Mini 801- Kubrick Mafia (Over)

[muzzz]

Vote: ortolan

For spamming his vote.

[muzzz]

Unvote, vote: BloodCovenant

Spartacus is seriously doubting that BC didn't get Cateraction's earlier gladiator references.

[muzzz]

Oh, and I agree with Ortolan that Spartacus probably isn't for confirmation purposes.

[muzzz]

Yea, I didn't call it a gladius. But I still got it.

No, I don't think you did. Cateraction was referring to the fact that Spartacus was a gladiator.

If you really did get that part, you'd have been expecting someone else to have the same info about Spartacus, making your attack on Pads completely bogus.

[muzzz]

Can you explain that a little more? How would this make my attack on Pads bogus?

If you were aware that at least two people (you, cateraction) knew about Spartacus then you shouldn't have been surprised that a third person (pads) also knew.

[muzzz]

At this point, anyone not claiming Spartacus is either absent or a complete idiot.

Re. Frothy Moth - The only thing I could find was an actual moth. Nothing that seemed to be related to Kubrick (or even drinking or throats, for that matter).

[muzzz]

@cateraction: because

if

anything can be learned from this scene, informed roles will be the most likely to pick it up. While we may have one or two of those on the town side, it's safe to assume that the scum are currently the most informed side. I'll be getting back to this, BTW.

Therefore, all townies should claim Spartacus to limit the amount of information that can be gained. And scum wouldn't want to stand out, either.

[muzzz]

It's extremely likely that what you're asking is, in practice, the same as asking "If you got a different role PM than most of us, please let us know." What on earth could that possibly do for us, except potentially force a powerrole to claim?

[muzzz]

Yeah. I already have strong suspicion that two specific players didn't get exactly the same information about Spartacus that I did. I'm currently thinking very, very hard about how much the scum be able to see.

I'm afraid we might have to force some claims today. We should probably try our best to avoid that.

[muzzz]

I completely agree with Ortolan's reply to BC. I'm 99% certain that BC did

not

get the same PM as I did. The same goes for Fishy and, by association, Ash. Lazarus just seems scummy.

Also, I have no reason to assume that people claiming Spartacus are more likely to be townies.

We should probably lynch Lazarus today. But before that, I'd like to bandwagon BC into a claim.

[muzzz]

After his most recent post, I am absolutely, positively, one-hundred-percent certain that BC is

not

a generic townie. If I figured it out than it's extremely likely that the scum did as well. So BC needs to claim before he gets NK'ed.

Do I need to be any more explicit?

[muzzz]

Why would you possibly want to bandwagon someone to a claim then lynch someone else? The only good reason for someone to claim is if they are otherwise going to be lynched.

"I'm 99% certain that the scum know what I am, so I'll just give you what little information I have before I get NK'ed and hope it makes a difference" is also a valid reason. At least in some situations.

But that aside, you're right in that we should lynch BC if he refuses the claim.

[muzzz]

Please don't call for claims until he has ~half the town voting for him

Did you mean "~half the vote threshold"? Because "~half the town" is "~lynched".

And what else was I supposed to do? Go "Yeah, you should all vote BC for reasons I can't divulge until he's at L-1"? Or keep to myself, cross my fingers, and hope very hard that the scum are complete morons?

His response to the Spartacus claim was widely different from others. He was the

only

one who appeared to have reason to find a Spartacus claim suspicious. If even a single scumbag noticed this, they wouldn't even need inside information about Spartacus to realize that BC needs offing.

---

Re. BC's claim - I kinda expected a claim of Spartacus. Or at least more information about him. But not the cop part. That seems a bit off from the movie's script. Especially with the recognizing. The only people I remember looking for Spartacus in the movie were the people trying to kill him. But since we don't know how close Emp is keeping to the script, it's not necessarily false.

I say we give BC the benefit of the doubt for now. I'm assuming that his claim means he's now recognized, and gets to investigate tonight. Which means we'll have more information tomorrow, whether he lives through the night or not. So for now:

Unvote, vote Lazarus

[muzzz]

Well, if he's telling the truth. Which there's no reason to assume he isn't day 1. Then would it be safe to assume that most or all pro-town players are Spartacus, and those lying are not?

I think it would be safest to assume as little as possible. In particular, I consider it entirely possibly that the scum were at least aware of the existence of a Spartacus role.

[muzzz]

I'm thinking Spartacus claims activate this power.

Hmmm, hadn't thought about this. I'm liking the idea, though.

But I have to stress, again, that we shouldn't assume only pro-town players knew about Spartacus. We have

absolutely no evidence

to support this. There are a great many reasons why the scum might have known about him. What if, for example, (one of) their role PM's started something like this: "Your job is to find and kill Spartacus and his followers without getting caught."

