Mini 737 - Hack Poetry Mafia (Game Over)

[don_johnson]

there's a man there in the alley,
arguing with a woman in a coat,
as he gets mad and hits her,
i see my only course of action is to

VOTE:
WolfBLitzer

[don_johnson]

you claim what belongs
to all the players here, why
can it not be shared?

[don_johnson]

it eludes me not.
the vote i do not question.
haiku theft, makes me wonder...

[don_johnson]

distraction, perhaps. is that the best you can do?
'twas spolium who attempted the theft of haiku.
it seems that he says, that if things go his way,
scum catching can result from questionable play.
this may leave us in a pickle, fhqwhgads, my friend,
for how can you trust one such as he in the end
when he knowingly treds on the dark side of life
and mingles with thieves when out of our sight?

[don_johnson]

aye, good questions do come
from one named spolium,
my usage of "friend"
was a means to an end.
if i had more skill, or perhaps more time,
i could have searched around for something to rhyme
with fhqwhgads, but alas
how am i to announce
a rhyme for a name i can't even pronounce?

[don_johnson]

come one come all,
the wagons a rollin'
suspicions avast
through their posts i've been storllin'

they've posted now twice,
of "scum", "scummy", and "scumtells",
employed a scum tactic, to get scum to appear,
yet have little input on the rhymes they find here.

i'm reminded of a saying, to this time well fit,
"he who hath smelt it, be the one who hath dealt it."

vote: budja

seriously. no shit.

[don_johnson]

prose?
i suppose...
now,noone knows
how far we could take it?
best mafia game ever,
had we chosen to make it.

that said, i can agree. it is not for everyone, however, i don't see how prose will make it any easier to find scum. words are words, poorly explained votes are poorly explained votes, active lurking is still active lurking. these things could all be found in poetry. but i digress...

I added a third vote to provoke proper discussion. It did .

What kind of discussion did you think would be generated? What kind of "scummy signs" did you think would appear by placing a 3rd vote on Wolf?

this confused me as well. what kind of "proper" discussion stems from a poorly explained bandwagon vote on someone who "seems" to be making a joke? that is what i meant when i said:

employed a scum tactic, to get scum to appear

the blatant bandwagon is not necessarily a scumtell, but it is at the very least "anti-town" as we have no way of knowing a players true intentions. scum can easily hide behind this type of "pressure" vote.

Frankly, I'm more concerned with Budja hopping on board that bandwagon with you Ice. His post made it seem like he wanted to pressure Wolf, piggyback on your suspicions, and have his vote counted as a "random" one, all at once.

i didn't notice the "piggybacking" when i voted, but it is a valid point as well.

budja: please explain what you hoped to accomplish? (hint: the answer is not, "to find scum.")

[don_johnson]

"That he voted a target in expectation of later seeing scum tells rather than based off of something he thought was scummy."

I don't see anything wrong with this, this is no worse than a random vote. The fault I made was to declare the vote was pretty meaningless.

the problem is that you were trying to take us out of the random stage with a vote that was "no worse than a random vote" and "meaningless". this is counterproductive. i have employed similar tactics as town before, so this is not necessarily a scum tell. what ends up happening is that if your target eventually does slip up, your accusations have little credibility due to the fact that other players will see it as the pot calling the kettle black.

as for the vote and its "self defeating" explanation, i am not sure i agree with spolium and goat. a vote carries with it an inherent "ability to lynch". saying a vote is a "pressure" vote does not defeat the purpose. the vote carries pressure until said player unvotes, as we have no way of knowing if it is scum or town placing the initial vote. i.e. scum

and

town can easily place a pressure vote and go v/la, "forget" to remove it, and contribute to a lynch. scum can do so intentionally and hide behind this excuse.

unvote

[don_johnson]

vote: springlullaby

for active lurking. get in here.

[don_johnson]

@

don_johnson

: Why did you unvote Budja when you did? Why haven't you mentioned him since then?

i don't think a poetic slip was worth the continued pressure. had we continued in poetry form it is hard to say whether or not my vote would have stuck, but what good would it do for me to push budja? i have made the mistake before of harping on a players early game mistakes. one scum tell does not a scum make.

personally, i think your attack on spolium is a bit over the top. it is always good to question players when they are defending someone, but i think you are making more out of spolium's defense of budja than need be(at this point). patterns are one thing, but i appreciate it when players point out flaws in others arguments.

SL: your posting is eerily reminiscent of your last game with me, however, incomplete meta is a terrible reason to vote someone.

unvote

i am going to reread this thread and post more at the end of the weekend. i will be v/la for a bit as i have some rl to catch up on.

[don_johnson]

OK, don, you answered the first part of my question, if somewhat vaguely, but you totally ignored the second part. Why are you now choosing not to mention Budja at all unless prompted to do so, when earlier he caught your attention enough to earn your vote?

read their posts since then. there is not much to comment on. like i said, what good does it do to push someone around over one issue? am i going to forget about budja? of course not, but there are several other players involved in discussions now. i think it would be better for me to reread instead of tunneling on one person for one post.

[don_johnson]

---

personally, i think [Ice9's] attack on spolium is a bit over the top. it is always good to question players when they are defending someone, but i think you are making more out of spolium's defense of budja than need be

But Ice9 said that he wanted to stop talking about it, that doesn't give you any comfort?

no. escpecially considering he came out of the gates guns blazing and then shut down the attack after a well explained response and an FoS from spolium. no comfort at all.

[don_johnson]

I think Ice9 is playing very aggressively and is willing to push hard to find scumtells by your attempted pressure on Wolf, me and Spolium. I do not think Spolium has played scummily but I definitely do not suspect Ice9 for pushing so hard as it is consistent with his earlier play style.

when you say "earlier" playstyle, do you mean earlier like page two earlier, or earlier meta wise?

[don_johnson]

@don_johnson

- Given that this is the only thread in which Ice9 has posted on these forums, your "

meta-earlier?

" question to Budja in #106 seems a little off - like you're asking a question for the sake of it. What did you expect to gain?

i have no idea who Ice9 is, nor do i check peoples posting frequency or location as a matter of habit. i asked the question because i did not know what Budja was referring to.

someone tried to lynch me once based on meta and when pressed, could not produce what they said existed in regards to their claims.

so i dislike people referring to meta in

most

cases, and when they do i prefer to question them on it and find out where they are getting it(unless i agree with them). generally, i find that when people refer to meta that they are talking bullshit and when called on it can usually produce little to no evidence.

by stating that he was referring to this game, budja's argument instantly becomes a bit more credible(not sure if that's the right word) and also allows me to research the matter for myself much easier, thereby supplying more evidence to work with. what did i expect to gain? an answer to my question. it's not a gamebreaker or a trap or something like that, just me wanting to understand what another player is trying to say.

[don_johnson]

ebwop: mod can you fix my quote tag please. it should end after the first question. what did you expect to gain?

Like the idiot I am, I stopped reading before you explained where the quote ended. 30 seconds of my life lost

[don_johnson]

i have no idea who Ice9 is

I find this statement alarming. You don't know who Ice9 is?

i know he is in this game. i have never played in a game with them before.

nor do i check peoples posting frequency or location as a matter of habit

Neither do I, but if the scope of meta available for a player was pertinent to something I wanted to know then I would consider it prudent to check their post history.

which is part of why i asked the question. time is avaluable resource and i don't like to waste it. by asking questions i can narrow down where i need to look to find evidence myself.

so i dislike people referring to meta in most cases, and when they do i prefer to question them on it and find out where they are getting it(unless i agree with them).

Interesting. Is there any particular reason that you didn't raise such concerns when I employed meta to explain Budja's actions?

didn't catch it. i haven't had time to read everything and so have been skimming some posts. you guys are going on about quite a bit. i plan on rereading as much as i can before voting, but once we kicked out of the poetry it became a bit harder to follow.

also, note that i said "in most cases" meaning if you aren't using meta to make a major point, i am not going to fight with you. i pointed to meta when i voted springlullaby, but i didn't try to build a case on her for it. in Budja's case, i was asking a question to clarify their own statment for myself.

[don_johnson]

First off how the hell can don not know who Ice9 is? Either not really paying attention to the game and trying to act like he's contributing or something just severely damaged his brain since his last post.

sorry guys, is Ice9 famous or something? i know he's in the game. i stated that. i have some interaction with them. that doesn't mean i know them well. i have never played in a game with them before, therefore i have no grasp as to whether Budja was referring to meta or this game. why is this an issue?

[don_johnson]

I also agree that a few of Spring's attackers were hypocritcal for not saying anything about earlier discussion, then jumping on him when they weren't contributing either. I'm one of the people who attacked Spring as well. Though I felt I made my stance clear on the earlier debate. I'm not liking Spring's play now even more so now because any useful information generated from a townie pulling off such a move would have been revealed by now. Now he's just not giving us anything to get a read off him which is getting scummier the longer he stays quiet. Now's the time to tell us what you gained from simply "watching"

springlullaby is female. or so she says. methinks she may have bailed.

There's nothing I can really do there but give you townie points

for catching that. I'm not going to try and weasel my way out of what I said in those posts; I contradicted myself.

in return, can he give you "scummie" points? just kidding.
but seriously, you feel that Goat has made a good case against Budja?

[don_johnson]

And did you mean to say fhq instead of Budja there?

no i did not. that's why i asked.

And I can't give you a good reason for saying what I did to Budja. It's almost like, my gut tells me fhq is sincerely trying to stand up for Budja, but my brain tells me that fhq is suspicious.

Like you, I think Goat makes a good case against

him

.

i couldn't tell who the

him

referred to.

i have to agree in wanting some explanation from jebus. i know the whole townie/scum list is common when one replaces in, but spolium and goat have pointed out peculiar "inconsistencies"(if you can call them that). of interest to me is why you vote "anti-town" over scummy. i hate situations like this. once out of the rvs you should be voting who you find scummiest. if you don't have a "scummiest" player then you vote for pressure. if you have a "scummiest" player, but vote elsewhere for "pressure", you then siphon away much of the actual pressure from your vote. leaving town with nothing but headaches trying to figure out why you would do such a thing.

[don_johnson]

FHQ, why did you try to shift the current focus to pursuing the lurkers.

Look, I wasn't generally trying to shift the focus in as much as it was starting to feel like everyone was hyper focussing on Budja. I was in no way trying to give him a free pass, I just found that some people were just floating by, not even contributing to the Budja argument and thought we should at least call them out to get their opinion.

fhqwhgads: who are you most suspicious of(among the active players)?

is there a particular lurker which bothers you the most?

where exactly do you stand on Budja?

[don_johnson]

Having people upset with you is one thing. Being at L-1 is quite another. If she doesn't talk then, she deserves to be lynched or replaced.

FoS: Jebus

, for suggesting putting a lurker at L-1. even on day one, this could be a dangerous move.

[don_johnson]

Having people upset with you is one thing. Being at L-1 is quite another. If she doesn't talk then, she deserves to be lynched or replaced.

FoS: Jebus

, for suggesting putting a lurker at L-1. even on day one, this could be a dangerous move.

What's wrong with it? When is it an acceptable time to put a lurker at L-1?

What's wrong with it?

well, for starters, we have no idea who SL is yet. we may as well have skipped the rvs and bandwagoned the last player to confirm. putting a lurker who is "busy atm" at L-1 is poor play.

we have no idea what roles are out there(no i am not talking jester). so placing someone indiscriminately in danger of being lynched is a gamble. you are gambling that every town player is smart enough not to hammer, and that scum are not that brazen. we have no idea of game balance or special roles, etc. if you are upset with SL then demand a replacement, don't put her in position to be lynched. that said:

When is it an acceptable time to put a lurker at L-1?

like most mafia questions, the answer to this depends on the circumstances. the earliest i could see this happening is day 2, however, days 3 or 4 are much more likely. i find lurking much more suspicious if it seems like a strategic shift in playstyle. meta can play a role, too, but i have already explained how i feel about that. SL knows she will accumulate a vote or two from lurking, sometimes a little pressure does the job, but if a player is bogged down in rl or other games, pressure will only have so much of an effect. the right thing to do on day one is request replacement.

The other problem is that no one else really jumps out at me. If you're gonna push me, I have to say don_johnson's 'fear' of L-1 is a bit much. The argument why that's not necessarily a problem has been made and one has to wonder if he's just trying very hard to do the 'townie thing'.

sorry, but "fear" seems to be a convenient interpretation. also, at the time of your post i had not yet responded to the argumnent as to "why its not necessarily a problem", so i don't really see how you can paint

me

as trying to do the "townie thing". are you saying that

i'm

the most suspicious person in this game to

you

as of this post?

this could be a

dangerous

move.

change the word "dangerous" to "assanine", or "downright stupid". if a dumb townie hammers then you have NOTHING to go on day 2. when a player is at L-1, all someone needs is a halfway legitimate reason to drop the hammer and we are left to decide if they are dumb town or scum. in that way you are putting someone in a position to be lynched without a decipherable bandwagon because the only viable excuse is that a dumb or overzealous townie(or scum) hammered. lynching a lurker day 1 is anti-town. request a replacement if you are dissatisfied with their play.

Don, I don't know why you're worried about L-1. If anybody quick lynched spring, they'd be under strong scrutiny the next day. How do you think Spring should be dealt with if she keeps it up? Replacement?

replacement. absolutely. pressuring and/or threatening to lynch is a waste of time and can only muddy the waters. let me be clear, i am not "worried" or "fearful". i just think placing someone in harm's way for "lurking" on day 1 is not the right action to be taking. people have both in game and out of game reasons to be aloof, so requesting replacements makes the most sense.

[don_johnson]

SL: you have an interesting take on my play. when i get a chance i will do pbp for where you seem to have missed the boat. don't see myself as a hypocriter on the lurking call. i didn't argue against voting for lurkers, i argued against lynching them. and my input has been pretty consistent. posting your notes does not make you town and it seems you call me out for echoing, yet that is all your notes seem to do themselves.

