Open 120 - Rebels in the Palace - Game Over! before 756

[ortolan]

Vote: Lynx The Antithesis

because I dislike your avatar

[ortolan]

not really, it's more like some inverted version of assassin in the palace where the assassins are the majority

[ortolan]

Hi, argh, yet another game I'm neglecting. Post soon I promise.

[ortolan]

Hi guyth!

No need to replace me sekinj and I am sorry for WIFOMing you into wondering whether I need to be.

Here is the knowledge I've acquired from my recent read-through:

Corvuus is likely town for Post 24 alone.

Random voting could work. The only problem I see is that the gaurds and king will obviously not kill the king. So day 1 we 8 people who will vote for the king, and we would have to get 7 of them to agree. So if we random vote there is a good chance to hit rebel because 11 people will vote for a rebel, and only 8 will vote for the king... I am not sure that this makes alot of sense. I also do not see any better strategy really, like lynx said. There is only so much information we can gain because nobody really has any info to give away in this game.

This is precisely a reason to make the voting *genuinely* random via dice or somesuch.

With your setup speculation in Posts 29 and 33 also it would have been far easier to simply ask the mod as this is an open setup. I pm'ed the mod asking if it was nightless (which I couldn't find in the rules), which she confirmed. pm the mod if you don't want to do so publicly, which is understandable as I have been lynched partly (and stupidly) for asking questions of the mod openly in open setups before, due to the argument that scum would feign ignorance of an aspect of their roles.

I don't get why anyone would want to break a setup, I think it's stupid... where's the fun in it?

Many would interpret this is as a scum-tell, although I personally wouldn't. It is generally accepted that you play to win however, this certainly includes breaking setups when the facilities are provided for you to do so.

Unvote

Vote: Shin

- for this post:

Poor guards and king

which seems like he's distancing from the scum team

This is a poor argument against Shin but probably not a scum-tell for Empking

unvote
vote shinnen_no_me

I didn't sign up to be badgered to try to break the game. Especially by someone who must be hiding something, since their join date is less than a week ago but is obviously a seasoned player. Weird that a replacement player in this game has a site join date more recent than the game start, no?

What?

Whether he is an alt or not has no bearing on whether it is scummy or not to try to break the game, which it very decidedly isn't.

To all people complaining about "breaking setups", please do not play in open setups if this is an issue for you. It's half the point. Play in a mini normal (or mini theme) instead if you want less knowledge about the setup, which in turn leads to it being less likely to being discussed and less likely to be broken if the potential exists.

I still do not see the reason for random killing, I do not think it is a viable strategy. If the way we chose the victim each day was truley random, say with a dice roll, or sosomething of that nature, then it would be a pretty good strategy. But as it stands, the "random" vote will be picked by the players, 4 of which definently will not vote the king. It would not be random at all, and you would have to get 7 of the eight remaining players to agree on who to lynch, while 4 other would be pushing for other players.

Yah, a dice roll is perfectly easy to do, don't worry.

I want to vote shin, I really hate self voters, but I don't want to screw the replacement

Why do you hate self-voters?

From ~Posts 125, we definitely should wait prior to random-lynching. This setup isn't like assassin in the palace- we don't have that much to lose from mislynching really and we don't have a king to protect. So we can discuss things as much as we like.

[quote"Zachrulez (141)"]If you are a guard or the king, and you're rolling all the dice for our "random lynches" I think we can be pretty certain that the "dice roll" is never going to land on the king. (Unless you're going to try to convince us that you wouldn't play to your win condition in the case of hypothetically not being a rebel.)[/quote]

No. As far as I'm aware a dice roll is random when posted and cannot be messed with, otherwise it displays the result "fixed".

where someone brought up the point that it's hard to do any meaningful discussion if the lynch is a foregone conclusion.

I've finally finished the calculations.

Without considering the possibility of a random lynch hitting the king when town exactly equals scum (since it won't work - a full majority can't happen), otherwise random lynches have rebels winning ~

65.63%

of the time, guards/king winning ~

26.20%

of the time, and the game coming down to the king and one rebel ~

8.63%

of the time (happily ever after). Yes, I realize the percentages don't equal 100%; blame it on rounding.

I'll probably get everything up on the wiki later tonight or tomorrow at some point, so if people want to look at my process and check it, they can. In the meantime, since random lynches have a >65% probability of winning,

Unvote; Vote: Wall-E.

Those odds are too good to pass up, I shouldn't have even bothered with a re-read

Vote: Wall-E

[ortolan]

Probably, were it not for general lack of experience compared to others who post there plus the fact I'm not inclined to even discuss uninteresting/unoriginal setups there to begin with (I've only commented on the ones that look interesting).

[ortolan]

Well, assuming what you told me recently in that thread I believe (that 60% town odds of winning are heavily imbalanced), then 65% town odds of winning are worth just going with the setup-breaking strategy instead of trying to scum-hunt.

[ortolan]

^^ I reiterate that request.

[ortolan]

P02 - (BlakAdder)
P03 - orangepenguin (Citytube)
P04 - Corvuus
P05 - Empking
P06 - Lynx The Antithesis (erikw11)
P07 - Zachrulez (Shinnen_no_Me, Magus_Stragus)
P08 - (Numberfourteen)
P09 - ortolan
P10 - Qanqan
P11 - Trumpet of Doom
P12 - zwetschenwasser

Original Roll String: 1d11

1 11-Sided Dice: (5) = 5

[ortolan]

Vote: Empking

[ortolan]

I didn't actually realise Empking had rolled four times, sorry LOL.

