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

[destructor]

Olzo, iv I have mizzed zomzing about ze cazes on Iyzak and Plomb, zen pleez let me know.

And, I vonder iv ziz vill vork.

Mod:

Can hazcow be prodded?

haz, I hope you hav been doink ziz:

Hazkow:

I have a homevork assinment for joo. Even zo joo kant post today, I am not goink to let joo off ze hook. Using ze notes fonktion on zis site (or notepad, or votever joo vont, really), I vont joo to take notes on ze ENTIRE day as it happens. Every time joo see an interesting post/point, argument, or anything zat stiks out to joo, I vont joo to note ze post nomber, and write a sentence (or more) on it. Vonce joo are able to talk again, I vont joo to post ze ENTIRE set of notes in full. If joo are protownzh, a largely objective, stream-of-konsciosness, comprehensive analysis kan be a huge blessink in disgize. If joo DON'T post this tomorrow, I am goink to throttle joo. Joo have no excuse not to do zis, konsiderink joo shood be followink ze game anyvay. Thanks in advance.

[imaginality]

Ma-ia hii
Ma-ia huu
Ma-ia hoo
Ma-ia haha

Ma-ia hii
Ma-ia huu
Ma-ia hoo
Ma-ia haha

[destructor]

Hi imaginality.

[imaginality]

I vould be very very interezted in hearing ehveryone's opinion of [imaginality] and ze validity ov ze cazes he has made in zis game.

Usevuleesh zings I fink I haf done zis game inclod:

(a) 315, 584 - drrowing attenshjon to ze tone off Isaac's posts, hiss gettingk rattled by prezzure on him
(b) 379 - I vas firrst to prroposing ve lynch SlySly to test hiss claim (if not expleezit claim zen at list verrry strrronkly implied) of beink unlynchable
(c) 707 - first to vote Darox - admittedly at zat point my vote vas prrrimarrily forr lack off content but I stuck vid my vote (even vhen he posted hisss zemi-rrread, vhich vould haf be good moment to yustifiably drrop prrressure on him iff I had vanted to) and helped to lynch ze scum
(d) 720 - onzorred your points about me
(e) 830 - pointed out dat your prrroposal to force Glorrrk to claim vould only be beingk usevul to extent ve believed he vas scummy, not useful ozzervise (ant now you're Glork, feel free to zank me )
(f) 959/963/967/971 - backed idea off testink SlySly's unlynchability today vhich vould haf been good I zink, but only elvis and I zeemed to vant to; pressured SlySly over drinkingk lemonade
(g) 1071 - prrroposed Isaac claims (i) to get zis day movingk again and (ii) because if Isaac is town, I fink he beingk less likely to be today's lynch iff he claim now zhan if ve trrread vawter vor anodder view days

[Mirth]

Votecount

Isacc - 985309 - [Kmd, Imaginality, Sly]
Elvis - 292ug9wh94 - [Isacc, Plum]
Plum - 30948t02jf0tui40jg0rg - [Elvis, Caf]

Not Voting - 42 - [des, Hascow]

Cups of Lemonade Bought : 3

Deadline: Tuesday, March 24, 12:00 PM EST

hascow is silenced today, des. he doesn't need prodding

[caf19]

Warning, big catch-up post ahead... K, so I had some time to get together my thoughts on the Isacc case.

Just so you know, I'm coming at this from the view that while Isacc has done some stupid stuff in the game, it hasn't necessarily made him scummy, and I don't find that he joined the Darox wagon as late as everyone keeps saying (Sly and Plum were later).

This is all in reference to Kmd's case here.

Point One

-

Stays in random phase as long as possible

-

Yeah, I brought up something similar at the time. This is one of the points I agree with, although on its own it isn't incredibly damning at this point.

Point Two

-

"Admitting" points

Same post, "Yes Caf, you are well to point out I haven't done much yet. I admit, I was a little lost by the randomness of it all for awhile, and hadn't quite caught up."- Admitting it doesn't make it any less true. This is an excellent way for scum to try and lessen points brought up on them. They can say, "Yes, I lurked", "Yes, I lied", "Yes, I fucked up", but the truth is admitting it doesn't mean it never happened. It just means you are defending it differently. This point can still be used even if you admit it's true.