[muzzz]

I have no idea what you're talking about. And I don't remember you accusing me of not knowing something earlier. Clarify, please.

[muzzz]

Sorry, the "again" was because that was my reason for voting BC. I now apply it to you. I was told that claiming spartacus would be advantageous and the fact that you did not think it would be a power up leads me to believe that you did not receive a spartacus role. Hence the vote.

Did your role PM contain the word "may"?

And why should I think it would be a power-up? Did you consider the possibility that Empking

is

following the script? That Spartacus is an important target for the bad guys, and that we all claim to be him to confuse them?

@BC: In this case, there's a huge difference between "everyone" and "all you Sparticans".

[muzzz]

Let me get this straight: you agree with me that masking could be a reason for the Spartacus claims, and you're voting me for assuming that it's

the

reason?

[muzzz]

If Muzzz truly wanted to protect Spartacus, he would have asked for the doc protection for BC and left the subject alone.

I would never stake my game on the existence of a hypothetical doc.

Surely an answer to this question would constitute a breach of the rules. It should certainly not be answered without seeking clarification.

Him thinking about the question is less important than him answering it. Before I explain more, I at least want to know if he sees what I'm getting at.

[muzzz]

Are you saying that everyone, scum and whatnot included, is a Spartican?

[muzzz]

@BC: I'm thinking we might have a different definition of "Sparticans". Initially, I thought you meant "people who knew about Spartacus". But with your latest post, I'm beginning to think you meant "people who would claim Spartacus".

I definitely agree that scum would claim Spartacus. Even if they didn't know about him at first, which I'm undecided about. But my point re. Ortolan was that he wasn't asking just the people who knew about Spartacus to claim. He was asking everyone to claim Spartacus, even people who might not have known about Spartacus before the first claim. That seemed like an attempt to confuse scum by "invalidating" the claims.

[muzzz]

Why are you answering questions directed at someone else?

Also, no response to 149?

[muzzz]

So you are saying that Ash doesn't want input on that question from anyone else? Only from Infis? Infinis will probably give some other explanation, I just wanted wanted to give my input, and with that I think i should be free to give my analysis to any and all questions at my discretion. So, i guess my new question is, do you not want what could be vital information circulating?

No, but you should let Infinis answer before you give your opinion. That way you avoid potentially influencing his answer, which could be important to the person that asked the question.

and there was no question in 149. Therefore, i have no response.

You don't have a response to the fact that I'm saying the assumptions behind you vote are incorrect?

---

Why am I the first player to vote Pads after this post?

Because I thought he might be a specific townie powerrole. I was hoping I could make him see he was using too much non-vanilla info before the scum saw it. But with two people claiming that Pads knows more than they do, the scum are already aware that Pads is non-vanilla.

Unvote, vote Pads

Let's see if he'll claim what I think he will.

[muzzz]

@Emp: the vote count for Pads should be 3

[muzzz]

Given that I don't think anti-town had such an instruction on their roles

What, exactly, are you basing this assumption on?

[muzzz]

What bothers me most about Fishy is his initial over-eagerness to assume scum wouldn't know about Spartacus. I've wondered more than once if maybe he

knew

that scum lacked said info.

And on re-read, I have absolutely no idea what this is referring to:

I also thought that the Spartacus claims (of which

I knew there would be at least three left

)

[muzzz]

So by "three left" you meant "even if everybody stopped claiming after that point, there would still be at least three players who had claimed Spartacus"?

---

Consider that I claimed Spartacus third- I think it's not very realistic to think I did it without information.

I disagree. I think it's quite realistic to expect someone to make the connection between two Spartacus claims and the "I am Spartacus" scene.

And I can't stress this enough:

we have absolutely no reason whatsoever to assume anything about the scum's knowledge

. People need to stop assuming silly things and start playing with what we know. Suggesting that the scum wouldn't know something without having facts to back it up is counter-productive. All it does is give people a false sense of trust towards others. And only scum profit from that.

[muzzz]

This is utterly ridiculous. I seriously doubt you're even reading my posts.

Yes, it's you and BC that are to blame for the outing of Spartacus.

He was outed long before I pushed him to claim

. All I did was force BC to inform the rest of the town. I've said this before, and you're still misrepresenting my point.

And that mason part is just a fantasy without any sort of facts to back it up. Didn't I just mention how counter-productive that sort of stuff is?

[muzzz]

Also, I noticed that BC still hasn't replied to me. So:

@BC: the reasons behind your vote for me are completely invalid. Why are you still voting me?

[muzzz]

You read my most recent explanation about confirmation of my role, does this quote make more sense now?

No.

Wait? Howso?