Vote: Lynx

However,

(and this is the bad news) if we lynch a rebel D1 (which we did), our chances drop to ~53%.

This doesn't matter- by mislynching day one we reduced our chances of winning irrespective of following a plan. Plus even now we have an above-chance chance of winning

[ortolan]

Vote: orangepenguin

[ortolan]

I should have objected to this earlier but unfortunately inattentiveness got the better of me-

the ways these names were selected was not truly random- Empking was ambiguous in which of the two interpretations of his dice roll he gave and if he were a king or guard could simply have chosen four that didn't include the king, or if neither had the king the one with the fewest guards.

That said I don't think it's likely in Empking's case, but am dissapointed someone more vigilant than I did not pick it up.

And it's impossible to fix now also, because if we do so we get the WIFOM of whether this is a king/guard motivated move.

[ortolan]

I do not understand the above post.

But I'm happy to go with the dice rolls presently. I'm not sure now whether it was actually the optimal strategy at all, but to try to derail it, which I'm not trying to do, would be self-evidently scummy.

[ortolan]

actually nevermind you rolled a 12 sided, then 11 sided, then 10 sided, then 9 sided which implies your way anyway.

My bad.

Lynch orangepenguin

[ortolan]

Vote: Zachrulez

[ortolan]

[quote=TonyMontana (289)"](5/8 * 4/7)
20/56 = 36% chance of us screwing ourselves [/high school dropout]
To
What if we agree on someone not being king? To try to help our odds alittle?[/quote]

I agree. I would go with Corvuus because everything I've seen from him so far is very well justified and pro-town. If he was the king or a guard I don't think he would be so careful to determine the dominant strategy via probability.

[ortolan]

Hey, you know what, I know for a fact I'm not king either

How about if all the rebels just reason based on that, then there's no chance of us losing!

Still think Corvuus is a better candidate for avoiding being selected than Empking

[ortolan]

It would be nice.
The point is that rolling dices isn't good strategy.

You chose to remove 4 people on a dice roll. It helped our chances barely.
4/12 Scum D1 = 33%
3/8 Scum D5 = 37,5%

1/12 King D1 = 8,3%
1/8 King D5 = 12,5%

Now we are 5 days in with no way to read anyone. I deem this strategy a failure.

Decent point, but you could also argue we were unlucky not to get more guards/ the king etc. Plus we haven't actually worked out our odds of winning if we continue using the strategy yet.

He was so-so on random lynching (had to be truly random and not controlled by players?) and when the voting started, was here and around to vote and lynch players on the list but wasn't here/around for Shin's lynch who did turn up guard. It most likely is a null tell since 14 was inactive/dropped off face of the earth and then replaced by hohum so we don't know if 14 would have tried to derail Shin's guard lynch, etc.

This is quite irrelevant anyhow as only a guard himself knows who he is- neither guards or the king know the identity of other guards.

For the one person who I would pick as 'most town', I'd pick Trumpet of Doom.

Why?

result: zwetschenwasser

zwet is not king.
Because what are the odds of not catching the king in 7 dice rolls? -.-

This was a joke I'm assuming. (This vindicated by later claim to have been joking).

Yeah I generally run by the rule that someone that makes contradictions and inconsistencies is scum... so...

vote: TonyMontana

I'm sorry this vote is

very

scummy.

Do you and/or Corvuus genuinely think TonyMontana's behaviour is interpretable as making him more likely to be a guard or king? Firstly if he were guard/king his only motivation in doing that would be to clear Empking, who is his king. I've played with him before though and I know he's not that stupid. Oh, that and his claim it was satire is perfectly credible and consistent with his earlier criticism of our dice-roll method of lynching.

Anyhow

Vote: Qanqan

for poorly reasoned and opportunistic wagon hop using cliched "he's contradicting himself (not proven) therefore he's scum!" excuse.

[ortolan]

Firstly, what does Corvuus have to do with me?

You are both voting for TonyMontana, as I said. That's a bit of an obvious link there.

Secondly, yes, I do think it makes him more likely to be a guard/the king, hence the vote. His posts, though few, have already been contradictory:

Taking account of the setup, why is the way TonyMontana has acted (apparently in a contradictory manner) more likely to make him scum? Do you think zwet is the king and he is a guard? If not how would he benefit from proposing the plan in the first place, even if he later backed off it as "satire"?

Saying the satire was perfectly credible and consistent, I don't believe that. It honestly didn't sound like satire, and if it was, well, would have been nice to say that rather than waiting another whole day to kindly point out that it was. (Even a [/satire] would have been helpful)

Irrelevant to the game but that does kind of defeat the point of satire.

The reason I vote for contradictors is that in general, most contradictors are mafia contradicting themselves because they are trying to get a quicklynch/mislynch/easy lynch in whichever way they can

So which of these (quicklynch/mislynch/easy lynch) were you proposing Tony was aiming for?

It isn't irrelevant. Guards do not start off knowing other guards obviously, but if they can crumb or notify each other then they gain advantage.

