence-sitting as I first saw it. But if he disagrees with the CKD-case, he obviously has a problem with the points against him, and if that's the case I don't see why he doesn't raise these problems with the case. The conflict of projected motives is evident.

This shouldn't be taken to give endorsement to the view that people should not defend others, but I do think that one can legitimately refuse to defend somebody if one thinks that their will be an information-gain from requiring them to respond personally.

While I understand what you're saying, I still think there's a conflict between the two motives that Guardian was projecting. I think I did acknowledge that it's nowhere near as solid a scumtell as the initial accusation of fence-sitting was (although I realized that to be invalid).

Rofl explained absolutely nothing! <quotes>

Fair enough. I remembered the exchange between SensFan and rofl, but I didn't pay much attention to it at the time. I thought rofl had more to it than that.

Vote: Zazier temporary placeholder while I find a better home for my vote. Zazier, where art thou?

What's the reasoning behind this vote?

You're calling his second vote (for rofl) random now, but you didn't at the time. I was calling into question the fact that you seemed to think the best of his votes. You didn't consider that ckd could be scum.

The unvote and vote elsewhere wasn't suspicious in particular.

Korts is more active now, but I'm still not convinced that he's really trying to catch scum. I'm finding a lot of his argument's reachy. I can point to them later.

Can you do this (assuming you didn't earlier?)

-----

I have to go catch a train, and the ride is three hours long, I'll continue catching up when I arrive.

[Korts]

Hmm.

Unvote
Vote: Korts

ckd, I still want to see you responding to the posts I mentioned.

I understand your sentiment, but I gotta ask: why now? If you weren't comfortable with CKD at L-1, why were you content to have him at L-2 before, when basically that was the same thing?

[Korts]

As I said at the time, I didn't like his Guardian vote. Accusing Guardian of being "non-committal" when it clearly wasn't the case that Guardian was shirking from having an opinion - he was simply letting CKD fight his own battles. "Non-committal" is just like "WIFOM" - it carries powerful implications, but is open to abuse. Later on, when I pointed this out, he then changed tact and argued that Guardian should be arguing in CKD's defence - leaving a silence as to what was scummy about this

I think that you weren't the first to point it out, actually. And I "changed tact" because I realized that I had mislabelled Guardian's action as something far scummier. Not defending CKD when he doesn't agree with the case is only mildly scummy, as I think I expressed.

His accusation that Rofl was buddying up by asking why Yos was on a list also seems a bit of a stretch.

Yes. That was a false start at scumhunting.

though it should be noted, that I have also self voted as scum too (though I dont think in Day 1)..so the self vote from me, should be taking at the most as a null tell.

This post almost made me give CKD slight town points, but then again, there's no motivation for town either to bring attention to the fact that he does it as scum, too. The "(though I don't think in Day 1)" corollary seems a bit fabricated and seems to want to imply that he wouldn't do such a thing Day 1 and he's therefore town for doing so now.

Not sure how my vote on rofl was OMGUS when I voted him first (which started this whole mess).

I thought I clarified it enough times that I meant

case

instead of vote. Your initial vote seemed like another random one, but the way you presented your case after rofl attacked you made me think that you made that case only

because

rofl attacked you.

You make good observations/theories here. My reaction to rofl wasn’t a knee jerk, but I can see maybe how one might think that. I was mostly angered how rofl refused to answer my question and only through out more crap…then I was upset that no one else really seemed to see what I was seeing (at the time) I agree with your thoughts here though…it is easy for people to say “I agree with X” if someone knows that X is town and is getting ready to get hung…it might by the town creds later…is that what Korts is doing?..I don’t know…but like I have said, those who scream X is town the most, is probably scum…

How was I saying "I agree with X"? At most I was saying that I don't find a change of vote particularly suspicious. I don't especially like how now that your wagon seems to have died down you start pushing the one that was the second biggest.

I had been away from the game for a few days and hadn't had a better place in mind to stash it, as I said in the block you quoted.

That much was clear. But what purpose did it serve in your opinion if it was admittedly temporary and in no way expressive of an intent to lynch or pressure?

[Korts]

Also, I find it odd that Korts, Volkan, and Destuctor are all all attacking for my vote on CKD and yet not one has shown the slightest bit of curiosity for why I am voting him.

Where have I even mentioned you?

I would like people speculate as to why Guardian was killed. No, really.

Scumkill and vigkill are both likely possibilities. Scumkill because Guardian was basically uncovering a plan that could ensure a quicklynch, and vigkill because the same, which was a clear attempt to stop any more votes on CKD, implied a heavy connection between Guardian and CKD. Why do you think this question will help in any way?

[Korts]

]In addition to my strong gut feeling that he's scum here, Korts isn't doing any real scumhunting - case on Guardian was based on a missrep and Korts fizzled it out, now he's attacking BM who's always a comfortable target, for bad reasons - would BM off Guardian after buddying up to him?

This question is based on an assumption that isn't really based on any evidence. Why are you assuming the Guardian kill was a scumkill unless you took part in deciding it?

Where are you seeing DGB elbows deep in shit? Are we even reading the same game? She's under no pressure at all...

You misunderstand me. When I said "elbows deep in shit" I was saying that she's not afraid to stir up shit with her bare hands, as in fishing for emotions, reactions etc.

The second sentence is a circular argument, and doesn't actually say anything.

Shouting WIFOM at every hint of it is idiocy and a way to be acting like you're scumhunting. Again, looking at the motivations for her actions, I have the impression that she has slightly more motivation to be stirring up shit the way she's doing as town than as scum. Ignoring the motivations and running around screaming WIFOM isn't exactly a logical reply.

Most importantly, your own case on BM is trying to dig deeper into his town read on Guardian. I find this inconsistency is very scummy.

This comment carries heavy implications without you having provided any proof. Where was I doing that? Quotes plz.

If you can't explain why you made the assumption of Guardian being a scumkill, why you think it's WIFOM to explore the motivations for certain ways of behaviour, and how I was attacking BM for his town read on Guardian, my vote will be more than happy to visit you for an extended stay.

[Korts]

This question is based on an assumption that isn't really based on any evidence. Why are you assuming the Guardian kill was a scumkill unless you took part in deciding it?

Because Guardian makes no sense as a vig kill, and we're not even sure we have a vig. I can't completely rule it out, but I'm willing to assume the far, far liklier option.

I don't see how Guardian shouldn't make sense as a vig kill. You have to at least acknowledge that there were multiple players suspicious of him; and his attempt at stalling the CKD wagon at L-2 could've been taken as either buddying-up/opting for brownie points or derailing a scumbuddy-wagon as well as pro-town apprehension.

You misunderstand me. When I said "elbows deep in shit" I was saying that she's not afraid to stir up shit with her bare hands, as in fishing for emotions, reactions etc.

Why can't that be a scum move? It carries no real bad implications for her and gives the appearance that she's actually scumhunting.

That's true, to an extent. It's basically intuition that I tried to explain.

