/in-Vitational Game 4 (Game Over!)

[iamausername]

/confirm.

[iamausername]

Vote: alexhans

[iamausername]

Excellent, the first post smiley's self-satisfied grin is even funnier when it massively fails at actually being a first post.

[iamausername]

iamausername, what do you think of self-voting?

I think it's a very silly thing to do in almost all situations.

We NEED to avoid fluff.

It would be nice.
What was the purpose of posting this sentence:

I have my own theories about what roles may be in this game but I've learned that setup speculation this early is pretty useless.

?

---

ITP I am not voting for Xyl.

[iamausername]

@IAUN - so you don't like the Xyl wagon. What about BaB, E_K and Kmd?

KMD wagon is totally bogus, the "there are 4 scum" is just an extension of the "these people are scum" which is a legit way to get out of random voting by acting surer of things than one has any actual reason to be.

I'm not sure that elvis being overzealous about the slip is actually scum-motivated though, I can believe that she honestly thinks it was a slip. I'm much more suspicious of rofl buying the supposed slip as a slip, because I'm pretty sure he pulls that opening gambit all the time.

BaB wagon is well deserved for this:

Originally my thinking was that E_k seems like a more legitimate vote, but if I made the vote this early, it wouldn't have as much merit because it's so early, and I wanted to make this vote when it had more merit.

which is difficult to interpret as anything other than "elvis didn't have a ready-formed wagon for me to jump onto".

ITP I am not voting for Xyl.

Why not?

I liked my vote where it was, alex saying "we must be careful not to post fluff", and then posting some really obvious fluff was scummier than anything Xyl had done at that time.

@iamausername:
Other than announcing that you didn't vote for Xyl in your last post, do you have any opinions on anyone?

At the time of that post, not particularly. Now, yes.

He's encouraging alex to setup speculate

No. Asking what the point of saying "I have some setup speculation, but I'm not going to actually post it because setup speculation is bad" is =/= "Hey alex, you should post that setup speculation!"

iamusername: what does ITP stand for?

In this post.

As far as Shabba is concerned, there are multiple players who are lurking a lot harder. Does anyone even remember that there are players in this game with the usernames "SerialClergyman" and "iamausername"?

True dat.

I don't have internet at home right now, and the site went down right in the middle of my last visit to the internet cafe, thus preventing my planned catch-up post on friday. I will have a connection back sometime in the next few days, but until then, yes, I'll be pretty lurky. Nothing I can do about that.

Unvote, Vote: roflcopter

, but I totally support a BaB claim.

[iamausername]

rofl is one of the people pushing hardest against BAB, so how can you think the BAB wagon is deserved and want a claim from him AND vote for rofl?

I think they're both independantly scummy. They are very unlikely to be scum together, but one of them probably is scum, and I don't know which. And since BaB was at I think L-2 when I made that post, I didn't want to vote him in order to prevent an accidental (or 'accidental') lynch before a claim, so I gave my vote to my other main suspect instead.

I'm much more suspicious of rofl buying the supposed slip as a slip, because I'm pretty sure he pulls that opening gambit all the time.

uh, what? what the hell gambit are you talking about?

The gambit of acting surer than you actually are about things in the early stages of the game.

Iam, why Rofl?

Because I don't believe that he genuinely believes that your supposed 'slip' was actually a slip.

Then I left EkIm w/o a * or crossed out because he is VLA recently, but he is sort of a lurker

Why are you making allowances for ekiM's V/LA, but not mine?

There is absolutly no reason town should stall the game for weeks just because it's not the deadline yet.

God, yes.

Unvote, Vote: BridgesandBaloons

[iamausername]

Also, if iamausername is not scum I'll eat my hat (see photo).

Looks delicious, enjoy it.

[iamausername]

His vote on rofl after stating the scumminess of BnB was weird, and now the quick switchback at very mild questioning is strange enough for me to think he is potential scum.

It's not a 'switchback', since I wasn't voting BaB before, and it had nothing to do with the questioning. I didn't want to vote him while he was already close to a lynch, and had not yet claimed. Now he has claimed, and that claim does not provide any reason not to lynch him, there's no reason not to vote him.

Why was BaB's plea for time scummy and the reason for you to make him L-1? (Specifically, what was the scum motivation?)

It's not. The reason to put him at L-1 is that he has now claimed vanilla, thus removing the only reason I wasn't already voting him.

Which is not to say that his stalling for time is in any way pro-town. The scum motivation is that the longer he manages to delay his lynch, the more chance there is of something happening that causes someone else to become a viable lynch. He's acting purely in the interest of self-preservation.

I'd love to hear more from iamusername, serialclergyman and especially ekiM before deadline.

What in particular do you want me to say?

[iamausername]

Just because you didn't actually vote doesn't mean you weren't saying you were going to. In fact, you spent most of the post building up to it and then dropped the rofl vote. Now, maybe you were indeed waiting for a claim before voting or maybe you were just hesitant about looking scummy so close to the hammer. I think that is where I am interpreting your rofl vote differently. I mean, if what you are saying is true, why spend so much time stating your intent to vote BnB? Why wouldn't you condense it down and say something like 'I support the BnB wagon, but I think we need to hear a claim first'? Seems to me like you were telegraphing your punches.

OK, see, here I was thinking the problem was that I hadn't made my intent to vote BaB clear enough, because that would actually make sense.

