Mini 730 - Hard Nights in the City - OVER!

[geraintm]

post 3 - nothing of substance here
post 4 - nothing of substance
post 5 - nothing of substance
post 6 - nothing of substance here
post 7 - a vote here, but i kinda feel it was a stretch, early in game so stretching allowed though
post 8, you don't really contribute much here, you ask a question to another player to get them to respond
post 9 - here you mention the mega-don pairing, and i have looked before this and couldn't work out where. also, more questions to other players.
post 10, you are waiting for someone else to answer a question and thus vote for them.
post 11 - nothing here
post 12 - nothing of game substance here
post 13 - again, you don't really add much yourself, you just comment on someone else's post
post 14, asking a Q to penguin, but some analysis of penguin too
post 15 - nothing
post 16 - nothing, just applying pressure to penguin
posy 17, pressure applied and worked, you back off but leave yourself free to come back to penguin when you feel like it
post 18, again, you don't contribute anything, you instead ask penguin to post more
same with porkens
post 19, partly a good post to canadian, partly a nothing to do with the game post
post 20 -
post 21- still making out unsure of penguin
post 22 - you ask a question to Canadian
post 23 - nothing
post 24 - asking for more contribution from nameless, some analysis of nameless and then wasting time with guessing what to do with penguin as tracker.
post 25 - decent post against nameless
post 26 - asking me to explain myself
post 27 - asking me to explain myself
post 28 - hung up on this 3 person scum team topic.
post 29 - gone back to penguin, still suspicious of him
post 30 - wants juls thoughts and wasting time on directing doc
post 31 - pushing nameless bandwagon, asks juls another question
post 32 - asks porkens to elaborate
post 33 -
post 34 - wants more analysis from porkens
post 35 - wants more from porkens, and some general twilight observations
post 36 - wants penguin to explain himself more
post 37 - "i don't agree" feels like one of the few times he read someone's post and actually responded to it instead of just asking for more explanation.
also asks nameless a weird question about lynching lurkers
says his votes are well explained. i disagree here, i think there are two votes so far, one on mega i thought was a stretch, one on penguin that was better, well explained is going a bit far.
bring sup SK again, still pushing nameless
post 38 - wasting time on doctor again
post 39 - lots of talk about something, and finishes with "what do you feel nameless"
post 40 - wasting time trying to work out day 2 plans
post 41- still on about doctor
post 42 - some good analysis on candian, still on about SK and doctor, lots more with nameless and wants nameless to explain strawman
post 43 - decent post, if still filled with doctor ramblings
post 44 - still doc ramblings/SK musings
admits has tunnel vision
post 45 - hey, lists top 3!
post 46 - decent post
post 47 - no idea except i get that you like girls
post 48 - not sure what this post is about
post 49 - decent post
post 50 - you point out you use wifom to dismiss people's responses, but when you ask so many people so many times their opinions, you can't dismiss them all all the time.
agrees with plum talking setup is not helpful, but all game he has been talking about a SK because you've been in other games with them despite there being no evidence of a SK in this one...?
post 51 - more SK talk
post 52- dismisses my claim and goes into setup guessing, despite saying with plum in post 50 that guessing the setup is bad
post 53 - decent post, asking me lots of questions you want me to respond to
post 54 - more setup/role guessing and asking me to respond to your post
post 55 - more set up guessing
post 56 - more set up guessing and using it to assume one of me or penguin is lying
post 57 - utterly bizarre post, seriously one of the biggest reaches i have seen in any game of mafia to attach suspicion to someone.
post 58 - brings up a self vig post, is this for real? i always assumed the self vig thing was a joke
post 59 - votes nameless and is sticking with it
buddys to mega
post 60 -more set up/role guessing
post 61 - asking plum questions

[geraintm]

sorry, not clear, the above refers to don's posts during this game

[Nameless]

Alright, I'd rather not be the primary bandwagon and Don appears to the other popular acceptable lynch, so.

Unvote: Gerantim
Vote: Don_johnson

At this point, I'd suggest all players shift their votes to myself or Don as the only lynches likely to go through. (I will self hammer rather than have a no lynch, if it comes to that.)

I

don't have a particularly powerful role, so you don't need to worry about that, but DO NOT judge Don by my allignment. Megatheory is talking out of arse in that regard, and if I am lynched I would suggest seriously examining his play over the last few RL days. Canadianbovine also deserves more attention D2 than he's getting now. Force IP to scumhunt, and do the same constantly with Gera. I don't trust either of them, but they need to try harder and interact more to fully judge them. If Porkens doesn't start playing well D2, I would lynch him for it. Do everyone a favour and prepare some anaylsis during the night, there's a lot happening right now to consider, and town needs that extra effeciency D2+.

Alright. Now that's said, let's try to not die.

#359. I've already clarified Don's misinterpretation of strawmanning. Don is obviously defending Mega in this post rather than let Mega answer for himself, but doesn't actually correct my suspicions or do much else than accuse me of strawmanning, again. (First it was wifomic, I take it this is Don's new pet word to throw around.) Asking a townie to self vig is not, under any circumstances, a good idea. It loses the town a member for exactly no benefit, and Don giving Mega "townie brownies" for this (what I had assumed not to be serious) seems either a mindless agreement, or WORSE if Don had actually thought about it first. As for "muddying the waters", my "wildly popular" remark might have tipped you off that the comment was at least partially sarcastic. Otherwise, apply my entire previous explanation.

(The only real concern here is the

previous

times Megatheory has defended or assumed to be town Gera, even from joke comments. Even when Mega claims to suspect Gera, he includes clarifiers such as just the latest post, or that it's too early to make real judgements. Next thing you know he's claiming to have known Gera was a bad lynch, defends Gera's posts, believes his roleclaim without any explanation why or as to how it supposedly fits his playstyle, and generalises other players actions to cover up Gera's lack of contribution. Given possible motives and gut on Mega's playstyle, I would say this is more indicitive of Mega's alignment than Gera's. YMMV regardless, Mega has gone much further for Gera than a townie would have reason to.)