I've seen this argument before, and I've been pulled up for doing something similar in other games (possibly even this game too)... my opinion of it is that while yes, it doesn't absolve you from whatever you're admitting, it doesn't really swing the other way and make you even more guilty either. Not everyone who 'admits' is scum. So, we have to look elsewhere for definite tells.

Point Three

Bad Excuse

Also, "I was waiting for Imaginality's explanation of his vote, but I think i just figured it out."- This was your excuse for staying random. You were waiting for him to explain. What? Do you get random and joke around when a game is in LYLO and everyone is waiting for a player to respond? I don't. You could have done more while you waited.

Yeah, again, I think there are multiple explanations for this one. I know I've done "waiting on x" posts as both town and scum. If you look at Isacc's play from the viewpoint that he's probably scum, I can see how this might compound the case, but to me it just seems fairly subjective and null to me. That applies to quite a few things, so in order to prevent this post being a wall of text where I repeat myself over and over again, I'll skip to some of the juicier points of the case.

Point Seven

Distancing from Darox

Hm, I hadn't really considered the 'FoSing Darox without voting' behaviour before. The first instance is explainable (Isacc had missed a bit of Darox's explanation for voting), but the second one is more interesting: Isacc FoSes Darox in 273 for an unexplained vote, Darox never explains it or addresses said FoS, but Isacc seems to let it drop anyway. @

Isacc

: any explanation for that?

Isacc does continue to suspect Darox without voting for quite a long time, but like I said before, there are a couple of people who are worse culprits of that IMO, so there you go.

Point Ten

"I'm not scummy. Someone else did it too!"

a) Hascow calls you out and you literally say, "Plum did the same thing as me five posts above the one you're voting me over..... So why are you voting for me, but made no such comment to Plum? Scummy." (The dot dot dot is to note that I removed some of the post because it's not relevant.) So. You can't be scum because Plum did the same thing. Not only that, but Hascow is scummy for thinking you are scummy. Textbook OMGUS.

I think what Isacc says himself is not particularly reprehensible on its own, as it's essentially true (Plum did defend Kmd before isacc did). What the issue is here is that (as hascow said at the time) Isacc was ostensibly misrepresenting hascow's case, as he was suspecting Isacc not for a general defence of Kmd, but for a "chainsaw defence" where he attacks the attacker (dahill). @

Kmd

: you didn't really mention this aspect of the argument in your case. Do you think Isacc carried out a "chainsaw defence" and/or misrepresented hasd?

Point Eleven

Extreme over defensiveness

a)We see this when Hascow votes you. You call his accusation "bull crap" and say it "pinged your scumdar like mad". You also toss out a "major FoS Has for a totally bull accusation and tunneling." which is hilarious because Hascow was far from tunneling.

b) Your post 19 is filled with caps, bold, profanity, and bad points. (Not that I have a problem with profanity. Just the way you used it looked over defensive.)

c)Not even gonna go into your response to my original suspicions again. Note that it's there though.

Leaving c) aside (you both get pretty aggressive at that one), I do find a) and b) to be fairly valid points. Posts such as 305 do contain empty displays of aggression that don't serve to further his logical arguments at all.

Point Twelve

Ordering Des to die

Yeah, I gave my opinion of this one at the time... a dumb gambit to attempt, and didn't help the town, but doesn't necessarily make him scum. Sly's position of "gambits are never town" is foolish, IMO.

The other points I missed out are largely illustrations of Isacc's non-committal nature (not wanting to vote, refraining from making a lot of cases on people etc). Fair enough, but I don't really get that feeling from him myself. Meh.

Again, I can discern multiple points against Isacc, but they are all of a fairly minor nature - the overall, major picture doesn't make me feel that we should lynch him. I don't advocate getting him to claim at this point. Perhaps later on if he's still going to be the deadline lynch, but not yet.

---

Some comments on recent occurrences:

I want to see an example where a protown player called his actions, in game, a gambit. I have never seen a protown player do that before, ever.

Why must you continue to be so awkward? People gave you examples - just because there weren't links to them, doesn't prove you right.

Well, tyvm Plum, your helping Isacc defend himself is duly noted. I'm still not moving my vote.

Aaand it's the unwinnable scenario for everyone else. People don't post links, their opinions are useless; people post links, they are scummy for helping others' defences. This is not good scumhunting.

@

des

: Hi! What do you think of EK (the other player who is currently being voted, whom you haven't mentioned so far)?