I might not have actually said the words "I support the BnB wagon, but I think we need to hear a claim first" in that exact order, but the sentiment was obviously there. If you've noticed the fact that I was obviously showing an intent to vote BaB, how do you read the words "I totally support a BaB claim" and not realise that that was exactly what I was saying? What is the problem here? I seriously don't understand.

[iamausername]

Just because you didn't actually vote doesn't mean you weren't saying you were going to. In fact, you spent most of the post building up to it and then dropped the rofl vote. Now, maybe you were indeed waiting for a claim before voting or maybe you were just hesitant about looking scummy so close to the hammer. I think that is where I am interpreting your rofl vote differently. I mean, if what you are saying is true, why spend so much time stating your intent to vote BnB? Why wouldn't you condense it down and say something like 'I support the BnB wagon, but I think we need to hear a claim first'? Seems to me like you were telegraphing your punches.

I tried reading this again, and it still doesn't make any sense. I made it very clear that I intended to vote BaB if his claim didn't give me a good reason not to, therefore you doubt that I was actually waiting for a claim? Whiskey Tango Foxtrot.

Also, I am curious, as a general question to people:

As scum, have you ever claimed vanilla?

I've claimed vanilla in massclaims as scum, but that's really not a comparable situation. But then, I don't think any of my scum games have comparable situations.

Of course, a better question would be "As scum, has BridgesandBaloons ever claimed vanilla?" If only search weren't disabled so I could easily find out.

I'd like to hear other peoples' interpretations of what Thesp said.

Pretty sure elvis's interpretation is right, though I can see how you misread.

Oh, I see!

Man, you already found what, 3, 4 scum? Please teach me your scumhunting techniques after the game

Just out of curiosity. Suppose I'm not scum, who would take my place in your list?

So, are you simultaneously putting down rofl's ability to find that many scum already, and then asking him to find another? I'm assuming a certain amount of sarcasm in the first half of the post, correct me if I'm wrong.

Yos2 is scummy but I recoil at the thought of lynching Yos2 on day 1.

Why?

if you aren't scum then i'm even more sure that iamausername is. he's currently holding the "if there's a 5th its this guy" spot.

So, is there any particular Claus/username scum dichotomy, or is it just a process of elimination thing?

Would like to hear @IAUN opinions on Yos, Inhim, Tajo

The last two games I played with Yos, I was town both times, he was scum in one and town in the other, and I was right about him in both instances. So, I trust my gut on him, and so far, I'm not getting a scum feel.

tajo seems pretty town. But I don't know that I've ever seen tajo as scum, so I'm not so sure I should trust my gut on that one. Still, ignoring meta concerms, I can't see anything disagreeable in his posts.

inHim is pretty dodgy, voting BaB because lots of people were talking about him is an extremely weak reason, and he definitely hasn't been making waves.

[iamausername]

Just because you didn't actually vote doesn't mean you weren't saying you were going to. In fact, you spent most of the post building up to it and then dropped the rofl vote. Now, maybe you were indeed waiting for a claim before voting or maybe you were just hesitant about looking scummy so close to the hammer. I think that is where I am interpreting your rofl vote differently. I mean, if what you are saying is true, why spend so much time stating your intent to vote BnB? Why wouldn't you condense it down and say something like 'I support the BnB wagon, but I think we need to hear a claim first'? Seems to me like you were telegraphing your punches.

I tried reading this again, and it still doesn't make any sense. I made it very clear that I intended to vote BaB if his claim didn't give me a good reason not to, therefore you doubt that I was actually waiting for a claim? Whiskey Tango Foxtrot.

Don't leave me hangin', VP.

rofl, can I get a list of all large games you have been in where the number of scum was not public knowledge from the beginning?

It's an ongoing game, so I can't really talk about it, but there are a few players in this game who are/were in that game and can back up what I'm saying.

My understanding is that pointing out the times that a player has posted in an ongoing game is not a problem, as long as you aren't talking about the actual content of those posts. I know for a fact that the mod of the game in question wouldn't have a problem with that, at any rate.

I need to reread, but this seems like a good place to park my vote in the mean time.

Vote: SerialClergyman

[iamausername]

I tried reading this again, and it still doesn't make any sense. I made it very clear that I intended to vote BaB if his claim didn't give me a good reason not to, therefore you doubt that I was actually waiting for a claim? Whiskey Tango Foxtrot.

I'm not seeing where you "made it very clear" that your vote on BaB was dependant upon his claim. All I see was you put something like 'I support a BaB claim'. So, yeah, I think my interpretation of your post is still accurate. I think you may have been feeling out a place on the wagon without jumping right on when it was so close to a lynch.

I made it clear that I had intentions of voting him, and I asked for a claim. I guess I thought people would be able to put two and two together and not get fifty six.

Why do you think I supported the claim, if that had nothing to do with my vote?

[iamausername]

Also, as I said above, your point was not made as clear as you seem to think it was.

The thing is, I could totally accept the idea that my intent to vote BaB wasn't entirely clear. But you said yourself that it

was

perfectly clear, and are instead arguing that somehow it wasn't clear that my request for a claim was in any way connected to my intent to vote. This idea, I struggle with, because those two things are pretty self-evidently connected, as far as I'm concerned.

How about this, if you were indeed waiting to see BaB's claim before deciding to vote him, why even bother voting for rofl? Why not wait until BaB's claim and then decide where to vote?

Because I suspected rofl more than alex (who I had been voting up until then). I mean, in retrospect, the rofl vote probably was pretty pointless, but certainly no more so than keeping my vote on alex would have been.