Shouting WIFOM at every hint of it is idiocy and a way to be acting like you're scumhunting. Again, looking at the motivations for her actions, I have the impression that she has slightly more motivation to be stirring up shit the way she's doing as town than as scum. Ignoring the motivations and running around screaming WIFOM isn't exactly a logical reply.

I just realized I meant third sentence, which is:

DGB's actions so far have been pro-town, therefore I have no reason to suspect her.

If you take the first half of the sentence as granted, the second half is evident as conclusion. And the first half isn't circular logic/WIFOM in itself. Therefore I don't see what you're implying could be WIFOM here.

Circular argument, says nothing. Wasn't talking about WIFOM here. The BM-Guardian link that was part of your attack on BM is a WIFOM trap in light of his kill, I'm surprised you didn't comment on the kill in relation to BM before.

First off, wait a second. Circular logic is the same as WIFOM, unless you're misusing the term. Please give your definitions to those two terms. My understanding of WIFOM is derived from the Princess Bride, and deciding whether the Wine In Front of Me or the Wine In Front Of You is poisoned is a very clear circular argument.

Second, I admit that I failed to correct that the BM-Guardian link that I made is obviously invalid now that Guardian's flipped town. But that never was the focal point of my case. Note that the vote on BM (in post 327) came structurally after I replied to BM misrepping rofl even after clarification, and not after I accused BM and Guardian of being connected. I also continued the post after the vote.

This comment carries heavy implications without you having provided any proof. Where was I doing that? Quotes plz.

Firstly, I didn't know how else to phrase it. Secondly, it was you who were implying you knew Guardian was town. Since there are no pro-town linked roles on the front page, this doesn't sit well with me, particularly because you didn't outright state that you thought Guardian was town, but tried to plant the thought of Guardiantown with a passing comment.

I'd have had no problem with you stating that you have a town read on Guardian, what I do have a problem with is you trying to pass it as almost a suggestion.

Right here.

See bolded. My beef was with the very subtle

implication

that Guardian was town, specifically because of the structure of the sentence BM implied it in. When I first read it, I didn't even realize that he extended the implied townness to Guardian, I thought he only meant himself.

If you can't explain why you made the assumption of Guardian being a scumkill, why you think it's WIFOM to explore the motivations for certain ways of behaviour, and how I was attacking BM for his town read on Guardian, my vote will be more than happy to visit you for an extended stay.

What good does this threat do you?

[/quote]

Basically I thought, and still think, that you are merely following up on your stated "bad feeling" about me with a very poorly fabricated case. Your points are weak and rely in semantics.

unvote, vote: Raging Rabbit

[Korts]

Normally one would think so, but that's not how the posts looked to me, at all.

What did those posts look to you like, then?

It's a wierd situation. On the one hand, the fact that Guardian was defending CKD and then died might be a good sign for CKD. But on the other hand; if the scum wanted CKD to be lynched, why not wait until he was at lynch -1 and THEN kill someone off the wagon, making him suddenly be instant lynched? Doing it at lynch -2 makes no sense, if that was their goal.

I donno...best guess is, it's probably something totally unrelated. Perhaps he dropped some kind of power-role tell or something.

Do you discount a vig kill as unlikely?

Right...but if that is what you meant, why is DGB pro-town for it?

I mean, stirring up reactions is something that scum has an enormous motivation to do - it serves as a means of triggering town errors. Town can do it also, of course, so it's ultimately a nulltell.

That's a stance that I can understand. I still hold that town is slightly more motivated to provoke reactions. I guess it comes down to a difference in ideology.

This isn't WIFOM, so much as the fact that stirring up reactions is something which benefits any alignment and, thus, it is neither a towntell nor a scumtell

The fact that it isn't WIFOM was the point I was trying to make. RR was trying to pin a "circular logic" (i.e. WIFOM) tag on something that isn't. The fact that you deem it a nulltell is beside the point.

@Korts: In a few brief sentences, why are you voting RR? I ask because it wasn't clear from your last post

I'd said this before, right before the vote. I thought I was clear enough; I don't feel RR's case has any good points, and the ones that aren't reaching (my town read on DGB) are misreps or due to less thorough reading (accusing me of WIFOM, accusing me of questioning BM's town read of Guardian). Basically my impression is that RR made a case on me solely because he had previously expressed a general "bad feeling" about me, and tried to follow up on that.

i still await a response from the DrippingLurkerBall

To what?

I'm not sure I like DGB jumping at vollkan in post 462 for trying to explain how my town read on her isn't well-justified.

[Korts]

i still await a response from the DrippingLurkerBall

To what?

To the question i asked. Duh.

BM

I thought the implicit implication that I didn't see you asking any question previously was sort of clear.

[Korts]

Yeah, I saw your question the second time. That's why I didn't bother to go back

[Korts]

I never said it was WIFOM, I said circular logic.

DGB's been pro town because you've no reason to suspect her

, and you've no reason to suspect her because she's been pro town. This sentence doesn't actually say anything and is only there to make your read appear more justified.

The bolded part is BS. Me not having a reason to suspect her doesn't meant she's been pro-town specifically, just that she hasn't been scummy. Her being pro-town does, however, mean that I don't have a reason to suspect her.

I don't have the patience to really go into exact definitions right now, but WIFOM is basically trying to form a set of assumptions that goes on an infinite loop and is therefore useless, while circular logic is an argument that depends upon itself as proof - X is bad because god said so, god said so because X is bad - and therefore in effect doesn't say anything new.

I think what you're describing is begging the question. Nonetheless, I get your point, and see the above quote and reply.

I just don't think a disagreement on the use of tenses - to which you later conceded - is cause for a vote, so I assumed the more important point was BM's connection to Guardain.

I did later concede that point, but at the time of my vote, it wasn't clear whether BM was just being boneheaded about it or purposefully misrepping. And purposeful misrepping I see as a valid premise for a vote.

Subtle definitions aside, what you're basically doing here is trying to dig deeper into a town read - the same thing you accused BM of doing with your read on DGB.

What? That's BS. You're completely missing the point. I wasn't "digging deeper into the town read"--there wasn't a stated town read. I was accusing BM of subtly implying the notion that Guardian is town. I never asked BM to clarify on his read.

Yes, my case stems from my inital strong gut feeling. How does that prove to you I'm scum exactly? I don't see any reasoning for your vote other than pure OMGUS.

Obviously you don't have much option other than accuse me of OMGUS or back down. And you're conveniently ignoring what I said in 452 in the last paragraph, just so you can make another jab at me.

I'll say it again. The thing that convinced me wasn't that you followed up on your gut case, but the fact that you followed up with such a weak case and invalid points, and seemingly only for the sake of staying consistent with your apparent "bad feeling" regarding me.