I explained this already. Please read my posts.

–Already talking about claiming three pages into the game.

Yes, because some idiots were already flaunting their knowledge.

Oh, so you want claims, you just don’t want to be the one that forces them?

Vice versa. I'd rather not have claims, but I'll force them if I think somebody's already outed for all practical intents and purposes.

Wait….? You do want me to claim? Why me? Did we ever bring that into question? And why do you want a claim from me, if you plan on lynching someone else? You could of saved me the trouble of Role Claiming.

I already explained why I wanted you to claim. Please read my posts.

If you truly know, then why don’t you keep to yourself, or defend me if I get bandwagoned? You could of saved town a lot of trouble. And now you’re telling me that I need to get claim before I get Night Killed. Or, why not, if we have a doc, and he noticed the same thing you did, wouldn’t he most likely save me Night 1? You’ve only been around for a few months, unless you’re an alt, how did you pick up on something that is so specifically town play, when I myself considered it to be a generic scum hunting.

I've already explained why I didn't keep to myself. And that I won't trust in a hypothetical doc. Please read my posts.

Also, don't confuse my join date with my experience.

This jackass

even threatened to lynch me if I didn’t claim.

Nice Ad Hominem...

If you don’t believe my claim, then flat out say it.

I have no idea where this is coming from.

this is the dumbest idea ever. If it were true, my role would have activated by now.

Uhmmm... isn't cop a night power?

because you just said that you liked the idea.

So because I liked the idea after someone mentioned it, I should've actually been the one to come up with it? That makes no sense at all.

Ok, as soon as you see my response, you try to say that we have a misunderstanding. The thing is, everyone that knew of Spartacus, regardless of alignment, will claim it, because they want to be perceived as pro-town. You sir, I believe had never claimed anything yet, this leads me to believe that you were extremely confused throughout this point in the game. Besides, confusion is scummy.

I did claim Spartacus. Please read my posts.

Ok, i read that post several times, and it didn't even look like that was what you were trying to say.

What didn't look like like it was trying to say what? This is so vague it hardly qualifies as an opinion.

And you are really into forcing claims aren't you?

I try hard to make the best out of hopeless situations.

But wait, you did push a claim on me, read my post above. Not only did you push my claim, you’re pushing some one else’s rather discretely. Which is, extremely scummy. So, basically, you spent the game wanting to find out who I was, and now some one else. What I also noticed, was that page seven, you were also putting pressure on Fishy. You seem indecisive. Being wishy-washy is scummy, and I believe you are acting so.

Pushing a claim != outing. And I don't need to find out what Pads is. At first I thought he might be the doc, but after his latest post he's almost certainly scum.

And there's nothig wishy-washy about pressuring and/or suspecting multiple people. After all, we likely have more than one scum. It would, in fact, but very short-sighted to focus completely on a single player.

Then your most recent post is you trying to nullify my vote, when just earlier today, I said that I was going to give a post, and you seem like your anxious, and trying to get me off your back. Well, my vote stands. You sir, seem very scummy. I would be surprised if you turned out otherwise.

---

You didn't say you'd post, only that you'd re-read and analyse. But what we see here is that you didn't spend a second actually reading my post. All of that time went into making a non-existent case against me.

tl;dr summary

BC didn't even read my posts.

[muzzz]

Yes, the outting of Spartacus I had an unintentional hand in. But we're talking about the outting of the cop, which I had nothing to do with. Once I saw Blood's surprise at my Spartacus claim, I

left him alone

. But you didn't. What exactly am I misrepresenting?

My intentions. You said I wanted to learn his role, which is false. I wanted him to say he is indeed Spartacus. I didn't expect, nor really want, the cop-ability claim.

Informing the rest of the town, and thus making sure they have the same understanding of Blood's claim that the scum looking for Spartacus do is fine, but what does that have to do with making him claim? There was no reason for it that I can see.

Because if I say something, the town might disbelieve me. Scum would have had a much better idea of whether I was right or not. And making him claim is also a precaution against the possibility that he's fakeclaiming scum.

That's obviously not true. BC's claimed PM included a part that clearly stated a group of players had to recognize him. Is it entirely unreasonable to guess that such a group of people can talk to each other in a non-main game thread capacity? Couldn't that be Masons?

Yes, it's entirely unreasonable to guess that without any direct evidence. For all we know, that group was just "the townies".

Yes, but if my theory is 'baseless', as you describe, despite being based on someone's claim, then we can classify some of your theories as baseless, too....

You're misrepresenting my points, again. Those things you quoted weren't theories. They were counter-arguments to people

who were assuming too much.

[muzzz]

EBWOP:
For the record: I have nothing against theories, as long as they're just that. I do, however, have huge problems with people assuming one theory over the other without any evidence.