#360. Megatheory says I can't argue Gera's actions are suspicious compared to bad play, but Mega has at no point argued why Gera's actions are bad play rather than suspicious, making this a nulltell at best and hypocritical at worst. (See also my reply in #366.) Mega accuses me of not addressing his arguments and just heaping suspicion on him, but even after quoting my points does not respond to them. Also hypocritical. Mega then states either Don or I must be scum. These kind of absolutes are bad for the town in any case, but he specifically points out I would need evidence to argue against this, after proving none himself. Again, hypocritical.

Also, in #363 Megatheory states I was trying to prevent my own lynch (this is a nulltell because it is no player's best interest to be lynched (Jesters aside, but let's not go there), and notably I had no votes or obviously high level of suspicion at the time) or Don's (despite having listed Don has an acceptable lynch, and my only mention of Don in the last post at the time raising another suspicion against him). I've mentioned this before, but am repeating now as a reminder that Megatheory has made no attempt to justify this statement when questioned.

#368. IP joins my bandwagon with no further explanation than I'm "starting to read scummy". Right. IP's claimed previous suspicions of me make for light reading: There was one FoS soley for not giving specific examples of flaws in his Question Time Analysis. I did then give examples, and recieved no response to them. Some time later he gives a few reasons in #228, none elaborated, which in my next post I answered as much as I could without particular examples to refute. Later, IP agrees with Don's "vibes" argument, but gives no explanation or examples. Basically, IP has made no case to answer.

#369. canadianbovine Joins The Brawl! The only reasons he gives for voting me are that I do not provide quotes for my arguments. In first case (my FoS regarding his suggestion to confirm Gera), it was obvious which post I was referring to, and Bovine quotes it himself in his defence. (As for the confirmation itself: Scum might be able to fake a vig kill, but since that would give control of scum NK to the town, it's a good thing. Relying on tracking is bad for all the reasons noone could actually agree on a plan for IP.) In the second case, it was regarding my noting connections. I've elaborated somewhat on that earlier in this post now that I'm apparently a lynch candidate but the reasons I didn't quote everything then are the same that I didn't quote everything last time I mentioned possible connections. (See: #203) Note also that (lampshade hanging aside) the way I posted connections then was no different to what I did the first time, but the first time Bovine made no comment other than he didn't quite understand it. As a whole, bovine is similar to IP in giving very little explanation for voting me.

#370, and Megatheory is back for another attempt. (I'm going to need to paragraph this ...)

Suspicion number one, I used rhetorical questions. About the only reason I had for using them was that I felt like using that particular arguing method at the time, but the fact Mega is arguing against a method still clearly conveying my point amounts to meaningless semantics.

Number two, I accused Mega of considering voting/lynching part of discussion. Mega even admits that I answered this, but to repeat it again: it is entirely possible to discus something, even strongly scumhunt, without voting. The reason I found Mega's statement suspicious was that by implying voting of one party was inevitable from discussion, Mega was implicitly discouraging generating discussion. (Yes, this was a weak suspicion, but it was very early in the game.) Mega even directly responded with a clarification of his intent in #63. This isn't an unanswered question, this was a concluded exchange in the early game that Mega only brings up now in an attempt to justify his vote.

Three, I distorted Don's case against Mega. I didn't actually comment on any point in the case TO distort, to start with. My only comments were that I believed Don's case to be exaggerated given it came from a discussion on game theory (I stand by that), and that it's bad to state one of two players must be scum (I admit I misread Don's post at the time, and kind of quietly moved on when I was corrected). Note also that Mega says Don had good points against Mega, which makes you wonder why Mega then

never responded to it himself

rather than expecting me to have done so at the time.

Four, I implied there are probably scum on IP's wagon but was dubious of Mega when he agreed with me. This is a gimme; I said there were

probably

scum on the wagon, whereas Mega said there

were

scum on the wagon, and in case it wasn't obvious already, using absolutes is suspicious. (This wasn't a case of mistaken semantics either, Mega's followup to Don indicated he did mean it.)

Five, I accuse Don of jumping on the IP wagon when Don was the first to vote IP after the Question Time Analysis. There still was a small bandwagon on IP at the time though, so the statement is literally justified if a poor choice of words, but my accusation wasn't THAT Don joined the wagon, it was WHY Don joined the wagon that I disagreed with (Mega just didn't bold that part). And this was among a list of other suspicions. Oh, and Mega blatantly argues semantics by suspecting me for the word "disagree" rather than summarising with a harsher word. I'm sorry, I'll swear next time. (Mega also says I'm using a "distancing tactic", but since he doesn't explain this I can't defend against it.)

Okay, I'm done, enjoy the wall of text.

[Plum]

Sorry, all, I had a long post detailing my suspicions of DonJ but unfortnately I was kicked off the computer last night before I could finish and post it and the computer was shut dow. From the top, now:

My suspicions of DonJ, a synopsis:

1. Suspecting Nameless because of his scumbuddy speculation (fine) but asking him to elaborate, saying that 'without explaining yourself you leave the players in question with no possible way of defending themselves from what may eventually turn into an angry mob'. You continue to press this point and ask for elaboration (that's anti-town) long, long after the point had been well-done; you seemed to need to burn it to charcoal.

2. Directing the Doc, the Juls arguments and the aftermath:

plum: if we don't lynch scum today, you don't want to have ip protected so we may benefit from their results? you just want the doctor to decide? even if the doctor is geraintm who(as determining by their "random lynching" comment) may simply apply their power randomly so as to have no effect on town strategy? yes, i am speculating, but you, like juls and nameless, have not explained how this hurts town.

You keep saying 'no, I'm not dircting the hypothetical Doc; heaven forbid!' At the same time you say 'The Doc should strongly take into account my strategy here'. You also, now that I look at it, say something pretty rediculous about Geraintm. Huh? You continue to accuse Juls of making scummy 'veiled threats' after you continue to try to suggest a course of action for the Doc (which, yes,

is

anti-town, and by this point, after that fact has been made clear, your continued persistance in trying to do so

is

scummy). You say that

'"veiled threats" refers to the obsession players have with using their vote in a threatening manner. "you better knock it off or i'll vote you." it seems more of a scum tactic.

