Mini 698 - Georgetown Mafia - Game over

[Huntress]

Vote Count

StrangerCoug 2 - (Zeppo007, Cephrir)
Apothecary 3 - (StrangerCoug, Ythill, MacavityLock)

Not voting 6 - (Apothecary, Atlas, Corvuus, Elmo, LLamaFluff, MiteyMouse)


With eleven players alive, it takes six votes to lynch.

[Apothecary]

No, I'm just trying to show an objective view point. Yes, I view claims with suspicion, but I can choose what I believe that person might be. To Ythill, I wasn't asking you to change your vote. I was just suggesting that there may be scummier people out there and that you shouldn't try to start a bandwagon. But I'm quite suspicious of the quick swing to voting me as a response to my feelings.

[Cephrir]

Apoth, that doesn't answer the question at all.

Possible LA for a couple days.

[MacavityLock]

Minor correction:

Apoth, that doesn't answer

any of

the question

s

at all.

[Apothecary]

Alright then. I personally believe he was just shielding himself from the pressure and decided that it was in his best interests to avoid an immediate lynch. Of course, that is also a defense for scum players, and now I see how that was a bit stupid to suggest that. I apologize, if that's what you want.

[StrangerCoug]

Alright then. I personally believe he was just shielding himself from the pressure and decided that it was in his best interests to avoid an immediate lynch. Of course, that is also a defense for scum players, and now I see how that was a bit stupid to suggest that. I apologize, if that's what you want.

OK, but apologies don't change anything. Sorry.

[MacavityLock]

Alright then. I personally believe he was just shielding himself from the pressure and decided that it was in his best interests to avoid an immediate lynch. Of course, that is also a defense for scum players, and now I see how that was a bit stupid to suggest that. I apologize, if that's what you want.

I'm still wondering what in his play made you think those things.

[Elmo]

367 doesn't seem like a scumtell to me. Wrong, but not scummy. Zeppo looks worse than him to me.

[Apothecary]

It is kind of ironic that SC says apologies don't change anything, then apologizes in the same post.
I thought those things because I want to have, as I said before, an objective and pragmatic viewpoint. I suppose that clouded my judgement a bit.

[Atlas]

It is kind of ironic that SC says apologies don't change anything, then apologizes in the same post.

LOL that's funny. I fell out of my chair.

I was kind of busy Vendredi and Sabado so I'll respond to Ythill and voice my thoughts about the rather spontaneous situation with Apoth after I finish my homework.

[Cephrir]

It is kind of ironic that SC says apologies don't change anything, then apologizes in the same post.
I thought those things because I want to have, as I said before, an objective and pragmatic viewpoint. I suppose that clouded my judgement a bit.

"I was trying to be objective, and I guess that clouded my viewpoint."

Wha? Also, is there any actual reasoning behind 379 based on SC's actions?

SC's reaction to 379 is almost as though it's not SC himself who was the one Apoth was talking about. Weird.

[Atlas]

Random questions: Is your name pronounced why-thill or yih-thill? Also I'm not familiar with WoW. Or cherry-picking, but I presume it means picking certain arguments to respond to and ignoring the ones that will cripple your defense on mention. And why is everyone calling him Apoc instead of Apoth?

See? Theory discussion is so boring, you nodded off while trying to defend it.

Whoa, that is scary. I remember exactly what I wrote about theory discussion but somehow it vanished (or maybe I just didn't say it...). Anyways, in order to start discussion I started a discussion about starting a discussion. I don't see how that could be interpreted as trying to distract the town, but hey it's your FoS.

You made six into five. You lumped three together. You pointed out that other players were doing it more. In a word, you minimized. Which is fine. Then you admitted to the widespread suspicions after I cited them, but claimed it was not scummy. If it was not scummy to begin with, why did you minimize it?