[muzzz]

You say that scum will most likely not want to stand out, yes, but how are people standing out if they just go, "oh yea, i'm spartacus too!." and no one bats an eye.

My point was that scum would go "oh yeah, I'm Spartacus too" so they wouldn't stand out. No one batting an eye at that is pretty much why they'd do it. I don't see how your statement is questioning mine.

Flaunting knowledge? not really? How do you see us as 'flaunting knowledge.'

Claiming Spartacus. Counter-claiming Spartacus. Saying people who (counter-)claimed Spartacus are likely town. Etc..

But if you know i wasn't a generic townie, but still thought me to be town, then why would you need a claim from me?

Because for various reasons, which I've repeated more than once, I found it necessary to have you state your claim for the rest of the town.

I apologize, but I fail to see this. I just see you saying that i obviously have a different role than you, which.... you kind of knew from the start, didn't you? Theoretically to say at the least.

I didn't know you had a different role than me until you counter-claimed. A claim might still have been avoided at that point. But then people quickly showed that your position was entirely unique. That's the point were you became a scum target even if the scum hadn't known about Spartacus beforehand. And that's when I knew you had to claim.

But why not? it's a big enough game. You didn't answer the question.

The chances of a single townie catching something are much smaller than the chances of at least one of the scum to catch it. That's why I didn't keep to myself. If we had a doc, he would've been more likely to miss it than the scum. And bandwagons have nothing to do with NKs.

Anything else?

I don't think that's really an Ad Hominem.

I really don't see how "jackass" would be directed at my arguments.

OH! Now i get to say it, read my post.

You said "If you don't believe my claim". But I never suggested I don't believe your claim. Your post has nothing to do with that.

Yea, but that doesn't mean that mine is activated yet, and even after Night 1, it still might now be activated. Emp will let me know when it is activated.

Did he say he'd let you know immediately?

I get to say it again! read the posts surrounding my quotes and maybe you will understand.

I did read those posts. You say it was a dumb idea, but that I'm scummy for not having liked it from the start. None of that makes sense.

I fail to see it.

FFS, I was the one who said "anyone not claiming Spartacus is absent or an idiot"... And I've made countless arguments, many against you, that claimed or implied some knowledge of Spartacus. Stop fooling around.

It didn't even look like you were trying to say this, -> "You don't have a response to the fact that I'm saying the assumptions behind you vote are incorrect? " I didn't see that at all.

It's most definitely there.

What hopeless situation?

People who out themselves to the scum.

I think you understood the interpretation of my post, but are trying to use this against me.

I'd like to see you back that up.

[muzzz]

Oh really, you asked me to claim three times, if not four times. And not to mention, didn't my initial question to pads show how honest and sincere I was? I wasn't about to let some one else claim my role. And when you ask for a claim, if you asked anyone else, in this game, or any other game, they would tell their actual role, when faced with a RC. They wouldn't only say, "Oh i'm just Spartacus." Because that's bullshit, If that's all I claimed, then I would have been ridiculed and lynched.

Your initial question only showed you sincerely thought Spartacus should be counterclaimed. Being Spartacus is the simplest explanation for that, but not the only one.

I can't answer for the rest of the town. But the important part for me was that you claimed something which validated your suspicion.

1. he did not do that.
2. you seem to be refusing his theory.

He was assuming masons over other possibilities. And I never disagreed that masons might be possible.

[muzzz]

@Infinis: OMGUS. You insinuate a whole lot. But you don't even point at a single concrete fact. Let alone a shred of evidence.

[muzzz]

Oh, and I agree with Ortolan that Spartacus probably isn't for confirmation purposes.

poisoning the well

How is that poisoning the well?

[muzzz]

Yeah, that bothered me too. He actually seemed to have some sort of case on Fishy. But then he votes me with what basically amounts to "what Pads/BC said".

And my third-person Spartacus is apparently too subtle for him. But he's willing to read a cop claim in BC's use of the word "sword". That was barely a Spartacus reference. The cop part wasn't even in the picture yet.

[muzzz]

Skitzer, Cat and Archon haven't posted since Wednesday, Thursday and Friday, respectively. From each of them, I want to hear who their two top suspects are, as well as their opinion on all three bandwagons so far. I also want them to answer one of the two following hypothetical questions:

- If you were the cop, who would you investigate tonight?
- If you were scum, who would you want to kill tonight?

[muzzz]

What a sucky bandwagon. Pads and BC seem to be the only ones who are even trying to make a case.

Cateraction and Lazarus think I'm confused about the Spartacus business. I think it's more likely that they've been reading too much into their PM's. But without a response from them, I don't really get a chance to make that clear.

