Open 127 (Lovers Nightless -- GAME OVER) before 761

[zwetschenwasser]

Emp, have you considered the possibility that people get mad at you because of the way you play?

[sekinj]

pot...kettle...

[-TinVision-]

Fifth Vote Count of the Day

sekinj (2) -- zwetschenwasser, Plum
Empking (1) -- mith
Plum (1) -- ortolan
mith (1) -- Empking

Not voting (1) - sekinj

With six alive, it is four to lynch.

[mith]

mith goes V/LA and the game dies...

(Just checking in... nothing new to add until ortolan posts his list and/or Empking responds.)

[sekinj]

mith - what do you expect? you run this place

[zwetschenwasser]

The game dies for half the day as I'm in school...

[zwetschenwasser]

Posting for OCD purposes...

[sekinj]

I'm going to go ahead and

Vote: zwet

Plum had a resonable enough response to my suspicious, but zwet seems to be bent on intentionally misunderstanding/misrepresenting my explanations.

[Plum]

Prodded. Many apologies.

Happy scumday, mith .

Wait, wait, something I thought of when I was rereading/skimming: Empking says he randomly chose a player (mith) to declare that he would hammer said player (mith) if said player reached L-1. Mith is, on basis of experience and impression (as Zwets said, hey guys, we actually are playing with the founder of this site and all) the least likely player to reach L-1 - especially Day 1. The question is: is there any significance to that which should make me doubt that it was, as Emp said, a random choice? Thinking aloud about possible benefits to that if Emp is scum, I'll say at least that Emp doesn't run into problems of looking scummy, whatever his reaction be, if mith would reach L-1. Avoiding that but still trying to look useful? It's not itself condemning, but it make my gut twitch weird.

New stuff: Zwets' inane focus on the supposed scumminess of Sekinj's 'fabricated' percentages is noted and scummy - though this is Zwets, and, as I've learned, with Zwets an obvscumtell needs to be downgraded a few degrees.

FOS: Zwets

, though.

New list:

Emp
Zwets Ort
Sekinj
mith

For the record, Zwets appears before Ort because I think there's a slightly greater chance of him being scum than Ort.

@ Zwets: Why don't you vote for mith? Curious, as you'd only be putting him at L-2 (though, granted, I can start to see more of the stupidity which will arise from Emp's claim). You even say explicitly that you want a mith lynch. - so why no vote?

It's clear that, argument-wise, Sekinj is in the right. She's bad at math and put 'scale from 1-10' into percentages, unless I'm much mistaken, and by '%50' on a mith/Emp scumteam she meant 'average chance of pair existing (and not, in her mind, significantly affected by Emp's claim)'.

Ort: In one part of a post of mine you questioned, I was addressing the fact that I seriously don't know if it's humanly possible to get a real read on Zwets. Then I said hello to you. Part of my problems with you, in this game, stem from the fact that - do I recall incorrectly? - you accused me of being scummy partly in not taking a stance on Emp while you took little strong stance yourself. Though I haven't said it in quite as many words as you, I do happen to be aware that Emp often loks scummy regardless of alignment. I'm trying to work with it anyway - but you attacked me rther hypocritically in the context of Emp, but refused to take a stance on him yourself. The whole thing does make that pairing seem more likely in my eyes.

Ugh, a whole page of arguing back and forth re: Emp's playstyle (and mith's meta - as I think I've explained, Emp's behavior in that area is one of the things that concerns me about him). Not on my list of things to do . . . everyone focusing on it is focusing on mostly the wrong things, partly, I think, due to questions with little or no point and demands that they be answered. I got to see mith give a sorta cryptic though on my play and playstyle, however .

pot...kettle...

QFT.

Hey, did I not unvote or did the Mod make a mistake? I'm too lazy to check the ruleset now, so I'll assume it was probably my fault. For posterity, a page or two ago I voted Emp. I don't think I unvoted. My vote, according to the votecount, is still on Sekinj. Sorry about confusion. Please note that I intended my vote to be on Sekinj since the post in which I attempted to vote Emp.

Unvote; Vote: Emp

[-TinVision-]

Sixth Vote Count of the Day

Empking (2) -- mith, Plum
sekinj (1) -- zwetschenwasser
Plum (1) -- ortolan
mith (1) -- Empking
zwetschenwasser (1) -- sekinj

With six alive, it is four to lynch.

I may have made a mistake last time on Plum's vote, but I'm also too lazy to check it now.

Edit: Fixed sekinj's vote.

[ortolan]

183 makes me feel better about my mafia ability in general.

I had my post almost typed out as to why Plum was in my favoured scumpair with several people, and mith was one of them, but it got lost when I forgot and turned off my computer.

Plum's standard meta is to appear substantially pro-town and I don't believe I've seen her as scum. I've no knowledge of her scum meta but her posts strongly suggest to me she is scum, and is not yet good enough at hiding it.