[Korts]

Do you really have a problem with me voting for someone and not explaining all the reason why I did so right away? Because that's a common tactic I use to get the most useful reactions. Usually, I wait for the person I voted for to respond to the initial vote, and then I go into more details. And as of the time of your attack on me, he had not yet responded to my initial vote. (Unless you count "voting for himself" as a response.)

If this was the case, you are being inconsistent. Previously, you said that your vote was basically based on gut, and you had a hard time explaining it; now you're implying that you did have a solid reason after all?

"Paving the way to disaster"? WTF? It's day 1. Town is supposed to just lynch someone who looks scummy then move on to day 2. If town is REALLY good, we might even have a 45%-50% chance of getting it right. Why are people so afraid to even come close to a lynch these days that a guy putting himself at lynch -1 makes everyone jump off of the bandwagon? Games don't HAVE to last a year and a half, you know.

What's the length of the game got to do with the fact that you cast an L-X vote (where X is either 1 or 2, I don't recall) without justification per se?

I don't think that's the a question people should be answering, Korts.

And I don't think people should speculate on Guardian being a scumkill when pro-town killing roles may be in the game too.

[Korts]

Huh? CKD's posts feel somewhat scummy and weird to me. I was willing to explain why they did as much as I could, and did so as soon as someone asked me to. What inconsistancy are you talking about?

The tactic you described in the part I quoted requires undisclosed reasons and not just a difficult-to-explain gut feel, therefore the implication that you were using the tactic you described was also an implication that you do have such undisclosed reasons.

[Korts]

Huh. I must have skimmed over that part. I'll do a reread of it tomorrow.

[Korts]

What's my point? We go from the very strong point of "DGBscum doesn't have any motive to be elbows deep in shit" to "Town is slightly more motivated to provoke reactions". When I pressed you to explain yourself, you directly contradicted your earlier point.

You raised a legitimate point as to what motivation scum would have to do the same. That led me to change my opinion slightly. See the word "still" in the first quote. That implies that my stance didn't change completely, only my conviction was weakened.

[Korts]

Why would I jump a wagon that I don't fully understand?

[Korts]

You've no reason to suspect her > none of her actions are worthy of any sort of suspicion > "her actions so far have been pro town"

That's a stretch between the second and third links.

But you yourself admit it wasn't clear, and it a disagreement about the use of tenses is a very minor point anyways and not worthy of a vote.

Once you conceded it, both this and the connection with Guardian were no longer viable. Why didn't you unvote at that time, than?

Because I didn't see any better place for my vote.

There totally was a stated town read, subtle differences aside. What it seemed to me you said in response to BM's questioning was "it's worthless digging in to a town read" - in other words, town reads aren't good scumtells. You then used BM's town read on Guardian as a scumtell.

There was no stated town read! Show me where BM explicitly stated that he has a town read on Guardian before my accusation. My beef was with the implicit suggestion. You are blatantly ignoring my points and restating yours.

So any case made against you which you find weak is cause for a vote? I'd consider the earlier gut read a pro town sign in this case, if anything.

When the case seems to have been made for the sole purpose of following up on a stated read, I think the conviction in it deserves to be tested. The gut read is at best a null-tell.

[Korts]

In your situation, assuming that you're town, a "weak" case that came out of nowhere would look worse to me than a "weak" case based on an ealier expressed gut - the case can be explained as the townie trying to follow up on his feeling, and not doing too well. I don't see how this is a town tell.

I assume you mean scumtell. And I see your point. It's just that I felt you made the case solely because you felt you needed to follow up on your stated read with a however weak case. Do you agree that making a very weak case and pushing it anyway is scummy?

Backing up a little and considering the whole of our argument, though, I agree with you that my vote was on a very weak premise.

unvote

I'll be looking for a good place for my vote starting this weekend, I have a lot to do, sorry. I'll review the CKD wagon, because I don't understand all the hype.

But BM, you're already bus'ing a scumbuddy... never mind. It's OK if you're the Godfather, you can bus either buddy, we don't care. So my advice that you vote yourself is incorrect. Sorry about that.

ok awesome. As Korts is obvscum, and i'm being co-operative, why dont you hop on the largest wagon?

BM

Elaborate? Give me something to defend.

[Korts]

Sorry, guys. Didn't have time to do that reread, and I won't for a while longer. Got me a lot of studying...

Meanwhile, I haven't seen pop give an insightful post in a while. His last four posts were "moar CKD votes", "moar CKD votes" again, a quick, fairly meaningless question at Kison, and a "yeah" post.

[Korts]

I dont have anything else to say. This thread needs CKD lycnhed. Its the most optymal lynch I can think after my reread.
Deflecting much? And why did you pick me over other people who doesnt even have other posts? Whats your opinion of CKD?

Haha, the irony. First, you accuse me of deflecting, and then you point at other people saying they're worse at it than you. I love you

[Korts]

CKD'S lycnh is optymal for me because I think that CKD has more prob of turning scum than Korts.
I love u too, Korts but what did that last post try to accomplish besides avoiding my questions?

I'm sorry for pointing out the hypocrisy of your post. Only one of the three questions is valid, and that's the one about how I feel about CKD. Unfortunately, I don't have much of an opinion, and I'm not really in comprehension of the case on him, which is why I intended to do a reread. I don't have the time for that right now.

[Korts]

You stood out with your last post, and that enticed me to take a better look at you. Others didn't catch my attention; and only BM springs to mind who hasn't posted in a while. The thing that actually is scummy is that you point at others the second I dare mention your lack of recent content; and to top that, you accuse me of deflecting with the same momentum in a fit of hypocrisy.

[Korts]

I'm very sorry, but I don't have the time for an extensive reread right now.

vote: CKD

Partly because I trust DGB and rofl's judgement, and partly because I want to save my own ass.

[Korts]

vollkan.

destructor - Without canonising him as Saint Des the Most Protown, I've found nothing in Des's play thus far that warrants suspicion and his posts and reasoning are of a high standard. He's also asking the right questions. At this stage, Des breaks below 50 and scores a 45.

After this, I have to question your motives in attacking my pro-town read on DGB for

very

similar grounds.

[Korts]

BM's reluctance is strange considering he expresses his desire to hammer, but he did keep the pro-town read on CKD pretty much all the way through. So no, I don't see your point, DGB, since CKD will die tomorrow at deadline anyway.

[Korts]

Well, if he's been keeping his pro town read, do you find it odd that he expresses desire to hammer?

No, not really. I get the urge myself whenever someone's at L-1 and I'm not voting them, more or less regardless of my opinion regarding the player.

Pushing poorly thought out arguments is a scumtell for DGB. I cite Return of the Mafia as a pressing example (where she was Toaster Strudel).

Isn't that more of a trademark than a scumtell?

[Korts]

Hmm. I find DGB's behaivour quite strange on second thought.

DGB, why did you decide to start a wagon from scratch on BM

one single day

from deadline? Are you perhaps trying suddenly to disassociate yourself from the CKD wagon now that you've pushed it almost to the finish line?

[Korts]

Shut up, I'm subtly bussing

[Korts]

What with have I set your scumdar on fire? By asking a legitimate question?