Or a tactic to shut up a player doing something detrimental to the town, or making it clear that by continuing on the path of doing something detrimental to the town a vote will have been earned due to scumminess?

To recap a post of Juls' with only what I find legitimately scummy:

2) being distracting. This is the third "fight" that you have started and have difficulty ending. you and MT had the theory discussion, you had your button/flyer campaign for nameless with few real bites, and now with me, you wouldn't end the doctor discussion despite at least 4 people suggesting it is a bad idea.

Yes, yes, this exactly.

3) you were leading the doctor despite being asked to stop.

That there

4) you targetting me in an OMGUS kind of way

Yes, your suspicions of Juls did reek of OMGUS

Other things of note: You

do

seem to use the 'loner vibe' you have on Nameless as a full-fledged part of your case .

This took a while, but DonJ did seem to very much want a response. I gave it to you. Later I might do some analysis of the Nameless/Mega arguments; but after the obscenely obvious logical fallacies, etc. from last night, my feelings on Mega are currently none too good.

IP IS STILL ACTING REDICULOUS; JOY.

[Juls]

Can someone please tell me why we are so inclined to NOT believe geraintm but willing to believe IP. I think everyone agrees that IP has been beyond useless, very scummy, and he didn't respond to my request that he respond by yesterday or I would push his lynch. And his response was a couple of one liners. If we weren't so damn close to deadline and didn't already have a divided group, I would be pushing for your lynch. And I might just be tomorrow if I am still here.

Next, I am not voting Nameless on D1. I may be clouded by my extreme suspicion of don_johnson but I just see Nameless as more sarcastic than anything and he is muddying the water with his overanalysis or enjoyment of seeing his own posts. If don is lynched and turns up town I will definately take a more thorough look at Nameless. Who knows, he may be playing me like a fiddle.

@Geraintm

, you posted a summary of don_johnson's posts. Was that for everyone's benefit or do you intend to vote him?

Current vote counts for don and namless are:
Nameless (4): don_johnson, Megatheory, insanepenguin02, canadianbovine
Don_johnson (3): Juls, Plum, Nameless

@Porkens - are you going to leave your vote on geraintm or vote for nameless or don?

@Danchaofan - are you going to leave you vote on geraintm or vote for nameless or don?

@geraintm - are you going to vote for anyone?

@Atronach - are you going to vote for anyone?

@ChaosOmega - are you alive? are you there? Did you pick up your prod?

Mod: can you elaborate?

So based on the above it looks like there are 4 active players left to vote/change their vote to get a lynch (and an inactive player). All 4 would need to vote for Don or 2 of 4 would need to vote for nameless (since he said he would self hammer).

EVERYONE: The deadline is tomorrow!

[geraintm]

juls, don asked me to go through his posts cause he wanted evidence when i accused him of beiing wishy-washy, so i did.
i think the only reason people are giving me such a hard time is i claimed an odd role, one half of which follows on from the previous claim.
i will vote for someone before the day ends. jut frustrating the day has such a fixed deadline, i would be voting choas on principle otherwise. he hasnt posted in over a week anywhere on this site.

mod can you prod/replace chaos please

[Porkens]

Shot and Beheaded look like our two kill flavors. Ger, without quoting, can you share any clues you might have as to your kill flavor?

what purpose does this achieve? i haven't killed anyone yet.

Should I read this as an answer of "No"? I think it's important...

why do you think i am lying? has there been anything about my claim that strikes you as feeling untrue? have i not been forthcoming and given as much info as possible? what could i have done with my role to make you believe me more???

My first instinct tells me that there aren't two trackers in the game, and your JOAT with only two abilities also doesn't make sense. You're defense in this long post gives me a bad feeling in my tummy.

There's one more thing, you said this:

plum, i brought up the night zero kills because there had been discussion of possible sk because of the two kills, i wanted to kill that discussion till there is some evidence. i didn't mean to sidetrack talk today now with that, i was trying to kill talk on a pointless topic of the existence of a SK.

You're pretty vehement about not talking about and SK, while to me the night 0 looks awfully like a big "HAY GUYS" from our mod.

My vote stays on the SK.

[Porkens]

OH, I missed a page, my bad. I'll switch my vote after I do another read.

but hey, if you want to all hang Ger, I think that'd be good.

[Juls]

Can I just remind you guys we have got to L-1 twice and had two claims. I would rather votes come sooner rather than later because if some other curve ball comes we need time to adjust. I don't mind a hammer coming on the last day (tomorrow) but I would like to see us have a direction today.

[geraintm]

what purpose does this achieve? i haven't killed anyone yet.

Should I read this as an answer of "No"? I think it's important...

i have no idea about any flavour of my kill, i am just distracted by shiny things is about as much as i have

My first instinct tells me that there aren't two trackers in the game, and your JOAT with only two abilities also doesn't make sense. You're defense in this long post gives me a bad feeling in my tummy.

there are only 12 players, i reckon this game will last about 4 days. giving me any more than 2 abilities means i have an ability every night and my choices are then just in which order i use them. giving me two means i might run out, meaning i might not want to use them straight off giving me a more interesting game choices.

There's one more thing, you said this:

plum, i brought up the night zero kills because there had been discussion of possible sk because of the two kills, i wanted to kill that discussion till there is some evidence. i didn't mean to sidetrack talk today now with that, i was trying to kill talk on a pointless topic of the existence of a SK.

You're pretty vehement about not talking about and SK, while to me the night 0 looks awfully like a big "HAY GUYS" from our mod.

My vote stays on the SK.

i feel day onesuch things as discussing SK (generated pretty much by one player), directing the doc (same player), trying to plan out 3 or 4 days of what penguin should do and so on are pretty much a waste of time. not just SK i have said i thought was a waste. night zero, all i got from that night was mod making sure there were no cops in the game and we knew that, not that there was a SK in our midst

your last line, you have me pegged as SK then?

