Mini #764: Notre Dame Mafia, Game Over

[DrippingGoofball]

Looks like someone faked reading the thread.

[AceMarksman]

Looks like someone faked reading the thread.

[Looker]

Looks like someone faked reading the thread.

dammit u got me, sorry dgb...

[Kast]

...? No one's ever suspected her before. She throws out a little bit of logic to appear town and lets y'all scoot about formulating suspicions of other players. She's free of pressure.

IF that were true; if we ignore actual post and vote history, and pretend that nobody has suspected DGB so far this game; how does that implicate DGB as scum?

Assuming what you said is true, that puts us in this situation:
There are only two scum remaining. If DGB is one of them, then DGB's partner is one of the other 9 players. If we discount you, then there are 8 townies who have been failing to suspect DGB.

If we consider that DGB is a townie, then there are 2 scum players out of the 9, and discounting you, that leaves 7 townies who have been failing to suspect DGB.

I don't follow how you determined that one of those situations is more likely than the other.

[Looker]

fuck. look im tryin but i just dont get it

[charter]

Lynch him?

ortolan, where are you?

[DrippingGoofball]

Lynch him?

It is very tempting.

[DrippingGoofball]

I checked out Looker's posts all over the site.

He's a zwet clone. The only difference is that Looker doesn't capitalize 35% of the time when he should, whil zwet is a more reliable "capitalizer."

[ortolan]

what's up br0

I'm wondering whether I should bother to make another whole case against DGB (I've already done so), or just self-vote. It does aggrieve me that more than likely 3 out of 4 of AceMarksman, charter, ac1983fan and Kast are actually

town

, but that's for post-game discussion.

Just for reference, when someone says they are willing to vote either of two people, one whom they are 60% sure of being scum, the other who they are 100% sure of being scum, when the 100% person has been ridiculously out of accordance with her town-meta and generally extremely scummy. If this 60% player flips scum, this does not mean the person was wrong or scummy not to have voted him, it still could very likely be that the 100% person, was scum. It is not even a scum-tell. How many dead townies have to tell you DGB is scum before you lynch her?

charter is a good candidate to be DGB's buddy- there's several things I re-read a while ago on day one which look like deliberate busing i.e. I recall comments along the lines of "hehe I hand you a scum on a silver platter and yet you vote me???"

It's also the fact that he and DGB started off today calling me obv-scum (LuLLo) but when I started to force them into the dilemma of "lynch me and you'd better damn well lynch DGB when I flip town", miraculously they become all hesitant about my wagon, with DGB for example using blatantly shallow, nonsensical and scummy justification like "oh ortolan's tone comes across as sincere".

Now Looker gets suspicion for coming into the game and announcing the obv-fact that DGB is obv-scum.

Vote: ortolan

Lynch DGB tomorrow. I don't have much confidence in this town to be honest but I've shown you what to do.

Oh there's also, just from memory, the fact that DGB yesterday insisted repeatedly that zwet was very, very, very obvtown and now tries to divert votes to his wagon so she can chainlynch me tomorrow.

[Kast]

Okay. If you genuinely are curious about the cases against Ort and against Zwet, this is what I think the main points against each are (I may miss some, and I don't subscribe to all of them).

Ort:
-Said he was suspicious of Budja but did not follow up with a vote.
-Tried to pull people away from Budja and onto AM at first, then DGB second.
-Said he thought Charter was a townie yesterday but did not vote to keep Charter alive (since then has changed his mind about Charter's affiliation).
-Proposed letting himself die to guarantee the lynch of another player.

Zwet:
-He has a doubled plague and plans to use it.
-Votes erratically with little or no reason.
-Possibly scummy card choices.
-Lurked at end of Day 1.

I guess I'll include what I see for Kinetic and DGB as well:

Kinetic:
-Claimed his night action with little or suspicious reason.
-Claimed to have used plague against a player who most of us thought was more likely town than scum.
-Possibly scummy card choices.

DGB:
-Erratic voting, sometimes with little or no reason.
-Defended Budja.
-Top suspect of our only confirmed townie.

This isn't going into details on possible pairings between any of these 4 with other players...that would be insane/nuts.

[AceMarksman]

ort is obvscum. I've never seen a self vote from a pro-town player.

[AceMarksman]

I checked out Looker's posts all over the site.