[Korts]

I thought you preferred my lynch over CKD's, Kison. At least, that's what your last vote implied.

[Korts]

See rule three. Adel adds that character beside the name of the player who will be lynched at deadline. Since previous vote counts showed that the character was, in case of ties, beside the player who had been at that number of votes longest, I'm saying CKD will be lynched if votes don't change.

[Korts]

EBWOP: make that rule thirteen, sorry.

[Korts]

The thought crossed my mind, but it seems much too obvious. That's wifom thinking, though.

The timing of her putting her vote elsewhere is very convenient, though, especially considering she'd been the one who'd pushed the CKD wagon hardest.

[Korts]

DGB, I see you've posted since, but no answer.

Why did you change your vote to BM, when your vote on him was the first, and deadline is today i.e. a day away from the time you changed your vote?

[Korts]

DGB, I admit that you have a point that BM should have chosen one of the two leading wagons, but while your point is true, it applies to you, too. That's cowardly scum hiding off wagon, in your words.

I don't understand why CKD didn't vote me. I mean, he hadn't expressed any pro-town read on me, so since he knows his own alignment, it would make the most sense to save his own ass...

I have Korts-scum who seems to know that CKD is scum and therefore bus'ing him.

No, you have Korts regardless of alignment knowing his own alignment and wanting to save his ass.

And we have vollkan and BM, two cowardly scumbags, refusing to commit to a productive vote, ie, a vote for either CKD or Korts.

vollkan had committed to a CKD-wagon two pages prior to this comment. Inattentive or purposefully misrepping?

Meanwhile Korts is trying to frame me for whatever happens today

I don't see how it isn't deserving of attention that you switched your vote off a lynch candidate to start pushing a completely fresh one from scratch

one day

from deadline. A lynch on BM would have only happened if enough people checked in

and

they agreed that BM should be lynched on those grounds.

Did you really believe there would be any possibility at the point of your vote of BM getting lynched today? I don't think I believe so.

I note that Korts has failed to claim though he was in jeopardy. That IS scummy.

No-one asked me to, and it didn't occur to me. Now that deadline's passed, I won't claim unless I'm again wagoned to near lynch.

[Korts]

You jumped off the CKD wagon to pursue BM (without anyone else voting BM); you only voted me when I expressed discomfort at you doing so one day from deadline. Nice misrep, though.

[Korts]

Really, then where's his vote, now?

vollkan's vote? On CKD as far as I know. Why, where do you think his vote is?

Yeah, I got excited. I didn't realize the deadline was so close.

Yeah, obviously.

Seriously. Duh. How long have you been playing this game?

Yeah, I got excited. I forgot.

[Korts]

I have this vague feeling Kison is scum. I dunno why, but I'll definitely look into this gut read properly when I have normal access (I'm currently through a proxy site right now, my brother blocked MS and the searchword "proxy" because apparently I'm spending too much time on MS...)

[Korts]

See, DGB,

now

I'm more than happy with a BM wagon. It's just starting it one single day before deadline that bothered me.

vote: BM

[Korts]

He needs to save his own arse, and DGB is giving him an opportunity to do so.

Wait, save my arse from what? The size of my wagon yesterday was partly due to the proximity of the deadline, IMO. I've got time to earn some town cred back today. And I'm starting with you.

Also, OMGUS is such a fictive scumtell. It doesn't exist in practice.

[Korts]

Also, what is this lie you refer to in regards to DGB?

[Korts]

Hmm, that's not especially damning, BM. Going and checking up on the answering post of DGB's;

Initially, this is her response:

@BM. I'm retired. I've become a little fuzzy on 'days of the week.' I also seem to be unable to tell the words 'Guardian' and 'curiouskarmadog' apart, though I blame it on one ending, and the other starting, with the letter 'g'.

This is the answer I think you're alluding to:

Where were you last thursday?

BM

Why, I think I was home most of the day. You didn't see me betting at the races. did you?

While you have a point, being home doesn't immediately mean being on MS. Not everyone's like you and me

[Korts]

I don't follow. What motive would DGBscum have had to put Guardian down?

[Korts]

Ok so I was wrong.

[Korts]

I have this vague feeling Kison is scum. I dunno why, but I'll definitely look into this gut read properly when I have normal access (I'm currently through a proxy site right now, my brother blocked MS and the searchword "proxy" because apparently I'm spending too much time on MS...)

[Korts]

note: I promise to catch up with what I have to and post something of content tomorrow or the day after that.

[Korts]

wow what a scumtell I dropped there, you got me

[Korts]

wow what a scumtell I dropped there, you got me

Those promises are rarely kept. It's called 'active lurking.'

I'm sorry if my exams are a bigger priority than mafia atm. I've got minutes to write, an essay to complete, about four exams looming, and I don't know right now what else. If this is a scumtell, so be it. I try real hard not to break promises.

Also, aren't you supposed to call me out

after

I fail to have adhered to my promise? Otherwise, you're just grasping at air.

By the way I don't discount a possible vig kill by far. Why couldn't it have been, again?

There is a Mod initiated time delay between kill and announcement. And my suggestion is not that Yos killed Kison because he was a threat, but that it would enable him to cast suspicion on those attacking Kison-as indeed, he did.

I don't think he was casting suspicion. He was justifying how this could've been a vig kill.

The amount of speculation and BS from BM is beginning to amaze me. I'm good for his lynch.

[Korts]

[Korts]

So the only really valid point against me is still the one vollkan brought up in regards to jumping on rofl after des.

Your case is basically this, correct me if I'm wrong: I made a case on Guardian (which was justified, just not based on the tell I thought it was); I made a case on BM based on a BS point of view in an argument, which I later retract on account of it being weak, but leave my vote because I can't find another place for it; "OMGUS" case on you, based on the fact that you seem to be pushing a weak case very hard; self-preservation vote on CKD (how's that even a point against me?); "bad logic" on the gut read on DGB.

Your case is very weak, RR. Its focal point is that the cases I've made were weak. They were, but I don't see how that's a scumtell.

[Korts]

hi!

[Korts]

You voted Guardian for being "non-committal". That argument was rubbish, as I have said already. How was that justified?

He was saying that he didn't agree with the CKD case. The logical conclusion from that is that the points didn't make sense. And a point doesn't make sense, it is every pro-town player's duty to show how it's faulty. But he refused to give his contribution to the CKD wagon for or against it, basically saying that he would "allow" it to be pursued even though he thought it was invalid. How's that

not

justified taken the circumstances of that phase in the game?

1) You defended Rofl as having justified himself when, as I showed, he'd done absolutely nothing of the worst

I seemed to remember him giving a more extensive explanation for the suspicion of SF. The fact that I understood his point made me believe that he had explained it more thoroughly. I concede that I was wrong.

2) Subjectivising disagreement over your argument about DGB's actions being towntells

Well, that's because our disagreement

is

subjective. You draw the line a bit further in the case of towntells than me. This is nothing more than a nulltell and I think you know it.