[geraintm]

Can I just remind you guys we have got to L-1 twice and had two claims. I would rather votes come sooner rather than later because if some other curve ball comes we need time to adjust. I don't mind a hammer coming on the last day (tomorrow) but I would like to see us have a direction today.

the players who might feel the need to claim should already know who they are, and nameless has claimed non-powerful role already

[don_johnson]

geraintm: post 375 is unacceptable and insulting. i have typed out over 60 posts that span nearly three pages of this thread. that acounts for just under 20 % of the material in this game. you have reduced my contribution to 61 incomplete sentences with no regard for the actual substance of my posts. i require an apology. you said you were bad at scumhunting. this is proof. i will not respond.

as to self viging: noone is saying that it is what should be done. but it is a viable pro town option. how it works with a "one shot" vig could be difficult, but typically if a vig's alignment is in question and the situation arises where a mislynch can cost town the game, it is a good strategy for a player to self vig, thereby confirming their alignment to town and not causing a mislynch. players are only confirmed by their deaths. for us to confirm ip to be town we will either have to mislynch or count on mafia killing him. you have the option of suicide. that is all.

[geraintm]

Don,
i wrote this about you

don - Mon Jan 12, 2009 2:01 am his post here where he brings up the "more than one player has speculated at the megatheory/don_johnson scum pairing"
i never saw this.
up to this point, i found his posts to be pretty wishy washy, full of quantity but very little quality. i don't find his posts helpful in trying to find scum at all. too often responding to others comments, pressuring them to talk more or him directly asking questions, the whole doc thing, just a waste of time...same with any mention of SK

you objected to this, you asked for evidence of why i thought this about you and why i thought you were a bad scum hunter.
i then went through all your posts and gave brief summaries of them (the 61 incomplete sentences, which they were, but it was easier writing "nothing of substance" rather then "Whilst rereading this old post of Don's, i did not find much of it of importance." you said i made no regard for the actual substance of your posts, what did you want me to do, quote every single one of your posts and then write under it, i didn't find anything interesting here, nothing that significantly advanced the towns cause? i read them all, i read the substance of all your posts).
i wasn't going to do detailed, too much there, too little time.
this long list was not scum hunting, it was my attempt to show why i thought your posts were often wishy-washy and that you wasted too much time talking about topics i felt were not really relevant.

but, i stand by what i wrote about your posts. i feel that many of them were not helpful in finding scum, many of them are you asking other players to respond to your points and i don't find that style of play a good one. i feel that style of play allows a player to appear in the game but actually is forcing other players to talk a lot and give others more words to twist if needed. seriously, there is no apology coming from me for my post, i feel it was what was asked for when you asked for evidence of your posts being wishy-washy and focussed on poor topics. i am sorry you are so offended by my post, but i have no regret at all with what i wrote.
But, i seriously hope your reaction to my post does not derail the game.

so MT doesn't mind lynching nameless, don, or ger? I'm not reading who CB or porkens (still) would like to lynch.

pay attention much? Mt specifically stated he believes geraintm and offered a viable solution for ger to confirm himself later in the game(self vig). come on man, we're close to deadline, the least you can do is RTFT.

as to self viging: noone is saying that it is what should be done. but it is a viable pro town option. how it works with a "one shot" vig could be difficult, but typically if a vig's alignment is in question and the situation arises where a mislynch can cost town the game, it is a good strategy for a player to self vig, thereby confirming their alignment to town and not causing a mislynch. players are only confirmed by their deaths. for us to confirm ip to be town we will either have to mislynch or count on mafia killing him. you have the option of suicide. that is all.

sorry. one person was saying that is what should be done. it was you, and you follow up when you said no one said that should be done by then saying you think it is a good idea.
with 12 players, i cannot see it being good thinking at all to kill myself when the info which it would confirm - one track - isn't worth the loss to the town of a townie.

[don_johnson]

#359. I've already clarified Don's misinterpretation of strawmanning. Don is obviously defending Mega in this post rather than let Mega answer for himself, but doesn't actually correct my suspicions or do much else than accuse me of strawmanning, again. (First it was wifomic, I take it this is Don's new pet word to throw around.)

Asking a townie to self vig is not, under any circumstances, a good idea.

It loses the town a member for exactly no benefit, and Don giving Mega "townie brownies" for this (what I had assumed not to be serious) seems either a mindless agreement, or WORSE if Don had actually thought about it first.

As for "muddying the waters", my "wildly popular" remark might have tipped you off that the comment was at least partially sarcastic.

Otherwise, apply my entire previous explanation.

first: the funniest thing about this is that you refer to geraintm as a "townie". no one here is a confirmed townie. saying this is a scumtell. the reason behind self viging, which by the way is an approved protown strategy, is to confirm someones alignment without a mislynch. you apparently already know geraintm's alignment. how could that be?

second: you had been told before that your scum buddy assertions and connections were not pro town. we are no longer in the rvs. why on earth do you think it acceptable to joke about such matters at this point, so close to deadline?

(The only real concern here is the

previous

times Megatheory has defended or assumed to be town Gera, even from joke comments. Even when Mega claims to suspect Gera, he includes clarifiers such as just the latest post, or that it's too early to make real judgements. Next thing you know he's claiming to have known Gera was a bad lynch, defends Gera's posts, believes his roleclaim without any explanation why or as to how it supposedly fits his playstyle, and generalises other players actions to cover up Gera's lack of contribution. Given possible motives and gut on Mega's playstyle,

I would say this is more indicitive of Mega's alignment than Gera's. YMMV regardless, Mega has gone much further for Gera than a townie would have reason to.)

if gera is a townie, like you stated above, shouldn't mega be going out of his way to defend him? you are contradicting yourself here. in your fist attack in this post you have gera as confirmed townie and suggest that anyone suggesting a self vig on a townie is "not a good idea under any circumstances." now, for purposes of painting mega scummy, gera's alignment is in question. interesting.

(#360. Megatheory says I can't argue Gera's actions are suspicious compared to bad play, but Mega has at no point argued why Gera's actions are bad play rather than suspicious, making this a nulltell at best and hypocritical at worst. (See also my reply in #366.) Mega accuses me of not addressing his arguments and just heaping suspicion on him, but even after quoting my points does not respond to them. Also hypocritical. Mega then states either Don or I must be scum. These kind of absolutes are bad for the town in any case, but he specifically points out I would need evidence to argue against this, after proving none himself. Again, hypocritical.

intersting. i read post 360 and will quote it in entirety:

so MT doesn't mind lynching nameless, don, or ger? I'm not reading who CB or porkens (still) would like to lynch.