I used a different sense of the word. Anyways I minimized my suspicions because earlier you said that I was "slinging lots of mud", which I felt was an inaccurate description of how many suspects I actually had and based on how many everyone else did. I claimed it wasn't scummy because it's not. I used two defenses above because you used two accusations; 1) I slung "lots" of mud, and 2) slinging lots of mud is scummy. I responded to both parts of it.

What part of "pick one" did you not understand? This goes back to that whole "neutral instigator" thing. Let's not cloud the thread with WoW. Since you didn't pick one, I will arbitrarily choose the first: #10.

Because I felt that all of them were either silly or barely scratched the surface of buddy-behavior. Why don't you pick the one that you feel is the most incriminating? As for #10, your reasoning is whoa. 1) My defense was motivated by Zeppo's weird accusation. It's not like I swooped down to defend Cephir from a valid case. And I have nothing to say about my agreement with Primate but I will say that it should be used as an example in the Wiki's definition of "reaching." (At least you admitted it.)

Are you really making the too-scummy-to-be-scum argument? After claiming that Primate's play would help him avoid the noose? Contradict yourself much?

Huh? I wasn't saying that being an oddball in this case makes you scummy (too-scummy-to-be-scum), I'm saying that it's futile to be an oddball as scum because no one shares those views.

Quote fixed. Most everything that happens here is a null tell.

Let me rephrase that. Would his PR make it tremendously harder for players to have a detailed argument with Primate and draw conclusions from the many implications that originate from word-based posts, which are then used to lynch him? Sure.

None of this is evidence of Primate's alignment. All of it is consensus of suspicion on Primate, so you've really just proven my point. You became suspicious of Primate and then backed off even though the evidence of his alignment did not support such changes.

You're (mostly) attacking me for being suspicious of Primate at a convenient time, correct? A "strategy of anti-town alignment" includes suspecting a player when most of the town does already, when scum would go unnoticed. I pointed out that this was not the case as with my oddball defense. 1) How did I prove your point? Only three people called Primate anti-town, none of which believed that he was scummy. 2) I didn't necessarily "back-off" because I never dropped my suspicions on him. If you mean decline in interest, then yes I did back off. 3) I stopped talking about Primate partly because, and I quote, "there were scummier fish to fry". Fish that made him look like townie fish. 4) I had reason, though minor, to think that Primate was town. The diagram in #161 (his most useful post this entire game) definitely showed some improvement in terms of relevant communication. Like I said it was minor, seeing how he never clarified any of it...

The wagon started dying. You backed off without any real cause.

Ythill, I never dropped the Primate-is-scummy argument. The only thing that happened was Cougar looked scummier and succeeded Primate. And since I thought it was unlikely for both of them to be scum, the next likeliest scenario was Cougar- scum and Primate-town.

But you didn't respond to that so I have no idea what to say. If you are talking about my interest decline immediately after #157, I did so because of Primate's obvious improvement in #161 that alleviated my suspicion somewhat.

Another question: you dismiss my immediate posts after #157 that go against your case, yet you take into account the ones that occur pages later? Just because they support your case? Isn't there a scandalous term in the wiki for this act; selective bias, confirmation of bias, biased case, or is it just BIASED? I'm noting that you banana-rolled my post a bit. I do believe this is a tell, because I do it myself as scum.

I hate responding to this game. It's OK guys, you can admit that you aren't reading any of this. No need to say "I'll look into Ythill's case later" while returning with nothing a week later. (Oh who am I kidding, you know who you are. )

Something tells me that Primate labeled me scum in #161 for the same reason that Ythill is now. OMGUS maybe? Outside role information? *pulls a Zeppo*

No I'm not finished with my defense against Ythill but I just wanted to respond to the direct bits before I lose sleep.

---

Since Ythill actually presented a decent case on Atlas I believe, I will unvote Ythill and demote him to a minor FoS: Ythill (I still don't like the fact that he's trying to rush us). I want other people to give their input before I do anything else, though.

