Mini 733- Congratulations! You are... Mafia (Game Over)

[Isacc]

[snickers mischievously]

Weeeee this should be fun, doncha think?

Hehehehe...

Anywho...random vote...yes yes..

Vote: Caf19

because his profile piccy is blurry. Blurriness causes confusion, confusion helps scum, he must be scum!!!!!!111one.

[Isacc]

To silly ol' Darox:

Flash
Torch
Superman
Wolverine

And to Everyone else
OMGWTFPANCAKES: Glork has two votes!! Ross Perot is at L-4.1!

Oh, and to SlySly, I don't think we're going to learn anything significant by any voting strategies. Seeing as Ross Perot is at L-4.1, I think the vote counts are basically joking.

[Isacc]

Imaginality, Why do you vote me for what SlySly says! That's not fair...

[Isacc]

Darox: No, no no!

I will cede Flash for Hulk.

Superman I wouldn't have picked against anyone else, except that Aquaman has no powers, except in water. All superman has to do is fly and Aquaman must simply sit in his puddles begging superman to come for a swim.

Plus, wolverine pwns batman, hands down. He has claws...and heals...and he's badass.

Though...Christian Bale beats Hugh Jackman in The Prestige...so when they play Batman and Wolverine, does the defeat carry over? We have reached a pair-a-ducks!

[Isacc]

Aquaman has no powers except to converse with fish. FISH. Fish that can't do ANYTHING. Except, you know, swim.

Fish = Fail
Aquaman = Fish
Transitive property says:
Aquaman = Fail

[Isacc]

Oh dear, it seems the lemonade thingy is on the votecount now...let's hope we don't die xD

As to the lawn gnomes, I know nothing of such creatures. Nor for the aliens.
Though I am sure in some fantasy land they might exist, so I do not deny the possibility that they might exist. However, I know nothing, so I shall see what happens in their regard.

Other than that, I do not know what more can be said.

[Isacc]

Waiting on me? I answered.

[Isacc]

Thanks =]

[Isacc]

Unvote

Ummm lot's to respond to I guess...

Yes Caf, you are well to point out I haven't done much yet. I admit, I was a little lost by the randomness of it all for awhile, and hadn't quite caught up. I was waiting for Imaginality's explanation of his vote, but I think i just figured it out.

As for the lemonade, I don't find it scummy yet, but I am still a little put-off by it. However, as this is a bastard mod, it's kinda hard to take any role-details at face value, and base your conclusions on them. I agree that we should wait til day 2 to see what happens to the lemonade drinker.

And no, sorry, pretty much no fancy posting restrictions for me. I could talk in a funny accent if you all would like lol.

Darox is odd to me. While it seems his "who would win" scenarios are probably a role related thing, that doesn't explain why he voted Glork for it. Seems a bit strange to still be random voting at this point. small

FoS

until we get an explanation on that.

Anyways, those are my opinions thus far.

And because I felt left out:

[Isacc]

Damnit! Imaginality stole my piccy! /cry

[Isacc]

Oh, my bad, I totally didn't see that part. Must stop the selective seeing. Alright, my FOS is removed.

However, I think you may notice that the second person he voted for is not playing IIRC.

[Isacc]

Idk...MeMe's name keeps popping up, so he's not doing a great job of being out of the game.

I'll have to go with Tony the Tiger.

[Isacc]

Like Plum, the length of this tiny squabble has made me realize I am going to be obligated to take some position or side, or at least provide commentary.

I think dahill is taking this out of hand. I wasn't particularly worried about the vote at all (it was in the random vote stage, who cared?). Dahill, you ask about a random vote, and then start getting suspicious when his explanation isn't to your liking? Duh his explanation isn't complex or anything more than "I just did," and why? Because it was the random voting phase.

Three posts ago, I wasn't really concerned and was just going to say "I didn't find it odd," but now dahill has

voted

over this? What the heck? There is no case being made, this vote is based on a person's explanation for a random vote?

Dahill,

FoS

for being, frankly, ridiculous.

[Isacc]

Why would a town feel the need to say it wasn't a bandwagon? Well, a town wouldn't want an opportunistic scum to jump on them.

Why is it weird to you that a person explains their actions as they do them? How in the world does that make it scummy? I'm reading it totally right, and I maintain you have no case, your argument holds no water, and you're voting for nothing.


And yes, the random voting stage matters, but not for the reasons you're trying to say. The votes themselves will rarely ever provide any significance (they are RANDOM). The random stage is valuable in that it leads to non-randomness.

[Isacc]

Dahill, I will start by saying you have defended yourself well, and my worries towards you have lessened significantly. That said, there are still some parts of your argument I disagree with.

I think a scum and town are both likely to want to explain their actions the way Kmd did. Yes, you make a point that a scum mindset could lead to his comments, but I feel it's also a likely action for a town to have made, which is why I say, I don't think it points towards scum.

And yeah, so maybe some town players would love for a scum to jump on them. But I've had idiot townies jump on me over stupid stuff, and then screw everything up by making dumb remarks that get them mislynched, or else convince other idiots to start attacking me, when we're both town.

Anyways, point I am making is that it seems reasonable for one to want to explain his actions, regardless of if they are town or scum.


As to your random voting stage opinions, I maintain that it's not the vote themselves that make it helpful. It's the responses that are important, like your and Kmd's little debate.


So anyways, that's my feelings. Pleasure discussing with you dahill.

(geez I'm channeling old west this last post...just watched Appaloosa xD)

[Isacc]

I love how people keep making comments about the NUMA NUMA SONG. Seriously, do you guys really not know what the song is? It's gotta be one of the most famous internet videos ever, and you guys are spazzing out as though it were some secret code. It's quite comical to watch actually, slysly and elvis trying to decipher it like some sort of code. Gave me some good laughs...

In other news, Sly your comments about foreign languages seems kinda anti-town. You have no way of knowing that post restrictions are scummy in a BASTARD MOD. So basically what you are saying is this, "From now on I am going to assume this particular action is scummy, even though it isn't, therefore finding people scummy when they might not be." Good town move there.

Other than that, I am still having trouble finding a good deal of tells. The argument between Kmd and his inquirers seems like a general difference of understanding to me, so I don't really feel like either side is pushing it as scum.

Although, Darox voted last page with essentially no justification. That seems kinda ridiculous.

Fos: Darox

for that.

[Isacc]

Alright, going to work, then LAN party tomorrow. Will be back Sunday!

Noted.

[Isacc]

Something tells me Glork might not be able to vote for real people. I'm gonna do a reread to check...

[Isacc]

@Plum: Mostly I want to say, "Because it made sense in my mind," but also, I (generally...again it makes sense in my brain xD) tend to FoS stronger actions by other people, things they do that are extremely odd (or scummy) AND have a large influence in the game (such as a vote). This is not a strict rule, of course, but that's basically the thought process I had. Sly's comment was anti-town, but it was personal, where Darox was giving a full vote, which seemed to require an FoS. Note though, that I'm not saying my FoS on Darox made me more suspicious of him than Sly...my mind just works this way I guess.

@Has: Ok, that bull accusation pinged my scumdar like mad. Let's see here...

1. Plum did the same thing as me five posts above the one you're voting me over. He took a stance on an issue and put his opinion in, saying that he did not find Kmd's vote scummy. So why are you voting for me, but made no such comment to Plum? Scummy.

2. I wasn't defending his vote, I was attacking Dahill's logic, which I felt was not explained at the time. You may notice that several posts afterwards, Dahill makes a much better explanation of himself, which I choose to respectfully disagree with.

3. Hey look, I also see a bunch

more

people agreeing that Kmd isn't scummy for his vote...again...how come you haven't attacked them? Did I look like the easiest mislynch to you? Sorry, but, it's not happening.

Anyways,

major FoS Has

for a totally bull accusation and tunneling. I might vote you, except I have not decided who exactly seems the most suspicious yet. And, I'm tired, so I will do more tomorrow after I have slept.