FoS: RedCoyote

for suggesting a policy lynch, which i have already stated my distaste for.

Spring: if that is going to be your only contribution, besides a vote before deadline, i suggest you request replacement.

[don_johnson]

Don_Johnson: You FoS RedCoyote, but aren't voting anyone right now. Why a FoS? Where's your vote? Looking back I see you FoS Jebus earlier but no vote as well there. Are you afraid to vote?

no. not afraid. hadn't seen a vote count recently. i am in several games and thought i had a vote laid down here. also, i don't think it would be wise to lynch someone who disagrees with me on day 1 policy, i just found it suspicious that RC again brought up the point. i thought we had already discussed it.

Bizarre non sequiture in there. I wonder what made your mind jump from your first paragraph to Red Coyote then back to me again.

sorry? let me know how you would like me to organize my thoughts in the future.

On the subject of replacement, I will make it clear that I will not do so.

Now please tell me what do you propose to gain from my being replaced

.

my request contained an "if" clause. it should be obvious what we stand to gain. someone who is willing to play, not say "well, i'll let my thoughts be known before deadline.

your analysis seems ripe with misrepresentations(not just of me).

vote: SpringLullaby

i won't lynch you for lurking, but i am willing if all you plan on doing is posting illogical analysis and casting suspicions without evidence. your bolded statement above seems pretty smug, too.

[don_johnson]

don:

5. RV WOLF
18. normal response to spolium's vote
20. ok smiley
25. a response to gads - I don't get this post, what the accusation was in the first place, scumlink don+gads

perhaps if you were paying attention you would have seen fgqhdads question to me, and subsequent accusation of "distraction". what exactly is the "scumlink"?

34. ok answer to spolium
37. VOTE BUDJA for posting twice with little input and criticism of 'budja's tactic to get scum to appear' - can't read
49. express regret at rhyme; further question budja ok - TR overall
62. general pov, UNVOTE -

hard to tell why the unvote here

but not scummy, more soft play

hard to tell why the unvote? interesting as i gave two solid reasons. >>

the problem is that you were trying to take us out of the random stage with a vote that was "no worse than a random vote" and "meaningless". this is counterproductive. i have employed similar tactics as town before, so this is not necessarily a scum tell.
>>> as for the vote and its "self defeating" explanation, i am not sure i agree with spolium and goat. a vote carries with it an inherent "ability to lynch". saying a vote is a "pressure" vote does not defeat the purpose. the vote carries pressure until said player unvotes, as we have no way of knowing if it is scum or town placing the initial vote.

75. VOTE ME for active lurking
92. ok reply to Ice, UNVOTE ME - "uncomplete meta is a terrible reason to vote someone" - queer, why didn't you think that before voting me? - milding vibe

i didn't vote you for meta, i voted you for "active lurking". a vote on a lurker is generally for pressure. i believe someone else pointed to your meta, and i agreed. i was not going to carry the vote based solely on that, however.

95. reply to Ice, says he is rereading basically - neutral
99. "no. escpecially considering he came out of the gates guns blazing and then shut down the attack after a well explained response and an FoS from spolium. no comfort at all. " - pinging some Ice reads town

how does ice "read town"? in my experience, aggressive play is dangerous and should be reserved for experienced players. causing a commotion and getting people riled up can be productive, but an aggressive, inexperienced townie can have the same effect as aggressive scum. i.e. if i jump into a car parked on a steep hill and take it out of gear, i will be the cause of what happens next, but it may not be beneficial for the town. my suspicion of aggression is waranted to say the least.

106. ask a meta question to budja concerning Ice - bad, where did that come from?

again, please pay attention. i was clarifying information.

123. answer to spolium - ok
127. more reply to spolium - waste of time bit shifty, no like; promise of reread
129. reply to lynx over ice meta - slight TR
135. suspicion on my sex, why, am I calling your penis into question? a little jokey with RC; ask if RC think made a good case against budja - null though not like much question as it looks throwaway

correcting someone as to your sex. the suspicion comment was a joke. we have no way of knowing who is male or female. but thanks for thinking of my penis. again, my main question to clarify information as is shown in the very next post >> p. 149

149. some replies to RC ; press Jebus - the fact that don mainly does echoes is starting to grate on my nerves
162. three pointed question to gads
165. FOS JEB for lurker L-1 - dunno, true caution or know i'm town?

doesn't matter if you're town, i explained this fully.

176. a spirited post which sounds genuine, but would be easy to fake as it is mostly general consideration

"sounds genuine, but would be easy to fake." so? basically you are willing to lynch me based on "gut" feeling?

Milding, nothing to make waves no drive as it seems. Kinda hypocrite on my lurking: was one of the first to jump, but since criticisms appear to be my biggest champion. Willing to lynch.

explain the hypocrisy. at the time of your "statement" i had 21 posts in this game(20 without /confirm.) you had... 9. of those nine, most were responses to accusations of lurking and contained no game related material, you completely skipped the poetry/rvs, and the ninth one was your wall of text stating your desire to lynch one of three players. so please, explain the hypocrisy.

i am out of time, but you get the idea, i suggest people double check Spring's analysis of themselves.

[don_johnson]

i am out of time, but you get the idea, i suggest people double check Spring's analysis of themselves.

when i get back on tomorrow, if noone has done so, i will continue, but i have to get ready for school.

[don_johnson]

perhaps if you were paying attention you would have seen fgqhdads question to me, and subsequent accusation of "distraction". what exactly is the "scumlink"?

A scumlink is a possible connection between you and gads. At the time I made that note I didn't see what you were answering to.

i didn't ask "what is

a

scumlink"? i asked "what is

the

scumlink"? apparently there is not one.

You are right. I misread that. Your unvote is justified.

thank you and strike two.

i didn't vote you for meta, i voted you for "active lurking". a vote on a lurker is generally for pressure. i believe someone else pointed to your meta, and i agreed. i was not going to carry the vote based solely on that, however.

That is an alright explanation. But if you voted me for active lurking; why did you unvote me in that particular post in which you mention my meta?

i unvote you because you responded to the vote, which was a pressure vote asking you to participate. i mention meta as a bad reason for keeping the vote. i clarify my stance on meta in a later post.

so i dislike people referring to meta in most cases, and when they do i prefer to question them on it and find out where they are getting it(unless i agree with them). generally, i find that when people refer to meta that they are talking bullshit and when called on it can usually produce little to no evidence.

in my only previous game with you, you lurked and were scum, so i agreed to a certain degree with someone else calling you on that meta, however, it was only one game(for me) that i had to base that opinion on and that was not enough to keep my vote on you. it is unfair to pressure vote someone without giving them an oppurtunity to relieve said pressure. no?

]how does ice "read town"? in my experience, aggressive play is dangerous and should be reserved for experienced players. causing a commotion and getting people riled up can be productive, but an aggressive, inexperienced townie can have the same effect as aggressive scum. i.e. if i jump into a car parked on a steep hill and take it out of gear, i will be the cause of what happens next, but it may not be beneficial for the town. my suspicion of aggression is waranted to say the least.

Dangerous play doesn't mean scum.

Ice reads town because his post has the boisterous nature of town post.

I think the way he unceremoniously dropped the whole Spolium thing is the biggest towntell in his book

.

i didn't say or imply the bolded statement. dangerous play doesn't necessarioly mean scum, but it does warrant suspicion. the second(underlined) statement is your opinion of what is really a null tell.

106. ask a meta question to budja concerning Ice - bad, where did that come from?

again, please pay attention. i was clarifying information.

Yes, I have gathered that, but it seemed to me that your question was out of the blue. Random questions is easy scum fare.

swing and a miss. is that strike three or four? depends on how you look at this one. the question was in response to a post in which there was a significant prepositional discrepancy. in a game where all we have is our written word, clarity can mean all the difference.

As for the question, when I read it, it seemed out of the blue, but upon further examination of your exchange with RC, I think you have sufficient motive in asking it.

strike five?

doesn't matter if you're town, i explained this fully.

Yes you explained. My remark suggest that you may be took that stand at that point, despite never being very concern by my wagon till then, because you may know my alignment.

this is wifomic. whether or not you are town was irrelevant to my reasoning. you seem to be simply speculating about scumdj based on null tell behavior.

"sounds genuine, but would be easy to fake." so? basically you are willing to lynch me based on "gut" feeling?

No. My assessment of your 176 is that it reads very town, but town read is easiest to fake when it comes to generic discussion.

if you think i can fake it, why can't Ice9? again you speculate about scumdj based on null tell behavior.

Now, that said. I will say that your reply here actually looks quite good.

Please tell me, can you discern how much of your vote is distaste for my attitude?

none. you basically posted a game summary and agreed with suspicions that were already placed on the table. the only "original" information you seem to have posted has been shown to be in the form of misrepresentations of people you are okay with lynching. i can't see why townSL would do this.

[don_johnson]

RC: a policy lynch is better than a no lynch. in my opinion it is not

much

better. an inactive lurker may not roleclaim, thereby putting town in danger of lynching a pr. also, a policy lynch leaves little to go on for day two as all participants have a "valid" reason for hopping the wagon. the only upside i see is the chance of hitting scum as opposed to not at all.

SL is my biggest suspect right now. her misrep of me seems intentional and thorough. i think she may have been hoping that people were just going to read the bolded parts and her lynch choices.

I don't understand. You express distaste of policy lynching so it's somehow scummy for RC to bring it up?

i felt he was regurgitating discussion. i feel we are generating enough information to lynch based on suspicions. a policy lynch, to me, would be a step backward. FoS is a tool to let people know how you feel. i feel that at this point in the game, anyone pushing for a policy lynch is aiming to avoid accountability.

[don_johnson]

i feel that at this point in the game, anyone pushing for a policy lynch is aiming to avoid accountability.

Do you think post 184 is me "pushing" for a policy lynch in order to "avoid accountability" on this game?

no.

[don_johnson]

SL is my biggest suspect right now. her misrep of me seems intentional and thorough. i think she may have been hoping that people were just going to read the bolded parts and her lynch choices.

That's quite the flimsy accusation to make and it is looking scummy on you. Do you seriously believe in the hypothesis of scumME being so crude about it?

Spring, you admitted to misrepresenting me on several points. to have gone throught the trouble of preparing your giant post, you had to have spent a certain amount of effort. effort shows intent. why the wifom question here? my accusation was preceded by an entire post of evidence supporting it. how is that "flimsy"?

I found this post suspicious because I didn't understand to what you where responding/what accusation you were making. Theft of Haiku?

not sure if you knew what you were getting into with "hackpoetry". Spolium had previously tried to commandeer the Haiku form(in the sign-up thread, i believe?) and his poem tried to express his ownership of it. personally i love haiku and didn't think it fair for one player to "steal" an entire form of poetry. this statement could be taken several ways. it was during the rvs. if you don't understand something, ask a question. you didn't ask because you were busy lurking. so by not clarifying information, your opinion was swayed, hence the importance of clarifying post content.

1) I think there is still possibility of backtracking on your part in here because you say that you voted me for active lurking: what at the point of your unvote did I do to change your opinion on that?

you responded. it was all i asked when i voted.

Please tell me, were your criticism of Ice based on what you think of his alignment, or on how you thought he should be playing?

i don't understand this. i explained how i feel about aggressive behavior. it is not a scumtell, but it has serious anti-town potential. i am always suspicious of it. unfortunately Ice has dissappeared.

2. I don't particularly like your 'underlined statement is your opinion' bit.

a) Of course it is my opinion, and I think it is a relevant opinion, so I'm sharing it. The only relevant consideration you can make is whether you think it is a scummy opinion or not. So basically your 'it's your opinion' means exactly nothing.

you gave an opinion. i disagreed. i didn't get "towntell" from it.

b) That was basically my trick as scum in the game we previously shared, and the fact that you would quote me almost verbatim here is bizarre, especially since it is not warranted here I think.

i stopped reading you at a certain point in that game. remember, i was scum too.

I can give you that making things clear is important. But still is the fact that your question amounted to nothing very much in term of scum hunting and the drawing of conclusion. Are we in agreement on that?

no. by not clarifying things we can let scum slip through the cracks, or make baseless and incorrect assumptions about other players.

Here you are missing the entirety of the argument. Your 176 is a post solely consisting of general considerations about gameplay at large, this is the easiest kind of post you can fake town read in because there is very little reason for scum to lie in theory discussion, and the spontaneity and sincerity involved translates readily.

Ice9 may be faking for all I know, but I don't think it is as likely because my town read of him arise from the attitude he takes in scumhunting proper. And that is harder to fake because, when it comes to scumhunting, deception is involved from scum.

okay, so you have a "gut" feeling on me. you produce no evidence to support this. also, you are pointing to a post that was made in response to several other players. you are faulting me for requested interaction. also, i do ask questions of others in this post and i believe that the post itself, inherently aids the scumhunting process. i think you are reaching on this one, supporting my accusation of "intentionally misrepresenting".

I think you are unfair, there are summary elements in my notes true, but there are also relevant opinions.

yes, but your opinions tend to give certain players the "benefit of the doubt" while painting others scummy for what amount to similar gameplay. also, your opinions are seem based off your notes, which you have admitted, are flawed. perhaps it is you who needs to reassess.

I also do not appreciate the ambivalent use of the word 'people' here suggesting plural.

i believe three other players have pointed to issues with your notes as well. three plus one makes four, hence plurality.

My notes are the process by which I came to the conclusion that you are likely scum but the comment in them are not meant to be definite accusation Ultimately my reason for suspecting you is that when

I view everything you have contributed to this game, I think it doesn't amount to very much.

as opposed to whose contributions? yours?

So here I will ask you, do you think you have done a lot of scumhunting in this game? Do you think you look very town?

a) yes. i think i found one. b) i have no idea, and this is a loaded question which no matter how i answer can be used against me.