I don't think Ythill is trying to rush my lynch as much as check out reactions. (Whoops! I blew your cover!)

To me Cephir's defence was not really a defence. Getting out of the random stage is going to happen...rushing it just made him look Scummy to me.

Why does that seem scummy? I would think getting out of the random stage is the towniest thing you could do at that time.

Ythill, who else's post count have you looked up? o.o

Cougar can you summarize your top suspects in one sentence?

Yes, Apoth's initial read on the claim is utter lose but I don't think it warranted a three-vote combo.

SC's reaction to 379 is almost as though it's not SC himself who was the one Apoth was talking about. Weird.

I noticed that too. It makes me wonder why Cougar voted for Apoth in the first place.

[Ythill]

(1) Is your name pronounced why-thill or yih-thill? (2) Also I'm not familiar with WoW. (3) Or cherry-picking, but I presume it means picking certain arguments to respond to and ignoring the ones that will cripple your defense on mention.

I added some numbers for reference.

(1) Yih-thill.
(2) WoW = Wall(s) of Words = long post(s)
(3) Cherry Picking = what you said above, though I don't know if the term differs between doing so strategically (the "cripple your defense" part) or in general.

I used a different sense of the word. Anyways I minimized my suspicions because earlier you said that I was "slinging lots of mud", which I felt was an inaccurate description of how many suspects I actually had and based on how many everyone else did. I claimed it wasn't scummy because it's not. I used two defenses above because you used two accusations; 1) I slung "lots" of mud, and 2) slinging lots of mud is scummy. I responded to both parts of it.

The above feels a little like scrambling for an answer. I'll leave it at that.

Why don't you pick the one that you feel is the most incriminating?

Asking you to choose was an effort to narrow the discussion without manipulating it. I was trying to be fair.

As for #10, your reasoning is whoa. 1) My defense was motivated by Zeppo's weird accusation. It's not like I swooped down to defend Cephir from a valid case.

Good scum will always have a reason. It's the number of instances that is most alarming. It belies a townie's level of paranoia.

Would his PR make it tremendously harder for players to have a detailed argument with Primate and draw conclusions from the many implications that originate from word-based posts, which are then used to lynch him? Sure.

Yes, what you say above is true, but it would be no more likely to inhibit conversation than any player who posts opinions and votes without reasoning, and doing such is, in itself, likely to lead one to the noose. Remember, we're not talking about the

potential

or

possible

effects. We're talking about effects

probable

enough to be the basis of a strategic decision, as scum, to do something that was guarenteed to make him stand out.

I believe this may be the most important point of our debate. I

need

to understand how you came to the conclusion that the PR was scummy, rather than just anti-town.

You're (mostly) attacking me for being suspicious of Primate at a convenient time, correct? A "strategy of anti-town alignment" includes suspecting a player when most of the town does already, when scum would go unnoticed.

Shifting again. You're barking up too many trees.

Another question: you dismiss my immediate posts after #157 that go against your case, yet you take into account the ones that occur pages later? Just because they support your case?

I did not discount any posts. I just insisted that something you said later does not change the weight of what you said in #157. I'll explain why: #157 was scummy, it is

possible

that you realized this and posted damage control. So I'm taking #157 at face value.

That said, parts of your defense are sounding okay to me. And, yeah... you busted me on the "reactions" hunt.

[StrangerCoug]

Cougar can you summarize your top suspects in one sentence?

Apothecary proposed the idea of vanilla faking doctor, and my suspicions of Ythill and Zeppo007 are minor anymore.

[MacavityLock]

Just to let everyone know, I'm away tomorrow, and probably on limited (though not that limited) access between then and the following Monday. I will certainly have time to contribute Tues-Sun, but I may not be as complete as I'd like.