[Isacc]

@Has: I had something I wanted to say this morning, but then I went to classes all day, so I hope this isn't missing anything:

I am not misrepping at all. Your argument is WRONG.

I wasn't defending. Dahill made a VOTE without really providing a case. Any time someone makes a vote without a case, I find that scummy. It made no difference to me who he was attacking, but the fact that he voted without a decent explanation was BAD, so I yelled at him.

Also, the claim that I was defending is bullshit. After Dahill made a case, I told him I was less suspicious, though disagreed. This makes it obvious that the

lack of a case

was what bothered me, not the target. If I cared about Kmd being attacked, wouldn't I have continued to defend Kmd, rather than agreeing to disagree?

And, the "random vote" excuse wasn't the argument being made, so it's irrelevant. The argument being made was that he had no case, which really has no correlation to your "I don't like your random vote excuse," accusation.

And finally, tunneling is when you focus solely on one person. Your number of posts has no bearing on the fact that you IGNORED OTHER PEOPLE for doing something similar to me.


Next..

@Imaginality:

Whining when someone votes me? Seems fair when I am voted for something I didn't do, especially when others did things similar to me.

I like how you are so eager to just take Has's accusation at face value, saying that I avoided the argument against me and misrepped, when I didn't (anyone notice that in my first post responding to has, the second of the three points was about NOT DEFENDING KMD...which Has says is his argument?).



And you guys can call OMGUS all you want, but your case is weak as hell and that's scummy.

[Isacc]

@Dahill: Pushing a lynch on bad logic = scum.

[Isacc]

Has, did you read the second paragraph you JUST quoted? "There is no case being made." So basically, you say you don't see my argument WHEN IT'S THERE WORD FOR WORD? What the heck?

@Kmd and Dahill: I attack bad logic. It's what I do. I blow up over

really

bad logic. See all my other games (WoT, mini 772). You don't like it, sorry, but if you think it's a scumtell, you don't know me.


Anyways, in other news, I also want to ask Cow: why do you hate the "random vote stage" comment so much?

[Isacc]

@Dahill: yeah, sorry. Neapolitan mafia.


@Has: You're taking the parts leading up to the main points, and saying they are the main points. My comments on the random vote explained why a significant case seemed lacking, so I pointed that out, and then made my final statement: there wasn't a significant case.

Also, you are STILL ignoring my defense. Paragraph 4 of post 324. Read it a few times. Now, do you have a counter-argument or are you just going to keep spouting that you're right?

[Isacc]

And about the random vote stage: it can be useful. This time, it wasn't.

[Isacc]

Kmd: Am I not allowed to respond to your comments? Don't overreact, I was just responding.

[Isacc]

Kmd: did you see Dahill's comment on me in 335? I was answering him too you know.

[Isacc]

Alright, well, I've made my defense against Has, who apparently doesn't believe the evidence before him because he feels it's fake. So, no point in belaboring the issue any longer, since I can make no defense.

Plus, this seems interesting. Destructor, you claim you don't have to speak in German? Explain post 142. Translates to, "If I could, I would." In response to being requested to speak in English.

I smell a lie, and your explanation seems more like backpedaling.

Vote: Destructor

.

[Isacc]

SlySly, question: What happens if we try to lynch you? Does the day end? Or does the lynch just fail and game continues?

[Isacc]

I would like to post, but alas classes are starting. I will post this evening when I am home again.

[Isacc]

Alright, while the whole SlySly issue is very interesting, I would rather address a matter I feel I can get a definite read on for now, so as to whether or not his claim seems legit, I am holding off on deciding.

@Has: In response to your question, I don't find Sly's case very strong. Ironically, I agree with some of the general points he makes at certain points, but not for the reasons he states. For example, not reading is deff anti-town, but I don't think scum can exactly go into a game without a read either, so I don't think it's scummy (yes there is a difference between anti-town and scummy), and also I am still worried about the language thing. Overall though, I find SlySly's case weak, but not hugely bad (I think it seems like he's trying, but I am not sure yet).

However, the language issue is what I feel can be solved now. I have an important deal to make, which I think my fellow town members will see the logic in.

Destructor:

You must not post in German ever again in the thread. Period. If you make another post in German, you will be lynched. Got it?

[Isacc]

I would tell you that today I had a talk with a buddy that plays mafia and I decided I need to start realizing that bad logic =/= scum automatically, but I doubt you'd believe that. Though, I am less concerned with you now (although, I still am annoyed that you made a case that I

cannot

possibly defend myself against, since you don't believe the evidence I presented). Anyways, you could say I am trying to turn a new leaf. And yes, I'm aware I probably look like bad pedaling scum.

I knew you were going to ask that, though. =P

[Isacc]

@Darox: He claims he will die if he doesn't make any posts in German. This will tell us if he is lying.

[Isacc]

Caf, if that's as far as you can think, you aren't thinking at all.

[Isacc]

Guys, I asked Destructor's agreement. Everyone else's consent was not necessary. I hope you will all trust me in that I think Destructer will agree to my demands, for his own good.

[Isacc]

Why should you risk being modkilled? Because otherwise, I don't buy that you ever had to speak in German at all. Prove yourself, or be scummy. Your choice.

[Isacc]

Alright, well, my gambit failed, because you all ruined it and completely missed the point. I guess I will just explain it, and we'll be back where we left off.

I didn't expect to push it till he was modkilled. I figured there were four possibilities, and they had four distinct reactions...however they all relied on him agreeing, which he didn't, which pisses me off (uncooperative = fail).

Town/honest = Acceptance with a tone of resignation to his death. Sort of martyr look to his response. This would result in me letting him post in German again.

Town/lying = why this would be the case, I don't know. I didn't factor this in, since he'd have to be retarded to fake a PR as a townie.

Scum/honest = Acceptance would be complimented by a tone of fear, and of an eagerness to end the day before he was modkilled.

Scum/lying = Acceptance would be super calm. He wouldn't really be concerned, due to the fact that he knew he wouldn't die.


There, now you all see. I hoped there'd be enough pressure to have him accept, but then everyone suddenly turned against it so fast, that it failed miserably. Had he accepted, I feel very strongly that the tone of his reaction would have told us a lot about him. However, now, we shan't know. I never expected, though, to have it last till a modkill.

[Isacc]

@Kmd: it was Wheel of Time mafia, where I flipped town. Plus, I never suggested we did the plan in that game, it was just...idk I made a weird post that I don't remember why I did. Lol...

[Isacc]

@Kmd: Frankly, I don't know why she would bring it up. It's kinda a null point, and doesn't prove anything. For one thing, here I did a gambit that, had people followed along, would have probably given some information. There, I described a possible claim idea that I was unsure of, for people to discuss, for reasons I cannot quite remember. However, I was town in that game, so if this is supposed to prove something, it would seem she was trying to point towards towniness (though, I don't see the two as similar enough to provide a meta tell).

Also, I don't see why people are so sure it had no chance of working. If my fellow town members were still suspicious of Destructor's shift from german to english (which I had thought), then I think it might have been accepted.

Really, it wasn't a "bad hopeless plan" as EK exaggerates it to be. It failed because the specific people in this game both didn't see the merit in it and weren't feeling particularly wary of the person it targeted. Not to mention, had the town pressured, it was almost guaranteed we'd get a good read on Destructor. So don't try to make me look stupid.

Votecount

Sly - 987654321123456789 - [Dahill, Elvis, des, imaginality, cow]
Des - 512346854563 - [Isacc, Sly]
Isacc - 8328 - [Kmd, Plum]
Kmd - 465364208 -[Darox, ]
PJ - 872648726 - [Glork]

Not Voting - 546543 - [Caf]

Cups of Lemonade Bought: 1
Orange Juice Bought: 1
Hard Cider Bought: 1
Coat Racks Bought: 1

[Isacc]

Does anyone else notice that SlySly is suggesting that drinking the lemonade has done something special (and apparantly, good) for him?

Unvote

because I had only voted Destructor for pressure.