Meanwhile, the debate between Yos and des doesn't seem to give proof of either one being scum. Yos seems to be slightly reaching, while des seems to be extrapolating Yos's scumminess from the fact that Yos is slightly reaching. Of the three main participants of that line of discussion (Yos, des, vollkan), vollkan seems to be the one who chimes in for personal motives.

[Korts]

You're setting up a false dichotomy here. As I said, one can quite plausibly be against a wagon, but also wish to leave it to the individual to explain themselves. Now, if Guardian had let the wagon go to lynch without intervening, there would be a problem, but there's nothing anti-town about not intervening in a wagon one disagrees with.

Okay, there may be some pro-town motive to not intervening, but I consider it a mild scumtell. Scum are more likely to do so, either because the case they're trying to subtly discredit is against a partner or because they are aiming for brownie points after the eventual lynch.

the point is that you made the simple assertion that it's an ideological disagreement over the alignment implications of a person triggering reactions. You're subjectivising it. In contrast, if you had explained your view (ie. by explaining yourself over my point about scum having a motivation to provoke town errors) I would have no objection. It's the fact that you guillotine all debate by simply making it a personal difference between us. Now, it might well be a personal disagreement at some level, but you didn't respond to the point I had made.

Okay, I see your point, I think. I simply saw us making the same points over and over again; that's why I said it looked like mostly ideological difference. And the point you raised, that scum have a motivation to provoke town errors, was fair, but town do have a greater motive to scumhunt, since the main goal of scum during the day is not to get lynched, and not to lynch someone specific.

The contradiction point is a separate matter, and one I forgot to raise before.

I'd already addressed the contradiction point when it was raised. Adjusting my point of view from "scum don't have motive" to "town have more motive" is, I would think, pretty natural when you had just pointed out how scum would have motive.

[Korts]

forb, there is no such thing as OMGUS. Seriously. Believe me. There is always an underlying reason to what you call "OMGUS", and that underlying reason makes the accusation of "OMGUS" invalid. Even if that underlying reason is only "that player's vote on me is weakly justified".

[Korts]

than you stay on BM after having admitted you don't have any real reason to suspect him anymoe

You are pushing this point like it's especially damning. I like keeping my vote out somewhere, and usually when I don't have any leads it's my most recent suspect who gets the honor.

than you OMGUS me on a really weak basis which I quickly disprove and you unvote.

See, it didn't happen that way. You presented a weak case on me. I answered your points. You kept pushing on the same ill-founded reasons. So I voted you for pushing a crap case. There's no OMGUS there (and I'm not even taking into account that OMGUS doesn't exist in practise).

"Unconvincing reasons" for my town read on DGB were because someone asked me to explain my gut read. Gut reads are generally hard to explain; I gave it my best shot. I still don't see how that's a scumtell at all. Elaborate?

----------

And the use of it can mean anything. So far we've been in a semantics debate about the use of OMGUS.

Um, actually, vollkan's point was that you used the term OMGUS on something that obviously isn't.

Except...it was. BM was a scapegoat, quite obviously. It's just too suspicious how things played out.

Ironically, you seem to be making DGB the scapegoat for BM's lynch now. Hypocrisy is the best!

----------

Where's this "more likely" coming from? I'm not going to facetiously ask "Have you got numbers to prove it?". What I would like to know, though, is what makes the pro-town motive I gave any less reasonable than the pro-scum motives you've given. It's just like Yos's narrative thing.

I can't explain it much better than this: to me, as town, it makes sense to either take a BS case apart when I first see it, or if I want the pressured player to defend himself first, I don't even mention it. As scum, however, it would make sense to ever so slightly discredit said BS case without actually refuting it regardless of the pressured player's alignment. I guess my "proof" is my own hypothetical play in the situation.

Yes, and the best defence for scum is a strong offence. That works in two ways: 1) It lynches town, thus preventing their lynch and; 2) They avoid being accused of being inactive. Consistent good logic is a mild towntell, as I have said, but simply trying to stir things up doesn't in any way show consistently genuine thought.

Fair enough, I can respect your stance. It's irrelevant now anyway, since I'm not so convinced DGB is town anymore.

---------

What about the rest of Yos' play?

This quote actually reminds me of the time you ignored ckd's reasons for voting rofl... selective commentary, or something... like your giving the discussion lip service without actually saying anything.

To be honest, I haven't had the time to thoroughly go through your row. As much as I gathered, Yos starts out slightly reaching, but has a valid point in you apparently dropping much of the suspicion you had on CKD. He seems to be tunneling pretty much exclusively on you, though, and apart from an exchange with vollkan on the same topic, and the push on the obvious BM lynch, he hasn't really commented on anything else.

[Korts]

Korts, do you like my list?

Well, apart from me being on it?

I agree that forb deserves suspicion. The Yosarian-suspicion I agree with to a lesser extent. I don't really see vollkan as scummy, though, and Elmo hasn't contributed a lot to discussion (I am aware of his computer problems, which might in part explain that).

[Korts]

Tajo is deserving of some pressure. I don't remember anything much in terms of content from him; he's mostly supportive of others' opinions, mostly DGB's and yours.

DGB is null, bordering on slightly scummy. Her recent posting seems different from her earlier game play which gave me a pro-town impression.

rofl has only two posts this game-day. He should post something. Otherwise, his play has been pretty much pro-town.

[Korts]

Mmm. Yosarian's reach on des might have been a distancing attempt, especially since he kept reiterating that he wasn't attacking des for the points he raised, merely questioning him. On the other hand, I seem to remember having read an accusation of Yos defending DGB (forb I think it was). Anyway, I'll read Yos' posts in isolation and see if I can find something.

[Korts]

People I won't vote for right now:

3. DrippingGoofball
13. Battle Mage
10. Elmo

Noted for possible connections: DGB and Elmo. Yos' reasoning:

The first two seem to be really trying hard to do scumhunting, and I like that. Elmo hasn't done that much yet, but I totally expect him to nail the scum godfather given another 48 hours or so, so I'll give him some breathing room.

The first two he justifies pretty well; and then there's Elmo. I realize this comment regarding Elmo was probably a joke, but it still seems strange that he's unwilling to vote Elmo for this.

The initial questioning of des re: unvoting CKD seems sincere.

Also, I find it odd that Korts, Volkan, and Destuctor are all all attacking for my vote on CKD and yet not one has shown the slightest bit of curiosity for why I am voting him.

Yos.. what

precisely

is the intent behind this post?

It didn't seem odd to you, that they were just flatly declaring my vote on CKD to be "gut", rather then, like, bothering to ask me for the reasons behind my actions?

I would say the intent behind my post was to try and start to flush out possible CKD scumbuddies.

The "it didn't seem odd to you that they..." sentence seems to be asking for support in pressuring the Kison-des-vollkan trio. More implication of an Elmo connection, perhaps, I'm not sure; although the daytalk would serve a better purpose for this kind of request for support, this post still smells a bit fishy.