If it was the fact that I voted rofl that you had a problem with, why didn't you just say so instead of posting all that nonsense about "telegraphing my punches" and whatever?

---

Everyone who can't see how ekiM's "one of these five is scum" post is obviously not serious, does it help if I point out that in that same post, he says he is "deeply concerned" about these five players lurking

less than 24 hours into the game

?

elvis, do you have any reasons for voting me that you haven't stated in the thread? Also, what productive purpose does arguing about whether or not somebody made a scum slip in an entirely different game really serve? Proving that slips actually exist in no way proves that KMD made a slip in this game.

Ojanen is making very good points against Yos, and on a vaguely related note, is obvtown. Don't agree with her ekiM case so much though; I don't think it's contradictory for ekiM to disagree with the reasons for finding Xyl and BaB to be unlikely scum together, but still find it scummy for BaB to attack the idea that he is not scum with Xyl.

ekiM -- Who do you think is scum? I have no idea who you are suspicious of.

Agreeing with this, though. I'd like to hear an answer from zu_faul, as well, because the same applies.

[iamausername]

Some people sited that as a reason early, but that is not why I am suspicious of ekiM

That's probably why I addressed that sentence to "Everyone who can't see how ekiM's "one of these five is scum" post is obviously not serious" and not you.

Also, I don't know who he is suspicious of.

You might notice that I quoted the part where you mentioned that, and agreed with it.

Also, iamausername's defense of ekiM should be noted.

Do you think the defence is invalid?

No, I've already told you that your failure to scum hunt at the beginning of the game was scummy. Refer to post 227 for more details. You left a random vote on alexhans for 14 pages. Some of that might have had some VLA in there... I don't know since you never really explained that totally. But even if you had some VLA that prevented posting, what I said about you in 227 is not dependent on your being VLA.

OK, I was just wondering if there was anything I'd done since I actually started posting that you found scummy. Since there's not, let me break down why this is a terrible vote.

My third post in the game was on a Wednesday. I intended to follow up with something more substantial on Friday, but the site went down during the only two hours I was able to get online that day, and I couldn't get on at all on Saturday, so I wasn't actually able to post again until Sunday.

Also, I did not keep a random vote on alexhans for 14 pages. As I've already said, I found the fact that he declared that we needed to avoid fluff, while also posting something that was clearly complete fluff, scummy enough to deserve my vote over anyone else at that time. That's not random. It's not particularly good, but since other reasons for votes made at that stage of the game include "I love bandwagons" and "I hate cats", I don't think that's a problem. This is also why I didn't join the Xyl wagon; I felt I had a better vote on alex.

So, would you have found my third post scummy in any way if it wasn't for the fact that I wasn't able to post again for several days? Since you apparently haven't found anything scummy about my posts since then, I have to assume that the answer is no. Which means the only reason you are voting me is because I had limited access at the start of the game, which is obviously not a scumtell in any way.

iam - How do you rate your play so far in this game?

Far from my best, certainly. I'm working on it.

Unvote, Vote: zu_faul

[iamausername]

Out of curiosity, why the zu_faul vote?

As I said in Post #553, I don't have any idea who he suspects, which I find more worrisome in his case than ekiM's, since he was an active poster throughout Day 1.

(I know what you're thinking, and the answer is; VP Baltar, Yos. Maybe zu_faul & ekiM depending on what actual opinions they are able to provide. Maybe rofl, depending on meta analysis. Definitely not Ojanen, Thesp, KMD.)

Also, did you like what serialclergyman posted? Did you unvote him because you agree with him or just the fact that he contributed something?

Yes.

Do you think my defence of ekiM was invalid?

I don't like iamausername's "I was busy so it's not scummy" excuse, btw.

It's "I was physically unable to read or post", not "I was busy", fyi.

Like he'll just look town if he votes lurkers and lets them off the hook for no reason to vote the next lurker.

Trying to look town is for schmucks.

I can't know if he's telling the truth or not.

Well, I posted in the V/LA thread about my internet being down on August 2nd (well before Role PMs were sent out for this game, btw), and checking any of my games (wiki me) will show that my posting was down across the board in the two weeks following that.

Not definitive proof, but it's the best I can do.

[iamausername]

So, when I started writing this, there about 7 or 8 less pages, so it's possible there something hugely significant that I haven't mentioned in the earlier alphabeticals.

alexhans / Pooky

There's really not a lot to go on here. alex barely did anything, and Pooky is Pooky. The one thing I think is worth commenting on is alex's Post #136, in which he says "@E_K: Max mafia team is 6 people. You forgot to count who receives the pm."

This is wrong; if you look closely at the sample PMs, you'll note that the person who receives the PM is one of the five sets of Xs in his own PM. Given that I think someone who had received a scum PM would be less likely to make this mistake, I consider this to be a towntell for alex.