I'm kinda bothered by some of the arguments being made now. SlySly has definitely done things I don't like, but the focus on the weakness of his claim doesn't bother me, and I can't seem to find why that's a big deal. I don't see the contradiction in his ideas about not being lynched (he doesn't think he can be lynched NOW but that doesn't mean he's immune all the time...I think?) and I also don't find his "Sorry, nevermind, I can't reveal that" so weird (in fact, it's less weird than Destructor's switch to english if you ask me).

However, his attitude is definitely unhelpful. It seems to suggest a person who is frustrated with everyone being against him, and is really just acting on that frustration. I can't tell if that is town with some subconscious OMGUS kicking in, or scum trying to find something that'll hit home. Either way, I am going to keep it in mind.

@Sly: As to who I find scummy, let's see...

Darox continues to frustrate me. He rarely posts anything original, and his content is more often the "Who would win" than anything else at all. The only time I think I see him making an actual argument is against SlySly.

Elvis_Knits is actually bothering me recently too. Plum made a good point when he said that EK attacked Sly for his "you (townies)" thing and then changed the subject when he was proven wrong. I definitely see that. Also, his mentioning of the "bad plan" seems pointless and an attempt to distract people, if anything, as the situations are almost completely different. Also the, "I don't know what that says about his alignment" seems odd, because if EK was trying to make a point based on my plans, it would have had to be that I was town (since that's what I flipped in the other game, and thus is the only conclusion you could draw, if anything, from the situation).

As for a third, I am not really sure. Sly does bug me, but not enough for a lynch.

Anyways, breakfast and work call.

[Isacc]

@Kmd: How was my plan scummy? He wouldn't have had to test it to the point of being modkilled. I wanted his reaction, not his death.

If you do not believe I am telling the truth, then you must already be suspicious of me: can you provide reasons for your distrust of me, plan obviously not being one of them?

If you do believe I am telling the truth...well then you shouldn't find my plan scummy, so I'll discredit that possibility.

@Everyone: Here's something I noticed. It would seem Glork cannot vote for real players. However, the vote count still requires a majority as if there were really 12 votes. If Glork was incapable of voting for a real player, why would his vote be included in the majority count? I think this may suggest a fake PR or perhaps something related to his role. Anyways, I thought it was an interesting thing to note.

@Everyone, part 2: So what do we think about the lynch? Does the flavor discredit SlySly's roleclaim, or is it just done so that Mirth can screw with us and we won't know if he's really a Sasquatch? Personally, I think the second is more likely, and I'm inclined to believe that Sly's role claim was honest.

[Isacc]

I think, in light of Darox, I am going to do a PBPA to see if my memory is correct. I'll post it later.

A comment I think I would like to make:

EK, you DEFINITELY changed the subject.

491 - you are explaining why you found him suspicious for his word choice.
492 - SlySly finishes what is a pretty logical defense, overall. Regardless, the topic is still on his word choice.
493 - you suddenly attack his "no lynch" claim, making no overall response to his defense against your word choice attack, and from then on never touch the subject again.

If that isn't changing the subject, then I am Abraham Lincoln.

[Isacc]

Ignoring the flavor isn't scummy at all, for this reason: It has nothing to do with your role, so it DOESN'T confirm you, however the fact that you were not lynched DOES seem to confirm you. Since there is an apparent contradiction, it would seem that the flavor is there simply to confuse us. Thus, so that we aren't spending all day going "zomg what exactly did the mod mean," we are going to ignore the flavor. At least, that is why I am ignoring the flavor.

Working on that Darox PBPA still... Hopefully I'll have time to post it by tonight.

[Isacc]

"Got distracted" is code for "changed the subject to."

I'm not liking your explanation here. I don't buy it at all. I don't see how SlySly changed the subject, and the fact remains you jumped from "Your word choice is suspicious," to "That one part of your last defense is suspicious."

Fos: Elvis_Knits

with a vote possibly coming after I do my PBPA on Darox.

[Isacc]

Sorry, haven't had time for the PBPA. I should get to it sooner or later... xD

@Kmd: You completely ignored my question. Mind ACTUALLY ANSWERING ME. If you think I was trying to get Des killed, that would mean you are suspicious of me

outside of my gambit

. You cannot use my plan as reason that you were suspicious of me prior to my plan: it doesn't work. Now, please, don't avoid the question any longer.

@EK: I don't know if I buy that you didn't understand what was weird about it. It looked like you were making an attack, realized it wasn't strong, and tried to switch to something else before you lost your momentum.

[Isacc]

Kmd, you are completely twisting my words. You are making absolutely

no sense

. Please, stop being an idiot.

Read what I am actually saying, rather than whatever nonsense you are interpreting it as.

I made a plan, and explained it afterwards. Based on my explanation, it

shouldn't have risked Des's life.

Now, there are only two possibilities for this.

1. My explanation is honest.

2. My explanation is a lie.

If my explanation is honest, then my plan is not scummy at all.

If my explanation is a lie, that does make my plan scummy.

Thus, the plan

in and of itself

is not scummy, and is only scummy

if you don't believe my explanation

. Thus, the plan cannot logically be used as reasoning for not believing my explanation.

Here is what you are saying:

"Your plan is scummy because your explanation is a lie. Why do I think your explanation is a lie? Because your plan is scummy."

It's circular logic. It's wrong. It's stupid.


Now, remove your vote from me until you actually think about what is going on. And in the future, make sure you read more carefully.

[Isacc]

@Image:

I said before why I did not join the Sly wagon. How is not joining a wagon scummy?

You don't like the tone of my posts? It's how I am, get over it. If you find that a tell, then you fail at meta. Also, there is nothing wrong for being scornful of BAD arguments.

That's not a preemptive defense. That's not a defense at all. It's a concession. Plus, a-priori is not inherently scummy either.

And finally, my posts give a sense that I place myself against town? Way to make an argument with NO evidence. Yes, just say I seem anti-town, and hope other people listen. Care to provide evidence? Care to say how exactly I seem against the town? Or are you just going to state an opinion that might likely be based on nothing, and call that a case?

[Isacc]

EXACTLY. WHY DON'T YOU BUY MY EXPLANATION.

That's the bloody question you've been AVOIDING.

Last time I asked it, you said "because, you made a scummy plan." Thus you WERE using circular logic.

[Isacc]

Mod: Can Kmd be reported for that avatar? I find it offensive.

[Isacc]

Ok now Cow is on the "I can't understand basic logic" train. Here, let me explain it AGAIN.

Based on my explanation,

there wouldn't have been any deaths

. I wanted a

reaction

out of Destructor, not a modkill. Thus, based on my explanation, my plan shouldn't be scummy.

Also, Kmd you contradicted yourself. Post 586, the last two sentences you say that if you believed my explanation, the plan wouldn't look scummy, but since you don't believe me, it does. Therefore you ARE saying that my plan is scummy because you don't believe my explanation, and that you don't believe my explanation because my plan is scummy. You ARE using circular logic. I am NOT putting words in your mouth. But, you ARE contradicting yourself.

[Isacc]

Oh and sorry, I'm not mad about your avi then. I didn't realize there was a bet.

[Isacc]

@Kmd: How was my plan scummy?

[Isacc]

Kmd, but my plan wouldn't have Des die. It would only have him provide a reaction.

See, a death resulting from my plan only follows if you are assuming I am a liar. However, the only reason you have been giving to suspect my lying, is that a death would have resulted from my plan. You can deny it all you want, but your logic

is

circular.

If you continue to not understand this, then I am going to stop explaining it to you, as you are not understanding simple common sense.

[Isacc]

WHY DON'T YOU BELIEVE ME?

Are you retarded? I keep asking you WHY DON'T YOU BELIEVE ME. The only answer you are giving me is BECAUSE OF MY PLAN. LEARN TO READ.

[Isacc]

That isn't an explanation. WHY do you think that?

[Isacc]

Plum: If other town members had supported the plan, understanding it was a gambit, the pressure would have forced Destructor to accept. It was the fact that the other people in this game did not like the idea that made it a bad plan, however you cannot attest that among other players the plan would still have failed.