Note: I'm up to post 15 (in isolation, of Yos' posts). Will continue tomorrow, gotta go.

[Korts]

What's your reasoning exactly, rofl?

[Korts]

I can see your point of view.

He was a bit too obvious, though. Buddying up, incriminating me, red herring for the town, I don't have much else I can reply with.

Anyway, I'll finish analysing Yos' posts tomorrow.

[Korts]

Well, convincing's my middle name. Mind you, not very is the first.

Anyway, there's not much I can reply with to an accusation that doesn't relate to an action of mine. You don't, I hope, expect me to explain Yos' possible motives for doing whatever he did.

[Korts]

Your vote was based on not liking how you thought my case was just a followup on my earlier bad gut, which as you yourself admitted later isn't a scumtell.

It was about how your

weak

case was a follow-up. If you had made a stronger case, I would't have "OMGUS"-ed you.

My focal point is that all of your cases had very little to none at all behind them, and you never invested yourself too strongly in one. They just seem like a tool for you to keep moving your vote around and appear to be scumhunting, which I don't think you are.

The cases I made were all as strong as I could find. I didn't invest myself in them strongly because they weren't strong cases. If this is your focal point, it's not a strong one.

What changed?

Didn't I concede that Yos was reaching? That, IMO, pretty much covers deserving suspicion to a lesser extent.

You on the other hand have been very non-comittal on Yos, saying you don't see any proof of him being scum and later when more attention was going his way that you see him as slightly scummy, again giving yourself lots of leeway to change your read in whichever way you liked.

Why don't you FoS everyone who has expressed no suspicion or conflicting reads on Yos? I agree, I have been non-committal on Yos, but I don't see how that's exclusively a stance that scum would take.

[Korts]

Ok, time for the claim. I'm a compulsive vig.

D1, I killed Guardian.
D2, I killed Kison.
Today, I killed Yos.

Basically, that's my story.

[Korts]

Thanks for killing townie players, especially those that hint at power roles. Players that aren't even contenders for the lynch.

They weren't confirmed townies. I explicitly expressed suspicion on them. The cases wouldn't have stuck; you yourself say that they weren't even contenders for a lynch. I trust my own judgement. A 1 for 2 trade is pretty fair IMO.

I don't see what your actual problem is.

(regarding lurkerhunt)

Yeah, nothing wrong with that.

I agree with this. forb, why do you think the fact that it's Day 3 lowers the validity of a lurkerhunt?

[Korts]

Why did you kill Guardian and Kison?
What was with the timing of the Kison kill?

I killed Guardian because I saw that the case on him wasn't going to stick, and I percieved him to be defending CKD.

I killed Kison because I had a gut feeling on him. The timing of it was because I considered the number of players who expressed Kison being town over being scum, and again I thought that a case wouldn't stick. In retrospect I was a bit hurried, but at least I got a kill through.

I breadcrumbed my role and targets by emphasising after both the Guardian and Kison kills that they could easily have been a vig target.

[Korts]

congratulations korts, the only person who i would have believed had vidged both guardian and kison

Is that bad?

re: the mafia kills, day 1 a defensive role (RB/doc) definitely went through. I don't think they missed sending a kill by deadline.

[Korts]

If he suspected Guardian on the basis of ckd being scum, why not kill ckd and start building a case on Guardian?

Because it was Guardian who defended CKD, and not vice versa. CKD's alignment is not so heavily implied by that action as Guardian's.

And Kison was going to post analysis on the ckd wagon, which, if Kison was scum, would have given scum-hunting-Korts more info to work with and find Kison's scum-buddies with.

I admit I didn't take every circumstance into account.

[Korts]

I have to apologize for my sub-par play this game.

Re: the Guardian-kill--my case wasn't enough to lynch, I give you that. Which is why I opted for vidging, instead. His defense of CKD wasn't explicit, you're right in that, des, but the urgency in his tone suggested, to me, that he really didn't want CKD lynched.

About the Kison kill, all I can say is, I had a strong gut feel, and while yes, I promised to explore it in detail, I realized that I won't have nearly enough time for it, so I decided to trust my gut. I'm sorry for that hurried decision.

On why Yos over FL; I felt that I could still avoid being outed as a power role, so I tried to disassociate myself slightly from the Yos kill by putting him as Suspect no. 2. I had been confident enough that I could handle the pressure without having to claim, but I was wrong. I guess I fucked myself over with that.

Those of you arguing that I'm an SK with those kills please take a moment to consider this: as a self-aligned role, my aim would be to survive the game; the sensible kills would've been RR or des both on Day 1 and 2, because they have kept the pressure on me constant. It's WIFOM, I guess, but the kills show that I wasn't driven by selfish motives.

[Korts]

Huh...What was the time pressure?

exams and general time crunch.

It is WIFOM (and scum-Korts really has just as much selfish motivation to make kills which don't obviously benefit him as he does to make kills which do. The very fact you are making this argument now puts this into action).

And, also, what about you as group

True, simply making the point that I wouldn't have had motivation gives me motivation. I can't argue with that. But have you really thought out how I could feasibly be part of a scumgroup? If I'm of the same group as Yos, why would I basically out myself after the group has already lost Yos himself? If I'm of another scumgroup, and that group did, indeed, kill Yos, that makes more sense, but not by a lot.

[Korts]

@pop:

My crumbs:

Before the Guardian-kill, I made several points against Guardian. After the Guardian-kill, I posted this:

I would like people speculate as to why Guardian was killed. No, really.

Scumkill and vigkill are both likely possibilities. Scumkill because Guardian was basically uncovering a plan that could ensure a quicklynch, and vigkill because the same, which was a clear attempt to stop any more votes on CKD, implied a heavy connection between Guardian and CKD. Why do you think this question will help in any way?

Before the Kison kill:

I have this vague feeling Kison is scum. I dunno why, but I'll definitely look into this gut read properly when I have normal access (I'm currently through a proxy site right now, my brother blocked MS and the searchword "proxy" because apparently I'm spending too much time on MS...)

After the Kison kill:

Ok so I was wrong.

Also, I could've sworn I said how the Kison-kill could easily have been a vidgekill; can't seem to find it.

Before the Yos-kill:

Meanwhile, the debate between Yos and des doesn't seem to give proof of either one being scum. Yos seems to be slightly reaching, while des seems to be extrapolating Yos's scumminess from the fact that Yos is slightly reaching.

As much as I gathered, Yos starts out slightly reaching, but has a valid point in you apparently dropping much of the suspicion you had on CKD. He seems to be tunneling pretty much exclusively on you, though, and apart from an exchange with vollkan on the same topic, and the push on the obvious BM lynch, he hasn't really commented on anything else.

I agree that forb deserves suspicion. The Yosarian-suspicion I agree with to a lesser extent.

After the Yos-kill, the claim.