But Infinis is the worst of the bunch. I mean, come on! Hacking through BC vs. me is one thing. But he can't even back up the well poisoning, or the sword = cop-claim.

Given this, I have half a mind to just make a full claim at L-1. I'm not really sure if it's the best of ideas. But it'll probably make some people listen to me, at least.

---

@Cat:
- You didn't give bandwagon opinions.
- You only had to answer one hypothetical.
- I really did mean "who would you want to kill", not "who seems the most town".

@BC: Trust me, it's an awesome question. Besides, it's too obvious to be fishing. The only reasons non-stupid scum would have for it are mired in WIFOM.

[muzzz]

Please show me where I say sword = cop claim. I don't say it. I said it's a signaling ploy or just simply someone playing along with a joke. Cop signal, did you think I meant? I'll clear it up for you, a simple signal that "hey I have a mention of Spartacus in my PM".

That doesn't change my point. You completely ignore the fact that well over half my posts claim or imply Spartacus. So why are you willing to read into that minute (and possibly irrelevant) comment?

And as to poisoning the well, you clearly didn't want a way for town to recognize each other. By restating, whoever brought it up first which can be ignored, you reinforced the point, making sure town could not use Spartacus as a way to ID each other.

<sarcasm>
Yeah, I really needed to do that. The town had such a good idea of who knew what. They would've picked out my fakeclaim immediately.
</sarcasm>

If there ever was a way in which Spartacus could've been used to identify people, why aren't you (and the rest of the players) just ignoring what I said?

[muzzz]

Missed this...

But you're giving scum (if their not smart enough) a list of who is their top priority to night kill.

Scum would need to be

really

stupid for that. I could explain, but I'd really like to hear from Archon and Skitzer before we discuss this at length.

[muzzz]

2. He didn't think Spartacus claims might power up Spartacus

I still don't get this one. Nothing in my PM contradicts the theory I had: that claiming Spartacus was meant to confuse the bad guys about the identity of the real Spartacus. Nothing in BC's claim directly contradicts it, either. So I really don't see how it's scummy that I didn't arrive at another conclusion.

For the record: I'm just hoping someone can explain this to me. I'm not asking anyone to drag in their PM's to validate the argument.

[muzzz]

@Fishy and everyone else who likes that argument: so you're saying it came so

completely

natural to you that you basically consider it an impossibility that someone with the same PM didn't arrive at the same conclusion?

I find this quite surprising. Nothing in my PM (or in what Cat described of his) directly supports the idea of claims powering something up. There's also nothing that directly supports it in BC's claim. As far as I can tell, it's actually a bit of a stretch. Not a bad one, mind you, but a stretch nonetheless.

@Cat, Archon and Skitzer: you guys still have unanswered questions.

[muzzz]

The fact that I'm the one responding to these questions may give the appearance that I like this argument more than I do.

Just like how I keep responding to you, even though I'd rather be arguing this with someone who sees it as a cause for voting. Where the heck is everyone?

There's nothing in either the PM or the claim directly supporting the idea. However, it was natural to be on the lookout for things to link the PM to (particularly as the early days of Spartacus were a rather unhelpful and predictable fiasco), and this seemed a natural candidate.

But at least we're making some progress.

I disagree that it would have been (or is) natural to be on the lookout for things to link to the PM. We already had a decent explanation, based on the movie. Keeping your eyes open for alternatives is good, of course. But as far as I see things, we had no reason to think our PM's might be hinting at some hidden power. So I don't see actively looking out for things like that as a natural thing. In fact, I'm inclined to say it's a pretty bad idea. Right up there with looking for confirmation options without having a clue about who knows what.

[muzzz]

I'm starting to run out of patience. People that have posted in the last 4 days:

Infinis
Pads
Fishythefish
Spolium
muzzz
BloodCovenent

People that haven't:

Archon (4 days, 15 hours)
skitzer (1 week, 3 days, 21 hours)
lazarusmoth (4 days, 18 hours)
ortolan (1 week, 6 hours)
cateraction (4 days, 20 hours)
AshMC1984 (5 days, 5 hours)

Yes, that's literally half the game that's gone AWOL.

@Emp: can we get prods on the second list?

[muzzz]

I don't become the cop until people work out that I'm truly Spartacus.

Do you have any idea how that will work in practice. Like, how will you and/or Emp know that they've worked out you're truly Spartacus?

A yes or no will suffice, by the way. If you know but feel it's better not to explain, I can live with that.

[muzzz]

Am I at L-1?

[muzzz]

That one was rhetorical.

