Things might be a little hard to read, so I've separated this post into sections with a little summary at the end.
--------
I think the best possible thing for me to do right now is to claim. I'll answer the questions directed at me below.
I claim Tracker.
Night 0 = Investigated darkdude, received No Result
Night 1 = Investigated Korts, received No Result
Night 2 = Investigated insanepenguin02, received No Result
I chose darkdude on Night 0 because he's the only one I knew in the game (like I've done in other games, it just seems to work out most of the time), I investigated Korts Night 1 because I was mildly suspicious of him at the time and Night 2 I investigated insanepenguin02 because I found his voting-hopping to a hammer on darkdude's lynch to be incredibly suspicious. Especially without any input to back his vote up.
Rage_post 257 wrote:Wait, so Puta would get
No Results
rather than anything of substance to go on? And whoever he chooses would get his investigation?
I don't get how you could "forget" what the investigation was in any game whatsoever. Sure, the message could be deleted, but what happens when he writes it down as soon as he sees the message.. or would there have to be an element of trust between him and the mod? Let alone the unsolvable problem of how to convince his brain's hippocampus (memory center) to 'forget' the investigation he saw?
I hinted at my role in this post (#257). Breadcrumbing the investigation was suggested, so I figured people would be too busy looking closely for that and not realize that I would have no idea what kind of message Puta Puta would get. I have only ever received No Results from my investigations.
And away we go...
Adel wrote:I think a fakeclaim gambit to buss a scumbuddy is something they have developed in their daily play. It would take coordination to pull off.
Sigh..
Surely you realize that the only way I can respond to this is by way of reaction, or calling upon a dead player?
Just so you know, we haven't been scum together for weeks.
Besides, haven't I drawn too much attention to myself (the long posts made unsuccessfully trying to understand the case against darkdude) for your assumption to be valid, or for me to even appear the slightest bit pro-town now because of it? I ask you, what could I achieve by purposely misunderstanding the case against him, giving him ample opportunity to claim something he just doesn't have, and then claiming against his roleclaim?
You think you've discovered something that just isn't there, I mean, if this is indeed our daily play, wouldn't we have sorted all the flaws you guys are seeing in the "plan"? I'm not saying we would've already won the game by now, nor that it would be perfect, but these flaws are just way too obvious to be scum slips from people working together.
Adel wrote:I think that how we didn't immediately accept darkdude's claim definitely placed more pressure on darkdude's scum buddies... and a rash move (or a planned move deployed prematurely) also seems pretty likely to me since scum generally think that their buddies seem more scummy to the rest of the town then their buddies actually are.
... what? You didn't say a word after darkdude claimed, and even if you wanted to I shouldn't be the one at blame. Insanepenguin02 came out of nowhere, not soon after taking his vote off of darkdude immediately after he claimed, and put his vote right back on only accompanied by a "Whatever...". How is my counter-claim of evidence more suspicious than the act of denying you your voice about darkdude's claim?
One other thing. Why do you say "we didn't immediately accept darkdude's claim" even though you hadn't said a word? Sounds too much like trying to fit in with Town to me.
----------
@
Kison
,
Kison wrote:Rage, would you mind explaining in a bit more detail why you were so sure of your meta on darkdude that you were willing to assume with seemingly meager evidence that he was crumbing having received the amnesiac cop result?
At that point, I wasn't sure what to believe. My case was waiting on Brain of Wombat to answer my hard-pushed questions and, yes, I even became Tunnel-Visioned on it, and I couldn't see more than opinion-quarreling on the darkdude case which I do not like to back up with anything strong ("strong" being the evidence like what contributed to my vote on him late Day 2), so I pulled out some meta that I had with him in a game between friends, where I thought anyone would have been most comfortable and show truer intentions about their actions. I know for sure that I haven't played enough online mafia with him to notice any subtleties well enough, and I probably won't soon, but I do think I have a good understanding of what he likes to do to set things up for himself and that's why I was under the impression that he was trying to set up his own claim of information. I was wrong. I didn't have anything strong to say about that case, since my "strong evidence" didn't mean one thing or another point, so I thought I'd input something that might actually influence what darkdude would say in regards to something not based on whether his wording meant one thing or another. He claimed not to have what I thought he did and I found myself confused, so I backed off and reconsidered my options. Upon his eventual claim, it was apparent that he was scum and I didn't need to say any more.
I can understand why people are suspicious of me for not divulging much information late yesterday, but to assume that darkdude and I had planned something all along is stupid. There may be things that someone may think mean a certain thing, but they're only going to be found if that's precisely what you're looking for.
Kison wrote:Also, why, if you believed this to be the case, did you decide to broadcast this to everyone? I don't recall him being in immediate lynch danger at that point(though granted he had a few people pushing for him).
I noticed that he had the most active members of the game on him, and although I'd really like to think that the more inactive players of any game would make good, thoughtful contributions to the game when they find the time to post, that isn't the case more often than not. I figured since the case was starting to build up that it wouldn't be long until it would be too late to input any one thing that could influence how strong exactly the case was, so in my long posts I focused on, as Ectomancer puts it, one half of what the case was about.