Ironically both mith and Plum's metas are apparently quite townie, and interestingly they've directed all their efforts towards Empking and zwet, who we know scum-tells are most unreliable with.

Also note mith and Plum's general failure to discuss one another (in particular mith, he barely mentions her but directs pretty much all his attention onto other players- in particular easy target of all easy targets Empking). Plum is more cautious to mention mith as much as possible, but hell if I was scum with him I'd play on the reputation as much as she has.

Plum is smack bang in the middle of mith's (cautious) list, while Plum thinks she can just get away with putting mith last under the assumption no-one will want to lynch him due to his experience/reputation (irrespective of the fact he's a priori just as likely to be scum as any of us), with little discussion.

I agree with ortolan's analysis of Plum here, and would go a step further to suggest an Empking/Plum pairing as a leading possibility. zwet/Plum also a possibility. ortolan/Plum looks unlikely, for now (though Plum mentioning ortolan when she wasn't really interacting with him at all is quite odd).

here mith can't help but admit Plum looks scummy.

FWIW, I agree with ortolan's (and, if I'm reading correctly, Plum's)

He knows he agrees with me but isn't quite sure of what Plum is saying, but probably agrees with her. Again, implying he has trouble understanding what she is saying thus he can't possibly know her well enough to be her scumbuddy.

Happy scumday, mith .

Appears to be an attempt to appear irreverent while interacting with mith i.e. "hehe he's not my scumbuddy because I address him so casually".

Mith is, on basis of experience and impression (as Zwets said, hey guys, we actually are playing with the founder of this site and all) the least likely player to reach L-1 - especially Day 1.

This is scummy. I have not played with mith before and have zero intention of giving him a free pass. Your attempt to do so with this appeal to authority is scummy.

New stuff: Zwets' inane focus on the supposed scumminess of Sekinj's 'fabricated' percentages is noted and scummy - though this is Zwets, and, as I've learned, with Zwets an obvscumtell needs to be downgraded a few degrees.

FOS: Zwets

, though.

Wait so the same argument I applied to Empking and which you criticised me for isn't valid here?

So yes, my big scumpair is mith and Plum.
Another less likely possibility is Plum and zwet.
Or indeed Empking/zwet.
I originally was going to exhaustively list pretty much any at all viable pairs but the more I read the more the mith-Plum scumpair just seems really obvious.

Vote stands on Plum.

[zwetschenwasser]

Plum, I'm mentally debating between voting sekinj, mith, or you.

[sekinj]

zwet - I would appreciate you typing out your supposed mental debate.

[mith]

Don't think I'm going to get to a full analysis tonight (just got home, and I've got some other things to catch up on before I crash), but some quick comments on ortolan's post:

"Ironically both mith and Plum's metas are apparently quite townie, and interestingly they've directed all their efforts towards Empking and zwet, who we know scum-tells are most unreliable with." - I'm not sure what's ironic about this. And it would perhaps be interesting that we've both directed all our efforts toward Empking and zwet if it were true; I've asked zwet a few questions in an attempt to get him to talk more, but I'm not particularly suspicious of him (probably at the bottom now, actually, though tomorrow I plan to do an analysis of all the pairings and that may change things somewhat).

And as a bit of an aside: I

don't

know that scumtells are unreliable with Empking or zwet. Some tells that are scum-tells for the general population are null tells for Empking because of the way he plays, and zwet is hard to read because of how concise his posts are (and because we have little scum meta for him), but I am confident (/certain) that both act differently in some identifiable way when they are scum. The question is whether we want to make the effort to try to identify those behaviours, or whether we want to just ignore him because the "usual" stuff doesn't work (which is silly anyway, since there is no such thing as a universal scumtell).

"He knows he agrees with me but isn't quite sure of what Plum is saying, but probably agrees with her. Again, implying he has trouble understanding what she is saying thus he can't possibly know her well enough to be her scumbuddy." - I can't decide whether this is spin or just stupid. I wasn't quite sure what her stance was because

she didn't actually take a stance

(just asked a question that implied a stance, in 125). The only think I was implying there was that I don't like putting words in people's mouths. As for the last part... it's pretty out there. I don't know

any

of you that well... and if I were someone's scumbuddy, I still wouldn't know that player well. [This

is

just a game, you know; the scumpair aren't

actually

life long lovers who know each other heart and soul. If I were scum, why would I think acting like I don't know someone that well would benefit me at all?]

---

"This is scummy. I have not played with mith before and have zero intention of giving him a free pass."

Two things to say here:

1. This has been niggling at me since ortolan first brought up the Plum-being-weird thing. On one hand, ortolan is reaching to make a connection between us (see above), and for that I am growing a bit more suspicious of him, but on the other she

has

behaved in a way that I would normally characterize as buddying-up to me. Given that if ortolan is innocent he doesn't know I am also innocent, I can understand that he might read that behaviour as pointing to mith/Plum and then reaching with some of the stuff I've said trying to make it fit.