And yes, I see that it's possible my gambit was actually to try and get him killed, and that my explanation is a lie. However, if someone believes I was lying, I want an actual reason they are suspicious with me outside of the plan (due to the fact that, as I explained, that would be circular logic). I have no problem with people attacking me for my plan, as long as they provide good backing. Kmd has not done so. His argument is "I feel like you are scummy." That is weak.

And I am still supporting the arguments on EK, however I still want to do my PBPA of Darox first, which I haven't had time to.

[Isacc]

I never thought you wouldn't get that it was a gambit. However, you knowing it was a gambit wouldn't have stopped it from working. You couldn't have known what reactions I was looking for.

[Isacc]

@Plum and Darox: He wouldn't have accepted IF PEOPLE WEREN'T PUTTING PRESSURE. You keep forgetting that part. If people had agreed, and threatened the lynch, he would have had to accept, which is why I was hoping I could get a reaction involving acceptance.

[Isacc]

@Caf1: Yes, that was not one of my finest/smartest moments. I was mostly frustrated that people going against me all of the sudden was going to give Destructor a chance to refuse the plan, which is basically what happened, and I definitely didn't handle it well.

@Kmd: Your argument IS that you feel I am scummy. You have NOT explained that it isn't circular logic (because it IS), in fact I have shown quotes of you where you word for word made a circular argument.

You have no case because you have not given any reason to suspect me of lying. That means, you have no case.

About your "If Des knew you wanted a reaction," If you read the quote you JUST quoted, I said that Destructor couldn't have known what reactions I was looking for, so they

wouldn't

be crafted. Christ, you have no clue what you are even saying. It's like arguing with Empking. No wonder Dahill found you scummy earlier.


Still haven't gotten to that PBPA. Sorry.

[Isacc]

@Kmd: You are an idiot, and I am done explaining this. You have no clue what you are saying, because you can't understand basic common sense. Luckily, I think the rest of the players in this game are smarter than that.

@Cow: Is the "fraud" thing related to YOUR role?

[Isacc]

I agree with Sly in that it'd be a waste of time to try to lynch him, as I don't find it likely we'll lynch him today (he was right before, was he not?). Better off trying to find a better lynch.

Personally, though, I don't find Dahill to be scummy for pushing the lynch, just overly-optimistic, or at least that's how his tone looks to me.

[Isacc]

Kmd, what you are saying is nonsense. You simply do not see it.

[Isacc]

For the sake of testing a theory, I will go along, though I don't expect any real results.

Vote: SlySly

[Isacc]

I don't know why Glork says that EK and Kmd are "obvtown." Wait, yes I do.

Glork, EK, and Kmd are scum.

[Isacc]

@Plum: Glork's last post, fourth paragraph (single lines count as paragraphs). It's the parenthetical part. He says EK and Kmd are "obvtownzh".

[Isacc]

Sorry for the double post, that'd be post 691 I am referring to.

[Isacc]

In your words, "obvschomz."

Good point though,

unvote

.

Vote: Elvis_Knits

[Isacc]

Protown =/= obvtown.

[Isacc]

Was out of town for valentines, and my comp is finally fixed. Prod received, will post tomorrow though.

[Isacc]

Am I the only one severely bothered by the fact that Darox is hugely buddying to Hascow? I mean, it's almost like reverse tunnel-vision. A large part of his post is about how hascow did amazing, and anyone who criticized hascow was scummy for it.

[Isacc]

Caf, who has bought lemonade from you so far? I forgot.

Also, yeah, Darox's big "analysis" still really bugs me. I don't know why people think it's content worthy of removing votes. In fact, I think I'll

Unvote

and

Vote: Darox

.

A few unanswered questions bother me, namely; Glork, why did you find Kmd and EK obvtown? I still don't understand where you had that reasoning at all.

Slysly: Your words were "if darox flips town" you'd have a new list of scum candidates. And what if Darox doesn't flip town? Why did you choose to make your most recent decisions based on him flipping town, rather than scum?

[Isacc]

@KMD: I had wanted to, but I was busy before and now my computer is broken for awhile, so I haven't had the time to. I will try to do it now, and maybe have it up in a little while.

[Isacc]

Alright, I am skipping the first 6 pages for this PBPA because they were mostly random and/or role-related. If anyone feels I have left out important details, you may correct me.

Darox PBPA:

Starting at page 7 though...

150-151: Role stuff, and votes Glork for having two votes (although both were on not-real people). The fact that both of glork's "votes" were irrelevant makes it seem kinda like he didn't think much about this.

177 & 179: Clarifies that his vote for Glork was based on having two votes, and then another role related "who would win" (abbreviated to WWW from now on, for ease).

183: Asks who Ross Perot is and another WWW.
185: Votes Ross Perot, and another WWW.
210: Calls KMD contradictory (through a WWW), and asks why Kmd cared about looking like a bandwagon.
212: Asks why Kmd would make a disclaimer on page 1.
249: WWW (between a lion and tiger, wtf?) and votes Kmd.
260: Modified WWW.
Nothing page 12
312: Doesn't understand why Glork thinks scum would buy Lemonade, asks for clarification. Another WWW.
329: buys hard cider. (Ignoring the debate between me and Hascow at this point, and also ignoring Destructor coming in and posting in english.)
Nothing page 15
384: Posts only "What" in reference to a Sly post saying not reading the whole game is scummy.
394: WWW, aliens vs sasquatch. Hasn't commented on Sly's claim.
406: Explains why Sly's role can be confirmed by lynch-attempt to Dahill. Another WWW.
409: Another WWW. Sly had just asked Darox why he was ignoring questions, and Darox now asks "What questions?" Sly doesn't clarify any time soon, that I can see.
423-424: Translates Zazi's posts, and another WWW.
437-438: Asks me why Destructor should stop posting in German, and another WWW.
446: Reminds me that I'll need more support if I want to follow through with my plan agaisnt Dest. Note that he doesn't actually say my plan is bad for wanting to kill Destructor. He makes no comments against it at all. And then another WWW.

463: Tells me Destructor would never have accepted my plan (again, still no explicit comments for or against it). Also, asks Sly why his role claim seems to be changing (which I never really thought it was). Another WWW.

477: Claims he's answered all questions directed at him. Accuses Sly for making a foreign language post after attacking people for it (even though it was obviously a joke). Then he says he doesn't like the way Sly pushed for a Destructor lynch, and provides quotes that apparently in his mind prove his point. Explains that Sly isn't defending himself against points, instead repeating himself. Also says Sly is guilty of what he's accusing Destructor of being (whatever that is, Idk). Ah, ic...apparently he's calling SlySly a liar. Then another WWW and puts Sly at L-1.

481: Explains to Sly why he didn't translate everyone's posts. Then another WWW.
519: Darox is confused as to why I say he isn't contributing. However, after doing this PBPA I feel completely confident I was right. He claims I am ignoring the parts of the posts that aren't WWW, however as we can see through this analysis, the vast majority of his posts didn't really say anything at this point.

Nothing page 22.
557: Asks Sly to explain an accusation about ignoring flavor, and accuses Sly of OMGUS. Then tells Caf that he's not the only one who isn't posting much content, and then another WWW.

Nothing page 24.
615: Again says my plan would never have been accepted, still avoiding saying whether or not it was suspicious, just that it wouldn't work. Also, another WWW.
Nothing page 26 and 27.
685: Says he's been busy. Will return soon.
708: He's still busy. Promises his overview.
724: Says he's still working on overview. Asks for votecount.
738: The promised overview...er...half of overview appears. Says Caf is townish except for accusing Hascow. Says Hascow rocks and has always been right. Says Dahill is alright. Is confused by EK, noting a few good points and also a few times Hascow "trashed" EK. Says Glork is Ok. Says he'll post the other half later. I see serious Hascow buddying. I think if Darox went up against a 40 year old virgin in a fight over Hascow's sexy parts, Darox would win =O.

773: Clarifies he was going in order of the front page list.
And that was his last post.


