Mini 703 - A Roccisi Autumn - Over

[Korts]

note: I'm suspecting that by now any mafia that wants to quicklynch BOW is already on the wagon. I don't have the time to go back and check, but I think BoW's at around four votes. Don't put any more on him for a while.

[TDC]

Vote Count

Brain of Wombat (3): tubby216, Rage, chuckrock

Tarballs (1): Korts
Rage (1): Brain of Wombat

Not voting (5): Ectomancer, IH, Tarballs, darkdude, ThAdmiral

[Ectomancer]

A couple possibilities for what happened last night. My questions would be, does a player have to use what the inventor gave them that night, or

can

they wait or do they

have

to wait until the following night to use it?

If that was a 1 shot vig, then scum was either role or doc blocked.

If there is someone hanging out with a gun, then that was scum's target last night.

I also think we dont know whether town or scum was the recipient of the gun inventor.

vote Darkdude

As Korts pointed out, his response to my statement did not equate to what I said. He even went as far as to ask why it would be more likely that last night's kill was a vig kill. Well, I didn't say that. It looks to me in that paragraph quoted above that I listed the possibilities with pretty much equal weight.
Darkdude then goes on and attempts to stifle conversation about the event. Why?
If he was the Vig, his kill is used, he is back to whatever he was, and he has a bit of an alibi of what he was doing that night.
If he is one of the roles that performed an action that could incriminate or validate someone involved with the death, you would want people talking about the event, hoping for that "ahah! I got you!" moment.
But if he is scum, there are a number of reasons he might not want us to talk about it. There are yet roles available that could have thrown in a wrench somewhere.
Funny thing is, I'm not as concerned about discussing it so much today anymore. Let anyone with a gun do what they will, so scum has no idea. They could have scum roleblockers, etc.
No, I'm much more concerned about motivations today. I think Darkdude's actions usually come from bad guys. Bad guys need to be lynched...or shot...but better lynched. We dont want a mafia doc to get the chance at blocking those one shot guns.
Still dont believe that Darkdude is scum?
Then tell me why he would discourage discussion about one of our discoveries (the gun inventor), yet encourage discussion about our amnesiac cop. He even goes so far as to

ask the recipient of the message to breadcrumb!

So you can kill him tonight before he reveals the only result we might have? (assuming puta puta even sent in a name) If he is going to breadcrumb, just come out with the result now, and at least we get something. Someone will be forced to declare another player either town or scum, and if that other player dies, and it turns up wrong, it incriminates the first player.

[Korts]

Ecto makes a compelling case.

[tubby216]

ok so that a good case on darkdude,, so my question is ecto why should BoW get a pass today ???

[darkdude]

A couple possibilities for what happened last night. My questions would be, does a player have to use what the inventor gave them that night, or

can

they wait or do they

have

to wait until the following night to use it?

If that was a 1 shot vig, then scum was either role or doc blocked.

If there is someone hanging out with a gun, then that was scum's target last night.

I also think we dont know whether town or scum was the recipient of the gun inventor.

vote Darkdude

As Korts pointed out, his response to my statement did not equate to what I said. He even went as far as to ask why it would be more likely that last night's kill was a vig kill. Well, I didn't say that. It looks to me in that paragraph quoted above that I listed the possibilities with pretty much equal weight.
Darkdude then goes on and attempts to stifle conversation about the event. Why?
If he was the Vig, his kill is used, he is back to whatever he was, and he has a bit of an alibi of what he was doing that night.
If he is one of the roles that performed an action that could incriminate or validate someone involved with the death, you would want people talking about the event, hoping for that "ahah! I got you!" moment.
But if he is scum, there are a number of reasons he might not want us to talk about it. There are yet roles available that could have thrown in a wrench somewhere.
Funny thing is, I'm not as concerned about discussing it so much today anymore. Let anyone with a gun do what they will, so scum has no idea. They could have scum roleblockers, etc.
No, I'm much more concerned about motivations today. I think Darkdude's actions usually come from bad guys. Bad guys need to be lynched...or shot...but better lynched. We dont want a mafia doc to get the chance at blocking those one shot guns.
Still dont believe that Darkdude is scum?
Then tell me why he would discourage discussion about one of our discoveries (the gun inventor), yet encourage discussion about our amnesiac cop. He even goes so far as to

ask the recipient of the message to breadcrumb!

So you can kill him tonight before he reveals the only result we might have? (assuming puta puta even sent in a name) If he is going to breadcrumb, just come out with the result now, and at least we get something. Someone will be forced to declare another player either town or scum, and if that other player dies, and it turns up wrong, it incriminates the first player.