------
@
Ectomancer
, either you misread or took this out of context, but either way you're wrong:
You think it goes like:
Rage wrote:
Ectomancer wrote: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.
Also, defending implies that I'm trying to protect him from being lynched. I am not trying to defend him, I'm trying to sort out the discrepancies I think I see in and against the case. I'm not doing a very good job, but at least I'm willing to let others to correct me.
But, in actuality, it was written like (in post #328):
Rage wrote:I don't think I've jumped to darkdude's aid. In the following quote Ectomancer, who started this, expressed that I should switch my vote to his case, which at its roots is an invitation to get involved with the case.
Ectomancer wrote: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.
Also, defending implies that I'm trying to protect him from being lynched. I am not trying to defend him, I'm trying to sort out the discrepancies I think I see in and against thecase. I'm not doing a very good job, but at least I'm willing to let others to correct me.
I have said this before.
Rage wrote:@
Ectomancer
, for that last part in your post I only quoted you. The text under it was addressed to Korts.
Anyways,
Ectomancer wrote:*Speculation - Rage got frustrated with Darkdude for claiming watcher instead of just the recipient of an investigation result. Finally decided to cut him loose with a bus, especially after I was unshaken by the claim and Adel led off with more questioning. In light of the revealed roles (2 town power roles, 1 goon), I would not be surprised to know that Rage really is a Tracker.
What are you trying to say here? That I'm scum because darkdude didn't do what I wanted him to do, but I'm town because of the revealed roles?
Also, I like that you assume here that I'm a Tracker before I say so myself.
Regarding your 3 parts to the case on me:
1st part, show me where any discussion was repressed by me and how it's similar to what darkdude was lynched for, please. I think that it's obvious that since I asked about specifically two possibilities it's a stretch for you to assume now that I tried to repress discussion.
2nd part, that was one half of what I addressed to you and darkdude when that was posted. In essence, I asked darkdude the same thing. Refer to my post #328 on page 14. How am I inviting darkdude to claim?
3rd part should be non-existant due to what I've posted above. I don't get how both Ectomancer and Adel read it the same way, but what can I do?
------
Speculation about what has occurred:
Scum decides or is unable to kill the guy who hints at his role and has outed one of their members, and decides to get him lynched tomorrow. Why has this only come up suddenly then? Surely something must have been noticed or at least hinted at by the creators of this case when it was actually going on?
This theory is that scum has now decided to mislynch one of the last possible town power roles.
------
And now I'd like to call Ectomancer and darkdude scum together, and hear Korts' (and others, but especially you because you expressed a gut feeling about this) thoughts about this.
Throughout the argument between Ectomancer and darkdude early in the darkdude case, I've noticed many manipulations of what the other has actually said. The ones that stand out the most are:
1) Ectomancer believing that darkdude had asked/requested for the breadcrumb
2) Ectomancer's thought that darkdude had much more affect on manipulating discussion, and being certain that he's scum throughout the case. For example, posts 291 and the beginning of 297, accompanied with 303 and 304, contradict each other. It's a matter of who-sees-what-in-what, which adds up to opinion about what someone writes and is not justifiable for a lynch.
In the next couple of posts, Ectomancer does not address the request again, albeit for a stronger part of the case. Oh, and then I make tons of mistakes trying to dissect darkdude's original post.
Secondly, not all points are addressed from post to post, and they happen to be some of the strongest against or for the case. Such as,
1) Ectomancer's read/misread that darkdude was requesting for the breadcrumber to breadcrumb
2) Darkdude not giving a straight answer about why he wished to discuss the Cop rather than the Gun Inventor
3) Darkdude's post #449 sums this up well with:
darkdude wrote:
WHY [ecto = tunnelvisioned town]?
I've explained it before. What he considers to be scummy posts from me are all perfectly normal plays by me, and I have explained this well, I think. I cannot comprehend why he is still on me if not for tunnelvision.
So, in short, my reasoning to think that Ectomancer and darkdude are scum together is that there was too much manipulation of what was said that supported the darkdude case, and evasion of points that could lean Town too much over the edge resulting in either's lynch.
------
Either that, or ThAdmiral is scum with darkdude because he quickly found his spot on the darkdude bandwagon when it was forming, and upon darkdude's questioning he simply said he found the case to be the strongest he had seen. He unvoted later after finding the argument on darkdude unappealing. After darkdude's claim, he ends up asking if he can be the hammer vote without any input about his thoughts on darkdude's claim. I'm keeping my eye on this.
------
So, I'm still deciding who at this point would be the safest lynch today, but, to sum things up:
1) I think insanepenguin02 could be scum with anyone, but I haven't heard enough from him to think any which way
2) I think Adel or Ectomancer are the likeliest scumbuddies of darkdude, and find it peculiar how Ectomancer took to Adel's case on me almost instantaneously.
3) I think ThAdmiral needs to contribute more.