I know Pooky has a well established history of not saying a lot, but really, there's a difference between keeping things brief, and not saying anything at all. Answering the quesion of whether or not the charter vote is actually serious would be nice, at the very least.

charter

Before reading him in isolation, I was finding the number of people asserting him as obvtown odd, since my feeling was that charter was somewhat hiding on the sidelines. After reading him in isolation, I think that's probably just because he hasn't said anything yet today, because he drove the BaB wagon early on based on perfectly good arguments, and made completely reasonable posts against Shabba and zu_faul once BaB's wagon was rolling along well. Even though 2/3 of them have flipped town, I don't have a problem with his choice of targets, or with the way he pursued them. Looking forward to seeing his thoughts on things once he's caught up on D2.

ekiM

Let's go over this again. Less than 24 hours into the game, ekiM made this post:

"I am deeply concerned by the continued absence of inHimshallibe, Kmd4390, Ojanen, populartajo, and Shabba. I'd wager there's at least one scum amongst those five players."

and voted Xyl. If you can't figure out how being "deeply concerned" about lurkers at that point is a joke, then I despair for humanity. If you are saying "Hey, take any random group of five players and there's probably scum in it, so you are not really saying anything here, ekiM": congratulations! YOU HAVE FOUND THE REST OF THE JOKE! Why is he saying there is probably scum in these five players? Because they are lurking, less than 24 hours into the game. If that part isn't serious, then what on earth makes you think that "one of them is probably scum" is? And if you do think that part is serious, then see above re: despair, humanity, etc.

His catchup post on D1 was overly focused on how much of a scumbo BaB was, which is not good. The only other person he really takes a strong stance on in that post is zu_faul (that part isn't bad). Mostly liking his thoughts D2 though. The recent spat with elvis, I don't really know what his point was, but I'm not seeing what the scum motivation is either, so I don't know why he suddenly got a bunch of votes for that.

Mostly I don't think he is scum because there are many suspect people voting him for bad reasons, and have been throughout the game.

elvis

I think elvis has been spectacularly wrong about virtually everything in this game, but I also think she's among the most likely to be town here. Gut read, but I really like how she has avoided getting completely tunneled; even when she's aggressively pursuing a case on someone, there are always pointed questions to other people, and also things like Post #387 where she looks for verification of her thoughts from others.

KMD

I've been hung up too much on the slip thing, I think, and ignoring everything else he's done. People were attacking him based on that, I didn't buy it at all, this translated into my head as "KMD is town", but looking through his posts individually, I'm not so sure about that.

These days, it's all about the unvote off a vanilla claim, but what I'd really like to know is why the vote was there in the first place. His original reasoning was "Shea said I'm bad at mafia, so why did BaB listen to me?", which is ungodly levels of terrible, and when he votes, he says he's sticking with the scumteam he originally named, so does that mean he was sticking with the reasons, too? He never gave any others.

As far as the unvote goes, I do think it's perfectly possible to find someone scummy until they claim vanilla, and then start to find them town. From a theory point of view, it is terrible play to run someone up to a claim, then unvote when they claim vanilla, because all that will lead to is outed power roles, but sticking slavishly to what is theoretically the best play is often pretty terrible play too. I'm not sure I'd unvote off a vanilla claim on D1 even if it did give me the feeling that the player was town, but I certainly don't agree that it's something that only scum would ever do.

Ojanen

Really like her contributions throughout, especially her case against Yos. #1 town.

poptajo

Don't have any particular problems with the things he's posting, but it does concern me a little that he hasn't really got stuck into any arguments, he's mostly actually been sitting on the sidelines, like I thought charter was.

roflcopter

Oh, he's been agressive, that's how he plays town, he must be town. Uh, no. So right, some things that really bother me about rofl.

1. He's been claiming absolute certainty that KMD is scum since pretty much the start of the game, and yet both days, he's ended up voting for someone else on the assumption that they are KMD's partner. BaB yesterday, Serial today. This way, he doesn't have to bother coming up with new arguments, just keep on pushing the scum KMD line and lynching his 'buddies'.

2. This post, right here, where rofl claims that he has never gambitted, and is always as sure as he acts. It's a lie.

See this post in Mafia 84, where rofl explains a gambit he made by acting surer about something than he actually was.

See also this post from this very game. "It's never worked 100% perfectly, but i don't let that stop me from acting like it will every game." There's got to be some serious self-delusion going for that not to equate to 'acting surer than you actually are'.

3. In this post, rofl says that Claus has a solid case against Yos, but that Yos doesn't fit as a partner of BaB. So why, when BaB did NOT flip scum, has rofl gone ahead and started acting like he is confirmed town anyway? I think his post here was an attempt to placate Claus and push the BaB wagon through to mislynch, because he clearly had no intention of actually following up on this suspicion of Yos.

4. "Attacking Yos today is a scumtell". Hi there, crazy chainsaw defence. Pointing out flaws in Serial's case, that would be fine (and not difficult, by the way). Or even just saying "SC's Yos case is terrible" without bothering to explain why, that still works. But rofl never says anything about the actual case, he claims instead that the action of attacking Yos in itself is scummy, regardless of the validity of the attack.

Also, the list of games he gave me is incomplete. I know of one game that rofl has missed from the list here (Mafia 90). But a) I can't see any reason why he wouldn't want me looking at that game, and b) I can understand wanting to forget that horrible excuse for a game of Mafia, so I'm willing to give him the benefit of the doubt that he honestly overlooked that one. If there are any other omissions, though, I want to know about it.

SerialClergyman

So, I unvoted him based on his first substantial post, because I felt like his thoughts were fairly in line with my own; gut town read on KMD, scum read on Yos and zu_faul.

Since then, he started reaching more and more in his argument with Yos, and and it seems like he refused to back down or concede any points purely out of stubbornness. I think that's marginally more likely to come from scum than town, though I've seen enough tunneling townies to know that that's not a solid tell.

That said, I don't particularly like his latest attempt at peacemaking either, it feels like he's trying to perform a Jedi mind trick in acting like the fact that he has realised that he doesn't have a good case against Yos should make Yos think the same of him. That and the fact that he unvotes without voting anyone else. Cardinal sin, that.