I don't get it. It seemed pretty clear to me that you guys were implying it was likely a vig kill since you're so eager to discuss it. What is the use of discussion if a vig kill is only plausible but not likely? Perhaps in this case I have made an incorrect assumption, but I do not think that it is unreasonable. Are you saying that you hoped to discuss whether or not it was a vig kill knowing that it was unlikely to be one?

Stifling the conversation...well I do not think the discussion is productive, and seemed like a distraction. First of all, because I think it is unlikely to be a vig kill, we should assume it is scum NK unless there is greater evidence for the vig theory. Second, it does not seem like there would be any hard evidence. Like I have said on the first day, if there is something to be revealed I am sure it would be self evident for that player. We need not a discussion to encourage that, and any words of mine should not stop anyone if that is the obvious play. I am against what I see as a discussion that would be inconclusive and only serve as distraction, while providing room for scum to peak at the intentions of the players.

I do not see the need for any power roles to discuss what to do in order to play optimally. After all, the point of vig is to act without the baggage that comes with lynches. You should see this, as your statement "Let anyone with a gun do what they will, so scum has no idea." is correct.

I would like you to give specific reasons as to why scum would want to cover this up in the case of it being a vig kill or a scum kill.

About the amnesiac cop, it would seem that you are the one who has misread this time. I was hoping to discuss what the optimal play would be since I was not sure what it was. I did not ask anyone to breadcrumb, as I was not sure if it would work. This discussion IMHO is much more useful because we are sure that unless it was Macavity or the scum, one of us would have to do something about this result.

[darkdude]

scum to

peek

at the intentions of the players

[chuckrock]

Okay, I didn't realize that would be an L1. I'm not that confident in my vote.

unvote

I still have an FOS BOW

I don't have enough to make it an L1

[tubby216]

there is 10 people left in the game BoW had three votes its 6 to lynch if i did math right he was at L-3 now at
L-4

[ThAdmiral]

Tell me why he would discourage discussion about one of our discoveries (the gun inventor), yet encourage discussion about our amnesiac cop. He even goes so far as to

ask the recipient of the message to breadcrumb!

So you can kill him tonight before he reveals the only result we might have?

This is the best bit.

I'm going to

vote: darkdude

as well.

[Ectomancer]

Okay, I didn't realize that would be an L1. I'm not that confident in my vote.

unvote

I still have an FOS BOW

I don't have enough to make it an L1

Scummy unvote after a new wagon begins gaining positive feedback while admitting he wasn't confident in his vote in the first place.

fos ChuckRock

Korts thought that any scum was already on the BoW wagon. That was a pretty weak manner of slipping off of it.

[Rage]

Vote: Brain of Wombat

Start talking.

Jeez, can nobody take a joke around here?

Vote: Rage

It's scummy the way you want to take every opportunity to wagon a valuable townie like me.

Oh, how peculiar. You have failed to mention the players before me who were more than happy to put their votes on you when I, on the other hand, asked you to explain yourself. In fact, you've only mentioned me! Aren't there like 8 other players in this game? Perhaps you are intentionally leaving Korts and chuckrock out of the question while you tried to put considerably weak pressure on me with this vote, and provide illogical reasoning.

In short, your vote is weak and it looks like you're just trying to divert attention away from your scummy mistake by saying as little as you can, and to the wrong person. My intention from as soon as I read what you posted in #244 was to understand what you were trying to say, albeit rather harshly. However, that's how you get someone to say what they really have to say and not to make stuff up. It isn't a confirmed theory, but I've found that it works.

Also, please note that as soon as I voted for you to start speaking, you did and you put your vote on me. Way to go.

So, anyways, other than singling me out from the two players who commited the action of which you spoke of, which is being eager to vote for.. Oh, wait, here we go! You say you're a valuable townie, eh? Well, so am I! Care to prove me wrong?

At this point, I'd like to add to my list of questions for you.

1. Why is asking a few questions to someone and then pestering the player for a response with a vote more suspicious than players hoping on the "bandwagon"?
   
2. How am I eager to take advantage of a bandwagon on you?
   
3. How do you expect everyone else to react after you have brought up a point from yesterday that you KNOW was a mistake? I mean, you've even said it was a mistake by using it as the reason why you slunk into a lower post activity!
   