Aside from a curious way of getting on the SlySly wagon (which I talked about in 515), I haven't found imaginality to have done much scummy stuff. Is there anything in particular I should be focusing on?

To summarise, my list of players looks something like this. Scum at the top:

Plum/Sly.
Isacc/EK.
Kmd.
Glorkdes/imaginality.

with hasd in some mystery position that not even I know.

[elvis_knits]

AND NOW, for more thoughts on the kmd case:

Points Four and Five

Non-Committal statements to create wiggle room/contradiction

a.)"As for the lemonade, I don't find it scummy yet, but I am still a little put-off by it."
First, you don't find it scummy "yet". So your opinion can change when everyone else's does? Sure, Caf may do something scummy later, but you are addressing lemonade specifically. There is no specific lean on it. Second, define "put-off" on something you admit you "don't find scummy". Seems like a contradiction to me.

(If Charter was in this game, he'd call you out on a scum slip because the only way to be "put-off" by something you "don't find scummy" is if you are scum worried about a power role. I rarely believe in slips though, so I see this more as trying to be able to take either side later.)

edit: I think you meant you didn't find it scummy (yet) that Sly bought the lemonade, not that Caf was selling it. Point still stands, but I think I misread who you were talking about.

Agree. Waffling can be scum testing the waters to see where the town is willing to go, what the town is willing to buy.

b/c)You were also non-committal in calling Darox "odd" and calling dahill "ridiculous". I elaborate on those later.

This I find one of the best points, since darox is known scum.

d)"In other news, Sly your comments about foreign languages seems kinda anti-town." anti-town? Not scummy? Looking through that post (15 under your posts in isolation), I see nothing that shows whether you think Sly is scum for this or not.

e)"Alright, while the whole SlySly issue is very interesting, I would rather address a matter I feel I can get a definite read on for now, so as to whether or not his claim seems legit, I am holding off on deciding." translates to "We had a roleclaim, but I'm not gonna look at it yet."

Agree. Scum testing waters without commiting.

Point Seven

Distancing from Darox

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

Your first suspicion of the game. Well, first real suspicion. (You joke voted Caf.) And you don't even specifically call him scummy. This is as small a suspicion as you can get. You call him "odd" and you even FoS. But wait. Not just FoS, but a "small FoS". Was there really a purpose in this? If you are town, I don't see one. If you are scum with Darox, I call distancing. (Note that the FoS was "removed" just 2 posts later)

b)Another FoS after Darox doesn't justify his vote.

c) "@Sly: As to who I find scummy, let's see...
Darox continues to frustrate me. He rarely posts anything original, and his content is more often the "Who would win" than anything else at all. The only time I think I see him making an actual argument is against SlySly."- Still haven't voted Darox AT ALL, but you HAVE FoS'd twice.

d)"I think, in light of Darox, I am going to do a PBPA to see if my memory is correct. I'll post it later."- You avoided this until I asked about it.

e) You finally vote Darox when it's clear he's our most likely lynch. Sets you up to say you look more townie for voting him. After that, you finally bring forward that PBPA and push hard for the lynch. And this late push makes you look pretty obsessed with getting Darox lynched. After just a few FoS's and small jabs before. Smells like classic bussing to me.

Agree. This is the most important part of the case to me. Ties to darox, and also for being hypocritical because Isaac was random voting for a long time too. But mostly for pattern of FOSing known scum darox.

Point Eight

Lack of Solid stance on early Dahill vs. Kmd

First, you only comment because you feel you have to, shown here: "the length of this tiny squabble has made me realize I am going to be obligated to take some position or side, or at least provide commentary."

Next, you say dahill is over reacting to it. Ok, you take a side. But you fail to correlate it to an alignment of either player. You FoS dahill and leave it at that. And the FoS isn't even for being scummy. It's for being, " for being, frankly, ridiculous."

"Why is it weird to you that a person explains their actions as they do them? How in the world does that make it scummy? I'm reading it totally right, and I maintain you have no case, your argument holds no water, and you're voting for nothing."
You are quite clearly disagreeing with dahill here and "taking my side", but again, nothing about an alignment on either player. No suspicions or even bad vibes yet.

"Dahill, I will start by saying you have defended yourself well, and my worries towards you have lessened significantly. That said, there are still some parts of your argument I disagree with."
Now you are acting like you had previously been calling dahill scum. You weren't. And still no suspicions at this point in the game. On anyone.