So here is what I will do, I will not make it easy for you, and I ask of you for a list of whom you think is scummy beside me, and why. Plus why you think I am scummier than any of your other suspect.

SpringLullaby
Budja
Red Coyote
Fghjdads
Ice9
Azrhei?
Jebus?
Plonky?
Lynx
Goat
Spolium

my suspicions of you are well documented. your mistakes seem less reasonable as "mistakes". I believe your intent is to misdirect town.

[don_johnson]

SL is my biggest suspect right now. her misrep of me seems intentional and thorough. i think she may have been hoping that people were just going to read the bolded parts and her lynch choices.

That's quite the flimsy accusation to make and it is looking scummy on you. Do you seriously believe in the hypothesis of scumME being so crude about it?

Spring, you admitted to misrepresenting me on several points. to have gone throught the trouble of preparing your giant post, you had to have spent a certain amount of effort. effort shows intent. why the wifom question here? my accusation was preceded by an entire post of evidence supporting it. how is that "flimsy"?

No, I have admitted that I had made 2 factual errors/misreads, which we clarified when you pointed them out.

sorry, more than two. reread.

I'm not sure what you mean by "effort shows intent".

you intended your posts to have an effect on this game, no? by putting forth the amount of effort it takes to concieve the amount of notes you posted, it proves that you intended some sort of outcome. maybe not the outcome i am intepreting, but you didn't post, just to post.

My question may be wifom, but I'm not particularly afraid of wifom:
the theory you suggest here is that I purposely made easily identifiable mistakes in order to misrepresent you. This is flimsy because I'm just not that bad scum, which you should have an idea of because you have seen scum me before, hence my question.

what "easily identifiable mistakes? you purposely bolded sections of your notes and drew attention to the fact that you did. it was like you were encouraging people to "skim".

1) I think there is still possibility of backtracking on your part in here because you say that you voted me for active lurking: what at the point of your unvote did I do to change your opinion on that?

you responded. it was all i asked when i voted.

I'm considering this, and I think it is quite the pointless move.

you are entitled to your opinion, but "pressure" is what got you involved in this game. do you disagree?

Please tell me, were your criticism of Ice based on what you think of his alignment, or on how you thought he should be playing?

i don't understand this. i explained how i feel about aggressive behavior. it is not a scumtell, but it has serious anti-town potential. i am always suspicious of it. unfortunately Ice has dissappeared.

I have asked that question because what I see there is a contradiction in terms and possibly a scumslip.

Yes you have explained how you felt about "dangerous play", but you have described it as a *townie* behavior.

As such, you being suspicious of it doesn't make sense.

do not put words in my mouth. i described it as much more then possible townie behavior. you are strawmanning this one.

Ok. By curiosity, were you not aware that I frequently used this line of argument in our previous game?

no, actually, you were the least of my worries, i thought you were bad town and was ignoring you. my hope was to carry you into lylo and then filet you.

I can give you that making things clear is important. But still is the fact that your question amounted to nothing very much in term of scum hunting and the drawing of conclusion. Are we in agreement on that?

no. by not clarifying things we can let scum slip through the cracks, or make baseless and incorrect assumptions about other players.

Well, I think that if 'clarification' is a minor subset of the making of case. Also I dislike your sudden use of 'we' here, but I fear I might be starting to get very nitpicky.

yes, you are being nitpicky. "we" refers to town at large.

Here you are missing the entirety of the argument. Your 176 is a post solely consisting of general considerations about gameplay at large, this is the easiest kind of post you can fake town read in because there is very little reason for scum to lie in theory discussion, and the spontaneity and sincerity involved translates readily.

Ice9 may be faking for all I know, but I don't think it is as likely because my town read of him arise from the attitude he takes in scumhunting proper. And that is harder to fake because, when it comes to scumhunting, deception is involved from scum.

okay, so you have a "gut" feeling on me. you produce no evidence to support this. also, you are pointing to a post that was made in response to several other players. you are faulting me for requested interaction. also, i do ask questions of others in this post and i believe that the post itself, inherently aids the scumhunting process. i think you are reaching on this one, supporting my accusation of "intentionally misrepresenting".

Are you missing the point on purpose? Why do you insist that "I have a gut feeling" on you? I never claimed such thing. Where am I reaching exactly? Right now you appear to be the one misrepresenting me.

Here I see the possibility that you may be under the assumption that I regard that post as a definite scumtell, I'll clarify again that it is not the case. I made an observation to the effect that I detected towntell from the post in question, but were wary of it for the reason described. And it was just that, a remark.

oh. it was "just a remark"? so i guess i should just let you make remarks that insinuate certain players are scum because their posts look "town"? not sure what your point is on this one. you can be wary of it, but if you publicize your wariness of "townie" posts with no evidence to the contrary and suggest someones lynch, i will find you scummy whether you are targetting me or not. sorry, but that's how i roll. you need to be accountable for your suggestions.

I think you are unfair, there are summary elements in my notes true, but there are also relevant opinions.

yes, but your opinions tend to give certain players the "benefit of the doubt" while painting others scummy for what amount to similar gameplay. also, your opinions are seem based off your notes, which you have admitted, are flawed. perhaps it is you who needs to reassess.

Here I think you are being unfair again. It is true that my assessment of this game is not very dramatic, but I believe it is the nature of this game which lead to that. There are very few players who distinguished themselves by their play today, the big bulk of you being in the grey zone, and not particularly distinguishable from each others. I made the best assessment I could, and pronounced myself accordingly.

okay.

I also do not appreciate the ambivalent use of the word 'people' here suggesting plural.

i believe three other players have pointed to issues with your notes as well. three plus one makes four, hence plurality.

And you agree with each and all of these "issues"?

can't say right now, but i haven't seen anything i disagree with. for your benefit i can reread them. my point still stands, unless we are looking at a strongly united four player scum team, you seem to be intent on screwing somebody.

My notes are the process by which I came to the conclusion that you are likely scum but the comment in them are not meant to be definite accusation Ultimately my reason for suspecting you is that when

I view everything you have contributed to this game, I think it doesn't amount to very much.

as opposed to whose contributions? yours?

Well, yes, I think I'm stepping it up quite a bit.

and why is that?

It was not a loaded when I conceived it, but I now that I consider it, I think it might be difficult to answer regardless of alignment.

I'll explain why I asked it further: you seemed quite indignant at my calling your play milky and amounting to nothing much. But looking at your play, I just don't see what you are indignant about because it is by no measure stellar, and you have pretty much backsitted the entire day. I think town would be more honest in their perspective of their own play. What do you think?

i think my play has been pretty pro town. i actually cast one of the first "serious" votes, accomplishing what budja claimed he was trying to do with his random/bandwagon vote. i admittedly lost some interest when the poetry died. i think the fact that i am now center stage with you speaks for itself.

This is not what I asked for, I'm asking for who your others suspects are, plus your reasons why you think them to be scummy. And why you think I'm scummier than them.

you obviously didn't notice the list i posted. top to bottom, scummiest to least. you are scummier because you are more obvious scum. i.e. you are intentionally misrepresenting other players. you are continuing to do so even after being called on it.

[don_johnson]

not sure if you knew what you were getting into with "hackpoetry". Spolium had previously tried to commandeer the Haiku form(in the sign-up thread, i believe?) and his poem tried to express his ownership of it. personally i love haiku and didn't think it fair for one player to "steal" an entire form of poetry. this statement could be taken several ways. it was during the rvs. if you don't understand something, ask a question. you didn't ask because you were busy lurking. so by not clarifying information, your opinion was swayed, hence the importance of clarifying post content.

Okay, I'm reading this, I'm reading all of this, but

come on

.

I know I sound like I'm completely in spring's corner, but this is just asinine.

I don't see how don can argue, on the one hand, that spring is so prone to misrepresenting everyone's posts, but on the other argue that her infamous notes post was completely concocted in order to make it look like she was following the game.

noone said the post was completely concocted. scum can follow the game and take notes, however, scums notes are going to be "trying" to find things scummy, as opposed to actually finding scum. hard to explain, but you are way off base with this accusation. also, how do you get this conclusion from my quote above?

Why would she not go to the trouble to make sure her notes were more accurate

if

she in fact she made the entire post up? These arguments seem completely contradictory to me.

they are contradictory, and noone is making them. if her notes were so accurate, why did she point out that her conclusions were bolded at the end of each section?

I don't think you can argue that she both made these notes up when she posted them and that they are misrepresentative of the game at the same time. If she made the post up, that necessarily implies that she was taking the time to read the posts carefully and write up the acceptable "note" of each post.

how many times in one post are you going to say this? i am not saying SL made anything up. i am saying that to me, it appears that she deliberatly spun her take on the game. thats what scum does, which is why i find her scummy. get it?

SpringLullaby
Budja
Red Coyote
Fghjdads
Ice9
Azrhei?
Jebus?
Plonky?
Lynx
Goat
Spolium

If you want me to be perfectly honest don, I think a great deal of this anger at spring is a smokescreen. The fact that you find me more suspicious that Plonky, a player who has had zero contribution to this game, is telling. It's telling because you are calling out spring for being such a lurker, and then you're going to turn around and say that Plonky, Jebus, and Azrehi are your 4th, 5th, and 6th most townie respectively?

i am not calling SL out for lurking. i pressure voted her to be more active. my current issue with her has very little to do with her lurking, and much to do with her misrepresentation of information in this game. yes, i find you more suspicious than some of the players who have not contributed as much. your entire post is opinion. you produce no evidence that Spring's notes are in any way accurate. you produce no evidence of these "smokescreens". i feel i have presented a very well rounded case here. i am not just throwing accusations around without backing up each and every one.

---

These things seem so completely trivial in my eyes, I don't think one player here has given a decent reason to look at spring that isn't completely derived in WIFOM (e.g. only scumspring would post "notes" like that). don's walls are not aiding the situation at all because

I'm not convinced spring's post was artifical

, which is the foundation for which all of Goat/don/Spolium/fhq's arguments rest on.

noone said the post was artificial. i don't really know what you mean by that, but you produce no evidence to show that her post is accurate. yes, she mentions that budja is scummy, but instead of producing evidence to the fact, she reduces one of his posts to "flowers and sunshine". that is blatant misrep.

I think we need to get Ice9, Jebus, and Plonky to post in here

as soon as possible

. I do not want this day to end before we have heard from them.

yes.

unvote

. SL remains at the top of my list, but i notice she has latent votes from missing players. if anyone wants to extend deadline i am fine with that as well. i would like both you and Spring to start talking sense and stop just tossing your opinions around as though they are facts.

[don_johnson]

Alot of players have been inactive so an extension wouldn't hurt. We wouldn't have any real read on these players on Day 2(Plonky, Azhrei, Ice). Plus, Budja and Jebus haven't posted in awhile.

i agree.

Don, why the unvote? You seemed pretty set on Spring as scum. She wasn't in any real imminent danger of being lynched.

like i said, there are latent lurker votes attached to SL. i want to reread and see where those votes came from, also. RC seems intent on defending townspring, but he has produced little which proves any of his beliefs. i.e. why is he so sure that SL is town? my case is not weak. noone, as yet, has punched any holes in it. this statement:

And I'll even go further than that and say that

don, Goat, and Lynx

have all slightly pinged back scummy to me for pushing this issue needlessly. I think spring is an easy out, and I would not be surprised if more than one scum is voting her right now...

seems uneccessary. how is questioning a player on a questionable post "pushing an issue needlessly"? i would think determining whether ort not SL's post was genuine would be an

extremely important

issue as opposed to needless. also note, he states that don, goat, and lynx are doing the pushing, yet he quotes fhq. i don't think any one of the three players he mentions are piggybacking at all on what fhq wrote. in fact, it seems as though those three players all have separate and solid issues they are trying to settle regarding SL's post. so, for now,

vote: RedCoyote

your play has been puzzling to say the least.

[don_johnson]

mod: azhrei unvoted before he quit...

[don_johnson]

!!!UPDATE!!!

i would think determining

whether ort not SL's post was genuine

would be an extremely important issue as opposed to needless.

don had to determine whether or not spring's "notes" post was genuine or artificial... right after he got through telling me in post 260 that he never considered her notes to be concoted.

I do not retract my argument from earlier, don is still in the group with Goat and fhq.

Additionally, I think him putting me at L-6 with 2 days left until the deadline is a foolhardy, suspicious move.

FoS: don_johnson

you are not understanding the quote you are referencing or you are twisting this and arguing semantics.

you

called the four players out for discussing whether or not SL's post was genuine or not. whether she followed along and wrote scum notes, or read the thread after the fact and wrote down notes, or if she didn't read the thread closely and simply tried to piece together a "town" looking post is only a small part of what these four players were discussing. also, your conclusion is way off base here as the quote is out of context. i urge anyone listening to this crap to actually go back and read the exchange.

i don't think her post was genuine. how she "concocted" it is not the issue. whether it was done while she followed the game or after the fact is not really relevant. you are strawmanning, focusing on a relatively minor point and trying to make it seem as though it is the focus of suspicions on her.

your bolded statement above is all semantics and attempt to completely derail a sound argument with "craplogic".

also, are you saying it is okay for SL to be suspicious of me for the "theft of haiku" post, but it is not okay for me to be suspicious of her for choosing to lurk rather than clarify something she found suspicious?

[don_johnson]

Because nulltell + nulltell doesn't a town make. See paragraph below.

but it makes scum?

That's just a crappy argument. A really crappy and scummy one. My bold were a formatting courtesy and that's pretty much it. To suggest them to be a ploy to "encourage people to 'skim'" is reaching and drawing on thin air.

how is your bold formatting an editing courtesy? if you expect people to read your entire post, why do you need to bold anything? i think i understand what you mean, but my take on it is far from "reaching"? by bolding your conclusions you draw attention to them and away from your notes. why would you do that? sorry, but i find this a valid line of reasoning.