4. Why didn't you mention this was a joke when you first made your post? How do you expect everyone to laugh it off and completely understand what you were doing, when on our end we see a player who asked for investigative roles to claim, got massively rejected, and then asked for it once again, the very next day? Did you honestly think you could get away with repeating what you took so much flak for yesterday?
   
5. Regarding your "valuable townie" claim, what do you think the Town could possibly lose by lynching you?
   
6. Define "valuable townie", please. Feel free to ask why, I won't find you suspicious for something as silly as that.

Moving on, I hope someone has noticed this already, but I "tested the waters" by voting for you, Brain of Wombat, so abruptly. That's not the same as being eager to take advantage of opportunities to get you lynched, that's me bugging you to defend yourself, which you still haven't done.

@

Brain of Wombat

, Please address the questions I made to you in this post as well as the previous questions in my Post #246, or I will start encouraging your lynch, which, regarding your latest post, you don't seem too fond of.

For reference:

Speaking of which, do we have any other investigators who could have found stuff last night?

Did you learn nothing from yesterday, or are you still trying to out investigative roles?

So, why are you:

1) Eager to know what investigative roles have discovered
2) Eager to know who the investigative roles are
3) Pointing out how sucky it is that a Gun Inventor died
4) Mentioning a dead player and how it seems impossible/confusing to have discovered his role before lynching him

[..]

Anyways, here's a non-rhetorical question for you. Why was Puta Puta lynched and not you? I think scum has to have started Puta's wagon, deflecting from you, and I'm going to reread for proofs. I'd still like to hear your answer, though.

@

Darkdude

and

ThAdmiral

, what do you guys think? I've noticed neither of you have said anything about this and chose to discuss, about not discussing, the "vig kill". 'Sup with that?

Regarding darkdude, you said you would post your thoughts later. Have you had time to gather 'em up?

@

IH

, hello?

[Rage]

I'm sorry, I got this part wrong (Don't worry, Brain of Wombat, this isn't about you):

@

Darkdude

and

ThAdmiral

, what do you guys think? I've noticed neither of you have said anything about this and chose to discuss, about not discussing, the "vig kill". 'Sup with that?

Although Darkdude hasn't said anything about this, ThAdmiral has.

Thus, I rephrase the question into:

@

Darkdude

, what do you think? I've noticed you haven't said much about this and instead chose to discuss, about not discussing, the "vig kill". 'Sup with that?

@

ThAdmiral

, now that there has been more evidence and reasoning added to both sides of Whether or Not to Vote For Brain of Wombat, what is your current position on this issue?

[ThAdmiral]

I don't like the "valuable townie" comment, and I want him to confirm that the original post was a joke (he really should have put a smily in or something if it was - i learned that the hard way), but other than that my position is still pretty much the same.

[Korts]

I don't get it. It seemed pretty clear to me that you guys were implying it was likely a vig kill since you're so eager to discuss it. What is the use of discussion if a vig kill is only plausible but not likely? Perhaps in this case I have made an incorrect assumption, but I do not think that it is unreasonable. Are you saying that you hoped to discuss whether or not it was a vig kill knowing that it was unlikely to be one?

I don't see how it's harmful in any way to discuss our possibilities.

Stifling the conversation...well I do not think the discussion is productive, and seemed like a distraction.

Then how come I don't see you pushing another line of discussion? You seem eager to explain how discussing a vigkill is unproductive, but you don't offer any alternative. How is that consistent with the thoughts you are trying to get through?

First of all, because I think it is unlikely to be a vig kill, we should assume it is scum NK unless there is greater evidence for the vig theory.

Stop right there. Just because you have a differentiating opinion, you say that we should stop assuming anything else than you are?

Second, it does not seem like there would be any hard evidence. Like I have said on the first day, if there is something to be revealed I am sure it would be self evident for that player.

And we have never imlied that we want hard evidence. Your point with this comment?

I am against what I see as a discussion that would be inconclusive and only serve as distraction, while providing room for scum to peak at the intentions of the players.

The majority of discussions that implicate players and lead to town forming an opinion to their alignments are inconclusive. There (almost) never is hard evidence through discussion only. Also, scum may indeed peek at the intentions of players, but they also would need to take a stance that they can be held to later on.

Chuckrock, why did you feel the need to unvote when BoW didn't even have a chance to reply between your vote and unvote? Also, where did you get the notion that it was L-1?

Rage, show me where I voted BoW, or retract that statement.

Define "valuable townie", please. Feel free to ask why, I won't find you suspicious for something as silly as that.

ROLEFISHING ALERT

MAN YOUR STATIONS

THIS IS NOT A DRILL

[darkdude]

I really hope you guys are reading what I wrote... because I get the impression that you didn't.