So, I can see only two accusations made (correct me if I am wrong...that's a lot of posts to analyze). He attacks Kmd with Dahill earlier. Then he attacks Slysly later. He also humps Hascow like a dog in heat.

What is most interesting is that he's ignored so much. He ignored Me v Hascow, Me v Destructor, Destructor v Slysly, Destructor v Glork (were there others? I forget). But he has, as you can see, made no comment on many of the major arguments of the game so far.

After this review, I'd say I like my vote on Darox.

[Isacc]

EBWOP: Ignore the url links. Apparently me calling his "Who would win?" things WWW's has caused a few oddly placed urls lol.

[Isacc]

I'm feeling lucky/daring. And it deff doesn't sound like a cult.

Maybe it's the meds talking, but I think I'll

Buy: Lemonade

. I've had town reads from you so far, so I think letting you live another day is a good plan. Hopefully I won't regret this once I'm off my meds.

[Isacc]

Kmd: What's your opinion on Destructor v Glork?

[Isacc]

Kittieeeessss

Okay, you win. I shall go die in a corner of cuteness over-exposure.

[Isacc]

I am personally for a Darox lynch. Also, Caf, I'd like you to thank my ass for buying that third lemonade...

[Isacc]

I am also for a Darox claim.

[Isacc]

Darox I think you are lying. At least some part of your role should be able to be revealed.

I like my vote.

[Isacc]

Darox: It's an assumption that I am more than comfortable making.

If your only role abilities are your post restrictions, then you would be able to say "vanilla townie." If you had a more specific role, I'd be willing to bet you could mention it.

Sorry, but I don't like the "Oh umm...yeah I can't say anything at all cause the mod said so!" defense. Kinda seems like a cop-out to me. Easy scum defense.

[Isacc]

Darox: you didn't call Hascow pro-town. You specifically said everything he said was right, and anyone who disagreed with him was wrong. You also found Caf (and maybe others I thought...) suspicious for disagreeing with Has.

That IS buddying.

[Isacc]

Darox: I'm lying through my teeth? HAH. Funny. OMGUS much?

Let's look through your post again, at your request...

Line 23: "The scummiest thing I see here is the thing with hascow about who hascow suspects and cafs various responses to this. Wary of Caf for now."

You find Caf suspicious for disagreeing with Has.

"He defends himself pretty well against Isacc's knee jerk attack."
"he pretty much stomps all over the people protesting his suspicion of Isacc. Several times."
"hascow pretty much trashes caf's weak jabs at him."
"Some trashing of Isacc and his Modkill plan occurs, and refutes EK's bizarre accusation of hascow having joined in on Isacc's Modkill plan."

Wow, you didn't buddy up AT ALL!

I will admit, you make one comment where you say Hascow confuses you, for jumping on Sly so fast. But instead of calling it suspicious, or scummy, you say it seems like he was confused. Wtf?

Yeah, I am DEFINITELY lying through my teeth there. You are SO right...Oh wait, no you're not.

Hey Darox, explain to me why we should trust the guy who has posted so very little real content so far? You've actively lurked 90% of the game. Scummy much?

You fail at lying and diverting suspicion btw.

[Isacc]

Darox: Your "please quote me" defenses, are irrelevant and don't disprove the point I was making. You're arguing straw man here, which is majorly scummy.

Also, I have explained more times than should be necessary why you are buddying. If you do not feel you need to disprove my points, then feel free to keep acting the way you are. However, you are doing a crap job of being pro-town.

"Please tell me" how a player can contribute next to no content and still expect to act scummy and not be lynched?

[Isacc]

Darox: Again, strawman arguments, ignoring the issue.

And if your analysis isn't ready, list off everyone and tell us whether you find them more scummy or more townie. Hell, do SOMETHING than just pathetic strawman defense. You're being as unhelpful as can be. Stop being anti-town.

[Isacc]

Lol...me, Elvis, and Dest....nice OMGUS Darox.

[Isacc]

I had a feeling Destructor wasn't lying by what he had said. I guess maybe I was the only one who actually understood what he was saying. Well, I guess that's a moot point now. Puts a couple of his attackers into some interesting light though...

Dahill doesn't surprise me. He seemed fairly town.

Caf: No, lemonade didn't seem to do anything to me.

I am trying to decide what the kills say about the scum, if anything...

[Isacc]

I have a case that I'd like to make, but I have to get ready for work. I'll put it up tonight.

More importantly though.

Kmd: Seriously? You're voting me?

Do you honestly think I would bus a scumbuddy day 1? You think I am scummy for trying to get Destructor killed: if so then, why did I try to push a Darox lynch in favor of a Dest lynch? You are suggesting that I am scum who had a good town target, but decided to convince everyone to lynch scum instead.

[Isacc]

Kmd: He probably bussed you Day 1 cause you were such a liability...I can deff see it as a possibility.

The point is, I made a case on what you claim to be my scumbuddy, when I already had a case on a townie that may have gotten lynched, had I pushed too. Call it WIFOM, call it w/e you want, but that just doesn't make sense -_-

Now, I have a more important case. I think I has found scum numero dos.

As most of you ought to know, EK has been pinging my scumdar since Day 1. Her actions have been a little off here or there, as I have pointed out before. Also, now I am noticing a suspiciously similar playstyle to another game where she has recently flipped scum. Meta is making me worry.

But here's a more interesting thing to note. Darox was scum, and prior to his lynch, I asked for his top three targets. He named, Destructor, myself, and Elvis_Knits.

This is interesting to me, as two of the three are confirmed town (at least to me...those two being Dest and myself of course).

The other, however, was already pretty suspicious in my eyes. So here's what I see: a scum going down would love to accuse a scumbuddy just before his fall, just so that people might loosen up on them after he flipped. So, if two of the three are town, but the other is suspicious...I say EK is probably another scum.

That said,

Vote: Elvis_Knits

[Isacc]

Kmd: Whatever, you had no case yesterday, and you have none today. You've also ignored every action I had D1 except the one tiny one you're still voting me over. You're an idiot.

[Isacc]

Plum: Well, here's my whole "scum-meta" thing. My friend who got me onto the game originally claims that EK is usually pretty darn aggressive. However, in both this game and my second most recent game (the one from which she cited my other "plan," which had no relevance) in WoT mafia, she acted particularly similar to this one. Aggressive-ish once in awhile, so as not to be a lurker, but not really pushing hard on anyone, and overall pretty calm.

Normally, I wouldn't take this meta so strongly. But given that she was already a large suspect in my mind, and I see this, and Darox flipped scum, that's what I think is likely.

[Isacc]

Kmd, you has no brain. Let me counter your bad logic point by point.

1: I stayed in the random phase as long as possible? WTF? That could be said about EVERYONE in game, seeing as it lasted til nearly page 8!

2: Yes, admitting points doesn't mean they didn't happen. However, admitting points is also NOT a scumtell. Actually, what would have been scummier is if I had lied about it. However, you are saying something I did was actually a scum move done in order to look town? Wifom much?

3: That wasn't an "excuse" for anything. You clearly have no idea what I was referring to. When I said I had been waiting for Imaginality's explanation, it was because he voted me after quoting someone else. Then I realized he was testing the "let's put a vote on everyone" theory so I said "Oh nvm Imaginality, I understand now." That wasn't an excuse for anything.

4a: Or, you know, it means I was wary to trust buying lemonade, but I didn't think it was automatically a scumtell, which was what people were calling it at that time.

4b/c: addressed later, I guess.

4d: There is a difference between acting anti-town and acting scummy. Being a retard is anti-town. However, it doesn't make you scum. If you don't realize the difference between anti-town and scummy, you need to go back to newbie games.

4e: No, it doesn't translate to that. It translates to, "I want to see Sly's interactions still, so I'm going to pursue a different case which was interesting to me."

6: Not a scumtell. Not really any tell. Not really...anything...

7: Ok, you are trying to manipulate the meaning of my words. "Odd" meant it is bothering me, sorry that I didn't use a word you felt more in tune with "scummy." So I small FoSed him, gave him a chance to explain his vote, because maybe he had a good case.