The deciding posts, approximately:

From Guardian:

ps: people unvote ckd, otherwise it seems that the scum could kill someone and change it from 8 to lynch to 7 to lynch. we don't want ckd lynched unless we want ckd lynched and have him hammered; if he is town and is at 7 votes, the scum can kill someone and get an instant lynch on ckd.

And this:

if ckd is town, lynch -1 basically means lynch, because mafia can kill someone, then there are 13 people alive, then it is 7 to lynch when it is now 8 to lynch.

so, realize that if you vote CKD now, and put him at lynch -1, you are effectively hammering him.

if you all are comfortable with that... then I'll find you suspicious for it.

CKD is under such suspicion and likely lynch that I would like to say some things in his defense, and I have a hell of a lot more I want to say today before ckd gets hammered. I prefer short days, but I prefer that we end days when we choose to, not because we didn't realize scum could kill someone and reduce the requirements to lynch.

From Kison, a general gut feel.

From Yos, basing a whole case on des on a reaching point.

RR, you're excluding the possibility that scum failed to send in a kill Day 2; BM was lynched pretty suddenly.

Also, I can live with it if you think I'm an SK and you want to keep me for vidging purposes.

[Korts]

If the mafia has a mafia doc, why wasn't Yos protected? Did they just underestimate how bad he looked? He seems far and away most likely to be vigged apart from a) Korts and b) townies, and you'd obviously want to keep the GF alive. Maybe I'm biased.

Why the hell would you even bring this up? This comment serves no real purpose.

[Korts]

And why did you claim, did anyone ask?

So I shouldn't have claimed, being at L-2 and with more than two people off wagon having expressed willingness to vote me? It's not in my win condition to get lynched.

Elmo seems scummy enough in his own right, but there's also a definite connection between him and Yos. DGB seems like a good scumpartner to Yos, too.

vote: Elmo

[Korts]

There aren't a lot of places where Sens is mentioned; rofl's "obvscum" stance and switch away is really the only interesting thing apart from Yos' lurker vote. I don't think you can safely read anything into the latter. FL's set of long posts is the only real thing from the role - they seem fairly.. unfocussed, for want of a better word, pretty much like you'd expect someone trying to get a grip on the game anew. I find it odd that she narrows in on DGB's behaviour towards BM, it seems fairly arbitrary.. the lack of analysis of Des - Yos is kinda worrying. It just feels unnatural to go concentrate on the BM wagon instead of looking at that, it seems a more "immediate" issue than the day 2 lynch, especially when you're primarily rereading day 3; again, I'm biased, Yos was creeping me out slightly with his first couple of posts, heh. (Yay meta.)

One thing I don't like is that she says Yos2 should be looked at closer, but doesn't seem to e.g. look up why Des suspects him. I think she asks if she missed reasons someplace, but it doesn't seem like it should take more than a couple minutes to skim back and get the overview of it. I don't think Des posts between then and when Yos is killed, but the direction of her posting doesn't seem to be towards Yos2, she doesn't ask him any questions, for example.

This is a very good case. Either Elmo is bussing, or he took the time to dig up material on a likely townie. Either way, I'm vidging Elmo tomorrow unless you want to lynch him instead.

unvote, vote: forbiddanlight

[Korts]

Elmo is scum. Does it get any simpler than that? That's not just my opinion.

[Korts]

Because fl is a much shinier wagon.

[Korts]

I'll post a case soon; I don't have the energy nor the time right now.

[Korts]

I will dig up my stuff for the Elmo case tomorrow, promise.

[Korts]

Woot I hammered scum.
Why am I not confirmed?

Why do you think that would confirm you?

[Korts]

Korts, do not vig anyone until we tell you to. We'll auto lynch you on principle. That's bad for you if you're the SK since you lose any chance of winning, and bad for you if you're town since you deny us information from your kill and cause your own lynch to top. Seriously, don't.

Okay, okay, I got the message yesterday. No need to tell me every page.

[Korts]

It didn't sound like you did yesterday, but I'm glad.

I have an itchy trigger finger with a good idea of who's scum, but I respect the town's decisions.

[Korts]

rofl, my condolences, but you mentioned something about your reasons against me. It is basically only you and the horribly opportunistic Korts who were interested in my death at any point, after all.

What did you mean, your condolences? Perhaps you had sent in a kill? Otherwise, it doesn't make sense.

I find the fact you have to "dig stuff up" instead of posting a summary like I asked quite significant. Could it possibly be that you don't have anything to hand because you never had solid reasons, and are only now looking for stuff you can plausibly spin?

I have already said that I saw a strong connection between you and Yos. The quotes I provided so far are very incomplete (pretty much only the first couple posts of Yos'). I will have to get the quotes to justify my stance; what's so "significant" about that?

[Korts]

That. I am not a cheesy Bond movie villain, nor am I subtly breadcrumbing my nightkills so I can better convince people when I later claim mafia goon.

Oh. My condolences, too. Sorry for that accusation.

And I will give my reasons today. I'm starting with sifting through your and Yos's posts now and will be done in a couple hours (multi-tasking and such).

[Korts]

Again, there's this from Yos:

Ok. I'm not actually going to have any real logic behind most of this, so don't expect it, but based on my readthrough:

People I won't vote for right now:

3. DrippingGoofball
13. Battle Mage
10. Elmo

The first two seem to be really trying hard to do scumhunting, and I like that. Elmo hasn't done that much yet, but I totally expect him to nail the scum godfather given another 48 hours or so, so I'll give him some breathing room

Which is strange because while DGB and BM had been posting relative content, the sum of Elmo's posts is random vote, bitching about what is "worth reading", admitted spamming with nice pictures, a meta comment, and unjustified claims including a scumlist out of the blue and BM being meta-townish. Pretty much everyone else had contributed more than Elmo, so I don't see why Yos chose him beside two very active players.

Then there's this post:

See, I was all ready to explain to Vollkan why lurking is pro-town, but then Yos had to post, and I just can't bring myself to in his presence. (No, I wasn't lurking, no, I don't intentionally lurk as scum, no, I'm not particularly lurky in general.)

Yeah, I don't think you were lurking. I mean, this is, what, something like your 10th post in the first 4 days of the game? I can't imagine any standards by which that could reasonably be called "lurking".

The accusations weren't lurking in particular, to the best of my knowledge, but despite that, not only does Yos accept the mischaracterisation of the argument against you, he comes to your defense. (The case was, as far as I know, deliberate and admitted lack of content and reasoning.)

Also, I find it odd that Korts, Volkan, and Destuctor are all all attacking for my vote on CKD and yet not one has shown the slightest bit of curiosity for why I am voting him.

Yos.. what

precisely

is the intent behind this post?

It didn't seem odd to you, that they were just flatly declaring my vote on CKD to be "gut", rather then, like, bothering to ask me for the reasons behind my actions?

I would say the intent behind my post was to try and start to flush out possible CKD scumbuddies.