Thesp

Talks a whole lot of sense. Really hoping he'll get back to us soon. I feel far less need for detail when talking about my town reads than my scum reads.

VP Baltar

Wow, some of his earlier posts have a whole lot of words for saying absolutely nothing. Very much a feeling of posting just to stay active, there's absolutely no strong stances taken on any subject at all.

Well, until he decides that I am such obvious scum that he will eat his hat if he's wrong. Which somehow isn't more worthy of a vote than ekiM saying that there is "probably scum" in the five people he was "deeply concerned" about lurking less than 24 hours into the game. I think that he didn't want to derail the BaB wagon by pushing anything with any strength, hence the vote staying on someone who wasn't around to respond and leaving the attack on me on the back burner to come back to it today.

Just going to respond directly to some stuff in the post where he finally gets around to voting me, since I haven't yet:

My point is that you were leading up to it in that post and then did not. You're saying that, more specifically, your intent to vote him

later

after his claim was clear. I'm saying no it was not. Your intent to vote him in that post seemed clear enough, then you didn't. There is a difference to me in those two points, even if they both speak to intent.

Then again I ask, why do you think I said I supported him claiming, if that had nothing to do with the fact that I obviously intended to vote him? You asked me why I didn't "condense it down and say something like 'I support the BnB wagon, but I think we need to hear a claim first'"; the answer is that you can't

condense

'I support a BaB claim' into that, but you pretty obviously can do the opposite.

I mean, in retrospect, the rofl vote probably was pretty pointless, but certainly no more so than keeping my vote on alex would have been.

Not really.

Now I believe you're just reflexively disagreeing with everything I say. How on earth would leaving my vote on alex have served any purpose at that point?

I don't see how you [ekiM] are saying that it was an RVS comment considering you implied your bandwagoning Xyl vote in that same post to be serious.

(Not from that post, I know.) The problem is that you are terming it as "an RVS comment" instead of "a joke". THERE IS NOT A DISTINCT LINE DIVIDING THE 'RANDOM' PART OF THE GAME FROM THE 'SERIOUS' PART.

Xylthixlm

Xyl really strikes me as town, though I am hard pressed to pin down exactly why that is. His reaction to BaB feels natural, not buying the case at first, but then agreeing that there was no reason for townBaB to argue that Xyl could be his scumbuddy. I like the way he shows a lot of willingness to accept the possibility that he is wrong.

Yosarian2

I didn't have a problem with Yos's posts throughout D1, and I still don't. The big point of contention for me is the way he retroactively claims to have been suspicious of KMD from the start of the game. Post #525, after Ojanen points out how Yos's stance on the KMD/elvis thing at the time was that he didn't buy into either case, Yos brings up a quote where he does take more of a "KMD is scummy" stance. From reading this post, I'm sure you would assume that the quote comes from around the same time as the one Ojanen brings up, but it most definitely doesn't; this quote comes from Post #431. The important point about that is that it's after KMD unvotes BaB for the vanilla claim. That was when Yos decided to go after KMD, and the fact that he acts like he'd been suspicious all along, and tries to use this quote to prove it, just does not speak to a pro-town motivation in his attack.

He's now saying that he went back and reread the KMD/elvis exchange, and that was when he decided that KMD was scummy. Now, that's a story that fits the facts, and would have made perfect sense if it wasn't coming immediately after insisting that you'd been saying KMD was scummy all along. As it is, though, you appear to be admitting to a lie right there.

zu_faul

So, right from the start, we've got some scumminess here with the pretty blatant setting himself up to go along with whatever is convenient by claiming he is not dissatisfied with any of the major wagons. The rest of his contribution on D1 consists pretty much entirely of speaking out against the BaB wagon without making any attempt whatsoever to get any alternative going. He claims that his attempting to slow the BaB wagon is his usual scumhunting strategy, but if that is the case, what scum did it help him find?

There's also a few times where he says something without explaining it, and acts like he has already explained it in a previous post, despite this not actually being the case. Example; "I already said enough times why I disregard the "scum with Xyl" argument" in this post. Not true. He's said several times that he disagrees with the argument, but reading his posts, I don't have a clue

why

he disagrees with it.

Then D2, he's decided to go after Serial because "You had a chance to come back in the game and all you produce is some questions and an attack on Yos2." This falls into the same problem I had with rofl above; he's dismissing the attack on Yos2 out of hand without giving any thought to the validity of the action. Secondly, this is some amazing hypocrisy; what has zu produced up to this point? He makes much the same point on ekiM, too. Those are easy, easy targets. zu has been just completely coasting, I really can't see anywhere that he's put any serious effort into scumhunting at all.

---

Unvote, Vote: roflcopter

Other lynches I'd support right now; zu_faul, VP Baltar and Yosarian2. Feeling most sure about rofl, though.

[iamausername]

-I think the first rolefishing accusation is rubbish though.

i was happy with how i read yesterday, and

unless you know something i don't

i still don't think all my theories were wrong. for instance, kmd-zufaul being scum together. and now i'm willing to bet on you for a third partner.

Unless you've got some knowledge about Yos2 that I don't have

, looks like you're doing exactly the same thing.

It felt like a matching response and it was actually making a distinct point about hypocracy that fits the context

This is another prime example of Ojanen awesomeness.