"I think a scum and town are both likely to want to explain their actions the way Kmd did."
Good to know. But no mention of which is MORE likely in THIS situation.

"it's not the vote themselves that make it helpful. It's the responses that are important, like your and Kmd's little debate."
Ok, but it's only important if you take something from it. You really didn't.

This could be the sort of non-commital waffling behavior I agreed with above. But I don't think it's as strong. sort of null to me, but possibly the scum testing the waters.

Point Ten

"I'm not scummy. Someone else did it too!"

a) Hascow calls you out and you literally say, "Plum did the same thing as me five posts above the one you're voting me over..... So why are you voting for me, but made no such comment to Plum? Scummy." (The dot dot dot is to note that I removed some of the post because it's not relevant.) So. You can't be scum because Plum did the same thing. Not only that, but Hascow is scummy for thinking you are scummy. Textbook OMGUS. And your first actual suspicion of the game, so congrats on that. Want a milk bone? (Damn image tags. I can't get it to work.) "Unvote because I had only voted Destructor for pressure." I take back that milk bone. =/

b) You also throw in the little gem, "Hey look, I also see a bunch more people agreeing that Kmd isn't scummy for his vote...again...how come you haven't attacked them?"

I agree that "Someone else did it too" is not a defense, but it is important to point out where others are being inconsistent with their suspicions, so I don't blame Isacc for doing it. Except that it's not an explanation for why he did something.

Point Eleven

Extreme over defensiveness

a)We see this when Hascow votes you. You call his accusation "bull crap" and say it "pinged your scumdar like mad". You also toss out a "major FoS Has for a totally bull accusation and tunneling." which is hilarious because Hascow was far from tunneling.

b) Your post 19 is filled with caps, bold, profanity, and bad points. (Not that I have a problem with profanity. Just the way you used it looked over defensive.)

c)Not even gonna go into your response to my original suspicions again. Note that it's there though.

Strongly disagre with this one. Overdefensiveness is not a scum tell. In fact, I think it's scummy for a person to tell another person they're being overdefensive. So... this is actually scummy from kmd.

Point Twelve

Ordering Des to die

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

I think I've said enough on why this is scummy. (earlier in the game)

"He claims he will die if he doesn't make any posts in German. This will tell us if he is lying."- Awesome. If he's modkilled, we know he's town. That's helpf....wait a second.

I agree Isacc's plan was bad and unhelpful, but overall I think it's null since I have seen Isacc make unhelpful plans as town.

OVERALL:

I think many of kmd's points are null on Isacc. Ones I didn't even list were ones I thought were null. I do however think Isacc's behavior toward darox was extremely suspicious, the FOSing and such. That's the strongest part of the whole thing, and for that alone I think Isacc is a good lynch candidate.

[SlySly]

I have never heard of a town gambit.

vote: Isacc

A town gambit.

Even iv zis is not an ekzelent ekzample, Sly's stanze on town gambit'z is zilly.

Issue has been closed.

FTR, I now know town gambits exists and that at least one idiot before you even referenced his actions that way, in game.

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

Mod:

Can hazcow be prodded?

Are you stupid or just scum that doesn't read the game?

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

Sly's position of "gambits are never town" is foolish, IMO.

See above.

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

You going to claim, Isacc?

[Isacc]

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

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

I am fairly sure you are town, right now.

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


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

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


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

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

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

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


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

terrible

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


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

sure

I am scum.

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

confirmation bias

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

[Isacc]

Woops, forgot sly...

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

[elvis_knits]

@EK: Your analysis of the case is, admittedly, not really scummy, defying my expectations.

This made me lol...

So, anyway, I guess I should know this about you since I played with you once before, but, you prefer to FOS over vote until you feel "sure"?

Personally, I almost never FOS, so it seems weird to me.

[SlySly]

Woops, forgot sly...

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

You are probably right. Best approach is probably to diddly fart around until the deadline resulting in your lynch, whether it be right or wrong.

[destructor]

hascow is silenced today, des. he doesn't need prodding[/b]

Hrmm. I figured zat iv he iz not ded, zen he iz ztill expekted to be reedink ze game. To anzer sly, hoo zo ekzitedly kolled me ztupid or zkohmz, I voz tryink to ensure zat hazcow vill not hav forgotten ze requezt Glork made ov him and vud be postink zis az zoon as he pozted next (iv he becoms unzilenced).