And how are you proposing they would do this without very, very high risk of getting caught seeing as they have had no way of talking to each other prior to the game? What sort of methods are you suggesting they would use to breadcrumb their guardiness? Voting for the king in RVS? Saying something else about the king? What?

The point is to pressure and question 14/hohum on what his view/read etc. is and everything else. We simply do not know if the guards confirmed each other or not; they may have.

Until you convince me there is a good chance guards have somehow confirmed one another (I doubt you're going to) my point was perfectly valid.

At this point, I consider it unlikely that you (ortolan) are guard trying to help them (odds, meta, etc.) but how do you think it will look for you if they DO flip guard?

Entirely irrelevant until you demonstrate the mechanism by which I've supposedly recognised my fellow guards.

Since you asked why I picked Trumpet as likely to be town; I'll ask you the same. Why pick me? My answer (short version) is that his stance/meta is similar/close to mine.

I was very clear about why in my original post (292). And saying "his stance/meta is similar/close to mine" is a nice way of saying precisely nothing. Would you please elaborate?

[ortolan]

n hindsight, probably a bad move to vote directly after Corvuus, as it did look sus, but what did you want me to do? wait for 20 fluff posts after Corvuus's post, and then vote? I was already going to vote for TM and just because I found him suspicious, independantly to Corvuus (though it might not look it) doesn't mean I'm therefore his scumbuddy, or anything like that.

The funny thing is I never said anything about Corvuus being scummy- if you remember I called him my most townie earlier, then said:

I'm sorry this vote is

very

scummy.

Do you and/or Corvuus genuinely think TonyMontana's behaviour is interpretable as making him more likely to be a guard or king? Firstly if he were guard/king his only motivation in doing that would be to clear Empking, who is his king. I've played with him before though and I know he's not that stupid. Oh, that and his claim it was satire is perfectly credible and consistent with his earlier criticism of our dice-roll method of lynching.

Anyhow

Vote: Qanqan

for poorly reasoned and opportunistic wagon hop using cliched "he's contradicting himself (not proven) therefore he's scum!" excuse.

I never said Corvuus was scummy, I said you were scummy for the way you jumped onto the bandwagon. I did however, ask both you and Corvuus questions about your case on TonyMontana. That was the only "link" I drew between you.

Because it's a scumtell (sorry, should have explained my point better before), scum will contradict themselves more often than town, because scum often try to mould different opinions on different situations to try and get town lynched. And, in their attempt to get town lynched, throwing around different stances to help their cause, they contradict themselves. Town, on the other hand, don't do this (or at least not as often), since as they aren't aiming for a quick/mis/easy-lynch, they don't lie about particular stances they have, so they wont accidentally contradict it later.

This is true, in general. However in this specific game, in this specific instance, TonyMontana, if indeed he did contradict himself, did not do so in order to get a mis-lynch but rather to actually protect zwet. He did not say anyone was scummy, he simply made a series of dice rolls and used it to argue zwet couldn't be the king. Now how does that fit in with your musings on what scum

generally

do?

Don't see how this is relevant, a bit of a red herring, since I never said anything about Zwet.

No, but you should have done, seeing as your case against TonyMontana is actually contingent on his relationship with zwet.

Satire doesn't need to be funny

Well, in the long run, enough mislynched to win, and condsidering how the last random lynching worked out, both quicklynches and easylynches as well (an easy quickmislynch, I guess).

And who are you suggesting he was trying to get mislynched?

[ortolan]

Ok, I misinterpereted your vagueness, does this make me any scummier? How is anything of what you just said relevant?

I am curious about your hyper-sensitivity to being linked with Corvuus.

Nice strawmen, but I'm not talking about his rolls which were supposedly to protect Zwet (those are your words, by the way), and this crap about TM not saying anyone was scummy (Where the hell did that come from? You're putting words in my mouth now, and just making things up).

Strawman? Your reasons for voting TM are expressed here:

Secondly, yes, I do think it makes him more likely to be a guard/the king, hence the vote. His posts, though few, have already been contradictory:

295/297/299: He is telling us how we all need to use analysis, rather than random voting to play this game, and goes so far as to 'deem the strategy a failure'.
308/309: Suddenly, in the space of less than a day, he is trying to pull for another set of random lynches like Empking did,

which is a contradiction

of his prior opinions that the random voting strategy is a complete failure. Not even a reason as to why he had changed his mind, he just did.
324: Then, he does some rather scrappy backtracking with the good old 'it was just a joke' card. If it was a joke, why defend the random rolling thing in 315. The whole satire backtracking yadda is again,

another contradiction

to 308/309/315.

Saying the satire was perfectly credible and consistent, I don't believe that. It honestly didn't sound like satire, and if it was, well, would have been nice to say that rather than waiting another whole day to kindly point out that it was. (Even a [/satire] would have been helpful)

Unfortunately these all boil down to exactly the same reason- you think he was being disingenuous in that random roll plan, and genuinely did want to clear zwet (I made a mistake in saying it was Empking earlier). He then backtracked when his suggestion was called out as scummy. However, assuming you believe his explanation that these rolls were satire (and in fact those dice weren't fixed, so he actually had no way of knowing who the dice would land on anyway), then you don't have a case. And what I'm asking you is- even if he did backtrack and claim "satire" when his plans were foiled, what were his plans to begin with? What did he hope to accomplish, if he was scum, by those random rolls? He certainly wasn't going for a mislynch, like you claimed, because his intention was to

clear

someone, not put them up for the chopping block.