[muzzz]

@Emp: Infinis unvoted in 232

---

I am curious that muzzz seemed to pre-emptively assume that Blood was "100% not a vanilla townie". At that point I was trying to work out whether or not he was scum and I wonder why muzzz almost seemed to have foreknowledge he was a town power-role rather than scum.

I figured that the simplest explanation for his behavior would be that he is Spartacus, and wasn't informed that other people knew about him. And I really do love Occam.

But I should note that what I expected was a Spartacus

claim

. In other words, if BC is scum, I'd still expect him to have claimed Spartacus there. At this point I see very little direct evidence for or against his claim. We should definitely give him the benefit of the doubt for now, but I don't see him as a confirmed pro-town role.

---

At no point did I say, or even imply, that scumMuzz and masonMuzzz were the only two possibilities. Do not put those words in my mouth.

They were the only two possibilities you talked about. That in itself implies enough. If that's not what you intended, you should speak more.

---

If it was just me, I'd rather lynch Pads than Infinis today. But with the current state of the Pads bandwagon, I no longer see that happening. So...

Unvote, vote: Infinis

[muzzz]

Wow, find that Muzz's vote on Infinis seemed very opportunistic. Muzz's post 262 spends little time at all speaking about infinis, just that he notices that the Pads wagon is going nowhere. So he goes to vote Infinis. I don't like it.

My vote is only opportunistic in the sense that I'm willing to settle for 2nd scummiest today. If you look through my posts, you'll see that I have quite a few valid reasons to vote Infinis. The only reason I didn't vote him earlier was because I thought we could lynch Pads.

[muzzz]

Vanilla clam shouldn't dissuade us from lynching. I'm OK with a hammer at this point.

WTF, Cat? You've voted me because you thought I didn't know about Spartacus. And now you're asking for a hammer on Infinis because scum probably know the extra PM.

Explain.

[muzzz]

Also

Unvote
@Emp: For the record, I had switched my vote to Infinis in 262.

[muzzz]

Something townie, of course. What exactly depends on how much they know, I guess. My unvote is based on the reasoning that it's unlikely for the scum to know more about VT's than BC. Do you disagree with that?

[muzzz]

@Orto: too many variables. I could see them claiming a powerrole under any of these circumstances:

- they know enough about a role to make a decent fake-claim
- they know enough about a role to make them want to trade a scumbag for a counter-claim.
- they know a role doesn't exist.

@Fishy: I assume that by "breadcrumb" you mean post 37?

[muzzz]

Also @ Orto: I'm getting the impression that you'd sooner expect a fake-VT claim than a fake-power claim. This kinda implies that you believe the scum would sooner receive details about VT's than powerroles. Am I correct? And if I am, what makes you believe that?

[muzzz]

Seriously?

[muzzz]

Cateraction voted me because, according to him, I didn't immediately recognize the power-up idea as something related to the townie PM. But now he, apparently, didn't immediately recognize the name of "his" role.

I think he has some explaining to do. Although looking at his participation so far, I doubt that he'll actually respond to this.

---

@Orto: it seems you missed 292.

[muzzz]

Fishy has a point. If I read BC correctly, he didn't recognize the name "extra" as something from his PM. Rather, he recognized it as something related to the movie theme.

[muzzz]

I ignored it because it wasn't useful. Because the mod could do anything [...]

Then let's try this without the mod part. What do you think scum would claim if bandwagoned to L-1, and why?

True, but not actually relevant to the discussion at hand as BloodCovenent's claim is currently being believed.

I didn't say that to deduce anything about BC's alignment. My point was that we can use BC to deduce what (some) townie PR's do and do not know. Believing his claim does not make that deductions less relevant.

Also, I seriously hope no one is taking BC's claim for granted. There's no direct evidence that he faked it, but neither is there any direct evidence to support his claim. The best anyone can reasonably do at this time is give him the benefit of the doubt.

Sorry kids, don't know what to tell you. It's been a while, forgot the name. When I was pushing the case muzz it was because of spartacus related info, not the name. It just slipped my mind.

It "just slipped your mind"? Even after BC bolded it in the post right above yours?

[muzzz]

@Emp: did Archon pick up his prod?

[muzzz]

I definitely wouldn't be willing to lynch anyone. Although I admit that there's currently no one who I consider obvtown.

And what lynch are you talking about, anyway? Ash? Infinis? Yourself?

---

@Fishy: are those questions rhetorical?

[muzzz]

@Infinis: answer Fishy's question.
@Orto: answer my question.

Pretty please.

[muzzz]

Stupid me...

@

Fishy

Lazarus: are those questions rhetorical?

This was in reply to 314.

[muzzz]

I am waiting for others to answer it. That was

my

question you just asked back to me, I want more than one opinion on it first.

You already have two. And I know it's your question. I'm asking it back at you because you dodged my somewhat similar question.