I do NOT want to lynch ger. If you would pay attention, you would notice most of my last post is devoted to arguing

against

his lynch.

don or Nameless should be lynched today.

Note that Megatheory attempts to handwave the different cases against three players under the same category of "bad D1 play". This is stupid because bad play is an incredibly general term that pretty much every scummy action falls under, and because Mega tries to use this as a reason to attack several players for, god forbid, pushing a single player for lynching. Mega then states that one of Don or I must be scum (BAD, townies get into arguments too, you know). Mega also obviously defends Gera.

HoS: Megatheory

and this man needs to be examined closely D2.

I noticed you can't argue that ger's actions are truly suspicious as opposed to bad play. The difference is huge because town and scum are equally likely to play badly. Your vote is still on him. Do you really want to lynch someone when you can't argue that they are suspicious? Maybe you can, but instead of addressing my arguments and understand what I'm saying, you're taking the opportunity to shovel dirt on me while masking the core issues I've brought up.

I defended ger because I believe his role claim. His play backs it up. Why bother arguing that it doesn't when you can just heap suspicion on me?

You and don have had much more than a simple argument. don thinks you are scum, and went so far as to campaign for your lynch. Either he is scum and dropped a case that he saw wasn't working, or he is town and caught a scum, but became discouraged too soon. Unless you can suggest an alternative scenario

with evidence

, then the best play is to lynch one of you.

I'm still rereading, but I already know what we should do.

Vote Nameless

nowhere in post 360 does megatheory say :

Mega then states either Don or I must be scum.

NOWHERE.

#368. IP joins my bandwagon with no further explanation than I'm "starting to read scummy". Right. IP's claimed previous suspicions of me make for light reading: There was one FoS soley for not giving specific examples of flaws in his Question Time Analysis. I did then give examples, and recieved no response to them. Some time later he gives a few reasons in #228, none elaborated, which in my next post I answered as much as I could without particular examples to refute. Later, IP agrees with Don's "vibes" argument, but gives no explanation or examples. Basically, IP has made no case to answer.

true. this will not bode well for ip in the future so consider this noted.

#369. canadianbovine Joins The Brawl! The only reasons he gives for voting me are that I do not provide quotes for my arguments. In first case (my FoS regarding his suggestion to confirm Gera), it was obvious which post I was referring to, and Bovine quotes it himself in his defence. (As for the confirmation itself: Scum might be able to fake a vig kill, but since that would give control of scum NK to the town, it's a good thing. Relying on tracking is bad for all the reasons noone could actually agree on a plan for IP.) In the second case, it was regarding my noting connections. I've elaborated somewhat on that earlier in this post now that I'm apparently a lynch candidate but the reasons I didn't quote everything then are the same that I didn't quote everything last time I mentioned possible connections. (See: #203) Note also that (lampshade hanging aside) the way I posted connections then was no different to what I did the first time, but the first time Bovine made no comment other than he didn't quite understand it. As a whole, bovine is similar to IP in giving very little explanation for voting me.

it was already well publicized that scum pairing speculation without reasoning was anti town. so he called you out on it when you did it AGAIN. also, fellow players, please look back at the thread. the matter of bovines suggestion of confirming ger with his tracker ability was just that: a suggestion. it is pro town to make suggestions. read cb's post, there is no malicious intent.

#370, and Megatheory is back for another attempt. (I'm going to need to paragraph this ...)

Suspicion number one, I used rhetorical questions. About the only reason I had for using them was that I felt like using that particular arguing method at the time, but the fact Mega is arguing against a method still clearly conveying my point amounts to meaningless semantics.

this is your opinion. you did not prove your point. you are not proving it now.

Number two, I accused Mega of considering voting/lynching part of discussion. Mega even admits that I answered this, but to repeat it again: it is entirely possible to discus something, even strongly scumhunt, without voting.

but you are suspicious of me for not voting geraintm? interesting.

The reason I found Mega's statement suspicious was that by implying voting of one party was inevitable from discussion, Mega was implicitly discouraging generating discussion. (Yes, this was a weak suspicion, but it was very early in the game.) Mega even directly responded with a clarification of his intent in #63. This isn't an unanswered question, this was a concluded exchange in the early game that Mega only brings up now in an attempt to justify his vote.

are you sure your post numbers are right? that's not what 63 says.

Three, I distorted Don's case against Mega. I didn't actually comment on any point in the case TO distort, to start with.

My only comments were that I believed Don's case to be exaggerated given it came from a discussion on game theory (I stand by that), and that it's bad to state one of two players must be scum

(I admit I misread Don's post at the time, and kind of quietly moved on when I was corrected). Note also that Mega says Don had good points against Mega, which makes you wonder why Mega then

never responded to it himself

rather than expecting me to have done so at the time.

Four, I implied there are probably scum on IP's wagon but was dubious of Mega when he agreed with me.

This is a gimme; I said there were

probably

scum on the wagon, whereas Mega said there

were

scum on the wagon, and in case it wasn't obvious already, using absolutes is suspicious.

(This wasn't a case of mistaken semantics either, Mega's followup to Don indicated he did mean it.)

good points. the first one was never said.

it's bad to state one of two players must be scum

you strawmanned it out of mega's posts. if it is somewhere it is not in the posts you are referring to so i suggest you go and find it. second bold remark: absolutes like the one you used to start this post?

Five, I accuse Don of jumping on the IP wagon when Don was the first to vote IP after the Question Time Analysis. There still was a small bandwagon on IP at the time though, so the statement is literally justified if a poor choice of words, but my accusation wasn't THAT Don joined the wagon, it was WHY Don joined the wagon that I disagreed with (Mega just didn't bold that part). And this was among a list of other suspicions. Oh, and Mega blatantly argues semantics by suspecting me for the word "disagree" rather than summarising with a harsher word. I'm sorry, I'll swear next time. (Mega also says I'm using a "distancing tactic", but since he doesn't explain this I can't defend against it.)