[ortolan]

Tony should have the obligation/opportunity to respond to these questions before I do- we are getting into discussing his motivations (and in fact it seems we disagree about more than that) so I will wait for him to reply first.

[ortolan]

Oh, also, I didn't ignore any of your previous questions that I'm aware of. Which are you talking about?

[ortolan]

fair enough

answer the other questions Tony so I can get back on the offensive please

[ortolan]

To get another random lynch like Empking did. Maybe there is a reason why in Empkings random lynch, everyone jumped to get lynching, but for Tony's, no one wants to go ahead and lynch (which would possibly suggest that the king is one of the first few to be lynched in his roll (Corv, Trumpet, TM)).

Tony's rolls weren't for random lynching and he never said they were. They were to determine who the king was. Again, it only really makes sense as satire.

I'm starting to get a little suspicios of you, ortolan, to be honest. Quite a lot of these arguments you have given are riddled with logical fallicies, and whenever you get a hole in your argument, you ignore it and attack in another angle in the hopes I wouldn't notice. They all sound a bit like scumtactics to me. And, considering I'm relatively new to mafia (on this forum, at least), you would have probably guessed I wouldn't have the knoledge and experience to pick up on them, thus making me an easy target. So,

Fos: ortolan

(No, this isn't omgus)

You need to be specific here. Rather than just saying "I do believe you are spouting logical fallacies holes in your arguments" and "I assure you, this isn't OMGUS" you need to provide some justification as to why these statements are true.

Corvuus, what do you think of Qanqan's behaviour?

[ortolan]

sorry, "I do believe you are spouting logical fallacies

and have

holes in your arguments".

[ortolan]

1. blatantly defending another player (TM)

Well, I am pointing out that Qanqan is incorrect (either deliberately or apparently ignorantly) in suggesting that Tony's roll was to determine who to lynch. He said it was to find the king. It's a clear error of fact.

2. Blatantly saying things which shouldn't be said unless you are advising scum.

What are these?

3. apparently this is all based on your belief that scum couldn't have verified each other, and thus there is no buddying to worry about and you think the fact that you blatantly buddy must somehow mean that you are rebel and so is TM since guard/king wouldn't be so obvious??

I'm not saying scum haven't verified one another, ironically at this point I'm feeling increasingly strongly that the king knows who one of his guards (at least) is. That doesn't mean no-one else has picked up on it, though. What I object to is your position in 342 that "WELL YOU DONT' KNOW, they might have found some AMAZINGLY CLEVER way of cross-confirming each other while the townies are oblivious to it." Again I ask you to describe any way this could actually be done in practice e.g.; or in fact I will go you one better. Do you think random voting the king would be a good way to subtly telegraph your role as a guard? Do you think breadcrumbing something strange about the king would be a good way to subtly telegraph your role as a guard? If not how do you suggest, they are going to do so with no risk of being caught?

i.e. you and TM's actions are suspicious, yet your 'defense' is that it is so BLATANT and 'stupid' for scum to do that it is not suspicious at all.

How are

my

actions suspicious? We've already seen yourself and Qanqan's justification for TM's actions being suspicious. I think it's poor, but you don't need to go there again. Just tell me why

I'm

scummy.

I couldn't careless if we lynch Zwet today, but I find it INCREDIBLY ironic that a defense for Zwet is as simple as "posting nonsense 1 liners, blah blah, joke, blah, crap" is so BLATANTLY scummy that he can't possible be scum since scum wouldn't do that.

and yet, the argument for TM and yourself Oro is pretty much exactly the same, yet it is ok when you and TM do it?

I don't understand what you are arguing here. TonyMontana is attacking zwet. You are saying you find zwet scummy. Yet you find TM scummy also???? And someone in all of this is apparently defending zwet- it's not me though. Who are you talking about?

At this point, I consider it unlikely that you (ortolan) are guard trying to help them (odds, meta, etc.) but how do you think it will look for you if they DO flip guard?

Funny that you didn't express any problems with me doing this to you in 292 and 298.

Or Qanqan doing it in 307:

I am feeling some pro-town vibe from Corvuus, like everyone else is I'm guessing.

How would

we

look if you flipped guard? In fact, in your response post 305, you deliberately avoid placing any suspicion on us after we say how townie you're looking. Your targets are hohum, then zwet/Empking/TM. And your most townie is Trumpet of Doom. When questioned you give no good reason for why. Nevertheless you fail to mention two people who've just nominated you as their most townie. This is interesting.

Please tell me what you think of Qanqan also, you didn't answer this question in your last post.

[ortolan]

I agree that TonyMontana is under obligation to explain his actions re: zwet now, he has pretty much acknowledged that the reason he voted zwet was one entirely consistent with zwet's meta.

2. Blatantly saying things which shouldn't be said unless you are advising scum.

What are these?

Oro: It is obvious. Read your post again and think about it. To say more is just giving out info.

No, it isn't, otherwise I wouldn't have asked. Attempting to suggest my actions are scummy then pulling back to "WELL IT'S OBVIOUS WHY" + "I don't want to help scum by making it explicit!!!" and refusing to justify yourself is unhelpful at best and pretty much outright scummy.