[muzzz]

Good answer.

I'm not convinced that scum got the townie PM. But I'm no longer sure that the opposite is more likely. That means I see Infinis' claim as a null-tell right now. Although a lot depends on his answer to Fishy's question.

In the meantime, I think Pads is the scummiest guy around.

Vote: Pads

For the record, the only people I'd never-ever lynch today are BC and Fishy. Yes, that means I'd prefer a me-lynch over a no-lynch. I generally dislike lynching lurkers, but I'm making an exception for this game.

[muzzz]

why?

For all the reasons I previously had and then some.

---

@Infinis: seriously, answer Fishy's question.

[muzzz]

Seriously read my post directly after the question. Again if you can't see it, FAIL.

That's interest ing, I might answer your question about Spartacus reference in my PM.

OK, fine. If that's your paraphrasing, then you didn't get the same PM I got.

Infinis hangs tomorrow.

---

@BC: you didn't forget about my earlier attempt to bandwagon Pads, did you?

[muzzz]

Let's lynch another scumbag.

Vote: Infinis

[muzzz]

can someone refresh me on the case for infinis? and how he looks like a scum-buddy with Pads? Then i'll do a reread in-light of the case.

All you really need to know is that he proved unable to paraphrase the extras PM.

[muzzz]

@Fishy: yeah, sure, he's trying to hint at a word that's also in my PM. But it's not a paraphrasing, and he didn't get all the points that were in my PM.

[muzzz]

Oh, grow up already. We have perfectly valid reasons for voting you. Your claim means nothing after Pads' reveal. Your "paraphrasing" was as thin as a hair. And how exactly are you WIFOM'd?

But what really convinces me is how you carry on Pads' ridiculous mason theory.

[muzzz]

Vote: Laz

I'll follow Spartacus.

I'm not going to vote yet, barning is bad.

Liar.

---

The rest is just too ridiculous to quote. No, we're not lynching a lurker when we can lynch obvscum. No, we're not investigating obvscum when we can lynch obvscum. And I

HATE

those "if I flip townie..." defenses.

[muzzz]

I'd either investigate the scummiest person to survive today, or the person who is hardest to read.

And it's a really bad idea to publicly announce your upcoming investigations. Unless you're WIFOM'ing the scum, of course.

[muzzz]

We don't

know

we have other powerroles. It's "just" the simplest explanation for the lack of a NK. But it's not the only possible explanation.

[muzzz]

Orto, did you read 390?

[muzzz]

Then you know he's voting Laz, right?

[muzzz]

Why wait if you're going to vote him anyway?

[muzzz]

WTF, Kise?

The guy is even more obviously scum than Pads was. And you want to give him a chance because he directed a ridiculous threat at Orto? He completely contradicts himself, and you ask us to consider him sincere?

Seriously, WTF?

[muzzz]

Not nearly as much as Infinis. Or you, for that matter. You've got exactly one point

against

Laz, and exactly one point

for

Infinis. By that count, your vote is horribly misplaced.

[muzzz]

And nice misrepresent of how things played out muzz in 390. See the argument above.

Screw you. Even if you had a good reason for voting Laz, you still lied about not voting.

[muzzz]

@Emp: Ash voted Infinis in 421

[muzzz]

OK, I've had some time to read the previous page more thoroughly.

---

I'm seriously beginning to doubt whether Laz is scum. He seems (or seemed) protective of Pads and Infinis. But neither of them seemed to have trouble voting Laz. And there's the fact that Kise, who's protecting Infinis, is also quick to vote Laz instead.

---

Re. Infinis barning BC - his suggestion that the scumminess of his vote is directly related to BC's scumminess is false.

Re. Infinis not claiming doc - WIFOM is never a valid defense. And let's not forget that the presence of a doc is currently more likely than it was when he made his claim.

Re. Ash's question - other games seem irrelevant in light of Pads' flip.

[muzzz]

Show me where I lied and I'll hammer myself. And as a side note I ignored you're first attack this "screw you " is inappropriate and highly unjustified.

Oh, grow up. I already showed you where you lied. My "screw you" was eminently justified. There was nothing to misrepresent about your posts. If you don't like it then don't take weak, back-handed swipes at my arguments.

In short: go hammer yourself.

[muzzz]

I see. Read it as "change my" vote. That's what the post is about the cop changing his vote. You misread my post.

No, nothing in that post is about the cop changing his vote.

Theoretically, it could've been about you changing your vote after you realized that Laz hadn't been investigated. But if that was the case, why didn't you bring it up the second I called you a liar?

Not buying this. Go hammer yourself.

[muzzz]

because You weren't clear exactly on why u were calling me a liar.

Oh, really?