Okay, I'm done, enjoy the wall of text.

i am happy to take responsibility for pushing ip hard. i found his post extremely scummy and am not going to revisit it. reread the thread. i explained myself in full. others agreed. what made me stand out?

[don_johnson]

Don,
i wrote this about you

don - Mon Jan 12, 2009 2:01 am his post here where he brings up the "more than one player has speculated at the megatheory/don_johnson scum pairing"
i never saw this.
up to this point, i found his posts to be pretty wishy washy, full of quantity but very little quality. i don't find his posts helpful in trying to find scum at all. too often responding to others comments, pressuring them to talk more or him directly asking questions, the whole doc thing, just a waste of time...same with any mention of SK

you objected to this, you asked for evidence of why i thought this about you and why i thought you were a bad scum hunter.
i then went through all your posts and gave brief summaries of them (the 61 incomplete sentences, which they were, but it was easier writing "nothing of substance" rather then "Whilst rereading this old post of Don's, i did not find much of it of importance." you said i made no regard for the actual substance of your posts, what did you want me to do, quote every single one of your posts and then write under it, i didn't find anything interesting here, nothing that significantly advanced the towns cause? i read them all, i read the substance of all your posts).
i wasn't going to do detailed, too much there, too little time.
this long list was not scum hunting, it was my attempt to show why i thought your posts were often wishy-washy and that you wasted too much time talking about topics i felt were not really relevant.

you use the word wishy washy. please prove this. you are making statements without evidence. no you do not have to quote my entire posts. but wishy washy should be easy to show. that's what i am asking of you. evidence. i can easily discount your play as unintelligent. but i don't.

but, i stand by what i wrote about your posts. i feel that many of them were not helpful in finding scum, many of them are you asking other players to respond to your points and i don't find that style of play a good one. i feel that style of play allows a player to appear in the game but actually is forcing other players to talk a lot and give others more words to twist if needed. seriously, there is no apology coming from me for my post, i feel it was what was asked for when you asked for evidence of your posts being wishy-washy and focussed on poor topics. i am sorry you are so offended by my post, but i have no regret at all with what i wrote.

again. prove this statement. also, how is passionately pushing two wagons on day 1 wishy washy? i've changed my mind on a couple of things, but i have always laid out clear reasons. if you think i'm scum, vig me. don't lead town to a mislynch. nameless is obvious scum.

so MT doesn't mind lynching nameless, don, or ger? I'm not reading who CB or porkens (still) would like to lynch.

pay attention much? Mt specifically stated he believes geraintm and offered a viable solution for ger to confirm himself later in the game(self vig). come on man, we're close to deadline, the least you can do is RTFT.

as to self viging: noone is saying that it is what should be done. but it is a viable pro town option. how it works with a "one shot" vig could be difficult, but typically if a vig's alignment is in question and the situation arises where a mislynch can cost town the game, it is a good strategy for a player to self vig, thereby confirming their alignment to town and not causing a mislynch. players are only confirmed by their deaths. for us to confirm ip to be town we will either have to mislynch or count on mafia killing him. you have the option of suicide. that is all.

sorry. one person was saying that is what should be done. it was you, and you follow up when you said no one said that should be done by then saying you think it is a good idea.

Mt specifically stated he believes geraintm and offered a viable solution for ger to confirm himself later in the game(self vig). [/quote]

really? i said "it should be done"? looks to me like i said

Mt specifically stated he believes geraintm and offered a viable solution for ger to confirm himself later in the game(self vig).

this was in response to someone else not paying attention. even taken out of context it is not saying "it should be done". it is saying that another player has offered a viable solution. do you know what viable means? it certainly doesn't mean written in stone?

off topic(but not really): is english a second language for you?

with 12 players, i cannot see it being good thinking at all to kill myself when the info which it would confirm - one track - isn't worth the loss to the town of a townie

there are situations where it can be beneficial. not to you, but to town. seriously, i am not trying to trick you. it is an approved pro town strategy in certain circumstances. i would not expect nor ask you to self vig night 1. also, i did point out the issue of you being a "one shot" vig. a regular vig can use their ability to try and tag a few scum before they self vig. with you, it proves more difficult, but if it came down to it late game a self vig may prove more useful to town than having you around to possibly mislynch. your claim clears you for day 1, but later on your alignment may fall under serious scrutiny.

[Danchaofan]

Since geraintm is on my list, I will support this lynch.

Unvote. Vote geraintm

NOTE: This puts geraintm at L-1. Please don't hammer until he has a chance to defend/claim.

L-2 actually... This is leading to confusion, but IMO an honest mistake.

I feel this is very important. Plum was pinging my scumdar all last night. I'll try to examine these issues more closely in my reread.

I'm interested since I have still yet to read up on my "town-vibe" people

Atronach - i forgot he was in the game for a long time, he seemed under the radar to me
then he pushed an attack on me, i am not sure if he really believes all he has written. the things he has one me, i would never consider them scummy on someone else

Although, you still haven't acknowledged the fact that you don't seem to have scum hunted much.

dan - "IP: any flavour on tracker? " this one line i noted and liked. makes me think he got some flavour in his role and was hoping penguin would have something similar. this might be something tiny to go on, but i buy dan as town

This feels like someone trying to out a power role >.< I never said I had flavor in my role. I ONLY specifically mentioned in the apocalyptic flavor of the OP.

penguin -if scum, then picked a good role to claim.

This comment just feels odd...

juls - seems ok, done decent posting, gotten really sidetracked with the tracker thing.

Do you think discussing what we should do with our tracker is beneficial?

vote: Geraintm

This is nothing but a bandwagon jump. If I understand correctly, you are voting ger because he isn't acknowledging his poor scumhuing. He hasn't before, why would he now? This is bad investigation. You're hung up on this one issue and aren't looking at the rest of what ger has posted in any kind of serious way. I can't tell if this is a scum move or bad town play.

No, I was suspicious of Gera prior to that post, my vote was latent, we were close to deadline. I have looked at Ger's post. I felt he was probing for town power roles and he is only now dismissing the whole tracker conversation.

meta answer: I'm pretty sure the JOAT role can have whichever powers the mod chooses..

side note: If IP and Ger are both telling the truth, and there are in fact two trackers...is it possible there could be 2 vigs?