Oro: If you think you know who a guard is then say it. Otherwise, your post is quite stupid since you said to 'me' before to prove that they have not confirmed/know each other at all and now you say that you think they have so who is it and what was said.

No I didn't. I was mocking your suggestion that scum can have found a way of confirming themselves without alerting us to the fact. I do not believe it is possible for them to have done this and don't think it would be wise for them to attempt to do so either.

The rest, I don't know how much to say since I didn't say that they did a AMAZINGLY CLEVER WAY of confirming each other but that it could be REALLY stupid but obvious to them and not to us. If they did RVS vote the king, then that is really stupid. If it is a breadcrumb that is strange, then it is findable upon re-read and will end up being really stupid. So what is your read and your suggestion?

I have been very clear in saying I do not believe guards have confirmed one another. You originally suggested those defending guards were scummy, I asked for evidence of this because the guards/king don't know who the other guards are. You responded that you didn't know how they might have done it but are happy to assume the guards do know one another. I think this is stupid. I also think it's scummy you are so hesitant to discuss methods the guards could use to confirm one another when if we publicly acknowledge we're aware of them firstly we prevent scum using them out of fear and secondly we gain a chance to locate any attempts to breadcrumb one's guardiness which have already been made.

Oro: I did. Heck, you ignoring it is scummy in itself but maybe that is just how you play. If you don't find yourself defending/buddying with TM suspicious at all, then what do you think is scummy?

So your whole case is that I am defending/buddying with TM? Then, as I asked you to, tell me why I wasn't scummy to say I found you townie as I did. And tell me why Qanqan isn't scummy for

his

blatant buddying up to you.

Also, if indeed I am defending TM, I want you to look at TM's post for which he is being attacked very carefully:

result: zwetschenwasser

zwet is not king.
Because what are the odds of not catching the king in 7 dice rolls? -.-

Now, is he saying here that he wanted these players lynched in the order he rolled as Qanqan suggested? What's your interpretation? Also, if he did intend those as random lynches, he clearly didn't fix them, so the dice could have landed on anyone. What is his motivation, if he is scum, for using genuinely random rolling if this ploy was supposed to automatically benefit his faction i.e. scum?

How do I determine this? I decided to be AGGRESSIVE and EXTREME and see what people say about me then. I go after different players ( i will come to everyone in due time) to get a reaction out of them *AND* for the players who said "Corvuus is so townie", I will get a read off of them when they think I've gone 'less townie', etc.. I don't trust them or you 100% at all for 'saying i am most townie' and I actually trust you (oro) least since

1. You said you thought I was most townie in your post #15
2. Q said someone else (EMPKing) and you said you thought me instead in your post #16.

I could have just said "yay, i am most townie, i will just sit back and watch people die and hope that town gets it right". Instead, I interpret that my best optimum play is to USE this to my advantage in getting reads/info out of people and I can also test reads on people who said "corv is most townie", especially if they are guards and I do something that they don't like. Just because I don't explicitly mention you (since i would say your post would make you my biggest supporter back then oro) doesn't mean I didn't see what was going on, didn't like it and what I think about it.

I'm afraid it is plain for all to see that when I said I found you most townie you laid absolutely no suspicion at my feet. It was only after I started to attack you that you got all defensive. Now you are very obviously backtracking and saying "haha, it was a plan all along, I had it in the back of my mind that you were scum but I was just testing you until I had a good opportunity! (incidentially this opportunity arises as soon as you realise I am not on your side as you had previously thought)

2. Q said someone else (EMPKing) and you said you thought me instead in your post #16.

Which post are you talking about? All I see is 307 from Qanqan where he says:

I am feeling some pro-town vibe from Corvuus, like everyone else is I'm guessing.

You are the only person he nominates as town here and also tries to slip this in in qualified form saying "like everyone else is I'm guessing" as though it's so

obvious

you are pro-town. And Qanqan is another marked omission here- he is blatantly buddying up to you- see this post and his bizarre paranoia in 341:

Firstly, what does Corvuus have to do with me?

You still haven't told me what you think about Qanqan, I'm really desperate to know at this point.

Your play is scummy and you didn't answer or respond about it at all.

This is more mud-slinging, like Qanqan's "you are using logical fallacies!!!111 But I won't say what they are."

I gave a reason for why I thought Trumpet was townie. You can disagree with me, i couldn't careless. My reason was more detailed than yours or Q's so I find it scummy that you say "it is interesting" when your case is worse. Hypocrite much?

Saying "I like his meta and it's similar to mine" isn't even a legitimate reason, let alone a detailed one. Be specific.

I'm keeping my vote on TM until TM and Oro answer my latest post in a decent way but then I will be voting you Zwet for this response and

FoS

for now.

Kind of ironic you attacked TM for similar cross-attacking while under fire.

Lynching TM first, Zwet second (like Veerus said) is fine with me.

And you're even unashamedly setting up chain lynches.

[ortolan]

Oh, plus the whole "at this point on Qanqan, I'm...neutral" is yet another way you've blatantly dodged saying something meaningful or accountable.

Oh, also, I didn't ignore any of your previous questions that I'm aware of. Which are you talking about?

Beginning of 356.

Um you just told me to read my own post. Thanks for that. Let's hope you actually had some, any legitimate reason for accusing me of dodging your questions and it wasn't just more mud-slinging, but I'm having my doubts at this point.