Then, I FoSed because he never made a case. Seems pretty damn reasonable.

You complain that I didn't vote Darox? BFD. I don't think I am obligated to vote for every scumtell ever.

No, I didn't avoid the PBPA. I was freaking V/LA.

And NO I definitely did NOT vote Darox when he was our most likely lynch. In fact, I'm pretty damn certain I voted Darox about the time everyone was switching away from him in favor of Destructor.

8: To your "first," so?

Ok, the rest of this point is a boldfaced lie. I am noticing a pattern. You keep claiming that I am NOT suspicious of people I FoS. Do you know what the S stands for in FoS? I WAS suspicious of Dahill, don't try and claim I wasn't.

"Now you are acting like you had previously been calling dahill scum. You weren't. And still no suspicions at this point in the game. On anyone."
-Lie

"Ok, but it's only important if you take something from it. You really didn't."
-Yep, I did. I took from it that I find Dahill town, and you an idiot.

9: A vote is used for two purposes in my mind. Number 1, I am comfortable lynching the person. Number 2, I am demanding they address an issue. In all the situations you are referencing, neither of these held true. Therefore, I had no reason for a vote.

10: I wasn't saying that because others did it, it wasn't scummy. You are totally misrepping. I was saying that it was weird that Hascow singled me out. I did not at all say anything like what you are claiming. I do admit the OMGUS was my bad, and it was a common trend in all my games. However, you may note I have (since Hascow and I discussed it) stop assuming anyone voting me is scum.

11: That is how I roll. Or how I rolled. Either way, not really a tell unless you fail at meta.

12: I wasn't gonna make him die. But I won't get into why your logic is circular again.

13: Lulz.


So, your whole case fails. Here's a question. Earlier you "voted me for same reasons as yesterday." Yesterday, your reasons were only my gambit, and today you have a "case." Why wasn't that there yesterday?

[Isacc]

EK: I am not relying purely on some "unnamed person"s knowledge of you. Look at other games? Ok, I did. The one I just mentioned.

Next, I have a specific reference who tells me that as town you act differently than you are now. And it's not his "impression" of you, it's actually by your words that you apparently act different as a townie. Sorry, but if that's not good enough for

you

that really doesn't matter much.

And yes, interactions are important. Which is why I still find you scummy the way I did D1. It's just, the meta + Darox's final words makes me think there are too many coincidences to be a coincidence.

[Isacc]

EK: I have been told that you told a person you like to be very aggressive as town, and even more aggressive as Vanilla townie. However, since I haven't seen you be any more aggressive than WoT (where you really weren't) I see a pattern.

And all this does not erase the fact that you have been suspicious in other ways this game, meta aside.

[Isacc]

Kmd: Your responses to my point have done little/nothing to display any scumminess of mine. Half of it's wrong, and half of it is just dumb. And, I would respond to it point by point, but it would take forever and simply result in a similar response from you.

Why haven't I started being suspicious of you yet? Because in the past, I got too suspicious of people just for attacking me, and was often wrong, so I am trying to make sure I am not mistaking stupidity for scumtells, as I have been in the past. I'm trying to not make OMGUS my meta anymore xD.

[Isacc]

Imaginality: Any reasons for those choices?

[Isacc]

Alright, I'm back from a busy weekend. I don't have the time to figure out what I want to post though, so I'll post something more significant tomorrow. Sorry.

[Isacc]

Imaginality: Yay for bandvagoning, yes?

[Isacc]

Can we get a vote-count?

I would like to say that I am against the Plum wagon. He has been at the very top of my town-list since day 1, and I see a lot of garbage in the accusations towards him. However, that's for him to fight through.

And I would also like Plum to address the case against me. I would in fact put the same question to anyone who would answer: what is the opinion of Kmd's case against me?

I am, though, severely off-put by EK's claim of "OMGUS" on Plum. Plum had suspected EK since D1, and clearly still did today. Just because his vote came after EK's doesn't make that OMGUS.

And hascow saying LATER that he never supported the plan looks like a lie to me. Because of where his vote was

Funny because

this

looks more like a lie to me.

I am feeling confident in an EK lynch, and I find the Plum wagon very interesting.

Speaking of which,

Sly:

Yesterday you vote EK with no explanation. Today you vote Plum, almost as little explanation. wtfpancakes? You jumped on two opposing bandwagons in less than 12 hours without making a case.

FoS: Sly

.

[Isacc]

Sly: Idk about you but I find Caf as town today as I found him yesterday. He hasn't done anything to make me worry more, so I would have bought the Lemonade too, except now he has enough people.

Also, you completely ignored the focus of my question. You dodged it entirely. Afraid to answer?

[Isacc]

EK: In return to your "wagon of two people" comment...I count more than that...Glork attacked Plum hard already today, as did you, and now Sly has jumped on it...

I think I may see a trend by a different person...I am going to do a PBPA as soon as I have time...I'll let yall know afterwards.

[Isacc]

Sly: We're talking about the wagon on Plum, not on EK.

[Isacc]

@Caf's Question: I didn't find Darox's accusation a greater reason for scumminess, merely something that I felt added weight to my theory. EK has been in my top suspect list since Day 1, and it was EK that I planned to interrogate today regardless of Darox's accusation. That merely reaffirmed my suspicions.

The reason it would be likely for Darox to attack a scumbuddy is just simple distancing. He flips scum, and attacks often become looked at as reversed, sometimes just subconsciously.


Also, you're on Plum too now? Am I the only one who finds Plum still very pro-town? As much as EK tried to accuse Plum of talking too much to avoid answering questions, I understood Plum's post(s) perfectly, and I thought she answered a lot of the questions that EK had to re-ask. But, Idk, maybe I just think in a similar way to Plum.

Really though, I do not see scumtells coming from Plum. I won't defend her against accusations, but I feel it helpful to at least point out that I don't find her scummy.

[Isacc]

SlySly: What? Never heard of a town gambit? WTF are you even talking about?

[Isacc]

@Plum: In response to your questions to me...

In the Sly wagon, I hadn't found him scummy originally, and then when he challenged us to test his claim, I found it worth going along with, so I guess the answer is: yes, testing his theory overrid not finding him suspicious.

Wait, next you are asking me for my PBPA? It

did

materialize, I have already posted it. Post... 790. Don't accuse me of not making my PBPA xD.

About my vote for Darox: It came after he made his crappy analysis, and was reaffirmed after my PBPA.



Sly: I have not forgotten my actions, I am just wondering how it is only NOW that you vote me over it. It's LONG since happened. Also, if you do not believe in town gambits, have you ever read the mafiascum wiki? The example of a gambit on that page is a town gambit. Epic fail to you.

[Isacc]

Finished? Unfortunately no. I have a just-about-to-end game that I could name a town gambit from, however the person who did it isn't dead so he's

technically

not guaranteed town, regardless of chances.

[Isacc]

Sorry for double-post. I looked at the wiki, it references a

specific

town gambit:

http://mafiascum.net/wiki/index.php?tit ... o's_Gambit

Proof enough? Or are you going to continue to claim gambits are inherently scum tactics?

[Isacc]

Sly: Now you are just denying the truths we have presented to you. If you do not want to accept our answers, then stop asking questions. You can't just deny the truth.

Plum: Thx =P

[Isacc]

That is NOT a truth. Kmd, Plum, AND myself have all named specific examples. You are ignoring them.

[Isacc]

Sly: Lmao, I love how every time someone points out that you are acting ridiculous, you call them scum.

Seriously,

you

sound like scum squirming over trying to cling to a weak reason.

[Isacc]

Sly: How the heck was that defending? You asked someone (not only me) to give you an example. Now you are just being a liar and a hypocrite.

"Until someone posts proof otherwise, or you are lynched and flip town, I will continue to believe that."

Someone posted proof otherwise. However, you still continue to believe in your accusation? Why? Because you have no better case.

I am not squirming at all. Your accusation holds no water, but you're clinging to a disproved statement. Feel free to continue acting scummy if you want, especially when EK is so eager to defend you for it.