This is all in reference to Kmd's case here.

Oh. I did not reed ziz post. I vill do zo and post my zorts next.

@

des

: Hi! What do you think of EK (the other player who is currently being voted, whom you haven't mentioned so far)?

I ment to menshon on zis yezterday in relazion to Plombz caze on her.

I had a very week reed ov elvis zrough day 1, but voz not too koncerned becoz I had ztronger reeds on mozt ozzer playerz. I ztill am no zo zure. I feel I may hav to do zom meta-aynalyziz of her, in particular referenze to her commentz about Sly's "zlip", vich I beleev I commented on as veek at ze time, but I beeliv she voz completly inkohrect aybout Hazcow follovink Iyzak's plan - I beeliv Haz voz votink des-Khan befor Iyzak propozed it. Az it zeems she did not take ze time to verify ziz, her akshonz do zeem zomvat opportuniztic.

Aside from a curious way of getting on the SlySly wagon (which I talked about in 515), I haven't found imaginality to have done much scummy stuff. Is there anything in particular I should be focusing on?

My initial gripe voz for vat I zed in Post 622. Hiz poztz very moch giv me ze impreshon that he is scohmz. Zere are posts he has made zat I can only dehzcribe as strange, liek he iz hoping zat they are vat a townie vud do, or zomzing. I vill try to find ze vonz I am tinkink ov in particular.

To summarise, my list of players looks something like this. Scum at the top:

Plum/Sly.
Isacc/EK.
Kmd.
Glorkdes/imaginality.

with hasd in some mystery position that not even I know.

Vy is it zat joo hav Kmd in zat list?

---

Az I voz serchink for a link I realized zat des-Khan did not rezpond to thiz post ov imaginality:

1. Vhat I zed vhen I FoS caf vas:

I vondering, lemonade, eef maybe could be Kool Aid cult zuizide drink. I no trust caf19. FoS

I said reason for FoS, that I not trust caf. Death cult yust a possibility I raise as exomple of vhy lemonade could be bad if caf is bad. my later post (166) I zpell out reasons vhy I not trust caf. (Note phrasink in zat post, "Did not zpell out my reasons." - not givingk different reasons for FoS, yust explaining vhy I not trust caf.) 166 is not defensive/backtrackingk, 166 is explainingk.

Vas not makingk case to vote caf (my vote vas still on Isacc), yust to explain vhy I not buy lemonade and not think it good to buy lemonade.

Thiz iz not conziztent viz ze FOSing. Not tinkink zat it iz good to buy lemonade and

sospektink

zomvon are compleetly different.

Ze rest of thiz paragraph iz not absolvink - moch ov it iz superfluoz as imaginaity's over-anaylyziz ov caf's post voz.

2. "Why isn't he worried about..." Not whole lot of point voting lurkers until zey return (showing they lurking were), I not rrreally like to vote people who may yust haf flaked (as it turned out CoheedCambria did). I vas findingk it hard to get good reads on people in ziz game (still am somevhat, ezpezially elvis and Kmd). As for Darox, lack of contribution at zat time vas not so vorrying, it vas not so long zinz rrrandom stage. By now iss more scummy.

I vil hav to chek ze timeline arond zeez eventz agen, but I azzume I bort theez points up becorz Coheed looked liek he voz lurkink and Darox zeemed to be avoiding poztink content.

Ze main izzue I had here iz that imaginiality ignored theze tings, and insted decided to FOS caf vor zomthink that voz compleetly spekulatif. He iz arguink here zat he had trobel gettink reeds on players, but I do not zee thiz as an excuze to make reechy and unnezassary arguments.

3. Re. Sly's comment: I accept it vas a stretch and I vas tunnel on him zomvhat for the vhile. But I do not seeing vhy that is a concern. If scum, I vould know Sly was not scum, so I vould know he is likely truth-telling wif unlynchable claim, so vhy stretch to get him lynched?

To ze virst, maykink stretchy arguments iz a conzern becoz it iz ze scohmz hoo have to create their zuspekts. To ze zecond, zat iz WIFOM, yo.

[destructor]

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

It voz mostly a lak ov anytink incredibly schommy and ze evidence I find ov joo intendink ze gambit.

I am goink to reed Kmd's large caze now.

[caf19]

Vy is it zat joo hav Kmd in zat list?