Outing power roles a bit much?

I don't believe Gera. Partially because of the redundancy and partially because 1 tracker result is easy enough to fake and a SK or mafia could easily sacrifice 1 nk. I also don't trust Gera to follow the tracker discussion that he decided was worthless to realize that IP is under serious consideration for lynch even if he just hits one tracker result wrong, and IP isn't a 1-shot tracker.

why don't you believe me?
if i had made my claim first, without penguin's claim of tracker, would it have been more believable?
what would you do if i come up dead with the exact role i have described?

I find the tracker more believable then your joat. I find your joat not believable regardless of whether there is a tracker revealed. You don't need to wait to come up dead, I know that I am fallible, I know it is bad to outguess the mod, but I still don't believe you.

[Danchaofan]

o wtf? I was still looking at nameless's 377?

[Danchaofan]

#359. I've already clarified Don's misinterpretation of strawmanning. Don is obviously defending Mega in this post rather than let Mega answer for himself, but doesn't actually correct my suspicions or do much else than accuse me of strawmanning, again. (First it was wifomic, I take it this is Don's new pet word to throw around.)

Asking a townie to self vig is not, under any circumstances, a good idea.

It loses the town a member for exactly no benefit, and Don giving Mega "townie brownies" for this (what I had assumed not to be serious) seems either a mindless agreement, or WORSE if Don had actually thought about it first.

As for "muddying the waters", my "wildly popular" remark might have tipped you off that the comment was at least partially sarcastic.

Otherwise, apply my entire previous explanation.

first: the funniest thing about this is that you refer to geraintm as a "townie". no one here is a confirmed townie. saying this is a scumtell. the reason behind self viging, which by the way is an approved protown strategy, is to confirm someones alignment without a mislynch. you apparently already know geraintm's alignment. how could that be?

scanning simply because I have to go sleep now, but... a vig isn't town?

"Either he is scum and dropped a case that he saw wasn't working, or he is town and caught a scum, but became discouraged too soon."-MT 360


writing shameless doesn't exactly get you townie points either. I haven't read up that much on nameless but I'm not liking don enough to

unvote, vote: don

[Plum]

nowhere in post 360 does megatheory say :

Mega then states either Don or I must be scum.

NOWHERE.

Either he is scum and dropped a case that he saw wasn't working, or he is town and caught a scum, but became discouraged too soon.

Unless you can suggest an alternative scenario with evidence, then

the best play is to lynch one of you

.

He made it quite clear that he did not believe an 'alternative scenario' to one of you being town is possible. Is that a mismanaged Chainsaw Defense or do I have my terms wrong here?

[Atronach]

i require an apology.

No, you don't. Questioning you and your actions in this game is kind of the point of this game. Nowhere in his posts do I see him saying anything rude or offensive to you.

you said you were bad at scumhunting. this is proof. i will not respond.

It's not proof, because we don't know that you're town. And oh how I wish it was true that you would not respond. You actually have some worthwhile points in those posts- I do think that Gera using his tracking skill first and vigging himself is a workable option, though I'm not sure I'm advocating such a strategy. But that type of useful discussion is buried under mounds of insults and game derailing theatrics (and for the record: I think if you have to resort to childish namechanging tactics in your arguments, then your arguments cant have been very strong to begin with).
Your argument that Nameless saying "Asking a townie to self vig is not, under any circumstances, a good idea" is a scumtell is flat out wrong. Hes speaking of a hypothetical situation, for one. For two, in that hypothetical situation if someone CAN 'self vig' then it stands to reason that they ARE a vigilante. Thus, town.
@Juls- I already said who I'd be willing to vote for. I'm not sure I'm as suspicious of Don so much as exasperated by him- I'm not going to vote him just for that. I'm reading and will vote before deadline.

[SpyreX]

The Gerantim is hard to come up with something witty in my votecount votecount:

Gerantim (1): Porkens
Don_johnson (4): Juls, Plum, Nameless, Danchaofan
Nameless (4): don_johnson, megatheory, insanepenguin02, canadianbovine
Insanepenguin02 (1): ChaosOmega

With 12 alive, it takes 7 to get the powerup and win the game!

Deadline is approaching. Tick, Tock Clarice.

Notes: ChaosOmega has NOT picked up his prod. Due to my rules, he will not be modkilled tonight (as he did post today). However, he will be modkilled the following night and blacklisted from all my games if he does not respond before then.

[Porkens]

Why don't we lynch CO?

[don_johnson]

scanning simply because I have to go sleep now, but... a vig isn't town?

"Either he is scum and dropped a case that he saw wasn't working, or he is town and caught a scum, but became discouraged too soon."-MT 360


writing shameless doesn't exactly get you townie points either. I haven't read up that much on nameless but I'm not liking don enough to

unvote, vote: don

no. a claimed vig is not a "confirmed" town. nameless paints gera's alignment as definitely town in order to make one point, and then paints gera's alignment as if its in question in the very next paragraph in order to smear mega.

please, i don't care if you like me, but your sabotaging town if you don't pay attention. your reason as a vote is probably the absolute worst that i have heard. read and then vote, not the other way around.

plum:

plum, plum, plum.

nowhere in post 360 does megatheory say :

Mega then states either Don or I must be scum.

NOWHERE.

Megatheory, post #360 wrote:
Either he is scum and dropped a case that he saw wasn't working, or he is town and caught a scum, but became discouraged too soon. Unless you can suggest an alternative scenario with evidence, then the best play is to lynch one of you.

He made it quite clear that he did not believe an 'alternative scenario' to one of you being town is possible. Is that a mismanaged Chainsaw Defense or do I have my terms wrong here?

you are putting words in his mouth.


considering i wrote this:

plum: if we don't lynch scum today, you don't want to have ip protected so we may benefit from their results? you just want the doctor to decide? even if the doctor is geraintm who(as determining by their "random lynching" comment) may simply apply their power randomly so as to have no effect on town strategy? yes, i am speculating, but you, like juls and nameless, have not explained how this hurts town.

and you say i wrote this:

You keep saying 'no, I'm not dircting the hypothetical Doc; heaven forbid!' At the same time you say 'The Doc should strongly take into account my strategy here'.

then yes. you are absolutely one hundred percent wrong. you are skewing my statements just like you are now skewing his. nowhere did i say that the doc should strongly take my advice. NO FUCKING WHERE. your persistent misrepresentation of my words has been noted. i suggest you and others put their personal feelings aside and reread this thread. sorry im' an a$$hole, but that doesn't make me scum, and no matter how players like yourself and nameless try to spin my words, you can't remove my original statements from the thread. your interpretation of my words is simply untrue. now you are doing it to mega.