The question from my perspective is: Given that I'm innocent and therefore know I am not scum with Plum, why would she act this way if she's scum? I felt earlier that it didn't make a lot of sense, because in this game, buddying up to someone strongly doesn't seem like it would be a smart tactic by the scum - it would just draw attention to both her and me, make it more likely one of us gets lynched (as likely her as me), and even if I were lynched D1 wouldn't help her any tomorrow.

After the most recent batch of posts from her, though, two thoughts occur.

One, given Empking's and zwet's stance on me and ortolan's determination to not give me a free pass (to the point that I feel like he's trying too hard to find something scummy to pin on me), having mith/Plum as a strong possibility on everyone's mind is more likely to hurt me than her, and would take the attention away from her actual partner. (See, for example, "@ Zwets: Why don't you vote for mith?" in 183; this fits a Plum/sekinj pairing quite well.)

Two, she may genuinely feel that (on the basis of experience, impression, reputation, whatever) I am the most dangerous pro-town player, and as such is buddying up for entirely ordinary reasons - she doesn't want me turning my attention to her. (Oops.)

Given that, and given that after pages of questioning I'm still getting a pretty genuine vibe from Empking (even though he has said some incredibly dumb things), I am going to:

Unvote: Empking, Vote: Plum

2. ortolan, I find your statement somewhat... inconsistent? I don't think you, or anyone, should give me a free pass, yet on some level you are giving a free pass to Empking and zwet (as hard/impossible to read), and zwet is basically ignoring Empking. I'm not seeing how you can make a statement like this, yet find it noteworthy that I have been picking on the "easy target" (I haven't played with him before, and have no intention of giving him a free pass). Explain?

[Empking]

Wow. That post looked incredibly pro-town.

Unvote

- Until I see his scum meta.

[Empking]

Mith: Can you post a game where you were scum?

[mith]

Last game I was scum in was Mini 368. (Actually, I think that's the only post-crash game in which I've posted as Mafia; was killed N1 in Antrax Returns.)

[Empking]

Yeah, I didn't see anything approaching that last post there.

[sekinj]

just one post convinced you to do a 180, emp?

[Empking]

Yes.

[Empking]

Yes.

SWell more like 90.

[zwetschenwasser]

? Doesn't that technically mean that you're going halfandhalf with Emp? I'm getting a Plum/Emp connection, as both are fabricating percentages and numbers.

[sekinj]

zwet - didn't you say

I

was the one fabricating numbers?

[mith]

Quick questions/comments:

sekinj: You seemed to have a pretty clear pattern to your numbers, suggesting you are most suspicious of Plum, half as suspicious of zwet, and still on the baseline with the rest of us... except for the ortolan/Plum pairing. Can you explain your placement of it?

Plum: Your pairings/comments don't mesh with your posted suspicion list in 113. For example, you have zwet as more likely to be scum with Emp and with me than sek, and have them equally likely to be paired with orto. Yet, sek is listed ahead of zwet on your suspect list. From your posted pairings your suspect list would seem to be Emp > orto > zwet > sek > mith (which is more like what you posted in 183). Any response?

(What I can't decide is whether she's trying to distance from scumbuddy sek by putting him second on her suspect list while not expressing suspicion in her pairings - going so far as to say "But Sekinj hasn't looked hugely scummy" at one point - or if she's trying to distance from scumbuddy zwet by going after him harder in the pairings than her expressed suspicion list warrants.)

zwet: You said you would vote for me if the vote count was reset, while at the time you weren't voting. What was holding you back from voting me? You also mentioned sek as your second choice (after voting for him during the first part of the game), yet have not mentioned him among any of your possible pairings. Who do you think he is most likely to be scum with?

me: The reasoning behind my pairings was as follows (some of this still applies):

1. zwet has gone after sek pretty hard, and in spite of the weirdness mentioned in the previous question, I find it quite unlikely they are scum together at the moment.
2. Plum jumped on Empking pretty solidly as well. L-2 isn't a huge deal in a game where 4 out of the 5 other players needs to vote for a lynch, but still find it unlikely they are together.
3. orto hadn't done anything I found particularly scummy to that point (though that has now changed, and I also find Plum his least likely partner now).
4. If I were to assume orto is innocent and that I am right about the first two unlikely pairings, that leaves one of Emp/Plum paired with one of sek/zwet.
5. The remainder of the pairing list follows from my suspicion list.

Plum has moved to the top... beyond that, I've got Emp dropping down near sek and orto moving up near zwet; hopefully responses to these questions will help clarify the picture.

Emp: Similar to Plum's; why did you have zwet and orto on the same level, when all but one of your orto pairings were at the bottom? What does your list look like now?

[sekinj]

@mith - just an oversight. all pairings with plum should have been at 60%