I have asked that question because what I see there is a contradiction in terms and possibly a scumslip.

Yes you have explained how you felt about "dangerous play", but you have described it as a *townie* behavior.

As such, you being suspicious of it doesn't make sense.

do not put words in my mouth. i described it as much more then possible townie behavior. you are strawmanning this one.

I don't think I am, from your own mouth - in answer to my comment in which I said Ice reads town:

how does ice "read town"? in my experience, aggressive play is dangerous and should be reserved for experienced players. causing a commotion and getting people riled up can be productive, but an aggressive, inexperienced townie can have the same effect as aggressive scum. i.e. if i jump into a car parked on a steep hill and take it out of gear, i will be the cause of what happens next, but it may not be beneficial for the town. my suspicion of aggression is waranted to say the least.

In the quote above, the motive you impart to Ice's "dangerous play" is that of a "inexperienced townie" whose play may "have the same effect as aggressive scum" in causing town harm. At no point do you seem to suspect him of being an aggressive scum himself. So no, if you think he is a dangerous townie, then your suspicions are not warranted. This is were I see the possible scumslip.

^^^^^^ STRAWMAN. sorry, but no. you take this out of context and dice it up, but this was part of a conversation on why i am suspicious of "dangerous play". i am not attributing ice's play to any alignment, simply explaining how "dangerous" play can affect a game regardless of a players alignment and why we should be wary of it.

What you seem to be saying here in your defense, strawmanning me in the process, is that I imply causation between the two clauses. This is not the case: I am not arguing that your post is scummy *because* it looks town. I'm saying that it is a post about general gameplay considerations, *and* that if it sounds town, it doesn't impress me much as it is in these post that town tell is the easiest to fake.

your initial comment does not imply scumminess, you are correct. however, your conclusion is that you are comfortable lynching me. therefore, you are implying that i am scum from my gameplay, which includes the aforementioned post. no strawman, nothing in your notes was indicative of scumdj, yet you place me on your lynch list.

One serious vote doesn't make for protown play in my books. The fact that you are center stage count very little from where I sit because someone who is content to backsit untill the moment they are attacked in earnest doesn't look protown to me.

QFT. funny, you hadn't even made one serious vote before you were attacked. hey pot, i've got this kettle here, can you see what color it is?

No, it is you who missed the fact that I asked for *reasons*. An empty list is useless and scummy.

list wasn't empty. redcoyote and yourself are sitting atop my list for reasons already laid out. budja? wheres the case on budja? can someone list his scumtells? other than his original "slip" in the poetry phase i haven't found a whole lot "scummy" from him. "suspicious", yes, but there are a good number on non contributors in this game right now and that seems to be the biggest mark against him. i have seen alot of votes for budja, but i haven't seen much of a case. sorry, but that is my opinion. i have no problem voting to lynch before deadline, but i see no reason to hastily string up a player who could just be "bad town". both you and rc seem to be laying out deliberatly crafted misinformation. i'd rather see one of the two of you swing.

[don_johnson]

So ordering it up:

Budja

- pretty much what everyone's said, plus dependent tells made independent/null based on how he flips (aka info to be gained)

don johnson

- I think he's the bull side of the spring/don arguement.

Spring

- lurking through the beginning of the game, keeping notes private till page 9. Also the spring/don arguement, though that bit weighted lightly.

RedCoyote

- still just a feeling and a bunch of dependent scum tell (mostly on how others flip). I really want to look into this.

fhq

- Was scummy, made a strong recovery in 131, and is starting to scum up (general vibes).

just to clarify... is this list ordered from who you find most suspicious to whom you find least suspicious? i.e. is budja #1, dj #2, and so on?

[don_johnson]

hi millar13
hopefully you know your shit,
please help us find scum.

[don_johnson]

jebus: i am at a loss to describe "puzzling". RC just seems to be defending spring by casting accusations that don't stick to anyone. they lumped several players together trying to create the impression that all the arguments against spring were one and the same when in fact, people had different issues with different areas of SL's play. he also stated his opinion as though it were fact. he asked both SL and myself to "represent" our cases on each other. not a difficult task, but i see it as a scumplay. a townie should be reading and following cases. both spring and myself brought up valid points in our argument, yet he dismisses them. i don't see why he's going to the lengths he is in order to defend someone whose alignment he does not know from attacks that are actually valid. spring did lurk. spring's analysis post was ambiguous in alot of ways. was it scummy? that's up for discussion, but to seemingly deny that these things happened seems off. i urge you to reread our exchange. i present evidence. the only evidence RC produces is in regards to "fringe" type issues. i.e. he produces quotes to show that he is right in calling out players on whether or not they think SL's post was fabricated or "genuine". he focuses on that instead of the REAL ISSUE which was(is) the content of SL's post. good redirect, but not helpful in the least.

[don_johnson]

catching up and saw this:

RC just seems to be defending spring by casting accusations that don't stick to anyone. they lumped several players together trying to create the impression that all the arguments against spring were one and the same when in fact, people had different issues with different areas of SL's play.

I don't know if that was a slip of tongue, but I think it's unwise to partner people up this early in the game, especially when it's based on little more than me buying spring's position over don's.

they refers to you(RC). i interchange the terms in almost all my posts and games. mainly because when i started playing here i would get confused as to peoples genders and saw other players referring to people as they, so its somewhat subconcious. who did you think i was referring to?

[don_johnson]

Looks like you just overtook don on my scum-scale.

i would like to see your next post RC. latching onto the word "they" is another example of your weak reasoning. you seem to focus on small details of posts which otherwise contain good material for discussion. i accused you of lumping several players together in order to unify the arguments against spring. instead of defending that point and/or producing evidence to the contrary, you attempt to pull some sort of "tell" out of thin air. so answer these questions:

who do you think "they" referred to?

hypothetically, if your answer to the above question is correct, how does that affect the argument against you or the point i was making? i.e. how is it relevant?

[don_johnson]

Um well, at this stage do you want a claim?

i think a claim is appropriate.

[don_johnson]

i didn't see the tells outside of the poetry phase. alot of what people were calling "slips" seemed like honest mistakes. i am in another game with budja and he is playing similar. the only thing that drew my attention was his voting pattern. in hindsight he seemed to be hopping the popular cases these last few pages. damn tunnel vision. i actually thought that one of you two might be doc. if budja hadn't claimed scum here i would have asked for more discussion on the counterclaim. c'est la vie! good start.

Good luck to my scumbuddy.

not.

[don_johnson]

Is there a reason we need to wait to hear from everyone prior to hammering? I don't see the point of needlessly extending the day.

I'm voting him tonight unless I hear a compelling reason not to.

Fos: Goatrevolt

discussion only helps. the fact budja is scum entirely changes the look of the bandwagon and those not on it. we are not guaranteed in being able to hear from everyone tomorrow, so cutting off discussion seems like an awfully bad idea.

[don_johnson]

Fos: lynx

see above.

[don_johnson]

Hmm. Either I succeeded in my protect. Either there was no kill/ delayed kill/ some other kind of screw.

Right now I think I've just done a good job.

Vote don johnson

i love unexplained votes.

i'm going to reread.

[don_johnson]

Based primarily on yesterday's attempt to actively hijack the lynch before Budja's confession, I'll vote: don_johnson

do you mind explaining this? exactly where and what was my attempt at "hi-jacking" the lynch?

a) lynching SL is a stupid idea. she is an uncounterclaimed doc.

b) whoever she protected is by no means clear of suspicion, so knowing who it was is not going to be imperative to our current discussion.

vote: D.Octopus

for lack of better place to put my vote just yet. DO is suggesting we sac an uncounterclaimed doc who may have had a successful protection last night. i don't see the benefit there.

[don_johnson]

wow. another game now where the case against me is that i appear to be town. i really have no defence. i do like how RC bolds the parts of the quote that fit his case and doesn't seem to acknowledge what the rest of the post says.

lynx: i don't see where RC's interactions with budja were very genuine. can you provide some examples?

my vote would be on RC right now, but DO is off the charts with starting an uncounterclaimed-doc-who-may-have-prevented-a-nightkill bandwagon.

now the bad news: i think plonky dissappeared, he's just been replaced in another game. and millar? good god, if we get anything useful out of him i will be amazed. he seems to enjoy spouting nonsense...

[don_johnson]

I wasn't very clear. The post I was referring to was here:

i didn't see the tells outside of the poetry phase. alot of what people were calling "slips" seemed like honest mistakes.

i am in another game with budja and he is playing similar. the only thing that drew my attention was his voting pattern.

in hindsight he seemed to be hopping the popular cases these last few pages. damn tunnel vision. i actually thought that one of you two might be doc. if budja hadn't claimed scum here i would have asked for more discussion on the counterclaim.

c'est la vie! good start.

Your meta defense is a separate incident (From a brief skim of that game it looked to me like Budja was much more vocal. I may read the game closer a little later).

Here Don's reason for not voting Budja based upon a meta read

.

the majority of my post offered much more reasoning for my not voting budja than simply "meta". you imply that i did not vote budja based on meta. this is incorrect. not sure which game you are reading, but his early play seemed similar. i.e. budja seemed to not be much of a leader in either game. this, however, was only one part of my decision.

I don't recall Don ever really commenting on the vote.

don didn't.

When I questioned Budja about his switch to RC, he replied that he never really found Don scummy and that he only layed down the vote because the pressure on his lack of any real stance.

I think Budja just used the vote to distance from Don plain and simple

.

plausible, but unlikely. i wasn't on his wagon and i was in no danger of lynch at the time. how would the vote have "distanced" us? personally i interpreted the vote as a frustrated townie's attempt to scumhunt. though i felt spring's interpretations of my posts were misrep, i by no means claim to have been beyond suspicion and seeing as how budja's vote carried no wieght i felt no need to respond as i was concerned in finding actual scum. day 1 is never easy. i still don't read budja as scum.

lynx: i don't see where RC's interactions with budja were very genuine. can you provide some examples?

Frankly, It's more of a gut call based upon my reread which I tend to use more as the we proceed further into the game. [/quote]

i don't understand this. do you mean that you prefer gut to facts as the game progresses?

Now I reread purely RC and I've realized that his vote has been on since the RVS. He continually questioned Budja's though throughout the earlier party of the game. Now It's a pretty strong bus to keep your vote on your partner all of Day 1. Towards the end of the day RC got somewhat wrapped up in the Spring defense/opinion and most of his posts addressed that alone towards the end, but he was being attacked by many players. So he had plenty to respond to keep him busy. I do find it a little strange that he went a little quiet about Budja after page 10 or so. However I find his continued expression of suspicion enough to not see a strong connection between the two.

I find it a little difficult to buy that he'd ride his partner that much

.

i disagree. scum are desperate, as soon as the heat turned up on RCscum i don't see why he wouldn't be willing to bus his partner straight to the gallows. in fact, this seems to be a perfect example of a text book bus.

[don_johnson]

you are wrong on my reasoning for my vote on DO, it is more than just "a place to put it". you are mischaracterizing my statements by excluding parts that are relevant. my suspicions on RC are documented in thread.

you have confirmed now that your vote on me is "gut" and that it is "speculative in nature" and not based on facts.

I think that he went after you was a distance attempt.

Like I said it was a weak effort by Budja.

But now knowing that he's scum, not town, the "frustrated townie" doesn't hold up. Any vote by scum on scum is a distance attempt.

i don't get you here. because i now know that he's scum, my thoughts from yesterday are now supposed to change? it seemed like a "frustrated townie attempting to scumhunt" type vote. if it was a weak effort by Budja, did you notice any strong efforts?

The only other reason I see in this that you saw his mistakes were honest slip ups. So I considered that your meta was a large reason for your lack of vote. The rest of the post seems all like reasons why you should've have seen Budja as scum such as the voting pattern and jumping on popular cases.

you should go to "THE DEREK ZOOLANDER SCHOOL FOR KIDS WHO DON'T READ GOOD". you missed this one:

i actually thought that one of you two might be doc.

sorry, but i'm not down with lynching players i think might be doc.

[don_johnson]

I'm not getting this reason still. You thought that one of the two of them was the doctor before or after their claims? My thing against you was why you weren't on the wagon in the first place not after their claims.(well inserted Zoolander reference boosts my respect for you at least)

the thought occurred to me before the claim. first with spring, then with budja. why would i vote a player who i think may have a town pr?

[don_johnson]

I'm not getting this reason still. You thought that one of the two of them was the doctor before or after their claims? My thing against you was why you weren't on the wagon in the first place not after their claims.(well inserted Zoolander reference boosts my respect for you at least)

the thought occurred to me before the claim. first with spring, then with budja. why would i vote a player who i think may have a town pr?

But I have no way of knowing that you thought that before their claims considering you stated this read after both of their claims. I don't think it's fair of you to pose that question when I have absolutely no basis to believe you didn't vote them because you thought they were power roles. What in Spring's play made you think she was the doc before the claim? The same goes for Budja.

I have a macroeconomics midterm tomorrow so my posting's probably gonna be limited today.

you are the one asking about this line of reasoning, not me. would you rather i lie? if its a no win situation you have placed me in, it is much more polite to just let me know, than to ask me a series of questions whose answers you have already made up your mind not to believe.

[don_johnson]

I wanted to see if Lynx would bite down on this, hence the reason I had asked Lynx and not you, but this is what I was leading toward.

sorry, but can you explain this statement. are you implying a "gambit" or something? i don't really understand what you're saying here. thanks.

[don_johnson]

Considering that most of the town has shown disapproval for your plan to lynch the claimed doctor, are you still supportive of it?

Is there any alternate suspects you have?

I still think it would be interesting. It obviously isn't going to happen, so no use floundering in the mud.

unvote

care to answer the second question?