He made it quite clear that he did not believe an 'alternative scenario' to one of you being town is possible.

may be what you interpreted from what he said, but it is not what he actually said.

He made it quite clear that he did not believe an 'alternative scenario' to one of you being town is possible.

does not equal

Either he is scum and dropped a case that he saw wasn't working, or he is town and caught a scum, but became discouraged too soon. Unless you can suggest an alternative scenario with evidence, then the best play is to lynch one of you.

it simply doesn't. he is willing to hear evidence but is voting what he believes. the only answer i can see as to why you would continue to skew peoples thoughts and posts is if you are scum as well. it wouldn't surprise me one bit.

if you are town, start reading what people are writing and stoptrying to make up what you think they are saying in your own head and then spouting it as fact.

Why don't we lynch CO?

let the mod nightkill him. if he's town then we're wasting a lynch.

[don_johnson]

i require an apology.

No, you don't. Questioning you and your actions in this game is kind of the point of this game. Nowhere in his posts do I see him saying anything rude or offensive to you.

don't tell me what i need. i have contributed alot to this game and find his summary insulting. he presented no evidence, just his opinions.

you said you were bad at scumhunting. this is proof. i will not respond.

It's not proof, because we don't know that you're town. And oh how I wish it was true that you would not respond. You actually have some worthwhile points in those posts- I do think that Gera using his tracking skill first and vigging himself is a workable option, though I'm not sure I'm advocating such a strategy. But that type of useful discussion is buried under mounds of insults and game derailing theatrics (and for the record: I think if you have to resort to childish namechanging tactics in your arguments, then your arguments cant have been very strong to begin with).

Your argument that Nameless saying "Asking a townie to self vig is not, under any circumstances, a good idea" is a scumtell is flat out wrong. Hes speaking of a hypothetical situation, for one. For two, in that hypothetical situation if someone CAN 'self vig' then it stands to reason that they ARE a vigilante. Thus, town.

@Juls- I already said who I'd be willing to vote for. I'm not sure I'm as suspicious of Don so much as exasperated by him- I'm not going to vote him just for that. I'm reading and will vote before deadline.

the bolded statement is not true. when asking someone to self vig you have no way of knowing whether or not they can. so their alignment is in question. they are not town until their dead body shows up with a mod tag next to it revealing their role. that's my point. the other point i made is that nameless did a complete 180 when trying to smear mega in the next paragraph. nameless was also not talking in a hypothetical situation. a hypothetical has details. he gave none, just made the statement that asking a "townie to self vig is anti town". the point is entirely stupid. why would you ask a "townie" to self vig? you wouldn't. you would ask someone whose alignment is in question. which brings me to the point of why does nameless say that ger is town? ger is unconfirmed.

a slip like that IS a common scumtell. sorry i tried to be funny with the name changing, but nameless' scumminess is so freaking apparent to me at this point. if he flips town i would be utterly shocked and apalled. i believe the only reason there is a debate on this matter is due to scum pushing hard in nameless' defense.

what have i done taht makes you think i'm scum? a major difference between my posts and nameless' is that my posts actually contain quotes to back up what i am saying. if you read his case against me, it is solely his opinion and his twisting of existing posts. he has a hard time finding any actual evidence to back up his claims. come on, man. disliking me or my playstyle should not affect your vote. look at the evidence.

[don_johnson]

geraintm, if you are town i would like to make a point for your consideration. i would prefer not to do a pbpa of your post about my contirbutions, but if you would like me to i will. in lieu of that i would like to discuss this:

post 57 - utterly bizarre post, seriously one of the biggest reaches i have seen in any game of mafia to attach suspicion to someone.

here is post 57:

ebwop: found this on wiki.

The Jack-of-all-trades is a role with several night abilities, such as investigating, protecting, etc. Once he has used a type of ability, he won't be able to use it again.

several implies more than two.

i will stop posting for a while. if i am going to be bandwagoned i would like my questions answered and my suggestions considered.

nowhere in this post does it say, "gera is lying, this is meant to attach suspicion." my post, by its nature, does attach a certain amount of suspicion, but it should be acceptable suspicion. why? because scum can fakeclaim. scum will often fakeclaim as a last resort to avoid lynching, therefore, town pr claims need to be discussed for validity. my ebwpop was meant to do nothing other than quote directly from a reputable source exactly what JOAT is listed as. my post was not intended to accuse you, badger you, or anything of the like. it was an informational post meant to encourage discussion about your claim. do you suggest that when someone claims a power role, that we should just accept it without question? i think you could agree that that makes no sense. here's the thing.

i believe you at this point. but my ebwop is not "reaching". though i will accept your interpretation as one of several valid intepretations, it was not what was meant at all. for instance, why do you think i wanted ip to explain his role?

if he was scum and his claim was fake, he might post something that could incriminate him. by using wiki as a resource, we can go about deciding on whether or not to believe certain claims.

post 57 was an ebwop to inform town as to what they are dealing with. if you had an issue with it, all you have to say is that your role did not specify more than two abilities. that is perfectly reasonable, but to condemn me fo trying to help town figure out whether or not to believe you is not pro town.

if you notice, post 57 does not include the phrase "geraintm must be lying," or "this is what wiki says, and should cast suspicion on ger's claim." post 57 is simple and straightforward. i have noticed this discrepancy with some of your other interpretations and can point some out if you wish. i am asking you to please read my posts for what they are and try to remove your personal feelings. yes, i implied with other posts that you may be lying. but what alternative do i have? should i not be skeptical? should i just accept everything people tell me as truth. that would make me a terrible player.