I noted a couple of minor sources of suspicion on Kmd previously, such as this from post 946:

Kmd immediately switches back to Isacc when the deadline moves. This does make sense within his play as a whole, and he doesn't push for everyone else to change their vote over, so this is fairly excusable - but still, his "Darox is finally starting to be helpful" line seems rather implausible and it was the most rapid switch away from Darox. A minor mark against Kmd, I'd say. Kmd makes my scumlist but he'd be fairly low down on it; one to come back to later, imo.

I don't feel much for a case on Kmd currently, but I'm keeping it noted.

[SlySly]

hascow is silenced today, des. he doesn't need prodding[/b]

Hrmm. I figured zat iv he iz not ded, zen he iz ztill expekted to be reedink ze game. To anzer sly, hoo zo ekzitedly kolled me ztupid or zkohmz, I voz tryink to ensure zat hazcow vill not hav forgotten ze requezt Glork made ov him and vud be postink zis az zoon as he pozted next (iv he becoms unzilenced).

Oh really? How did you foresee cow going about confirm this for you since he can't post today?

Zere are posts he has made zat I can only dehzcribe as strange, liek he iz hoping zat they are vat a townie vud do, or zomzing. I vill try to find ze vonz I am tinkink ov in particular.

Yes, please do. No need for Darox-like delay.

I think you do make some good points about imaginality.

[destructor]

Oh really? How did you foresee cow going about confirm this for you since he can't post today?

Iv Mirth konfirmed that Hazcow voz prodded, zen he vud not hav an eckskuze ov "mizzing zat post" vor not doink ze enalyziz.

I vil gazzer ze ekzampols of imaginality's posts tat I menshoned later today.

[SlySly]

Oh really? How did you foresee cow going about confirm this for you since he can't post today?

Iv Mirth konfirmed that Hazcow voz prodded, zen he vud not hav an eckskuze ov "mizzing zat post" vor not doink ze enalyziz.

1. There is no way to tell if a silenced player is reading the game, nor is there any obligation for them to read while they are silenced. I would expect if they weren't reading as the game progressed, that they should read all that has taken place since their silencing at the point where they become unsilenced.

2. cow, though I think he should, has no obligation to do what glork asked of him.

I understand what you are saying but I don't necessarily agree with it.

[Plum]

New thoughts, in no particular order:

- Re: Des asking for Hascow to be prodded: At first I didn't get this at all. Looking back at the wording of the request, it makes me realize that it was a bit of harmless experimentation on Des' part which didn't really come to anything ("And, I vonder iv ziz vill vork.")

- Des makes good argument against Kmd's belief that Isacc did not actually plan the gambit to be a gambit, and I'm interested to see what Kmd will make of that when he comes back, as his biggest beef with the gambit was the fact that he thought it was really a scummy attempt to get Khan-Des to risk modkill or be lynched covered up, after pressure, by claiming it had been a gambit.

Just so you know, I'm coming at this from the view that while Isacc has done some stupid stuff in the game, it hasn't necessarily made him scummy, and I don't find that he joined the Darox wagon as late as everyone keeps saying (Sly and Plum were later).

Here's how I see it:

- Issac has committed various minor scumtells (lingering a bit in the random stage, over-aggression in response to attacks, the gambit [I've explained my position here]). A somewhat more meaningful scumtell is the noncommittal stances on Sly. So he's done scummy stuff, just like multiple players.

So now I want to do a more in-depth analysis than before re: whether Isacc's behavior with the Darox wagon looks strongly like bussing. The

first

Darox wagon grew to five votes without Isacc there at all - after five quick votes had been placed on Darox, Mirth announces that he's been prodded. There is little to glean from here - though I did actually check, and he posted little on the site in the interim, and in another game had the opportunity to explain that he was suffering computer difficulties. In fact, he only comes back after the deadline has been put off a week. At that point it had been clearly proven that multiple players thought that Darox would be a very decent lynch, he was under more scrutiny after the first wagon on him, and deadline was about a week away. Distancing is everyday stuff and scum will take it when they can get it, but bussing only pays dividends when the bussed player already looks too likely to be lynched. In any case, Darox still looked overwhelmingly the most likely to be lynched - recall, this was before I made my case on Des-Khan. At the point Isacc first voted Darox there was literally no wagon with more than one vote except on EK (myself and Isacc before he voted Darox). When I look at the timing of his vote . . . in regards to his own posts, he voted EK, posted a bit about Darox buddying, and then quickly joins the wagon. Pushing for the lynch once you start bussing is only ensuring that your investment is as strong and useful as possible. It looks like likely bussing on Isacc's part - decent bussing, not weak-willed and not wishy-washy. In any case, the defense:

Call it what you will, but I would be making a

terrible

play to bus so hard all the way to a lynch on Day 1.