I hate responding to this game. It's OK guys, you can admit that you aren't reading any of this. No need to say "I'll look into Ythill's case later" while returning with nothing a week later. (Oh who am I kidding, you know who you are. )

I admit it, you got me. I've been busy wrapping up work in time for my Thanksgiving vacation. Between that and the WoW between you two, I'm having a hard time going through all this. (I didn't know the term either, but it certainly applies in this case.) I'm going to try to dig in to this when I'm home, and I promise I'll get to it eventually.

I thought those things because I want to have, as I said before, an objective and pragmatic viewpoint. I suppose that clouded my judgement a bit.

So, to be sure, you're saying there is nothing specific that suggested to you that he was townie fake-claiming, as opposed to doc actual-claiming, or scum fake-claiming?

Cougar can you summarize your top suspects in one sentence?

Apothecary proposed the idea of vanilla faking doctor, and my suspicions of Ythill and Zeppo007 are minor anymore.

Sorry, I'm a bit confused here. "Minor anymore"?

[Apothecary]

There was nothing that suggested anything. I was just offering various views of the same thing.

[Ythill]

Alright then. I don't believe SC's claim. But I don't believe he's a scum either, but a townie hoping that the claim will shield him from the lynch.

This is offering "various views"? You're right that it doesn't suggest anything. It specifically states your beliefs. Now you backpedal to say you were just covering all of the angles?

[Cephrir]

I've been reading the WoWs... well, most of them >.>

In other news, Apoth is imploding.

[StrangerCoug]

Sorry, I'm a bit confused here. "Minor anymore"?

I already said Zeppo007's role bit has been explained, and I still don't like Ythill's rushing for an Atlas lynch.

(I missed the part about the pronunciation of Ythill's name, as if it's relevant. I've always pronounced the Y and the T individually in my head, e.g. "why-tee-hill".)

[Corvuus]

... I think I am trying to spend too much time 'reading in' to what people are saying so maybe just to make it easier for me... can people include in perhaps their next post or so a "top 2 scum" list for themselves?

I still have suspicions on SC (my previous #1, but I won't lynch a claimed doc), and as for #2... I am confused by Apothecary's statements/defense.

In particular, in a previous post (post #11 of yours in isolation) you state that you think SC is scum.

He claims doc and you later say you don't believe it, but also don't believe he is scum? (post #17).

What changed your mind in between your post 11 and post 17?

I can understand offering various views... but the way you said it seems interesting (in that it seems inconsistent from post 11 to 17) and there really is only 3 possibilities which should be fairly obvious to everyone, so there isn't much need to offer objective view.

Either he is doc, he is scum claiming doc, or he is town claiming doc hoping to live. It isn't a full 'get out of jail free' card since most likely he *will* die before the game is over, one way or another.

SC is my #1 but I can see him dying 'eventually' so I am ok with it.

Corvuus

[Apothecary]

I simply offered an alternate viewpoint. I don't see why this is arousing this much angst and suspicion. If we all jumped on someone when they offered an alternate view, we'd never get past day 1. I just passed a comment that may or may not have shown others that there isn't a rigid set of scumtells. I thought that was part of the game, to suggest things.

[StrangerCoug]

I simply offered an alternate viewpoint. I don't see why this is arousing this much angst and suspicion. If we all jumped on someone when they offered an alternate view, we'd never get past day 1. I just passed a comment that may or may not have shown others that there isn't a rigid set of scumtells. I thought that was part of the game, to suggest things.

Yeah, but suggesting that a vanilla is fakeclaiming to shield from his or her lynch is a good way to bankrupt your credibility.

[Elmo]

Dear god, the fact StrangerCoug is still breathing pains me.

I don't see why this is arousing this much angst and suspicion.

I have no idea, either. It's ridiculous.

In other news, Apoth is imploding.

Apoth is fine. Explain yourself.

[Apothecary]

Ha! I'm bankrupting my credibility! Most of us have done that already in this game! Right now you lot are just grasping at straws for quicklynches! That's pretty self destructive in itself.

[Huntress]

Zeppo007 has had to ask for a replacement. I am looking for one now.