[don_johnson]

intersting post. you completely misrep the circumstances surrounding my unvote of budja. i listed my reasons with my unvote post. not after.

the case on Budja was not as clear as you say. i agreed with some of the interpretations early on, but in my experience townies tend to make mistakes as well and i wasn't willing to push him for it considering some of the other things that were going on in the thread. you also lump posts of mine together(specicfically my post with a scum list and the following one you call a contradiction). there was action in the thread between those posts which led to my "scum list" being adjusted. sorry if i didn't explain that well enough, but your continued defense of spring arose my suspicions moreso than Budja.

your attack on me is pretty vicious.

My whole argument at this point in the game, contrary to the problems other players had with Budja, was that I thought Ice9's vote on WolfBlitzer was, without question, not random.

sorry. i disagree. none of the votes were truly random. the rvs is also referred to as the "joke vote" phase.

My point being that the RVS was long dead and gone before Budja voted, and I hit him for claiming that it wasn't, and I'm hitting don here for, essentially doing the same thing with this quote.

matter of opinion. in all honesty, i felt that my vote was the most serious one and actually brought us out of the random joke vote phase.

Secondly, don unvotes Budja with very little reason for doing so. He never claims he accepts Budja's explanation, he just unvotes, almost as if he never really cared for his vote to be there in the first place

untrue, as is this-

Your basic reason for the unvote is that you thought Budja explained himself well and that there was a poetry slip up. The facts just don't agree with this, and this is especially bad considering Budja's flip.

following were reasons offered at the time of the unvote:

the problem is that you were trying to take us out of the random stage with a vote that was "no worse than a random vote" and "meaningless". this is counterproductive. i have employed similar tactics as town before, so this is not necessarily a scum tell. what ends up happening is that if your target eventually does slip up, your accusations have little credibility due to the fact that other players will see it as the pot calling the kettle black.

i disagreed with the condemnation budja was recieving. also, in regards to the arguments going on at the time:

as for the vote and its "self defeating" explanation, i am not sure i agree with spolium and goat. a vote carries with it an inherent "ability to lynch". saying a vote is a "pressure" vote does not defeat the purpose. the vote carries pressure until said player unvotes, as we have no way of knowing if it is scum or town placing the initial vote. i.e. scum and town can easily place a pressure vote and go v/la, "forget" to remove it, and contribute to a lynch. scum can do so intentionally and hide behind this excuse.

just because budja was playing poorly didn't make him scum in my book. read some of my other games. poor play and misplaced votes do not always = scum. saying i wasn't paying attention is ridiculous considering my post, which you assert contained no analysis on the game, clearly contained my opinion on budja's vote and the surrounding commentary.

Lynx and Spolium get special treatment although their names were both heavily mentioned in my reread because I think they were sincerely considering Budja's role during D1. Contrast this with a player like fhq, a player who hasn't been using his vote, who hasn't been as open to other arguments, and who has portrayed the case against Budja inaccurately either intentionally or not.

so if we're voting on inaccuracy i'd be voting you. i was suspicious of Budja's actions, not enough to lynch him. in hindsight, anyone would lynch scum and that is what you are doing. looking back and saying "this and that" were obvious and everyone should have known. unfair way to push a case. it rests entirely in the knowledge we have now that we didn't have yesterday.

[don_johnson]

looking back and saying "this and that" were obvious and everyone should have known. unfair way to push a case. it rests entirely in the knowledge we have now that we didn't have yesterday.

Should the town not look back to Day 1 to acquire knowledge that it didn't have yesterday when considering a lynch?

I have more I'd like to discuss with you don, but this is what sticks out most because I disagree 100% with you

if that's your argument.

I'll be back later tonight.

actually, here again you are dismissing the larger portion of my post and trying to make it seem as if my argument is narrow. i presented several rebuttals to your findings and yet you focus on one part of my post and imply that it alone makes up what is my "argument".

of course the town should analyze day 1. i never implied that to not be viable. however, to look at day1 and assert that it should have been clear then, as clear as it is in hindsight, is fallacious. it is also dabbling in wifom to assume that if i were budja's scum partner that i would avoid his wagon. if his scumminess was as "obvious" as you are claiming it to have been, then most likely his partner(s) are on the wagon somewhere. most likely towards the back end if "lynch inevitability" is indeed a point you are making.

your analysis makes some sense, but i feel you are focusing on contradictory aspects.

[don_johnson]

RC: you are arguing with me about my "acceptance" of Budja's reasoning. you seem to think there was some sort of "absolute" and clear moment when this game left the RVS. i will do a pbpa sometime today, but your entire case seems based on that very narrow minded OPINION of when we left the rvs. also, how am i to be faulted for "accepting" someones excuse? in my OPINION there is no proof of when or whose vote took us out of the rvs. you thought it was ice9, budja thought it was himself, i thought it was me. why should i disbelieve a player who thinks that about their vote? there is no clear proof, nor did i see you chiming in at the time to dispute it. everything becomes more clear in hindsight. Budja played poorly and i was willing to see him lynched if need be, but yours and Springs ridiculousness trumped his stupidity.

This is contradictory. You disagree with my contention that Budja didn't have the first "real" vote yet you say the votes before Budja's weren't random?

why is this even relevant? i personally believe that most votes occuring int the rvs are "joke" votes. true randomness is a philosophy in itself. how did you decide who to vote for? in fact you voted Budja. how and/or why did you choose Budja? personally i chose wolfblitzer because i recognized the celebrity name. it stood out so i voted him. that's not random. you are now crossing into the land of "fishing" for scumminess. this argument is complete crap.

Like I said earlier in this post, your reasoning is based on the idea that Budja's vote is the first real vote, which is patently false. Budja cannot have been "trying to get us out of the random stage" because we were already out of the random stage. Period.

sorry, but no. i thought budja was an idiot. it seemed perfectly plausible to me that Budja thought exactly what he said he thought.

effectively dismissing Ice9 and Wolf's votes as random, and dismissing my argument altogether.

i haven't "dismissed" anything. please show me where i did.

I'm concerned with that fact that you just clean accepted his claim that he was the vote to "get us out of the random stage".

^^^ this was his claim. not mine. again, what reason did i have to distrust budja in such a manner as to accuse him of lieing at that stage of the game? also i did acknowledge other players. reread the thread.


{quote"RC"]In other words, that's not the only thing I wanted to address, and I don't appreciate you framing me in that way.[/quote]

hi pot! heres a kettle. can you tell me what color it is?

I don't wish to convey such bravado. I think you as scum based on a

multitude of factors

that I'm only able to see after Budja flipped scum, many of my points are dependent on that.

now its a multitude? before it was "only" my "acceptance" of budja's excuse.

sorry, but in regards to the wifom i was trying to appease you. i.e. you used wifom to show guilt, i can use it to show innocence- therefore it is silly. that aside, have you bothered to look at the back end of the wagon?


let me put a stop to this silliness.

role claim: town watcher
night 1 target: Red Coyote
results: confusing

i misinterpreted my ability. i thought its properties were more akin to the role "tracker" and have been back and forth with the mod as to my results. My first return PM stated that RC was home alone all night. when asked to clarify i got the response that as watcher i only see who targets my target and am given no information as to alignment. however, based on my continuing conversation i am leaning towards RC being town despite his entirely crap argument. has anyone here been watcher before? mods answers were puzzling to me and i have been wrestling with the results.

[don_johnson]

ebwop: "i will do a pbpa sometime today" should be "i will do a pbpa now". i couldn't resist.

[don_johnson]

first results were that RC was home alone all night. i asked about what i would see if RC had an investigative immune role, and was told that my results have nothing to do with alignment, and that my ability only reveals if someone targets my target(as you said). what i am stuck wondering is this:

if RC is mafia, is there any reason he would be home alone? there not being an nk last night adds to my confusion. wouldn't scum read as "out" anyway? i thought both scum and mason roles had to leave there houses to speak at night, which leads me to townRC.

i don't think i can paraphrase more than that.

[don_johnson]

Hey guys, I'm glad not all 19 pages are in poetry. I am reading through and trying to find connections/reactions given yesterday's lynch and the claimed night info.

i was actually hoping for all poetry. welcome. we could use some fresh insight. i am currently in reread.

[don_johnson]

Spring, Who did you protect? Why would you withhold this info in the first place?

Again I ask. There's no reason not to say, unless you're not actually a doc.

personally, i disagree. though it

may

help to know who spring protected, spring may have good reasons for not saying. obviously, as the game progresses, town will most likely want this knowledge, but to say "there's no reason" for her not to say is incorrect. i mentioned before that she "may have" prevented an nk. unless there is other reason to not trust her i will accept her judgement at this time.

i will post more when i am through my reread.

[don_johnson]

i think the question was clear enough that it deserves an answer. you may need to read it a couple of times, but it makes sense. maybe try reading it again.

[don_johnson]

she's asking your tone. pretty simple. but i digress...

[don_johnson]

SL: for the record I agree that you may have your own reasons for withholding. Please do not spill until it carries the most benefit for the town.

you say this as if SL needs your advice. seems like you are seizing a chance to come off as pro town here.

vote: sekinj

please, talk some more.

[don_johnson]

lynx: no, my rereading has been interrupted on quite a regular basis both with rl and with trying to keep up with the speed at which this thread is moving. i do not agree completely with your case on fhq. as for sekinj: no, not much more to base the vote off, mainly dropped in for pressure based on their posting at the time.

unvote

good golly, two docs... never seen a setup with two docs. as for my take on why sl witheld information: i thought maybe she could self protect. this info would best be kept under wraps. i see little reason for scum not to target her night 1. if i had understood my role i would have watched her.

not sure who to believe with the doc thing, though jebus letting the fakeclaim ride is somewhat suspicious, i can also see reason behind all of this. unfortunately any explanation seems to be an experiment in convoluted thought. i.e. sl(jebus) is town, lying to keep scum confused as to who the real doctor is.

bottom line: i agree with the current ideas about DO and would be comfortable lynching depending on how the replacement responds. chiming in to lynch an uncounterclaimed doc after an apparent failed nightkill and then dissappearing without further thought pings scummy to me. i am still trying to determine if "replacing" is used as a viable scum strategy on this site. i have noticed a trend of more scum replacements than town.

question for all: is there a way to use my ability to confirm one or both of our alleged two doctors?

i support a massclaim.

[don_johnson]

Jebus' protection claim doesn't add up though.

I heavily doubt Spring would be scum target number 1.

In fact, if his claim is correct, why would he protect someone who counterclaimed a role he KNOWS is false. This makes no sense.

why in regards to the bolded statement, please?

[don_johnson]

masslcaim forces scum's hand. if it is too early that's fine, but if it came up for a vote i would support. two doc's is an odd set up.

what if there are 2 docs, 1 watcher, a serial killer and a 2 man mafia team. AND the sk just happened to pick Spoilum....

That's a totally strange thing to say.

QFT ^^

[don_johnson]

still here and trying to keep up. i am utterly confused by two docs. i see the upside though, if we assume three scum(with one already dead) , and can confirm them both then they could possibly protect each other for a win, no? any ideas on confirming two town docs? i don't see any reason to disbelieve either claim at this point other than gut feelings, so i would rather work out a scenario to confirm them. then we can just lynch down the line.

Jebus: what about Ice did you find "townie"? also, what makes Goat "Very" townie?

Spolium: i am willing to follow directions to use my ability, you can lynch me at any time to confirm my results. i would prefer to be of some use as i feel had i understood my role i may have been much more helpful today.

[don_johnson]

@ don - what do you think of budja's reference to a singular buddy?

the wifomic circumstances surrounding such a statement lead me to ignore it. i believe the statement is useless, however, until tomorrow, we should not be discounting the scenarios that have been discussed.

[don_johnson]

Mod: can we get an update and a vote count? are we waiting on a replacement or no?

[don_johnson]

EBWOP

So, to me, it really does seem like we actually have 2 docs. BUt what would the mafia have to have to counter such a powerful town? at least a godfather I'm thinking...

Well we already know they had one power role in a role blocker. Perhaps they have a watcher as well? Don scum wouldn't have to fake sincerity in his confusion over his results then. Don's activity and playstyle has changed since he claimed I feel... might be something to keep tabs on.

not sure what you mean by "not having to fake sincerity"? if i had a scum parnter(s), don't you think they would enlighten me as to the particulars of my role?

to me, two docs is more indicative of a "hitman" type role. you know, something that would trump the docs ability. isn't there the possibility one of them is equivalent to an "insane" cop or something? i will look in wiki, but i assume there are variants to the role.

[don_johnson]

i guess we could lynch spolium to help clear that up, however, i still think rhinox is the best bet. they seem to be defending DO's play, but not contributing too much more. also, RC seems to have fallen off the radar when many of you have agreed that my results don't necessarily clear them. we lynched a roleblocker day 1, so i think it would be best to choose someone to help clear things up. i realize that puts me on the list again, however, i think i can be of more help than just one failed watch. i am wondering if we should each suggest our "top three" lynch list? i am often criticized for suggesting that one, but it may help us come to a consensus on who is most in doubt.

[don_johnson]

don: How would my lynch clear things clear up the doc issue, exactly?

for spring - CPR would be ruled out unless Jebus is a jailkeeper, and weak is only ruled out IF we assume Spoilum is town (which I'm not ready to do)... so she coudl possibly be any of those

i said "help clear up", not "clear up".

i thought jailkeeper was a different role altogether, i.e. a jailkeeper would know whether or not they are one, whereas a weak doc would not know? your lynch would not clear up much, but i was wondering where sekinj was going with this. apparently nowhere as they are not ready to assume you town, but not following up on finding out if you are. i don't really know what to do now. as i have stated: i think rhinox is our best lynch today.

[don_johnson]

v/la until 3/31(tuesday)

vote: rhinox/DO

this is the lynch i am most comfortable with.

[don_johnson]

unvote, vote: fhq

not my first choice here, but i am unable to check in again before deadline. i don't like the no-lynch suggestion, but i don't see it as necessarily scummy. i can't really argue against the case on fhq so i move my vote.