He's a zwet clone. The only difference is that Looker doesn't capitalize 35% of the time when he should, whil zwet is a more reliable "capitalizer."

No, you see, zwet actually has a brain and can think if he wants to. Looker on the other hand *twitch*

Sorry, I'm in a few games with him.

[charter]

vote ortolan

[DrippingGoofball]

ort is obvscum. I've never seen a self vote from a pro-town player.

I'm a notorious self-voter when exasperated.

[AceMarksman]

The difference being that you're "sanity-challenged" as you signature says, while ort isn't.

[ortolan]

-Said he was suspicious of Budja but did not follow up with a vote.

That is factually incorrect, and not necessarily scummy anyway.

-Tried to pull people away from Budja and onto AM at first, then DGB second.

Trying to pull people onto two people who's alignment you do not know, away from a scumbag (when I acknowledged that person

was

scummy, but DGB was more scummy, is not a scumtell).

-Said he thought Charter was a townie yesterday but did not vote to keep Charter alive (since then has changed his mind about Charter's affiliation).

What does this mean??? I stridently argued against charter's lynch so this clearly has a high degree of fail.

-Proposed letting himself die to guarantee the lynch of another player.

It's actually impossible to spin that as scummy any way you look at it. Please explain.

ort is obvscum. I've never seen a self vote from a pro-town player.

First time I've self voted for tactical purposes as town. It's useful in this scenario, to prevent DGB trying to mislynch someone else then coming back to me.

Btw, that whole stuff about "why did you claim to have doctored CTD" was again some very fail questioning. Why exactly would I not claim to have done so? Benefits: shows scum used rat. Cons: ...nothing.

I don't necessarily disagree that Kinetic plaguing CTD was anti-town. It is also interesting it coincided with my declaring one of the scum used a rat card (if he used the rat card he might have wanted to claim an action which was unverifiable in order to mask that action).

[charter]

There are numerous cons to claiming your card. Scum now know what you did. They know if you protected yourself, used a cop, used a plague. You tell them what cards they need to play next, or what cards they don't have to watch out for anymore.

[charter]

unvote

I still need to think about this.

[ortolan]

Also I don't like how Kast stretches my behaviour on Budja into two bullet points, but DGB's behaviour, which is far more scummy, makes up only one. The logic that DGB is less scummy than for never having voted at all, particularly on account of her anti-busing meta (which was even discussed

during

day one), is seriously horrid.

[DrippingGoofball]

@ ortolan

Assume for now that I'm town. I am, but you assume.

Who is your top suspect and why?

[ortolan]

There are numerous cons to claiming your card. Scum now know what you did. They know if you protected yourself, used a cop, used a plague. You tell them what cards they need to play next, or what cards they don't have to watch out for anymore.

Another failure. Sorry, try again. Scum don't know my other cards for a start

although DGB did try to get me to announce them in-thread LOL!!!!

charter's position: it's not scummy to ask someone to declare their cards in-thread for no reason, but it is scummy to claim a night action which demonstrated information about the scum, and gives virtually no possibility for your other cards being identified.

[DrippingGoofball]

You know, ortolan, I think we should acknowledge that both of us are absolutely abominable readers of the other's alignment.

I think you should fight your urge to tunnel on me, imagine that I'm not in the game, and spend as much energy making a case against another player as you would against me.

[AceMarksman]

ort is pulling defenses from his posterior. If I had more time, I would go through them one by one, but I don't, so it will have to wait for tomorrow.

[charter]

There are numerous cons to claiming your card. Scum now know what you did. They know if you protected yourself, used a cop, used a plague. You tell them what cards they need to play next, or what cards they don't have to watch out for anymore.

Another failure. Sorry, try again. Scum don't know my other cards for a start

although DGB did try to get me to announce them in-thread LOL!!!!

charter's position: it's not scummy to ask someone to declare their cards in-thread for no reason, but it is scummy to claim a night action which demonstrated information about the scum, and gives virtually no possibility for your other cards being identified.

What if you claimed to use your first card, and the person passing you cards was scum. They would know them all LOL!!!!

[ortolan]

DGB, if you weren't scum I would say Kinetic, Rishi or zEEnon

zEEnon for the whole "my predecessor looked scummy" (I don't remember anything else from him), Rishi for lurking, Kinetic for his card choice.