Asks for support. And no, it wouldn't have been better to ask in the quicktopic thread, because when asked a question publicly, you won't have as good a chance of refusing to take sides.

And now from Elmo's posts:

Also, I find it odd that Korts, Volkan, and Destuctor are all all attacking for my vote on CKD and yet not one has shown the slightest bit of curiosity for why I am voting him.

Yos.. what precisely is the intent behind this post?

This question seems simply for the sake of poising a question at Yos, since the intent of Yos' post was fairly evident.

SCUM:

vollkan ?
curiouskarmadog ✔
Battle Mage X!
Korts ✔

TOWN:

DrippingGoofball ~
destructor ✔
roflcopter ~
Yosarian2 ??
populartajo ✔

AMBIGUOUS:

Raging Rabbit ✔
SensFan ✔
Elmo ✔
Kison ✔

I think maybe we are on the same wavelength, but you are townifying Yos too easily. Take a long look at that thingigummie next to his name, and tell me you want to file him under town at this point. (Most other people, yeah, maybe.)

Notice the fact that Elmo is trying to keep Yos ambiguous; the fact that he's casting minor suspicion on him for something that has no relation to his in-game actions (the scummy award) makes me believe that this is subtle bussing.

Basically that's all there is before Yos is killed.

So that's the case.

[Korts]

DGB: rofl's dead.

Elmo: I'll address your post tomorrow.

[Korts]

Unfortunately for scum, they won't know whether to block me until after I've shot my bullet, since it's good for them if I manage to misvidge, and they have no way of telling that I will really follow the town (WIFOMtrap).

[Korts]

Hmm, interesting stuff. Sending the kill on vollkan now.

[Korts]

Adel has acknowledged my PM (quoted it back to me). So if the death scene isn't posted withing 36 hours, we can assume I was blocked.

[Korts]

Cool.

Adel:

the votecount's off. With vollkan newly

wed

dead, it should be 6 alive, 4 to lynch.

thanks for pointing that out. I'll fix it now. ~Adel

[Korts]

I'm actually still suspicious of Elmo. 4 scum is much more likely than 1 GF and 2 Goons against a Cop-Doc-Vig-Tracker town. At this point, a guilty on his scumbuddy when it's considered unlikely for there to be a fourth scum would basically mean an auto-win for the cop fakeclaimant.

[Korts]

Adel:

I noticed another thing Sorry to be such a pain in the ass, but vollkan's still being voted post-humously?

Thanks again. ~Adel

[Korts]

Elmo, if you're a third goon instead of cop, and I'm a vig, that's pretty balanced IMO; it would basically be four goons against a well-endorsed but possibly swingy town.

(I have not forgotten you, monsieur Korts. )

I better hope not! If you're asking for clarification on the case on you (I'm not sure I understand what you're trying to say if that's not it) it's still the relatively strongly implied connection between you and Yos.

[Korts]

4 scum is much more likely than 1 GF and 2 Goons against a Cop-Doc-Vig-Tracker town.

I love how your argument is predicated on an existent cop. Would you please explain to the gallery how compulsive vig + doc + tracker is balanced against 1 GF + 3 goons? Or why the mafia would have even have a godfather with no cop in the setup?

Umm what? How is my argument predicated on an existent cop? I'm saying exactly that the possibility for a cop is very low considering that there already was a doc and a tracker, and I know I am a vig.

And a vig-doc-tracker combo vs. basically 4 goons is more balanced because the vig is far swingier than a cop. I don't get to confirm innocents, I kill them if I happen to target them; and a tracker is a weaker investigative role than a cop. Weigh in an added scum role compared to a 3-man faction, and I think that's more than reasonable for a 14-player game.

[Korts]

Note, Elmo, that a Godfather can easily be just a red herring for scum. It doesn't prove or disprove the existence of a cop.

[Korts]

Not that my opinion matters at this point, but RR's plan sounded good. If you lynch me:

5 alive-RR, des, Elmo, DGB, pop
a)Elmo succeeds in both getting a result and claiming it
b)Elmo is killed before he can claim a result

Either way, mafia will probably try to prevent Elmo claiming by killing him.

4 alive-RR, des, DGB, pop
Possible scum is {des, DGB, pop} if Elmo doesn't claim results, otherwise change scumlist accordingly. If Elmo doesn't have a guilty, only an innocent, it's still fifty-fifty.

If you leave me alive, and Elmo is killed within 48 hours of the day, I will keep my shot to myself and you'll have two lynches for two or three possible scum(depending on whether Elmo can claim.)

[Korts]

I guess I have to put my money where my mouth is.

vote: populartajo

It's up to the town now.

[Korts]

Korts, are you okay with being lynched today for my plan?

If that's the plan, sure.

[Korts]

Do I have any chance of convincing you otherwise?

[Korts]

Yeah, I haven't been participating in the discussion of possibilities mostly because I have bigger things looming at the moment than mafia, and partly because the decision isn't down to me anyway and I much rather would like to see someone unbiased go through with the numbers than mess up and be accused of fiddling with the probabilities and stuff.

I'm pretty sure the remaining scum is either pop or DGB. Other than that I have nothing in particular to add.

[Korts]

I've seen you posting frequently around the site.

Also, finding the last member of the Mafia doesn't require you to look at numbers. It would have more to do with making cases.

I've been posting in those games where I had something to pursue. Here, the decision comes down to one of me and tajo, and you're deciding on probabilities. I don't have much say or sway in matters at the moment.

About making cases; I don't have the time resources to go back and make a proper case right now.

[Korts]

"clearly anti-town" is a huge overstatement. I had valid suspicions that were shared by others.

[Korts]

DGB's recent posting makes me want to change my vote. Sucking up to the others with post 1198 for instance, and pushing against a plan that clearly would work in almost any likely circumstance.

[Korts]

Sending kill now. This is so silly.

[Korts]

Can't you wait until Elmo dies?

[Korts]

Yay, scumday!
Nay, lynch!

Bah go town. I'd say I was blocked.

[Korts]

I'd guess a mafia roleblocker. Does anything else make sense?

[Korts]

Well, it was worth a try anyway...

I'm surprised I survived for so long. Good game town, especially des.

[Korts]

I feel it was balanced, yeah. And thanks for the invitation and the flawless modding

[Korts]

By the way, why did the mafia want to kill me Day 3? I thought I would've been an easy lynch anytime.

[Korts]

I think this town's deserving of a nomination.

[Korts]

Actually, Guardian, I wasn't even the one who killed you. I just took credit for it since it fit into the profile of me being vig slightly better than the failed kill on des.

[Korts]

I actually felt you are scum, and tried to gain back some town cred. Same with the Yos kill.

[Korts]

EBWOP: answering Kison, of course.

[Korts]

Seriously, though, why did you try to kill me in particular on Day 3?

[Korts]

Count me /in, if I'm worthy. But I'd say no to changing the protective/blocking roles' effect. They work best when active immediately, IMO.