[don_johnson]

target: spring lullaby. noone targeted springlullaby but me.

[don_johnson]

why? because it exposes you as a fraud?

[don_johnson]

don_johnson - I'd like an explanation on why he targetted me instead of Jebus

i thought that was the plan. SL protects jebus, jebus protects me, i watch SL.

why? because it exposes you as a fraud?

Explain how it 'exposes me as a fraud'.

it doesn't. that was my emotional reaction to your "disappointment" with me. though, i am confused as to why you are so concerned with spolium. i have a neutral read on them.

[don_johnson]

I also completely disagree with your Lynx thing. he is town.

^^^^ you say this with certainty. please explain.

[don_johnson]

Theoretically we could do some sort of protection daisy chain of all of them, spring protects Jebus, Jebus protects don, and don watches spring.

We would be sacrificing don's investigative use for more of a protective one, but that should keep all of them alive if they're all being truthful.

^^^ i thought this was the plan. it made the most sense. i considered reversing it, but i wanted to be sure we were all protected. i have no idea why SL is protecting spolium.

linx: how has my hunting "slipped"? what exactly has changed in my playstyle? mafia is a dynamic game and change is inevitable, so unless you can point to something specific and relevant i suggest you focus on something more productive.

as i said before, i was most suspicious of the end of the wagon on day 1. budja's lynch seemed a bit inevitable and i think our "bus" votes are there at the end. i want to read some players in isolation before i cast a vote today. my apologies that rl has been demanding my attention.

no to modkill, but yes to catfight!

[don_johnson]

Lynx flips 'nilla. p/quote[

is this a prediction or do you know? I just find this odd...

As for spolium, i believe that he was defending

budgja

from my

ealrier

attacks

cuase

they are scum. I was attacking budja with valid reasons, and he kept slapping a stop sign at me. His spring attack day 2 was weird. early on he gave the impression he did not believe spring,

bu tlater

he gave the impression he did. it seemed...unnatural progression for a townie. Like he was attacking spring but then i gave reasons against it, and then he was

suddently

also against hit. Just seems faked...like he was not sure how to react as scum, who maybe wanted spring dead, but then

backracked

when he realized it wasn't going to happen. that is my

impressionj

at least.

I don't know about sekinj. she keeps harpin on spring, but i can legitimize her stance so...i don't know. I have also attacked spring where i do not think her actions fit...so maybe hypocritical for me to pressure her on that?

so...yeah...posting drunk probably a bad idea...but i think senor spolio is of the scum

temperment

.

love it.

Look, the possibility of Spring being scum keeps dancing around in my head for reasons that I've explained already - primary because of the lack of read, partly because of the favourable position she's in, and generally because I get a bad feeling about her.

Yeah, maybe I'm totally wrong, which is why I haven't really been pushing for a lynch, and am trying to consider other options

.

the idea of scumspring is so freaking convoluted it makes my head spin. the fact that you are having trouble moving on is doubly troubling.

unvote

(if need be),

vote: spolium

[don_johnson]

Is that the only reason you're voting me, Don?

at the moment? yes.

[don_johnson]

Then I'll point out that it's not so much a case of me having trouble "moving on", as finding that her play consistently suspicious (for the reasons given in 837).

at the moment?

I find it strange that you would say that. What else could I have meant?

its not what else you could have meant. its the fact that i have no reason to believe you are town and that your case is one i am more than willing to investigate further. so yes, at the moment i have only one reason with which i will cite that i am voting for you. what the next moment brings only marty mcfly can tell.

[don_johnson]

It just seems to me that if you're confident in putting a vote on me D3, you'd have a better reason to do so than a vague assessment of something taken out of context. At least Goatrevolt rustled up something worthwhile.

a) what was "taken out of context"?

b) without votes, the game goes nowhere. what is the significance of D3?

[don_johnson]

a) The emboldened text in the quotation prior to your vote. In case you didn't notice, the answer in 841 is a summary of the remainder of the post, which you seemed to disregard when making the assessment in your vote post.

b) There's more to work with than D1 or D2.

the answer in 841? you mean the post which refers me back to post 837? the post in which your reasons were :

lack of read, partly because of the favourable position she's in, and generally because I get a bad feeling about her.

^^^ if there's more to work with on D3 than there is on D1 or D2 then don't you think you should have more on spring than a "bad" feeling, jealousy, and a "lack of read"? what exactly should i have been regarding here?

[don_johnson]

Goat stated that my attack on Spring was weird, so I explained why Spring was lurking at the back of my mind.

don't you think you should have more on spring than a "bad" feeling, jealousy, and a "lack of read"?

Oh, come on. This is just dishonest.

no, its not. its

my

perception of

your

words.

- First, you prioritise "bad feeling", although it was last one I listed (and probably the weakest of the points).

did i number them? no.

- Second point - concerning the favourable position - has nothing to do with jealousy. That doesn't even make sense.

i don't know how else to interpret your saying she has a "favourable position". linx reads town. are you suspicious of his favorable position?

- Last, the lack of read bothers me because her play has denied the town a read, not because I find a lack of read suspicious in itself (I don't).

i don't get it. you don't find the lack of read suspicious, yet include it on your list of three vague suspicions, slightly above your "bad" feeling?

what exactly should i have been regarding here?

The fact that my open admission of finding Spring consistently suspicious is a result of valid concerns, and being conscious of the fact that she could still be scum, not because "I have trouble letting go". She's not confirmed town until she flips town.

she is not confirmed, but i don't see your "valid" concerns, and frankly, it seems as though you don't really have any besides "lack of read" which you don't find suspicious, "bad feeling" which is the least of your suspicions and the "weakest", and your concern that she has a "favorable position.

I can appreciate that considering Spring town right now is a practical belief in terms of guaging the town, but you seem to be suggesting that I should have dropped suspicion of her completely. Why?

not suggesting dropping suspicion. suggesting moving on because she is our town doc until evidence suggests she is not. i think you are scum.

she protects me, i watch her. scum cannot win this game if she and i are town. i know i am town and i as i said: scumspring is extremely convoluted. after giving it some thought, i feel comfortable lynching down the line. i have no problem starting with you.

[don_johnson]

Well, let's just hope you and Spring are town, eh?

sorry, i don't speak canadian.

[don_johnson]

---

she protects me, i watch her. scum cannot win this game if she and i are town.

Why do you say this don? If there are at least two scum left, don't you think, theoretically, they could get it down to a lylo of 3 town and 2 scum with at least the possibility of a mislynch?

it is a possibility, but i think we can make it work. lynch down the line. if there are two remaining scum the odds say we will hit one before this scenario occurs, no? also, if we kill one scum then SL and i are no longer as valuable and could be scrutinized a bit more, plus, through role reveals we can better establish the

actual

set-up in case someone is fake claiming.

it may take some thinking, but coming up with an order could be somewhat revealing. lets say we agree, for instance, to lynch in this order:

1) sekinj
2) goat
3) spolium

does anyone have a problem with this? we could roll dice and select a random order, or vote for top three suspects and choose the two with the most votes. we only need one more scum to bag a town win if SL and i are town. if she or i are lieing i think it would come out during the next two days, no? scum will also be forced to be extremely picky with their nightkills and if they target me the kill might fail, and if they target spring then we have them. please explain if i'm missing something, but this game seems largely based in probability factors and i believe through discussion and implementation of this strategy, we have an extremely probable chance of winning.

[don_johnson]

Also, spring and I are arguing about her playstyle, a thing most other players have mentioned once or twice as well (I just chose not to grin and bear it). We are not arguing about a case. Therefore, it does not follow that one of us is scum and one is town. We are both town.

you say this with certainty. also, spring is arguing about a case. the one against you.


this game is in a rut, but i am fairly confident we can work this out as long as SL protects me. mafia games are balanced. right now its a watcher and two doctors against a roleblocker and an unknown(s). determining if SL and I are fakeclaiming should get easier as time passes. from my pov it is obviously more probable that SL is lieing, but i understand your feelings on the situation, lynx. outside of my shoes i would be more suspicious of my claim as well. spolium's reaction to my suggestion is enough for an unvote for now. Goat kind of coasted past my suggestion, focusing on the dice roll idea as opposed to the suggested list. also, sekinj characterized my idea as "random voting", which it was not.

unvote

[don_johnson]

first question can't answer. what are the two docs and watcher balancing against? second question: no. i wouldn't rule out more power rules. game balance is dependent on just that: balance. i have been in games where every player has a "power" role.

goat: the list was actually RC's. i suggested more than a dice roll. i used the dice roll as an example of a fair and indiscriminate way to handle the situation. i.e. by producing a list, any list, we have something to discuss; and how people decide on and react to that list may be very telling.

to wit: notice how sekinj is continuous in their mischaracterization of my post. dice are random, yes, but there was a list and an alternative method by which to generate a new list(popular vote). saying we

could

generate a random list as one option to go with my plan is very different than saying we

should

and nothing else.

[don_johnson]

Don: I asked you a question for clarification, "How is a dice role not random?" instead of just answering or addressing that question you make a comment about how I am mis representing you statement. that is not true. I DID think you were saying we shoudl either random dice role or go in the order you suggested. Now that you have indirectly clarified, I can see where you are coming from.

nice try. why would i address such a rhetorical question?(please, don't answer). how was my clarification "indirect"? i don't believe the initial statement was as ambiguous as you are trying to make it seem, and now you are trying to blame me for your poor reading comprehension.

I don't think it's problem to discuss a list of names... however, hasn't anyone considered that Spring is not going to make it another night? there is no one to protect her. I think the scum will take the chance of don seeing one of them to take out a confirmed townie.

i will see them. there is no "chance" from my pov. you seem like a zoo monkey, flinging shit at the fence to see what will stick. are you uncomfortable being at the top of that list?

[don_johnson]

I think the scum will take the chance of don seeing one of them to take out a confirmed townie.

ebwop: how is spring "confirmed" in your book? thinking and believing someone to be town and publicly endorsing them as 100% or confirmed is scummy imo.

Also, spring and I are arguing about her playstyle, a thing most other players have mentioned once or twice as well (I just chose not to grin and bear it). We are not arguing about a case. Therefore, it does not follow that one of us is scum and one is town. We are both town.

two slips in two pages.

vote: sekinj

[don_johnson]

ebwop: thinking and believing someone to be town and publicly endorsing them as 100% or confirmed is scummy imo.

should read: thinking and believing someone to be town is different than publicly endorsing them as 100% or confirmed, which is scummy imo.

[don_johnson]

I completely agree that it is worth it. I wasnt' bringing it up in order to have anyone change any night actions,

I was bringing it up to show that don's idea of just lynching down the line isn't really going to work out.

I think each new day bring new information and we should discuss accordingly.

^^^^ more certainty. sekinj, do you understand what i'm saying here?

[don_johnson]

speak for yourself. i am being quite clear. when i scumhunt i look for certainty, and you are exhibiting plenty of it.

[don_johnson]

i know my plan is not a brilliant scheme to assure victory. but thanks for reminding me.

all plans have flaws.

spolium: i don't think i'm stretching at all.

I completely agree that it is worth it. I wasnt' bringing it up in order to have anyone change any night actions, I was bringing it up to show that don's idea of just lynching down the line

isn't

really going to work out.

the scope of the plan involves more than just "lynching down the line", and "isn't really" would make more sense if it was changed to "may not". defend much?

[don_johnson]

^^^^ tru dat. happy easter!

[don_johnson]

have either of you actually caught up? there have been questions raised in regards to the set-up. also, i appreciate you both replacing (back)in, but we are not here to do your homework. RTFT.

for shits and giggles: some players seem to think my results were useful, but i am not so sure that they are. in any case, i believe spring's claim at this point.

[don_johnson]

i didn't confirm spring. i just happen to believe her claim at this point. night 1 i watched RC. noone targeted them. i screwed up my role thinking i had the abilities of a tracker. otherwise i would have watched spring(night 1)

night 2 i watched spring based on what i thought was the plan as posted in thread by RC.

for some odd reason, spring has protected spolium both nights 1 and 2. hopefully tonight she will be protecting me and i watching her.

[don_johnson]

for some odd reason, spring has protected spolium both nights 1 and 2. hopefully tonight she will be protecting me and i watching her.

I thought spring said he protected you last night, and spolium N1?

^^ incorrect. i thought spring would protect jebus, and jebus me, while i watched spring. spring stated in thread that she chose to protect spolium again instead. we didn't have a necessarily concrete plan, but i was following along with a suggestion by RC thinking that we all would. i was wrong.

[don_johnson]

And the fact that spring CCed a mafia fakeclaim... Anyone starting to think 2 scumteams of 2 yet?

Spring counterclaiming budja in my opinion almost excludes the possibility of two two-man scumteams altogether. If spring were scum with budja on a two person team, she would not cc him on day one and throw him under the bus like that with a doc claim, not knowing anything at all about the makeup of real power roles in the game - a single cautious cop could end the game for her team. Its also very unlikely that spring on a seperate two man scumteam would cc budja, because at that point she has no reason to believe that Budja isn't in fact telling the truth, and if she's on a scum team of two its a safe bet to think there could very well be a second scumteam out there, and why would you sacrafice a member of your own scumteam helping both scumpairs get rid of the doc?

Out of the two claimed power roles, I'm actually much happier believing Spring's claim than don's.

if you are locked into an either/or decision then i can agree with your reasoning, however, i would argue that doc is the most protown role there is and most scum teams will do whatever is necessary to get rid of it. spring was not entirely free of scrutiny on day 1. also, if spring were part of a two man scum team, she wouldn't necessarily be under the impression that another "team" exists. in such a situation, an sk is at least just as likely a possibility as another two person scum team.

that aside, lynching me seems like an unecessary gamble for town at this point.

[don_johnson]

i would support an extension. i have relatives visiting this week and it would be nice to have everyone's opinions before deadline.