You claim I am squirming? Prove it. I am acting exactly the way I always do: calling out failed attempts at twisting bad logic into an argument.

[Isacc]

Actually this could be quite useful. This forces him into a very interesting position, which may allow us to learn more about him.

Destructor: Would you please go back and check your arguments against Glork (were you calling him scummy? I think you might have, but I forget so please correct me if I am wrong), and please re-evaluate him now that you are his role. Please explain clearly what opinions about him have changed, and your reasoning for why.


Also, as a second note, what's your opinion on people's actions so far?

[Isacc]

If a majority of people want me to claim, I will. It will definitely reduce the number of lynch candidates, which should help the town.

If you want me to claim, please say so now.

[Isacc]

Dest: Thanks for answering my first question. Your answer was helpful to me.

I will go over Imaginality soon, as I was planning to do so anyways, however tonight the time is not on my side.

I am fairly sure you are town, right now.

Oh, as far as "being willing to show what [you] saw" that makes me seem town to you, was that your second post, or do you still have another reason to believe me town?


@Caf: Overall your read of Kmd's case seems fair (not surprising, considering my read of you) and is a less defensive version of some of what I was saying (also not surprising, as I am the one under attack here).

To your question, if you check the following page, the next day I went V/LA for 3 days, and the day I was coming back was the day Hascow made his first case on me, which (as we all know xD) distracted me a lot. That is probably the reason that the FoS on darox didn't come to any further fruition at that point.


@EK: Your analysis of the case is, admittedly, not really scummy, defying my expectations. However, that plus Caf's makes me see that I am suspected primarily for a personal play-style rather than a scumtell.

Unfortunately, there is not really a good case I can make in defense of myself, since that's the case, except to say that my "FoSing but not Voting" is just how I play.

In Day 1 primarily, I do not vote until I am confident that the person should be lynched. That's just how I am. If I recall, I was suspected for almost the identical refraining from voting in Neapolitan Mafia, where I flipped town.

I don't feel comfortable voting unless I feel comfortable with them being lynched, which doesn't happen very early on for me. That's really all I can say.


Also, as for all this "distancing Darox," I still don't see how it's likely at all that I am Darox's scumbuddy. I made a substantial case on Darox and I made an entire PBPA against him (which, I thought, was the final push that got him lynched). Call it what you will, but I would be making a

terrible

play to bus so hard all the way to a lynch on Day 1. It seems to me to be an unlikely idea, and that while possible, there are better cases to by on Day 2.


The problem with a lot of the points in Kmd's case are that they are subjective. They are "this is something that might be scummy, if he was doing it for a scummy reason." They are argued from Kmd's POV that he is

sure

I am scum.

This is perfectly understandable, which is why I haven't called Kmd scum for doing so. It's a logical psych term known as

confirmation bias

. Kmd is already sure that I am scum, and so his mind is creating scumtells for him. If he sees something that could swing town or scum, he'll see it as a scumtell rather than a towntell (or null).

[Isacc]

Woops, forgot sly...

@Sly: Why would I claim? Only 2 people are for it. That's hardly a majority.

[Isacc]

Alright, here is what consistently bothers me about some of the cases against me. Simply put: bussing is not a good scumtell. Here is why.

Someone has to join a wagon late. Someone has to be near the end votes of a wagon. Also, many times have people in games joined wagons of people who were near lynch, deciding they were a good enough lynch despite pushing for someone else during other parts of the day.

These things are equally available situations for town and scum. Not often do 7 players lynch someone on D1 where they all were openly and vocally suspicious of that person, and so very often do people (town and assuredly scum too) end up joining wagons in the same fashion as I did last day.

Bussing is not a provable event. It falls into the exact same category of "well, if he is scum..." Yes, if I were a scumbuddy with Darox, I would have been bussing. However, if I am town, then that is simply not true. There is no way of proving either event based purely on reading the vote-counts.

For these reasons, I do not understand how bussing can be used as your main tell. In my understanding, bussing as a term came about as an explanation of why scum would get rid of their partner.

Bussing should be presented as an explanation for why an already scummy person voted a person who flipped scum. Why? Because it's speculative. It should not be used to prove that someone

is

scummy because no one knows whether or not I was actually bussing.


Also, consider this. Apparently, I was wrong, but at the point when I made my final push against Darox, I saw it as the time when we were most likely to switch to a Destructor lynch. I saw a lot of attacks on Destructor, and I felt like Darox was a much better lynch than Destructor.

Then, after Darox's analysis post to attempt to redeem himself, I made my PBPA. If you recall, this was the time when a few people (Kmd, I recall specifically, maybe others? Idk) were falling off the Darox wagon again due to "increased content."

My PBPA and case on Darox was posted as a counter to what

I

worried was reduced pressure on Darox.


Next, consider this as well. Why did I post an entire PBPA on Darox? Why did I make an entire case against him, even though he was nearly guaranteed to be lynched? Has anyone considered the motivation for this? Would Darox's scumbuddy really need to post an entire PBPA on him, rather than just joining the wagon and voicing basic opinions?



Oh look! I found something wonderful!! I knew I remembered being on Darox before the wagon!!! I'll keep all that stuff above, because it's true as well, but I think this is the important stuff.

Important Fact

You people who claim I didn't get on Darox until he was very surely a lynch candidate:

Page 21, Post 513:

Sly had only just been "lynched," Darox was not even voted yet, and Sly asks who the top 3 scum-candidates are for everyone.

Here, I list Darox as one of my highest suspects. Before the wagon...WAY before the wagon.

Page 23, Post 551:

Darox

still

hasn't been voted yet and it is

here

that I decide I'll make a PBPA on Darox. I apologize that it didn't come until much later, but I had no control over that. My suspicions on Darox began

long before the wagon

.


So...who still wants to claim I joined it all near to last? Yeah, so maybe I didn't

vote

Darox as early as you guys did. But I was on his trial from the get-go.

And as my final point, if you still want to came this was an elaborate scheme to bus Darox, and a mixture of distancing and bussing and whatnot, then all I can say is

wow

I am flatterred. That's quite the intelligent scheme. Ironic, considering everyone thinks I am a tard for my gambit...

Please now. Consider motivations, consider consistency. This post and the things I have pointed out should make it clear that the case against me is not very logical, and it also is inconsistent with other beliefs about my playstyle.

[Isacc]

EK: The reason I didn't vote at that time was because I prefered

your

lynch. I still think you are the best lynch candidate, and this post you just made confirms it.

My argument about why bussing is not a good scumtell: you ignored. Why? Well, probably because you still want to pass off "bussing" as the biggest scumtell.

In fact, you've ignored every argument as to why I am not likely to be a buddy with Darox. A little odd, since rather than even countering them, you just stick to your guns that I

must

be buddied to Darox. Funny since I really don't even recall a good case as to why I was Darox's scumbuddy.

Next, you claim I am "sitting here doing nothing?" Says the guy who isn't looking for

any

scum suspect other than me. Push push push, on me, tunnel tunnel, that's all you're doing. At least if you are going to focus so hard on me, please counter my arguments rather than ignoring them completely.

Why so eager to force a claim? Yes, I have the most votes, but no the majority of the town doesn't want me dead. So, all you're really doing is trying to force a claim out of a town player. Not a very pro-town move.

"Isacc: claim or die."

I choose option three. Win. Why? Because you are scum.

[Isacc]

Everyone note that rather than address the issue I bring up, EK avoids it all to continue to push a claim.

Sly: Or, I don't want to claim because that would hurt the town. But hey, that's just me.


However, taking all of that into account, EK may be right and his vote may lynch me, which I cannot afford. I'd rather claim than be lynched.

So here goes.

I am

Tinkerbell

.

I am the town

Weak Doctor

I must protect someone each night. If they are town, I protect. If they are scum, I die.

Plum is most likely town, as I targetted him last night and I did not die. The only exception to this is if I was roleblocked.

Going to continue to claim that I am scum? Sly: does this sound like a fakeclaim to you still?