This is the best bit.

I'm going to vote: darkdude as well.

I trust that this means my reply to it did not satisfy you?

what do you guys think? I've noticed neither of you have said anything about this and chose to discuss, about not discussing, the "vig kill". 'Sup with that?

Regarding darkdude, you said you would post your thoughts later. Have you had time to gather 'em up?

I don't know what to do about him. I still get newbie vibe, but bringing up a "joke" without making himself obvious was not a smart thing to do.

And, I reread the stuff on Day 1 and concluded that Macavity is most likely victim of scum kill...

I don't see how it's harmful in any way to discuss our possibilities.

I just said, I thought scum might try to set up a vig claim or try to fish out the vig. That's what's harmful about it.

Then how come I don't see you pushing another line of discussion? You seem eager to explain how discussing a vigkill is unproductive, but you don't offer any alternative. How is that consistent with the thoughts you are trying to get through?

Funny. Do you not recall Ecto falsely accusing me of asking for breadcrumbs? That was me trying to discuss what a player should do if they have the investigation result from our amnesiac cop. Please read my posts again.

Stop right there. Just because you have a differentiating opinion, you say that we should stop assuming anything else than you are?

Obviously if I believe I am correct I will try to talk others into believing it too. What are you implying?

And we have never imlied that we want hard evidence. Your point with this comment?

Point: Discussion will hardly reveal anything new and the power roles should already know what to do anyways.

The majority of discussions that implicate players and lead to town forming an opinion to their alignments are inconclusive. There (almost) never is hard evidence through discussion only. Also, scum may indeed peek at the intentions of players, but they also would need to take a stance that they can be held to later on.

Fair enough. I don't know if that outweighs the risks but why would you not explain the pros of this discussion first before saying that my actions are anti-town?

ROLEFISHING ALERT

MAN YOUR STATIONS

THIS IS NOT A DRILL

Didn't Wombat claim already?

[Ectomancer]

Your case is weak next to mine Rage. Vote Darkdude. He is scum. He attempts to blatantly manipulate the conversation to only include the part he finds relevant. Tries to portray the gun inventor discussion as revealing player intentions, yet asks for a breadcrumb from the recipient of the cop investigation.

I did not ask anyone to breadcrumb, as I was not sure if it would work.

Yeah, you did. See bolded below.

Also, a couple of other things:

I'm also going to do a reread of all of Puta's posts to see if he left any hints/clues as to who he investigated and it's result.

No use. He was amnesiac cop. Which reminds me...

It seems like we should have someone here with his Night 0 result, unless it was Macavity. Needless to say, if it is scum, the person should come out immediately. But what is optimal move if result is town?

I was just about to write "don't say anything unless that player is about to be lynched", but then remembered that this information may get lost if the player dies before saying it... so maybe breadcrumb first, and then reveal it when player number in the game lowers to have a large enough impact?

When player numbers lower? Like when the guy who breadcrumbed is dead?

Darkdude, I dont have to give all the examples of where a conversation about the gun inventor and the night kill might lead. That is the purpose of the conversation itself.
All I have to prove is that you appear to have a reason to

not

discuss it, coupled with your opposite request of having a player with guilty/innocent reveal themselves through a breadcrumb.

That's it for me. My decision on your alignment is done until concrete evidence to the contrary arises, likely your death unless you can get someone to step forward with an innocent on you.

[ThAdmiral]

I really hope you guys are reading what I wrote... because I get the impression that you didn't.

This is the best bit.

I'm going to vote: darkdude as well.

I trust that this means my reply to it did not satisfy you?

To be fair your reply was pretty good, but I still think the case against you is the strongest I've seen so far in this game.

[Korts]

Funny. Do you not recall Ecto falsely accusing me of asking for breadcrumbs? That was me trying to discuss what a player should do if they have the investigation result from our amnesiac cop. Please read my posts again.

Alright, fair enough. So there was another line of discussion that you tried to start. Tell me, how is discussion about what the person with an investigation result from Puta should do any more constructive than a discussion about the likely cause of death for Macavity?

Obviously if I believe I am correct I will try to talk others into believing it too. What are you implying?

I am saying that you stating that the Macavity kill wasn't a vig and giving supportive evidence won't necessarily cause everyone to believe you, and there's nothing wrong with that. I don't see how disagreement on that would be such a big problem that you'd feel the need to push it so hard as to state "we should assume it is scum NK unless there is greater evidence for the vig theory."