[iamausername]

As far as the unvote goes, I do think it's perfectly possible to find someone scummy until they claim vanilla, and then start to find them town. From a theory point of view, it is terrible play to run someone up to a claim, then unvote when they claim vanilla, because all that will lead to is outed power roles, but sticking slavishly to what is theoretically the best play is often pretty terrible play too. I'm not sure I'd unvote off a vanilla claim on D1 even if it did give me the feeling that the player was town, but I certainly don't agree that it's something that only scum would ever do.

And since the game is over now, allow me to refer to Page 28 of Mini 811. kikuchiyo claims vanilla town at the top of this page, the nature of her claim (and, to be fair, the way other people jumped onto her wagon) convinces me that she is town when I had previously been a strong proponent of her lynch. Both of us were indeed town in that game.

Yeah it is like I did not attack elvis_knits at all...

Well, yes, it is a lot like that.

There's also a few times where he says something without explaining it, and acts like he has already explained it in a previous post, despite this not actually being the case. Example; "I already said enough times why I disregard the "scum with Xyl" argument" in this post. Not true. He's said several times that he disagrees with the argument, but reading his posts, I don't have a clue

why

he disagrees with it.

It seems I got confused about what I actually said in thread and what was only in my head. If you had asked directly, I would hav told you.

Well, alright, I'll ask directly now, then. Why did you disregard that argument?

I've seen the term "chainsawing" thrown around a bit, and I thought I had a sense of what it meant, but my thoughts weren't consistent with what seems to be expressed by it. Can someone who is familiar with the term as it's being used explain what is meant by "chainsawing"? Thanks.

Straight from the source:

"The general form of this tell is "a player who defends another player by attacking the other player's attacker is very probably scum".

The key to identifying this tell is intent - it is possible to confuse Chainsaw Defense with a player who simply finds the attacker scummy and has no intent of defense. In general, you can be reasonably sure that this tell is involved if a) the player supposedly using Chainsaw Defense has not previously been especially critical of the player he is now attacking, and b) the player supposedly using Chainsaw Defense seems to find the player he is supposedly defending at least reasonably pro-town.

The extreme form of this tell is Mutual Chainsaw Defense, where two players defend each other by attacking each others' attackers. This is a major scumtell, and Tarhalindur would be willing to lynch/vig both players with only this tell as justification.

The Chainsaw Defense is named after the mental image of a player ripping apart another player with a chainsaw for daring to attack his ally. It should not be confused with the Cochrane Defense, which can also be referred to as the Chainsaw Defense (the Wiki refers to the Cochrane Defense this way), which is a gambit made by players investigated as scum. The Chainsaw Defense can also be referred to as the Bodyguard Defense in order to prevent confusion.

UPDATE: After further analysis, Tarhalindur has determined that the Chainsaw Defense is only trustworthy once the player defended has been revealed to be group scum (once the player defended is proved to be Mafia, any player that used Chainsaw Defense on the dead scum should be scrutinized). Otherwise, it is a null tell. Mutual Chainsaw Defense may, however, still be an outright scumtell; more research is required here."

I'm not just disagreeing with you for the sake of it. I'm saying your vote on rofl was pointless if what you are saying about the BaB claim was your true intention.

Let's get a quote pyramid of this full conversation so we can see that VP Baltar is not even reading my posts before he reflexively disagrees with them:

I mean, in retrospect,

the rofl vote probably was pretty pointless

, but certainly no more so than keeping my vote on alex would have been.

Not really.

Now I believe you're just reflexively disagreeing with everything I say. How on earth would leaving my vote on alex have served any purpose at that point?

I'm not just disagreeing with you for the sake of it. I'm saying your vote on rofl was pointless if what you are saying about the BaB claim was your true intention.

---

Again, keep harping on the same shit to chainsaw for your buddy ekiM. This may have been a jumping off point for why I first started watching ekiM closer, but it is most certainly not one of the reasons why I want him lynched. Look back at the points I made against him if you want to know why I think he's scum (which you have chosen to ignore for this insignificant BS).

This "insignificant BS" was enough for you to keep your vote on ekiM over me through D1, despite my hat-eating scumminess, so, no, I'm not just going to let you sweep it under the rug when you've been proved wrong about it.

I'd like you to comment on those points, please.

OK.

His scum hunting Day 1 was largely non-existent. When he did finally get around to calling people scum, it almost entirely hinged on BnB being scum.

He was V/LA for much of D1, that is not a scumtell. I agree that his D1 catchup was overly focused on BaB, which I already said in my big post on everyone.

He has used IIoA and unnecessary repetition to pad some of his posts and seem busier than he really is.

I agree that the repetition was unnecessary. I doubt that it was done to make him seem busier than he really is, because that would be a ridiculously transparent ruse, and I can't see ekiM expecting anyone to read 500 hundred iterations of "It was a joke" and think "Boy, that ekiM sure is posting a lot of words! He must be town!".

The IIoA is more of a valid charge, though. As I said, his D1 catch wasn't great, and certainly I think some of the suspicion he's received has been warranted.

Oj points out a pretty strong contradiction from him here

Already commented on this one, I don't see that as a strong contradiction at all.

After 27 pages of play, the best suspicions he is able to come up with are as follows:

Kmd4390

- Yeah, I don't like that unvote yesterday. If you unvote for vanilla, does that mean you lynch investigative roles? I don't get it.

If you're sure someone is townie, you should be working your ass off to derail their wagon. He... didn't. Of course if he's scum and unvoted then he's off the wagon when a townie was lynched.
...

VP Baltar

- His fixation with me yesterday while I was V/LA seemed like a major cop-out. He didn't comment much on BAB wagon until right at the end.
...