He never said they weren't, and that's how they looked to me. There is more than one way to read people, you know.

You are voting him for it if you didn't notice. If you acknowledge your reason is subjective then that's simply poor justification for voting him.

I pointed out the fallicies as I was going along, with justification. You constalntly put in your interperetations of how I had supposedly interpereted the situation and tried to pass them off as mine, in the hopes I would attack them.

Sorry I don't even understand this passage.

sorry, "I do believe you are spouting logical fallacies

and have

holes in your arguments".

Wow, that's a little hypocritical. You can't tell me I need to back my claims that you are using logical fallicies (which I had done to a reasonable extent) and then make the claims yourself with no justification (and no, 'it was humour' is not a valid excuse).

Actually I was just quoting you there, I wasn't saying that (hence the quotation marks)

[ortolan]

^^

by quoting I meant paraphrasing/parodying

I don't like how corvuus is spending an inordinate amount of time speculating on possible scum signals.

Even worse he is speculating on their existence so as to use them in argument but not actually telling us what form they might conceivably take.

Sorry for triple post.

[ortolan]

no more votes for TM until Corvuus and Qanqan have replied to my latest post(s) please. If anyone else votes for him and is town I shall not forgive you.

[ortolan]

Please don't be moronic and allow Corvuus and Qanqan to answer my questions before anyone else votes, I have more to say.

[ortolan]

I seriously mean it about not hammering. 99% sure TM and zwet are both town at this point. I do not want to have to convince a bunch of people to lynch the king when we're already in LYOL.

[ortolan]

Where are Corvuus and Qanqan? I know it's the weekend and all but still...

[ortolan]

I will finish the game for us tomorrow. Until then waiting for answers.

[ortolan]

TonyMontana isn't the king, I am talking of someone else.

[ortolan]

I never expressed any desire to lynch TonyMontana. Quite the opposite.

[ortolan]

nup

[ortolan]

Corvuus is the king, Qanqan is a guard.

I'll tell you why tomorrow though I've got to go to bed.

[ortolan]

veerus happily places us into LYOL with a mis-lynch.

Corvuus needs to get lynched today. Qanqan is his guard and based on that veerus is also, blatantly playing zwet and TM off against one another and setting up zwet for a lynch after TM flipped town. Which means myself, Empking, Trumpet of Doom and zwet all need to be voting Corvuus.

I first started looking at Corvuus because I noticed he had taken on a very diplomatic tone (pretty much going out of his way not to get on the wrong side of anyone too early) to begin the game. There was also his attempting to defer random voting until after discussion and then later to again defer to "discussion" when the random voting finished. Whether random-lynching was or was not a good strat it is something the king would very rightly be afraid of.

When TM said:

What if we agree on someone not being king? To try to help our odds alittle?

I thought this idea was very, very stupid but not obviously scummy, it would be too obviously something a guard or the king would say and would attract attention to anyone who then got nominated as likely town. Because I wanted to test out Corvuus' scumminess, I faked what I would do as a stupid guard guard Corvuus-king. I was fishing for reactions, and thinking I would possibly look like a guard trying to defer attention away from Corvuus-king, which would then have the desired effect of getting the person I suspected of being the king, lynched. I re-iterated this in 298 to make it look more scummy, but no-one picked up on it.

Corvuus then replied:

Ok.

I read Qangan and Ortolan.

I think I understand where you are going with this so hopefully you don't mind me altering it.

(note that amusingly he recently claimed he was very wary of me buddying up to him here, not that it comes across at all in this post LoL!)

Then, despite saying he agrees with both myself and Qanqan, he says:

For my two:

#1: Hohum.

Not based on his recent posts (but it did make me read/consider him more) but I don't like numberfourteen (the player hohum replaced) posts (bleh, only 4 total??).
"I want to vote shin, really hate self-voters, but don't want to screw replacement" (shin turned up guard; rebel or guard who saw a crumb) and also the misleading part about "There is only so much information to gain since no one has any info to give away in this game", isn't true.

He was so-so on random lynching (had to be truly random and not controlled by players?) and when the voting started, was here and around to vote and lynch players on the list but wasn't here/around for Shin's lynch who did turn up guard. It most likely is a null tell since 14 was inactive/dropped off face of the earth and then replaced by hohum so we don't know if 14 would have tried to derail Shin's guard lynch, etc.

I *do not* want Hohum quicklynched and I am not voting him at this time. I want a reaction/response other than the EMP/Hohum interaction to get a read on.

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

For my #2, I don't know. Before re-reading Zach/Shin (with hohum/14), I would have said Zwet or EMPking since they post 'a good amount' but not much constructively except getting in 'emotional bickering/fights'. They pushed for Zach's lynch and 'following' the plan but that could be null; Zach himself (on replacing in) pushed for EMPking's lynch for even mentioning this plan (point for EMPking not being the King since Zach as a guard would know that) and Zach did have negative interaction with both EMPking/Zwet. I don't like their meta/play style but the odds of them being king are not high.

I'll say BlakAdder/TonyMontana so I can hear more from him.

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

For the one person who I would pick as 'most town', I'd pick Trumpet of Doom.