In that situation, bussing that hard may well have been the best play.

The thing is that Isacc looks like a fair call for a Darox-buddy and his actual play hasn't been scumtell-free either. Frankly the EK case doesn't look like it will get enough support to translate into a lynch, whether I will or no. But rereading Isacc, he seems a very worthy candidate for the lynch, especially considering his connections with Darox, as I've explained in this post and another fairly recent one of mine. Mostly I'm waiting out here for Des' Imaginality case and analysis of Kmd's case on Isacc.

We don't seem to have confirmation on how many votes it'll take to lynch today. There seem to be nine alive, and seven or eight votes counted in need for majority, which would suggest five to lynch either way, as GlorkDes' lack of vote still counts in the count as a player alive.

[Isacc]

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

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

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

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

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

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

is

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


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

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

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

I

worried was reduced pressure on Darox.


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



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

Important Fact

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

Page 21, Post 513:

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

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

Page 23, Post 551:

Darox

still

hasn't been voted yet and it is

here

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

long before the wagon

.


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

vote

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

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

wow

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

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

[destructor]

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

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

Ziz here iz good. Yez, som peepol hav raized mynor schom tells ov Iyzak, bot zey are too mynor in my mind, cud azlo be don by town and ignor ze zings zat idicate zat Iyzak may be pro town (town tells). I feel vat he haz jost explayned to uz (his early PBPA of Darox) doz tromp much of ze minor schom tells on him.

I did reed kmd's caze on Iyzak. I find mozt ov it was made of tells zat are not partikularly strong. Ze distanzing is maybe notewhorthy, but see above. On point ten, I read that situation differently zoch that Iyzak's reakshon zeemed perhaps OMGUZy but not schommy at all.

I vud not be arguink against zis (or any) caze normally, but I beeliv zat ve ar goink down ze rong trak and ze schomz are gettink away.


I am rereadink imaginality now...

Here iz won ov ze posts zat I did not like:

Before I am lynched, other than myself, who do you (townies) find scummy?

Hmm. Intehrrrezting phrase - "you (townies)" = SlySly not townie?

Iz reechy, ezpecially because Sly noted ezpesholly in brakets.

Vhat vorries me most is, imprresion I get from re-rread: Isacc's posts gif a sense zat he places himself against town rather zan sees himself on same side as us.

Can joo show us vat posts made joo tink zis?

Got prodded, apologises. I vas waited to rrread the rrrrest of Darrrrrox's overrrrrrrrview but zhat ztill haz not yet to arrive...

As for ozzer stuff lately, Isacc's post yust above helps confirm my zense of Darox vas deliberrrately tryingk to zkate through day while prrovided little in ze vay of analyziz orr vote rrecord. Still very happy with my vote on him, think he good lynch for today.

I take Glork's side about destrrructor, who zeems to haf been fish/prezzure Glork to roleclaim and prezzing too hard (at this stage) on Glork for current inability to vote. Azide from hoping to get claim, destrructor may alzo haf been hoping if ozzer vagons fizzle out ve vould fall back on a 'lynch Glork he iss useless' lynch as deadline apprroaches.

Not sure about points against elvis, haf to re-read her posts again. At moment prrefer Darox lynch, also ok with destructor lynch. Feeling better about Isacc due to rrezent posts, now I tending to think hisss earrrlier aggrrreszzsion may been ankry townie razzer zan prezzured scum.

Inisholly I did not liek zis post. It looked liek imaginality voz borrowink Iyzak's reesonink for votink Darox. I voz thinkink zat ze schomz at this point vere Darox, imaginality and Glork, so his comments about des-Khan/Glork zeemed very schommy to me. It dozzen't look zo bad in retrospekt.

I did not liek his jump bak onto ze Iyzak wagon after kmd made his caze...
Imaginality, do you still tink ze caze on Iyzak is stronk?


Hmm.