[don_johnson]

So... Is anyone going to back off? Or am I going to have to claim....

unvote

i think a claim would be appropriate.

[don_johnson]

Doc-Doc-Watcher-Cop... Which doesn't fit with the rest? Does it seem logical that the town can actually have all 4 of those roles? I think it seems likely now that at least 1 of the 3 remaining are lying.

QFT. Two investigative roles and two protective roles is far too powerful.

I think tonight Spring should target Sekinj, while Sekinj targets someone else - Goat or Rhinox would be good choices - and Don should target Spring. No sense in making the same mistake two nights in a row.

so are you talking no lynch?

i think sekinj's claim is bullshit. though it is highly believable that plonky failed to pick a target night 1, i find it unbelievable that sekinj would fail to state this with her initial investigation results. results are results and this claim seems like a last minute scum claim. but whatever. i would be okay lynching sekinj, but i am wary that my second choice for lynch seems to be suggesting a "no-lynch" and that docspring protects "cop"sekinj while "watcher"don gets whacked and left in a ditch.

[don_johnson]

when i have replaced into games, mods give me information pertinent to the role i am replacing, though i have not been in your position(investigative) i do know that info should be passed on. also, you didn't mention that you "did not have" the information before. also, if you didn't have the information and you replacxed in as cop, why would you wait until after you have claimed to pm the mod and ask him who you investigated night 1? seriously?

vote: sekinj

nice try.

[don_johnson]

@don - Whoa there. What exactly makes you think I'm suggesting a no-lynch?

your plan was devoid of a lynch choice. never said you were "suggesting" a no-lynch. asked you a question to clarify exactly what it was you were trying to say.

Something is very, very wrong with these claims.

yes. sekinj is lying. why would she not address the issue of night 1's investigation?

[don_johnson]

Scum would obviouslly be thinking about taking one of themm down. And whoever died would bring some light on their claims.

i don't see what's so obvious here. by nk'ing the power roles, scum would only be helping town at this point. i.e. clearing players

and

their results.

RC: how does lynching spolium clear up sanity issues? i will look in the wiki, but i don't see how spolium's alignment would clear that up. if we lynch someone, it should be because we find them scummiest. i don't think we have enough info to determine sanities at this point.

[don_johnson]

---------------------------------------------------------------------------------

Don, have you ever played in a game with a watcher or tracker before?

i believe i was in one game with a "jack of all trades" who had a one shot tracker ability. other than that, no. i have been in mostly newbs and minis with basic roles.

[don_johnson]

Upon receiving a role of watcher in this game, I'm not sure I can believe you would interpret your role as a tracker without at least a PM to the mod asking, "hey, is a watcher the same as a tracker?"

why would i ask the mod for something i thought i understood. i didn't need clarification until i got my reslults.

Furthermore, I'm not a mod, but I'm pretty sure its standard practice for all mods in a normal games to give a role PM to give more than just a role name, I.E. instructions for what you're supposed to do, and

what results you should expect.

And it really should have been a slam dunk watch on SL N1.

bolded was not included. i thought if i watched RC i would see whether or not he was home. that was not the case.

I also read back to when you claimed... you never said why you targeted RC. So... why did you choose to

track

RC (since you thought you were tracking)?

i was extremely suspicious of RC day one. i thought if i watched him, i would get a result of, "he wasn't home", meaning he was out cavorting with his mafia buddies. i didn't completely misunderstand my role, i thougt the ability was more akin to what "tracker" does.

[don_johnson]

Don, you intend to be watching spring tonight, yes?

i am not sure yet.

[don_johnson]

yes. I recieved a brief description. My role PM had my role name, what I needed to do each night, what the results could be, and my win condition.

i can confirm this.

[don_johnson]

absolutely. on rereading my role pm i can confirm that my pm states all of those things.

[don_johnson]

yeah. sorry, i haven't reread my role pm since the start of the game. i didn't realize that there was one half a sentence in their which states i would see who targeted my night choice. understand that i didn't replace "watcher" with "tracker" i merely thought my power was a bit more than it actually is. when i received my results i pm'd the mod for clarification. i didn't go to my inbox and reread my role pm.

[don_johnson]

You didn't think it prudent to check your role PM at any point during your initial confusion about your role?

no. i pm'd the mod. he explained it to me.

[don_johnson]

no. i pm'd the mod. he explained it to me.

Oh, okay.

Then, when Rhinox suggested that mod PMs would typically include a brief description of the role, you denied that this was the case without even taking a moment to double-check a PM which you hadn't read in some two and a half months (again, despite the earlier confusion)?

correct.

Don, please paraphrase your role PM.

i will have to check with the mod before i do this.

[don_johnson]

Furthermore, I'm not a mod, but I'm pretty sure its standard practice for all mods in a normal games to give a role PM to give more than just a role name, I.E. instructions for what you're supposed to do, and what results you should expect. And it really should have been a slam dunk watch on SL N1.

rhinox: if the information both sekinj and i are saying exists, is something that you believe should exist in a pm from the mod, how does our confirming now that it does, make either of us town?

[don_johnson]

Oh, and pretty sure paraphrasing is always allowable, so long as you're not quoting. Thats pretty much site standard. Paraphrasing should be pretty easy, since the role was written in poetry, and you can paraphrase in normal writing. So quit stallin'

paraprhasing is not easy. there are only so many words involved and i would rather send my version to the mod first to make sure it is acceptable to post in thread.

[don_johnson]

okay:

there is a poem about me sitting outside someones house.

it says i am town watcher and that i may choose a player each night and will be told who targets my choice.

it also includes my win condition.

[don_johnson]

i understand rhinox's reasoning here, but i am still highly suspicious of the claim. rhinox mentioned before(in thread) of what he thought a role pm should contain. they could be a scumpair that tried to set me up, but that would be a bit convoluted so no

unvote

i can entertain the idea of multiple power roles here. sekinj is as "confirmed" as any of us.

spolium has come across pretty well in his recent posts, but the case on RC seems rather forced. personally i am becoming more suspicious of ice9 and goat as time wears on. i know i am alone in this, but i found ice's day1 pretty scummy and his recent posts seem to be just trying to get a lynch. goat's activity level is dissappointing and i especially didn't like his post where he jumped to spolium with little reasoning, but i don't see it as a definite tell.

i may only get to post once more before deadline so if anyone has a case, present it. i will vote for any of the above mentioned players.

[don_johnson]

okay:

there is a poem about me sitting outside someones house.

it says i am town watcher and that i may choose a player each night and will be told who targets my choice.

it also includes my win condition.

Reading this, I find it unbelievable that you could not understand your role ability for N1. It seems pretty clear to me. Which part made you believe your role was more like a tracker?

no part. i didn't read my role pm close enough. i thought as watcher that i would be able to see whether or not my target was home. i read the pm once when i recieved it and have not looked at it until this recent line of questioning. my misunderstanding had nothing to do with the way it was written. i simply didn't remember the half a sentence that described my results. also, it may help it seem clear because i am paraphrasing it and it contains no poetry, alternate text and the like. also, if you know what watcher is, then it wouldn't need to be clear.

I agree that RC's latest posts have seemed sketchy, but I think the best course of action is to look for scum among those who didn't vote for budja. I wouldn't be able to believe that all other scum voted to bus the mafia RB on D1.

i understand your line of reasoning, but we have no way of knowing what other scum roles exist. i am much more suspicious of the late day 1 votes that jumped the wagon with little to no reasoning.

you are ignoring the fact that scum could most likely present their role pm to look town. you are ignoring the fact that lynx could be sekinj's scum partner. you seem to be focusing on one thing: getting rid of the only power role who can protect the claimed town doc.

[don_johnson]

don - you cannot protect the claimed town doc, you can watch her and hope that that discourages her being a target. Given the trouble you have had with your role PM, I think that is an important clarification.

^^ and? so discouraging a nk, possibly drawing an nk away from, or possibly seeing who attempts to nk spring doesn't fall under the category of "protection"? anybody here been in a game where doc can self-protect?

again, i haven't had trouble with my role pm. that is a mischaracterization of events.

i misunderstood the role itself, not the pm

.

i have to go to bed. when i wake up i will check in and vote. i am adding rhinox to my list of possible lynches. i believe DO liked the idea of lynching claimed power roles as well.

[don_johnson]

i understand your line of reasoning, but we have no way of knowing what other scum roles exist. i am much more suspicious of the late day 1 votes that jumped the wagon with little to no reasoning.

Refresh my memory - which votes were those?

you(DO), Spolium, Ice9(millar13)



i'm really going to bed now.

[don_johnson]

yes. yes i did.

ooc: sorry about the deadline. i overslept.

[don_johnson]

Don, tell me you watched Lynx.

why on earth would i have watched lynx?

it should be pretty obvious that RC tracked me at some point.

i watched springlullaby.

[don_johnson]

it should be pretty obvious that RC tracked me at some point.

How so?

why do you think he was so persistent in his support of my claim? i could be wrong, but it occured to me as soon as i saw how he flipped. i haven't seen any breadcrumbs, however, i also haven't reread him.

[don_johnson]

yes ice. i saw you. only you.

[don_johnson]

So... slip?

more like ^^^ reach. i didn't say i "saw" myself. okay there, ponch?

more later.

[don_johnson]

regarding the roles: i am currently in an open off this site and the role of jailkeeper is separate from doc. wiki states that the role of paranoid doctor is identical to jailkeeper, however, and that the player is told they are simply a doctor.

i have never been in a game with a deputy, but i was in a game with a nurse. effectively the nurse took over for doc if doc died. the player who had the role of nurse stated that he could not confirm the existence of the doctor with his role pm, but that he was aware that his role was nurse and the implications of said role. however, wiki states that deputy does begin as a vanillla townie and that there is a variant which knows he is deputy.

i think one of sekinj/rhinox now must be lying due to rhinox' question and sekinj's answer. based on the discrepancies of yesterdays claim(i.e. sekinj not reporting the lack of night 1 results until asked) i am inclined to think sekinj is scum.

[don_johnson]

I agree that the mafia probably has multiple roleblockers.

then you must think spring is scum, no?

Whether the block came from a role blocker targeting me, or from somthing in ice's role that caused me to get no result, the fact is something blocked me, so that is what I said.

because the result of my investigation seemed like I was blocked.

I was not informed of being roleblocked. I gathered that from the supporting evidence. My PM said I investigated Ice but I was not successful and returned no result.

And I was blocked. So we have nothing new on the cops. I tried to look at ice.

so you are now saying that you don't know whether or not you were blocked, yet you believe there to be two scum roleblockers?

so do you think it is suspicious of goat to think you were "informed" of being blocked, considering you stated in thread "i was blocked"?

it seems to me that you are trying to backtrack and cast suspicion on others by changing your story after the fact.

were you blocked or not? you have given no definitive answer here. if not, then why do you believe there to be two scum roleblockers?

vote: sekinj

[don_johnson]

you are reaching don. I was blocked. goat misunderstood so I explained it in more detail. If you haven't figured this out already I'm not caught up in the semantics. I'm not suspicious of goat for mis-understanding.

sorry, but when you qft someone's points it makes me think you are agreeing with them. >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>

Sekinj was informed about being roleblocked or is lying (doubtful)

What makes you say this? Sekinj never said that she was informed of being roleblocked.

qft

okay now this:

just because I think there are mafia roleblockers does not mean to think spring is one of them. I think she is a paranoid doc. however...

Thoguht: Tony has emphasized several times that we should not discuss the poems in the PMs and that they are for flavor only. Spring is currently "confirmed" because of the similarities between her and Jebus's poem. Maybe Tony is trying to tell us we should throw that out? or maybe we are too close to the truth...

so do you or do you not think spring is a mafia roleblocker? it is hard to tell what you mean when you say one thing and then throw out a sideays accusation like this.

[don_johnson]

ebwop: should read "sideways".

if you believe spring to be paranoid doc, why do you think there is a mafia roleblocker when noone has claimed to be roleblocked but you(sorry, you didn't claim to be blocked, you just said it and meant that you got no result which led you to believe you were blocked)?

[don_johnson]

(sorry, you didn't claim to be blocked, you just said it and meant that you got no result which led you to believe you were blocked)?

exactly.

you are not answering any questions here. even if i accept your bullshit backtracking excuse, your current suspicions make no sense. please explain yourself.

[don_johnson]

My power was blocked by something causing me to get a no result....

please paraphrase your results pm.

if you believe spring to be paranoid doc, why do you think there is a mafia roleblocker when noone has claimed to be roleblocked but you

If someone is mafia and is lying about their role, why would they say they were a roleblocker, when the only other known role blocker was mafia? woukdn't they just say "I'm 'nilla". I'm assuming the mafia is lying about the role claim, which I dont' think is too much of a stretch.

you are avoiding the question or misunderstanding it. if there is a mafia roleblocker then they would have targeted someone. you are the only person who is claiming to be "blocked". spring targeted you and you say you believe she is a paranoid doc. where's the roleblocker? who did they target? your suspicions don't add up.

[don_johnson]

you said " i was blocked". someone drawing the conclusion that "you were blocked" is not a case of the second party misunderstanding. it is a case of the first party misspeaking.

[don_johnson]

a paranoid doc stops someone from using their power while protecting them, correct? in terms of flavor, the paranoid doc locks someone in their office preventing them from leaving which results in them being protected and not being able to use their power... That is how she blocked me and protected me. or am I not understanding what a paranoid doc is?

*facepalm*

WHERE"S THE FUCKING MAFIA ROLEBLOCKER YOU SAY YOU BELIEVE EXISTS IF YOU ALSO BELIEVE THAT YOU WERE "BLOCKED" BY A PARANOID DOC? NOONE ELSE HAS CLAIMED TO BE ROLEBLOCKED. WHY DO YOU EVEN THINK ANOTHER MAFIA ROLEBLOCKER EXISTS?