Corvuus

i.e. we are the only two people he doesn't mention as either scummy or town. This is because at this point, he thought we were his guards, and didn't want to get caught out having called us townie if we were lynched, because then he would look associated with us. Of course he didn't want his guards lynched either. So he didn't mention us. Despite agreeing with us at the start of his posts, he didn't think us worth commenting on at all in terms of scumminess/towniness.

It's obvious he could give no genuine reasons for stating that Trumpet of Doom was town either, just "he has the same meta as me". The only reason he chose him was that he didn't want to choose me/Qanqan.

Then:

I am feeling some pro-town vibe from Corvuus, like everyone else is I'm guessing.

Having just trashed the suggestion of naming one's most towniest, Qanqan then goes on to slip in that Corvuus is his most townie, "like everyone else thinks". If this isn't a way of covering up defending the king by suggesting it's somehow a widely-held opinion that Corvuus is obviously town then I don't know what is.

Then the crappy wagon on TM starts.

Then I begin by attacking Qanqan, not wanting to reveal the entirety of my gambit yet. I say this:

Do you and/or Corvuus genuinely think TonyMontana's behaviour is interpretable as making him more likely to be a guard or king? Firstly if he were guard/king his only motivation in doing that would be to clear Empking, who is his king. I've played with him before though and I know he's not that stupid. Oh, that and his claim it was satire is perfectly credible and consistent with his earlier criticism of our dice-roll method of lynching.

This was based purely on the fact that Qanqan and Corvuus were both attacking TM, I was not actually drawing any link between them.

But in the first line of Qanqan's reply, he says:

Firstly, what does Corvuus have to do with me?

He becomes extremely defensive about an imaginary link between himself and Corvuus.

They then both continue their case on TM, whom of course I tried in vain to defend. I recall Corvuus pulling the argument "don't defend him, let him speak for himself" but was more than happy to lynch him as soon as he got the numbers. Corvuus/Qanqan still fail to explain how TM's actions in dice-rolling could be scummy. They are relying on crappy "his play is inconsistent therefore he is scum" arguments. They have failed to establish why trying to manipulate town back into dice rolling (despite saying just before he didn't want to???) could be scummy even if that's what TM intended. They have also failed to explain how this could help TM if, as was the case, he made genuinely random dice rolls- if he were the king or a guard they would be equally likely to land on him or a guard/king as anyone else.

Then you see Qanqan and Corvuus start attacking me out of nowhere when they realise I'm not in fact a guard.

Then you see veerus:

But if I was going by play.. I'd say that zwet and TonyMontana are the most likely guards/kings as they seem to be derailing the town the most (though in zwet's case, he's always pretty useless so I'd rather lynch TM first)

Even though they were attacking each other, veerus thinks they're both scum (LoL) and is lining them up for a chain-lynch.

Corvuus is also lining up chain lynches in 421:

I'm ok with a TM and then Oro lynch.

You can thank me for winning after the game

Vote: Corvuus

[ortolan]

not sure I'll have time to post in this game but Qanqan needs to defend himself

Please don't quicklynch him though, I need to work out who both Corvuus and the other guard were defending, and if it makes sense that Qanqan is the last guard or the king.

[ortolan]

What was the hohum vote in aid of Empking?

[ortolan]

Ok, I find it rediculous that ortolan is forcing this connection with me and Corvuus. Yes, I said he looked town, but so did Trumpet of Doom in 306, so did you. So why am I scum for my comment, and not you?

This shows you didn't read my post 436. Please read it again. My comment about finding him the most townie was not genuine, as I explained. The point about Trumpet of Doom is noted, I didn't notice that.

And those scumtactics of saying there was a link between me and corvuus, and then when I assumed you means because we were scumbuddies, you jump on me about therefore being his scumbuddy for interpereting it this way, that's rediculous. and so, I was ask again since you have avoided this question 3 times now;

You are both voting for TonyMontana, as I said. That's a bit of an obvious link there

How does me misinterpereting this vagueness make me scummy?

Also, how is 'Firstly, what does Corvuus have to do with me? ' an

extreme

reaction to being associated with Corvuus, as you said. What is so extreme about it?

This, again, was all answered in 436. In 340 I did not draw any link between you beyond asking you about the the reasoning for your vote on TonyMontana (because you were both voting for him at the time). You reply with the extremely defensive reaction "WHAT DO I HAVE TO DO WITH CORVUUS???" You were so sensitive to being linked with him you took offence to it even though I hadn't actually linked you together.

You continuing to try and project the illusion I am not answering your questions is in itself scummy.

[ortolan]

And you aren't answering one of my questions.

Which?

[ortolan]

and who do you think is the guard/king pair and why Qanqan?

[ortolan]

Could you quote me where in 436 you showed me

how

your vague comment supposedly proves that I am scum, or at least explain, rather than just saying 'that it does because it happened'.

What "vague comment" are you referring to? In case we're still talking about your sensitivity to being linked with Corvuus:

This, again, was all answered in 436. In 340 I did not draw any link between you beyond asking you about the the reasoning for your vote on TonyMontana (because you were both voting for him at the time). You reply with the extremely defensive reaction "WHAT DO I HAVE TO DO WITH CORVUUS???" You were so sensitive to being linked with him you took offence to it even though I hadn't actually linked you together.

If you mean something else say so. Quote the specific part of my post you disagree with and tell me why. Also nothing I've said "proves" you're scum, I have given several good reasons for suspecting you however.