---

Zom zorts zat I had vile tinkink zing over last night:
Plom and elvis probably aren't schomz toghether.
Plom and Iyzak probably aren't schomz toghether.
imaginality and Sly probably aren't schomz toghether.
Plom and Sly? - ?
imaginality and Sly? - ?
elvis and Sly? - ?
elvis and imaginaity? - ? (re-reeding, I notiz elvis made an attak on imaginiality at won point, so maybe not Post 432)

elvis as schomz I feel is decreezink ze likelihood of Plom- and imaginality-schomz. Tinkink furzur, hazcow-schom is decreezed olzo because of elvis' attack on him earlier. Zat is two out of my three livink inishol suspektz zat are unlikely to be ze schomz if elvis iz. Hrmm.

I vud find helpful iv ozzers can give comments on the pairinks I list obov.


I need to rereed hazcow. =/

[SlySly]

Ziz here iz good. Yez, som peepol hav raized mynor schom tells ov Iyzak, bot zey are too mynor in my mind, cud azlo be don by town and ignor ze zings zat idicate zat Iyzak may be pro town (town tells). I feel vat he haz jost explayned to uz (his early PBPA of Darox) doz tromp much of ze minor schom tells on him.

I agree with this on some levels. My vote remains on Isaac mainly for 3 reasons: 1) Semantics over 'gambit' (minor), 2) ridiculous mod suicide plan (less minor, but not major), 3) if pushed to L-1, a claim might clear him in my mind. I'm not pushing for that claim at this point though but not yet ready to move my vote.

I did reed kmd's caze on Iyzak. I find mozt ov it was made of tells zat are not partikularly strong.

That was my initial thoughts of the entire case kmd presented as well, but I am often initially overwhelmed by a WoW. After reading the case a few times, I found a few things noteworthy but, like you, nothing major.

I vud not be arguink against zis (or any) caze normally, but I beeliv zat ve ar goink down ze rong trak and ze schomz are gettink away.

You are playing this role much better than your original role, IMO. That makes me wonder if there is something special/scummy about des-Glork that is motivating you to play better. I play every role terribly, feel free to meta me , so please don't take this comment about your previous role play the wrong way. Which track do you think would be better to follow at this point over the Isacc one?

I take Glork's side about destrrructor, who zeems to haf been fish/prezzure Glork to roleclaim and prezzing too hard (at this stage) on Glork for current inability to vote. Azide from hoping to get claim, destrructor may alzo haf been hoping if ozzer vagons fizzle out ve vould fall back on a 'lynch Glork he iss useless' lynch as deadline apprroaches.

...

I voz thinkink zat ze schomz at this point vere Darox, imaginality and Glork, so his comments about des-Khan/Glork zeemed very schommy to me. It dozzen't look zo bad in retrospekt.

This sounds like des-Glork backtracking from earlier suspicions as des-Khan. des-Khan thought Darox (confirmed scum), imaginality and Glork were all scum, now des-Glork

slighty seems

to have bussed imaginality in your last post only to attempt to clear him with this post. At one point in the game, imaginality was my 1 scum candidate. I am kind of disappointed that your promised analysis of possible scum turns out to be a semi-clearing of him.

I vud find helpful iv ozzers can give comments on the pairinks I list...

Plom and elvis probably aren't schomz toghether.

(possible - they both gave caf a free pass for the day)

Plom and Iyzak probably aren't schomz toghether.

(100% agree unless I am being fooled by bussing between the two)

elvis and imaginaity? -

(possible, caf free pass giver/my former 1 scum candidate)

imaginality and Sly probably aren't schomz toghether.

(Sly is town, pairing not possible)

Plom and Sly? -

(Sly is town, pairing not possible)

imaginality and Sly? -

(Sly is town, pairing not possible)

elvis and Sly? -

(Sly is town, pairing not possible)

You have conveniently left off many possible pairings. No mention of caf, kmd or cow. You said you were going to reread cow, you may have more to add about him soon. Have you 100% cleared caf and kmd from your suspicions? If yes, why?

[imaginality]

Vrei sã pleci dar nu-mã, nu-mã iei
Nu-mã, nu-mã iei, nu-mã, nu-mã, nu-mã iei
Chipul tãu si dragostea din tei
Mi-amintesc de ochii tãi

Happy Birthday!

[SlySly]

Happy b-day to elvis and imaginality!!

[caf19]

des, what do you think of imaginality's role in the Darox wagon yesterday?