Then please point out which part of the following post confused you:

Even if you had a good reason for voting Laz, you still lied about not voting.

Also, I don't have to address anything you say about Orto. He's obvtown, you're obvscum. 'Nuf said.

[muzzz]

The difference between you and Laz is that Laz got attacked by Pads. The difference between Laz and Infinis is that one is scummy and the other is not.

Saying they're both "charged with the same crime" is a

gross

misrepresentation. As is calling the fact that Laz keeps getting attacked by obvscum (and even confirmed scum) a "theory".

Infinis gets lynched today. If he flips scum, you're next.

[muzzz]

@Kise: you seem to have missed the fact that Laz was protecting Infinis. It's highly unlikely that LazScum would do that unless Infinis was also scum.

Face it, the idea of lynching Laz first is ridiculous. All you're achieving here is making yourself more likely to be Infinis' buddy than Laz. Congratulations, I guess...

@Infinis:
1) You barned your vote to the safest person in this game
2) Then you got votes, panicked, and said you weren't going to vote yet. Oh, and there was that part where you requested to be investigated.
3) How can you possibly mistake not voting for not changing your vote? It's in the thread! I even pointed you at it, multiple times!
4) You take a quick, cautious jab at what seemed like the second most likely lynch to you.
5) Saying "I wouldn't do this as scum" is WIFOM in and of itself. The fact that it's logical doesn't actually make WIFOM any better.
6) You voted me twice yesterday, and now I'm overaggressive town?

I love how you keep calling my posts "misrep". The fact that you feel the need to take cheap shots like that really confirms my suspicions.

[muzzz]

I'm still bothered by muzzz saying I'm the next lynch if Infinis is scum. There's no telling if you're just bussing Infinis and setting me up. I hate to keep reiterating it, but I have no reason to be linked to Infinis. I am not buddying up to him, I just consider when people are possibly being sincere, rather than think everyone is lying.

WTF?

You're defending Infinis more vigorously than Laz had defended anyone. Heck, more vigorously than all of Laz defenses combined. And he's Pads' scumbuddy, but you're not Infinis' scumbuddy?

I don't see any sincerity here. Absolutely none.

[muzzz]

Oh, go find your grave already. First you say I'm scum, then I'm an overzealous townie, and now I'm scum again. You're just flailing.

[muzzz]

Orto/Muzz: Scum. They drove the lynch of inifis from the beginning, on no real merit, and to a townie lynch.

This is probably the cheapest shot anyone has taken this game. I'm not inclined to let this slide. But since lynching anyone but Skitzer today is completely idiotic:

Vote: Skitzer

[muzzz]

Missed this:

I'm really confused. I might of missed it, but where was it

proven

that pads, our only known scum, knew what was in the townie pm?

He claimed Spartacus first.

---

@BC: Roffman has got some explaining to do. I don't see why he can't do that today. It's not like anyone's lynching him before tomorrow.

[muzzz]

So claiming spartacus is proof that you know the extra pm? I don't know about you guys, but I have information regarding spartacus, but no idea about the extra pm. As far as I'm concerned, knowing one =|= knowing the other

Congratulations, you've just claimed non-vanilla.

[muzzz]

(or why muzzz would draw attention to the fact)

Yeah, that was weird. Especially since that muzzz guy has quite a reputation for letting things like that slide. </sarcasm>

Did you really expect me to stay quiet when a scummy looking guy makes a townie-PR softclaim?

[muzzz]

Yeah, I wanna know if we get to lynch Roffman.

[muzzz]

Cat - Sexy man.

Your avatar suggests otherwise

Your post seems to imply that you consider BC's claim confirmed. Is that correct?

[muzzz]

If I ask someone a question, I'd appreciate it if you let that person answer before volunteering your own opinion.

[muzzz]

I think you're probably genuine.

[muzzz]

Mafia can almost never do two actions in one night, that's just how it is.

@Lazarus, Roffman and Orto: you guys seem to have been around here the longest. Do you agree with Cat's assessment here?

[muzzz]

Roffman makes good points. Almost enough to make me glad I didn't get to lynch him

Keeping the Doc hidden seems like the safest approach for now. If he claims now it could potentially save us some fruitless discussion about him being scum. But I don't think that weighs up to the potential of him actually surviving a few more days.

However, I'm wondering if it might be a good idea for non-kill-stopping roles to claim now. Thoughts, anyone?

[muzzz]

Vote: Kise

[muzzz]

@Kise: is that a last-scum claim?

If so:

[muzzz]

Nice targetting, BC.

So you guys wanted to lynch me D1 for being right, huh

[muzzz]

Lolita used to be my softcore porn back in the day.

I wonder if there's ever been a pornstar mafia