I will also ask that you post a suspicions list of who the guard and king are (because they are who you're supposed to be looking for if you're town), and give your reasoning for why they are so. Failure to do so, if you are indeed town, will jeopardise your chances of winning by making you more likely to get lynched.

If Qangan is a rebel, we lynch Ort tomorrow (king, probably)

This doesn't follow.

[ortolan]

Stop being scummy, zwet.

I am not even advocating his lynch yet, plus you know for a fact I can't be the king because Corvuus was more than happy to attack me and line me up for a lynch (plus I'm the only one who's caught any scum so far).

[quote=(467)"]You are both voting for TonyMontana, as I said. That's a bit of an obvious link there

that vague comment[/quote]

The fact you were both voting for TonyMontana was technically a connection. So that's another reason why saying "omgosh what do I have to do with Corvuus" was scummy.

Now please tell us who you think the guard and king are (and why) or you'll really be screwing us up if you're town.

[ortolan]

TBH, I'm sort of inclined to take ortolan as being a little scummy - while Qanqan's protesting that he's being unfairly singled out for the "Corvuus is town" comments, I'd probably complain about something like that regardless of alignment, so it's a nulltell for him. But missing the amount Corvuus seemed to be tying himself to me (or not taking it seriously), that's... if I were a third party, I'd almost think ort's the last guard and I'm king.

So...I'm scummy because... um... nah I see nothing supporting that comment, all you comment on is Qanqan

Plus are you actually saying here "ortolan is scummy assuming I'm the king?" LOL

I am interested in TM's case on zwet and intrigued as to why ToD is playing like a jester.

[ortolan]

and I am still waiting for Qanqan's case for a guard/king pair.

Actually you all should provide this please. Failure to do so will be viewed by me as scummy in the extreme. I already did one yesterday, I may yet change it but I want others' (especially Qanqan's first). I also want ToD to fill in the many gaps in his reasoning.

[ortolan]

I'm not sure if language/age is an obstacle here or if you're just scum, but merely saying "OMGOSH LOOK @ ORTOLAN HE HAS SO MANY LOGICAL FALLACIES" doesn't mean anything.

Likewise, this crap about me not answering your question is entirely invalid argument from repetition. You being defensive about being linked with Corvuus was interpreted by me as a psychological tell, nothing more. I additionally had further points against you (although initially thought you were a guard). Your scummy attempts to evade contributions in the form I have asked for and attempts to redirect suspicion onto me (despite...opposing a townie lynch and...arguing for the lynch of a guard) have only added to my assessment of the likelihood of you being scum.

I will try one more time (I consider I am being pretty damn charitable). I do not want a list of "most likely to be guard or king", this is useless and gives town nothing useful to work with (especially when the person at the top of the list is there simply for all his "logical fallicies" without any being cited).

I want you to tell me who you think the guard is, and who you think the king is. This firstly shows that you have a townie thought process going on (or are at least trying hard enough to feign one), and secondly may even give us something to work with.

[ortolan]

Vote: Qanqan

Blatantly anti-town, defensive, needs to die.

[ortolan]

I don't mind a zwet lynch either btw- while I had veerus (who TM replaced) down as scum in my original case against Corvuus he was quick to vote Corvuus and admitted poor play (which is probably credible from what I remember of him in another game). Likewise I'll take a gamble that TM's reaction- "oh, shit, he was the douche that hammered me" to the person he replaced was indeed genuine. I expressed interest in the zwet case already (in 479).

Trumpet of Doom claiming I'm a guard is quite scummy, I have no qualms in saying I am the most objectively identifiably pro-town player in this game so far due to my results of: opposing lynch of TM first time round, advocating guard lynch (while in LYOL, and not thinking he was guard showing lack of perfect knowledge of the setup). My case against Qanqan is clearly very legitimate also with his over-defensiveness to being linked with Corvuus first time round and refusal to do what I asked and give his theory for the guard/king (instead evading the question completely in an entirely scummy fashion). So firstly anyone trying to direct suspicion onto me with no good argument gets a scumpoint from me. Secondly if you'll recall Corvuus (a flipped guard) named Trumpet of Doom as his most town prior to being lynched. So you're not out of the woods yet ToD.

It is of course possible that Qanqan is just an extremely anti-town rebel but I make no apologies for focusing on him for his plethora of scumtells.

But yes, to disprove the theory I am guard with zwet as king I shall

Vote: zwet

[ortolan]

Ok? That's good then, either way we will confirm he's not my king.

I can't recall calling him 99% likely to be town, I may have but his attempt to line up a lynch on me then Qanqan had scum potential. Plus the fact people are calling me scum for not voting for him, voting for him, as I am a townie, helps to dispel this perception.

[ortolan]

since his claim that he 'buddied' me to test things out is blatantly false.

No, let me assure you, it was entirely deliberate. As I explained it was because I thought you were the king, not a guard, and if nothing else it would be a good way of getting the person I thought was the king lynched because it looked like I was his guard.

Interestingly I had two guards in my 3-man scum theory but thought one of them was the king, and was wrong about veerus being the guard. Unless TM had made the case against zwet I would have continued attacking Qanqan which still would have been a decent result and placed us with a good chance of winning, but the result of following TM was much better. I'm glad either lynch would have put us further in the right direction though.