Now, lynch EK. NOW. *points angrily*

[Isacc]

WHAT? EK, are you seriously claiming my Doc claim is suspect? When is it ever a safe claim for scum to claim Doc? There's such a high chance of a counter-claim, I'd have to be retarded to find Doc a safe claim.

I am honestly laughing at the fact that you are still trying to push for my lynch. Don't justify it by saying Plum will be confirmed, because then there's a guaranteed night kill from now on, making 1 confirmed town = target range.

What worries me:

does anyone else notice this?

Also, EK has

still

deliberately ignored every accusation against her, that I've made.

Why aren't people noticing this?

Also, EK complains that my lack of a claim was stagnating the game, however now that I have claimed, instead of proceeding to find scum suspects, she tunnels again and pushes for a doc lynch.

Someone tell me you see the problem with this!

[Isacc]

How is it scummy that I held off on claiming?

I am the doc. Now that I have claimed, the town will (most likely) have no doc after tonight, meaning bye bye protection from night kills.

Had I not claimed, and instead been able to push against the lynch enough to get the wagon dispersed (which I might have been able to do if EK didn't consistently ignore my arguments). This would have been more pro-town, as then we would still have a doc.

So, therefore, the fact that I had to claim at all hurts the town. Now that the scum know my role, they can kill me. No doc = reduced win chance for town.

This should be an obvious thought process to explain why I did not want to claim if not necessary. In fact, the only reason I claimed still was because EK demanded it with the threat of a hammer

despite ignoring my arguments

.

Sly: You can defend EK and say it's my "anger" towards her, but please explain to me why you think she has not responded to any of my actual arguments?

[Isacc]

Doublepost.

Here's some food for thought.

I have been accused for allegedly "wasting time."

If others were

so

sure that I was the best lynch, they could have hammered me already.

If others were

so

sure that I was the best lynch, they could have countered my arguments and "proven" I was scum to the others, so enough could be swayed for a lynch.

However, my arguments were avoided. No one hammered or nearly hammered me. Maybe I'm not the one people should be accusing of wasting time.

[Isacc]

EK: In response to your points, in order.


This is a bastard mod. You really think it's odd that there'd be a Weak Doc instead of a Doc? I haven't been counterclaimed, and I don't expect to: why? Because I think a Weak Doc is all we have....because it's a

bastard mod.

You are tunnelling: You have yet to look for another suspect since I claimed. Yes, you are responding to me, but why haven't you even mentioned another possible suspect since the claim? You wanted me to get things moving, but

you

in particular are moving nowhere. You are staying on me.


You have been ignoring things. However, here's my specific question now. In post 1094 I made a case explaining why the case against me was illogical. Please, now, explain to me why you did not respond

at all

to the case I made, and instead pushed for a claim.


I did not see my refusal to claim as "stagnating the game." This is total bull. There was a lot of conversation going on, especially since Destructor came into the game

right

after I was told to claim. Why didn't you comment on him, if you were so annoyed by the slow game?

And I repeat, you claim that the town is now looking at others. I agree, with one exception: you. You have slid by since the claim without scumhunting at all.

[Isacc]

You missed my

actual

question this time. Are you avoiding it on purpose?

You

still

aren't looking for scum.

Is anyone else noticing this!?

In response to your argument:

You're missing the essential point. No we don't know anything, but we suspect people for things they

do

. You are suspecting me

because

I "bussed," however you have no clue if I bussed or not.

That is why bussing is not a "scumtell" because

you have no way to know if I am bussing

. You cannot say I am scummy because of bussing, because you have no clue if that's the truth.


Before you say another "everything is speculative," consider this. Look at other common scumtells.

Quickhammering: we

know

if a person hammers. This is a scumtell that can be judged.
Contradictions: you

know

if a person contradicts himself. This can be judged.
Bandwagoning without reason: we

know

if someone jumps on a wagon without posting a case. This can be judged.

However, you don't know if I am bussing, so you can't say "he is scum because he is bussing."

[Isacc]

Sly: Umm...what are you saying I ignored you about? I'm pretty certain I've answered your questions.

And, why are you defending EK?

Oh and, I

am

looking for scum. EK is in NO WAY confirmed. EK is the one who hasn't moved past the claimed doc. Two

very different

situations. Don't try and relate what she's doing to what I am doing, as they are very different.

Sly, your "paraphrasing" is utter crap. I have made arguments on a scum suspect. The person who is "rehashing" the points you brought up, is EK. Kinda funny how you blame me for this stuff.

And I am not tunnelling. Here's how it is.

Caf19 seems protown to me. Destructor seems protown to me. Plum seems protown to me.

Kmd seems like mislead town to me.

Has can't talk.

EK is suspicious, Sly is suspicious, Imaginality is less suspicious. Sly apparently cannot be lynched again, so no point in wasting time on you. Between EK and Imaginality, EK is the better lynch choice.

I am not tunnelling. I have chosen the best lynch. And sly, stop defending EK.

[Isacc]

Here's my thought:

I would like EK and Imaginality and Caf (in fairness, seeing as he seems to be the other prime suspect) to post reasons for why they should be kept alive instead of the other two. Each of you please post what reasons you find yourself to be more pro-town than the others.

[Isacc]

Re to all ppl who have discussed bussing: I see a misunderstanding between the points I have been making, and the ones you have returned. However, proving my point will do nothing to help scumhunting so I will leave it be, and I don't even think I could be fully clear in a forum what I mean.


In other news, Imaginality I think you misunderstood my question. I wanted you to explain why you should not be lynched. Please answer soon? lol.

Next, I still find EK a better lynch than Caf. The arguments for why we shouldn't allow Caf to stay alive seem speculative at best. Not really something to lynch based on.

Not to mention, I see no strong connections to or against Caf. Regardless of what he flips, I think the next day we'll be left with no new information to work with (at least, from the lynch). His lynch does not seem like it will be beneficial to us really.

Also, something I have re-looked at just recently. There were two kills last night. Maybe there is a Vig, but in the off-chance that there are two kills again, I'd rather lynch based on scumminess, not lynch based on policy, and frankly I don't feel Caf has been very scummy.

Also, the claim that Caf has lurked significantly seems like scum trying to make an argument near the end of the day, when people feel too rushed to check back. I remember always feeling like I knew where Caf stood, and feeling like he gave detailed posts. In fact, I think he's been more active than, say, Imaginality today.

I think EK is the best choice.

[Isacc]

Doublepost.

Does anyone find it interesting that Caf is now being accused of bussing and distancing with Darox? Kinda funny that since I am semi-confirmed now, the argument has just jumped onto Caf's back.

In fact, it's almost identical to the cases on me. Lacking major scumtells or scummy behavior other than speculative bussing and/or buddy with Darox. Interesting.

[Isacc]

I am honestly not sure what to make of the claims. EK is correct in saying her claim makes sense with her actions, however I do not know if that really makes her town or not. Caf's claim, on the other hand, is sadly lacking in detail, and yet I still can't see major scumtells on him.

I have to say, I am still for EK lynch. Worst case scenario, we'll get information. Best case, she'll flip scum.

And sorry Sly, but I can't make a point by point case against EK at this point in time. I have loads of homework to do, and deadline is tomorrow, and I am really wasting time even by posting this much. Honestly, a large minority of my read on EK is gut, or else just things that wouldn't make sense if I tried to explain it.

[Isacc]

This is my bah post.

I am very happy. Hehehe.

I sometimes feel like nobody bothers reading my rule set...

-

No

posting in this thread once you're dead. If you want to gripe about dying, please wait until the game ends, y'all may however, post during twilight, dead player included.

[Isacc]

Finally can post.

GG scum. This was the first game where I correctly guessed scum pre-death as town. It's also the only game where I correctly guessed all three scum. Don't take this for bragging, as I often don't actually do well with the actual catching process.

Kmd had me fooled until the role-claim. It was a nice gambit, with the whole tunneling on me, however I didn't buy the cop-roleblocker combo. Too OP to believe there.