Xylthixlm

- zwet alt? I don't like the huge number of one liners that don't really say anything. Got off the BAB wagon but didn't try and derail it. What does that achieve?

Notice how all of these are still related to the BnB wagon, and in your [Xyl's] particular case he is actually blaming you for not trying to derail it. Funny for someone who would have called you scum for doing that yesterday.

Horrible point. We lynched a player on D1 who flipped town. What is wrong with referring back to people's actions around that wagon to look for scum? The last sentence is particularly bad, trying to give the impression that ekiM thinking BaB was scum yesterday but then not thinking that any more now that he has flipped town is somehow a scummy inconsistency.

Several people seem to be up for a Baltar wagon, anyone wanna join me? (Thesp?)

Choo choo!

Unvote: Ekim, Vote: VP Baltar

.

Can't argue with this.

Unvote, Vote: VP Baltar

[iamausername]

Post #525:

In other words, just like I said yesterday, by not stepping in and responding to Elvis' initial post on page 4, and instad hearing KMD's defense and all that, I was able to figure out that KMD is probably scum and Elvis is probably town. Which is what I've been saying all along.

[iamausername]

Username in particular worries me because he had problems with VP before, but had opted to vote rofl. Yet when there was VP support, he came right over. Sort of like if there hadn't been support, he wouldn't have gone for VP.

Well, of course I wouldn't have switched if there wasn't so much more support for a VP wagon than a rofl wagon. So? Would you be voting ekiM right now if his wagon didn't have more support than anyone else you suspect?

IAUN, you also need to put down a vote on someone who can actually get votes

done and done.

Do you really think ROFL acting overly confident is a scum tell coming from him?

No.

I think rofl misrepresenting KMD's acting overly confident as a scum slip is a scum tell, because I would expect him to be able to recognise overconfidence, seeing as how it is his bread and butter. I think rofl lying and saying he has never acted overconfident when I point this out is a scumtell.

(Also, the way he has, on both days, ended up voting for people on the assumption that they are scum with KMD and not voting the supposed obvscum KMD himself. And the suggestion that attacking Yos for any reason today is a scumtell. And the hypocrisy of accusing Serial of rolefishing for making a post exactly like one he himself had made a few posts earlier.)

The whole point of that post was to demonstrate that Ojanen was wrong, in that my day 2 suspicion of KMD was not a sudden or "severe" change on my part. Which, frankly, is a pretty weak reason to attack someone anyway; town should make sudden and severe changes, but that's kind of beside the point here.

There was a sudden change, it just didn't happen at the start of D2. It happened when KMD unvoted BaB.

And it's not the sudden change that I find suspicious, it's the attempts to deny the fact that any such change actually happened.

[iamausername]

Vote Count:

8 to lynch.

VP Baltar: 6 (ekiM, iamausername, Ojanen, SerialClergyman, Thesp, Xylthixlm)
ekiM: 5 (elvis_knits, Kmd4390, populartajo, VP Baltar, zu_Faul)

VP's not the only significant wagon here that Yos has completely ignored.

[iamausername]

zu_Faul is town.

Pulled out some quotes that are the basis for that read (sorry I can't trim it down much more without losing the context). Giving opinions, following uncertain reads, willing to change mind, willing to admit to conflicted read of me. Totally town.

Pretty much all you've done is take pot shots at those that are suspicious of him.

This is plainly wrong. I did not attack anyone because they were accusing BAB. I made a comment at rofl and one at you. I doubt those really qualify as "attacks".
Saying something like this is just wrong.


Are you reading the same game I am reading?

Xyl, what on earth is there in this quote that makes you think zu is town? The others you bring up, I think I can see where you're coming from, but this just looks to me like someone trying to back out of taking responsibility for their actions.

VP, why the hell would you do that? You do realize claiming vanilla is just an inherently anti-town act, right?

This strikes me as a distinctly odd reaction to someone that you would be OK with lynching today claiming vanilla when put to L-1.

I'm good with a VP Baltar lynch. Yosarian2, what do you think?

Another Thesp-is-scum-ism! Why is he asking Yos when he would be fine voting for Yos?

Really, charter? You can't think of a reason why someone would ask one of their main suspects to comment on another one of their main suspects?

How are Yos and VP scumbuddies at all?

What speaks against it?

That's not how this works

Why not? If two players are independantly scummy, and there's nothing in their interactions that speaks against them being scum together, why isn't that a perfectly valid reason to believe that they're scumbuddies?

Theres something that caught my attention, why did you make a case against kmd and didnt include you in the lynches you would support?

It's a level of suspicion thing. I came out of my reread less sure about town KMD than I was going into it, but I'm still not sold enough on his scmminess to support his lynch - if I made up a scum-o-meter, he'd fall at the scummier end of the neutral zone. Ditto SerialClergyman.

You have reminded me that KMD hasn't actually responded to my question though; KMD, you've explained why you unvoted BaB, but why were you voting him in the first place?

[iamausername]

Yos2 needs more votes. Come on people. Don't make me actually put together a case.

If Yos and VP are both scum, what's the point of derailing a wagon on one of them to get votes on the other?

[iamausername]

his ridiculous "I'm xyl so I don't have to do any work in this game" is a terrible excuse for everyone to label him as town.

Awesome strawman.

I stopped reading the post after this.

That was a pretty terrible idea.

I'm usually fine with lynching anyone who claims vanilla unless I have a good reason to think they're town.

Do you have a good reason to think VP Baltar is town?