Fair enough. I don't know if that outweighs the risks but why would you not explain the pros of this discussion first before saying that my actions are anti-town?

The pros of discussing this are the pros of any line of discussion: they give something to talk about for every player, and if every player is contributing, then discussing this gives scum the chance to slip up. For instance, by stubbornly arguing that Macavity was a scumkill (in the knowledge that it was/wasn't) and refusing to admit that there were multiple people suspicious of Macavity.

Also, what did Wombat claim other than "valuable townie"? That isn't a full roleclaim necessarily, and I don't want him to, either, at this point. Rage was trying to delve deeper into BoW's role, and I do not approve.

[tubby216]

its very likely that it was a vig kill,
what do we know?

puta was an amnesiac cop who had to have sent his findings to another player.

macavaty was a gun inveter wich means he had to make a gun and give it away its pretty safe to assume he did ,, and since he had enough suspicion on him it is also likely the person recieving said gun could have shot him,

perhaps the scum have to wait untill given a gun in order to kill so macavaty wasn't their target,

is that in essance the thinkin behind a vig kil

[chuckrock]

Okay, I didn't realize that would be an L1. I'm not that confident in my vote.

unvote

I still have an FOS BOW

I don't have enough to make it an L1

Scummy unvote after a new wagon begins gaining positive feedback while admitting he wasn't confident in his vote in the first place.

fos ChuckRock

Korts thought that any scum was already on the BoW wagon. That was a pretty weak manner of slipping off of it.

Hey, if you are that prepared to get him lynched, i'll change my vote up again. In fact, I'll throw in the L1 intentionally just to make you happy.

VOTE BOW L1

I had my doubts, but you've thrown the guantlet and I'm forced to make this move to aleve that suspicion. I'll remember it if he comes out town-which, I wasn't totally convinced on-but obviously, I have no choice at this point. You've got the bandwagon started again-remember that one.

[Korts]

It isn't L-1, chuckrock. Sorry, but no cigar.

[darkdude]

Yeah, you did. See bolded below.

See bolded below.

It seems like we should have someone here with his Night 0 result, unless it was Macavity. Needless to say, if it is scum, the person should come out immediately.

But what is optimal move if result is town?

I was just about to write "don't say anything unless that player is about to be lynched", but then remembered that this information may get lost if the player dies before saying it... so maybe breadcrumb first, and then reveal it when player number in the game lowers to have a large enough impact?

Clearly the "maybe breadcrumb" part is my thoughts on what may be best. I was looking for what other players thought. I merely suggested that breadcrumbing could be a way to deal with this. You claimed that I ASKED for the person to breadcrumb, which is not the case here.

When player numbers lower? Like when the guy who breadcrumbed is dead?

This is just being nonsensical...
Coupled with this,

Your case is weak next to mine Rage. Vote Darkdude. He is scum. He attempts to blatantly manipulate the conversation to only include the part he finds relevant. Tries to portray the gun inventor discussion as revealing player intentions, yet asks for a breadcrumb from the recipient of the cop investigation.

Makes it look exactly like a case of tunnel vision.

Alright, fair enough. So there was another line of discussion that you tried to start. Tell me, how is discussion about what the person with an investigation result from Puta should do any more constructive than a discussion about the likely cause of death for Macavity?

I answered that already.

About the amnesiac cop, it would seem that you are the one who has misread this time. I was hoping to discuss what the optimal play would be since I was not sure what it was. I did not ask anyone to breadcrumb, as I was not sure if it would work. This discussion IMHO is much more useful because we are sure that unless it was Macavity or the scum, one of us would have to do something about this result.

I am saying that you stating that the Macavity kill wasn't a vig and giving supportive evidence won't necessarily cause everyone to believe you, and there's nothing wrong with that. I don't see how disagreement on that would be such a big problem that you'd feel the need to push it so hard as to state "we should assume it is scum NK unless there is greater evidence for the vig theory."

But there is something wrong with me trying to make them believe me? I think the discussion is not worth it, and if you think the otherwise you tell me why. What I don't see is why you guys are saying that I'm scummy for saying that. I mafia we have discussions ABOUT discussions all the time, why is this different?

refusing to admit that there were multiple people suspicious of Macavity.

How many is this exactly? I counted only ecto and yourself. In any case, when I said it was only you, it was a simple mistake of not reading properly. That's not a case of manipulating discussion or whatever you're accusing me of.

[darkdude]

its very likely that it was a vig kill,

It's not likely!!

[TDC]

Reminding IH that he replaced into this.