[don_johnson]

You think there are multiple scum roleblockers, but you think Spring is a paranoid doc? Where is the information leading you to believe a 2nd roleblocker is coming from in that case, if you don't necessarily think it's Spring? Nobody else has claimed to have been blocked, so there's no physical evidence of another non-Spring roleblocker. Explain?

already did. look at my conversation with don.

you have not explained this. you merely acknowledged the discrepancy and posted "lol". i am glad you find it humorous. anytime you want to clarify your suspicions will be great.

On sekinj and jailkeeping: my being a jailkeeper/rb is merely a possibility amongst other possibility. I feel that people latching/not latching on this tidbit may possibility interesting to explore, I'm to lazy to do it now, because other equal possibles are a) sekinj lying b) my targeting her having nothing to do in the reported result.

i think sekinj is lying. i think the claiming of "blocked" and its subsequent backtracking was a feeble attempt to keep suspicion on spring. you see, sekinj is playing both sides of the fence. if there is a scum roleblocker and sekinj is town, then spring

has

to be a leading candidate, yet sekinj is content to call spring "paranoid doc". yet sekinj believes there to be a scum roleblocker even though she claims she doesn't "know" whether or not she herself was roleblocked, and no other claimed power role has claimed to be roleblocked.

i am trying not to intervene in the goat/spolium debate here as i thought it was going somewhere, but it seems like you guys are arguing in circles. goat, what makes you think scumspolium is going to admit to being roleblocked when/if he committed the night1 kill?

spolium, sekinj said she was blocked. you say goat is scummy for assuming she was informed of being roleblocked, because he didn't seek to clarify this information. is this correct? if so, do you find it suspicious that noone else tried to clarify this infromation as well? i think both rhinox and myself agreed that we thought sekinj meant what she said. what did you think she meant when she said "i was blocked"?

[don_johnson]

target: ice9

only rhinox targeted ice9

i would vote, but i am thinking this is lylo.

goat/rhinox?

[don_johnson]

you are not a cop. you are scum. you targeted ice9. ice9 is dead.

only question is: who is your partner?

when sekinj flipped cop it occurred to me that you were most likely lying. watching you would reveal no significant results. i was pretty sure spring was going to target either spolium or goat due to the fact that if you actually were a cop then her targeting you would impede an investigation. likewise, her targeting me or ice could prevent us from seeing the nk. ice9 was the most "confirmed" townie when sekinj flipped. you've been painting me as scum from way back. goat was most likely attempting to block me.

[don_johnson]

ebwop: scratch that. i doubt we have a second scum roleblocker. i was most likely left around for mislynch.

spring: thoughts?

i would like to hear from spolium.

the idea of scumspring is and has been extremely convoluted. i have to believe either goat or spolium is scum.

[don_johnson]

Don: where does the whole second scum roleblocker business come from?

when sekinj flipped cop it meant she was telling the truth about maybe being blocked. it occurred to me that there could still be another scum roleblocker. but that would be you. i really don't see it as you, but its not out of the realm of possibility. if you are scum with rhinox then you could also be lying.

If Rhinox was the only one who targeted Ice9, then why wouldn't you vote? Wouldn't he be guaranteed scum in that case?

i don't know rhinox' partner. discussion would help. also, i need to be protown. wifomic, but true. it appears to be my word against his as i thought it would be.

post 1249 is speculative wifom that is bent to fit the scumdj scenario. here's some wifom: what good is a mafia watcher against two cops, two docs(providing spring is town), tracker, watcher(oh, and a deputy)?

[don_johnson]

Don: where does the whole second scum roleblocker business come from?

when sekinj flipped cop it meant she was telling the truth about maybe being blocked. it occurred to me that there could still be another scum roleblocker. but that would be you. i really don't see it as you, but its not out of the realm of possibility. if you are scum with rhinox then you could also be lying.

If Rhinox was the only one who targeted Ice9, then why wouldn't you vote? Wouldn't he be guaranteed scum in that case?

i don't know rhinox' partner. discussion would help. also, i need to be protown. wifomic, but true. it appears to be my word against his as i thought it would be.

post 1249 is speculative wifom that is bent to fit the scumdj scenario. here's some wifom: what good is a mafia watcher against two cops, two docs(providing spring is town), tracker, watcher(oh, and a deputy)?

[don_johnson]

take that! (accidental double post! )

[don_johnson]

dj has been in this position before(lylo as questionable townie). not sure why you peg me as "insinuating" anything with my statements. i need to be pro town because if i am lynched and this is in fact lylo, then scum wins. if there are two scum, then a quicklynch is a possibility. have you never seen scum self-hammer?

funny, you misread your role pm. according to you, misunderstanding one's role was so unbelievable earlier in the thread that it was a lynchable offense. oh, the irony.

anyways. spring, spolium. please post thoughts.

[don_johnson]

This is all BS. Again, there is nothing pro-town about waiting to place your vote in this instance, and you are suggesting that it would be anti-town to vote.

^^ your opinion. check my sig. all my town losses have been in lylo with me getting lynched. allowing scum the oppurtunity to end the day is anti-town. you are drawing an inference from what i said. that's not my fault. the statement was to explain my actions, not yours.

Look scum, theres a big difference between how you misunderstood your role and my misread. I hope the town can realize that. You took a perfectly clear role PM (IMO, based on your paraphrase) that anybody else would have understood perfectly and claimed to not understand it so you could explain not watching SL N1. I was given information and interpretted it the way anybody else would have - activated deputy given cop results after cop death equals backup cop.

i misunderstood the role, not the pm. not sure why you keep pushing that story. besides, i thought you were "gambitting"? also, please account for your "misinterpretation" of the results which were a major factor in contributing to the sekinj lynch.

A Deputy is a role that begins as a Vanilla Townie with no knowledge of their special role. Once the Cop has 'died', the Deputy will be notified and can choose to 'retrieve' the results of that Cop's investigations. If there is more than one Cop, the deputy usually can only get the results of one of the Cop's investigations, so they must choose wisely.

^^ doesn't say anything about being "cop". were you asked if you wanted to "retrieve" the results, or did the mod just send them along?

[don_johnson]

The point is, the way you paraphrased your PM, there is no way in hell you should have misunderstood your role. your role is the PM and vice versa.

i'd heard of the role before. i read the pm upon recieving it. i misunderstood the "scope" of possible results. i will not pursue this farther because i think it is a lie, but if you want to apply this argument to me, please realize the hypocrisy of not applying it to yourself.

I have to hand it to you don, you got the drop on me and I'm in an indefensible position. I'm even convinced that your attack on me right now is genuine.

Isn't there a scum role similar to a framer where scum can make it look like someone targeted someone else?

That would definately make sense in this game for scum to have against 2 watchers and a tracker. Because I didn't actually target ice. Thing is, if we're both town, you'd already be hammered unless there is only 1 scum left (or unless scum-spolium is sleeping).

^^ this had occurred to me. though i hadn't heard the term "framer" until recently, i believe there is a role termed "busdriver" and i am not sure if that would fit the townrhinox scenario. you said yourself that spolium hasn't posted since friday, so maybe you should remove your vote if you are reconsidering your position.

regardless, i think it is pointless for you and i to go back and forth. i have to make a decision based on the info i have at hand, and it is hard to envision a scenario with townrhinox, but i am becoming suspicious of the fact that we seem to be the only ones talking. we need more input. i am going to read up on some roles to see if it is plausible that you have been set up, but as of right now i don't know of any "watcher-immune" roles.

[don_johnson]

why did you hope i would watch you last night? you wanted to be outed as scum?

looking back, i do notice the lack of flavor for nightkills. i think it is a convenient coincidence for you. also, i don't see why you would target spolium night 1. any particular reason? there were players much more townie than he.

i think you are scum and you were hoping i would toe the line and watch spring.

spring: two scumgroups makes you scum more than any of us. i.e. you counterclaimed budja on day 1 because you thought he was actually doc. if you are scum roleblocker then who is your partner?

this is getting all types of convoluted. i am going with the sure thing, this discussion doesn't seem to be beneficial. i have to operate on the idea that rhinox is scum with either goat or spolium, which is the scenario that makes the most sense.

vote: rhinox

i regret being in the position i am in now, but i feel like i've done my best. i don't believe we have an sk. rhinox has done a decent job of distancing himself from everyone so i think we should proceed to night and see what happens.

[don_johnson]

why did you hope i would watch you last night? you wanted to be outed as scum?

Getting your role mixed up again?? How would you watching me out me as scum? you're not a cop...

because you killed ice. were you hoping someone else would target ice as well?

looking back, i do notice the lack of flavor for nightkills. i think it is a convenient coincidence for you. also, i don't see why you would target spolium night 1. any particular reason? there were players much more townie than he.

since when do sk's need a reason to target anyone? I'm not a vig. I generally target players for nk's who are unexpected choice. Want me to link you to my comment last week in the MD thread? Hang on...

imo sk needs game balance to win. if scum is lynched on day 1 it makes more sense for sk to look for obvtown. but i'll humor you.

I need a neither option. I tend to seek out the unexpected choices, and then laugh hysterically as the town tries to determine why on earth scum would ever kill THAT player!

The experienced, obv-protown player will probably be doc protected/watched/etc. anyways.

so why adjust your meta for the ice kill?

really? you as town would lynch an sk in this situation and hand the game to the scum?

no. i would lynch the scum who is most likely fakeclaiming sk.

Funny, now all of a sudden, discussion isn't beneficial and you want to vote. What happened to being pro-town? If I am scum with goat or spolium, wouldn't it be better for the town to decide between them in case I really am an sk?

you are not sk. it doesn't fit for me. sorry, but eventually townies have to make decisions and go with them. if one of goat or spolium is not scum and town chooses wrong then town loses. you are asking me to abandon the evidence i have in my hands. i am not going to vote on speculation during a possible lylo. evidence points to you being more likely scum than sk.

btw, your math is presumptuous. real math is based on facts.

[don_johnson]

why did you hope i would watch you last night? you wanted to be outed as scum?

Getting your role mixed up again?? How would you watching me out me as scum? you're not a cop...

because you killed ice. were you hoping someone else would target ice as well?

If you watched me, you wouldn't see me target ice... because you're a watcher, and not a tracker. Whats so hard to comprehend about that?

ah, i misunderstood. why would you think i would watch you when your evidence was the driving force behind our lynching a second cop?

Besides, sk doesn't need balance, sk needs to eliminate scum as quickly as possible to win. And trying to eliminate scum sets up a vig fake claim, while killing pro-town players makes it obvious there's an sk, not a vig.

sk needs balance, if you off scum too quickly then you lose. you are not sk, you don't even understand the mechanics of the role. in order to win you have to be last man standing. your odds of winning would greatly decrease without game balance.

I'm an sk, and I was frozen due to the watchers. Statistically, with two watchers, targetting anyone else would likely get me seen. It was either eliminate one of the watchers, or continue no killing and

an sk without killing isn't much of an sk.

I've played with ice (OGML) before and he seemed more of a threat to me than you at the time.

why risk it? makes no sense. no kill would have been a better option for sk last night.

First, you thought I would quicklynch myself to cut off town discussion... now you think I would claim sk as mafia to prevent my own lynch and draw suspicion on my scum partner, increasing the chance that he's lynched? not likely...

who said anything about your scumpartner?

another thing: you didn't target spolium night 1. you weren't even in this game. you failed to mention that it was your predecessor who sent in the night 1 kill and you are trying to justify your choice. it was obviously not your choice. please explain.

[don_johnson]

unvote

sorry, but i think rhinox is the best bet here. i am pretty sure he is partnered with either spolium or goat(leaning towards goat), but i'd rather take the 100% scum lynch. the only way i could see scumspring is if we are looking at two scum factions, and in that case we have already lost.

[don_johnson]

Two scum factions seems unlikely given the running maximum of one kill per night.

yes, as i said, the evidence does not point to an extra killer. thus spring should be town.

[don_johnson]

Also, in case I get killed tonight:

I don't think Don can possibly be scum with Rhinox.

There would be no motivation for him to throwaway a scum buddy in Lylo.

It's either Spolium or Spring. Based on play today, I'm actually starting to worry about Spring. Repeatedly suggesting multiple scum groups without any evidence. No real stance on Don/Rhinox. And I'm suspicious of the "scum claim" thing. I've seen her do that before as scum.

how does goat know its lylo?

vote: rhinox

[don_johnson]

scum QT: http://www.quicktopic.com/42/H/tH7AnVxC7D94

when i opened my role pm and saw i was scum i shut it before i read who were my partners were. i wanted to try and play day 1 as townie as possible and actually try and find scum. i jumped on budja's poem and later realized he was my partner. RC had me on the unvote scenario. i really thought we were done. goat did a great job being town, though. he made it very difficult to read him.

wasn't planning on pinning rhinox, but i thought me claiming i was blocked would be worse. we talked about me watching goat, but we figured spring would be blocking him or spolium.

i actually did confuse my role a bit, but not with tracker. i was thinking reporter. seriously though, my most fun game yet here at ms. hackpoetryII should definitely happen, and we should do the whole thing in rhyme.

oh yeah, the RC lynch was insane. i actually slept through it. that was really a stroke of good fortune for scum. i would have defended rc. this was fun!

[don_johnson]

rhinox- i thought the sk gambit was brilliant and i was really surprised i didn't get lynched. voting you for it was a mistake and spring called it, but didn't seem to push the issue. as for what you could have done: th gambit killed your credibility, so it may not have been the best choice. probably going back and pointing things out that made you town and me scum would have helped. your unvote on the previous day over results confusion helped you, but i think only spolium brought it up. had i tried to peg spolium i would have pointed it out as well, but as soon as i went for you i had to stick it out regardless. gg.

[don_johnson]

spring posted before i did, however, and said she blocked goat, so i would have had to post earlier. like i said, we thought about it...