It's best to have that information out there

How?

That is not why the VP wagon is bad. It's because it almost lynched him in one page, and because all the other top suspects are on the lynch!

Neither of which say anything about the actual reasons people have for voting VP. Although I guess it's hard to comment on those if you don't even read the posts they're in.

He was scummy and seemed like a good lynch at the time.

You know I'm looking for more detail than this. How was he scummy?

elvis. I want you to stop ignoring the thing presented directly to you in at least 910, 792, 799 and say why you would think Baltar was anyhow townishly involved with the BAB vote.

ELVIS. DO THIS.

[iamausername]

Woo, theory arguments.

How [is giving claim information useful]?

So if people are going to follow through with my lynch they at least know I'm not a power role.

But they'd find out you aren't a power role from the lynch scene anyway!

I really don't understand the argument 'don't claim unless prompted'. What would you have proposed should have happened, I kept quiet while people followed through with lynching me and then have me potentially come up a power role?

YES!

From your point of view, there's no potential for you to come up as a power role if you're not a power role. So there's no risk that a power role will be lynched by you not claiming. So there is no reason to claim.

How is that benefiting the town?

Because you'll find out who would be willing to hammer without waiting for a claim.

[iamausername]

P.S.

elvis. I want you to stop ignoring the thing presented directly to you in at least 910, 792, 799 and say why you would think Baltar was anyhow townishly involved with the BAB vote.

ELVIS. DO THIS.

[iamausername]

Didn't the speed of the wagon worry you?

No. But then, I had town reads on almost everyone who joined it.

Do you often see a wagon build on scum that fast?

No. Do you often see a wagon on town build that fast? Outside of lylo situations, I mean.

[iamausername]

Pretending you have role info when you don't is scummy.

QFT.

Why aren't we lynching rofl again?

[iamausername]

Vote: PookyTheMagicalBear

rofl and VP are still scum, but Pooky has given us absolutely nothing, and that needs to stop.

[iamausername]

Do you think Pooky is scum or would you be satisfied with a policy lynch at this point?

Pooky has given me almost* no way to tell if he is scum or town. I want this to change. So far, Pooky has apparently had no incentive to change this, I'm hoping that the threat of a lynch will provide him with one. So, if he still fails to give any contribution at all, then yes, I would be satisfied carrying that through to a lynch. Otherwise the threat wouldn't be there, and so the incentive wouldn't be there, and so the whole thing would be pointless.

*he did hop onto the Xyl wagon yesterday; this gives me something to work with on determining Pooky's alignment. And it's not something that makes him look good.

If I had to guess, I might guess that she got a "not goon" reading on someone

I think this is very likely the case. Not sure who, but then, "not goon" isn't a particularly useful result anyway.

PS. What exactly do you want me to give you?

Some idea of who you think is scum. Reasons would be nice too, but they're not so important.

We just had a

massive derailing of a wagon

, running up Xyl who is now confirmed town

led by roflcopter

and yet when day breaks on D3 he's back to his kmd case and it's like nothing happened.

Let's everybody please pay attention to the bolded when VP flips scum.

it looks to me like there was a double kill on Ojanen last night from anti-town groups.

Pay more attention when you're given setup info.

[iamausername]

mostly cuz after yesterday you'd expect the push to be for baltar due to the whole gooncop pointing at baltar all day yesterday. instead iam opens up with this comment about how VP baltar is still scum then pushes at me with a vote. a kind of draw up anger at this lousy lurking bear in the corner while covering his ass in case baltar gets run up from yesterday's stuff and promptly lynch. then his partner kmd blindly jumps in after him.

thats probly the best reason for voting me while implying baltar's scumminess in light of what happened yesterday.

I'm scum with VP? Really? That's what you're going with?

rofl and VP are still scum, but Pooky has given us absolutely nothing, and

that needs to stop

.

Note how the bolded does not say "Pooky needs to die". I wasn't saying "Pooky is lurking, let's lynch him instead!", I was saying "Pooky is lurking, let's threaten to lynch him, that'll get him to actually contribute!" And guess what, it's working!

If you assume that Ojanen did not have a guilty investigation on VP (which she clearly didn't, for reasons that have already been explained), do you still have a reason to believe VP is scum?

[iamausername]

If you want to find out his role, then make a case on him, get him to lynch -1, and then ask him to claim

This is a fantastic idea, let's do this.

[iamausername]

yessss

Unvote, vote: roflcopter

[iamausername]

I've thought about it, and I have come to the conclusion that this is for the best. I was hoping to get some more concrete claim from him before I did this, but any way I could see of trying to do that would just end up with everyone accusing me of rolefishing, and I think what we have is enough to hang him as the lying scum that he is anyway.

I have

reasons

to believe that rofl does not have the role he has been soft claiming. HINT HINT.

[iamausername]

This:

3. In this post, rofl says that Claus has a solid case against Yos, but that Yos doesn't fit as a partner of BaB. So why, when BaB did NOT flip scum, has rofl gone ahead and started acting like he is confirmed town anyway? I think his post here was an attempt to placate Claus and push the BaB wagon through to mislynch, because he clearly had no intention of actually following up on this suspicion of Yos.

thats a very narrowminded view of what could possibly cause me to change my opinion between the end of day one and the beginning of day two

and this:

i was under the impression that xyl had understood the implied message the first time i told him to stop voting for yos, but apparently the tidal wave of people who demand more explanation has emboldened him to go ahead and pretend he doesn't catch my drift either.

are the clearest examples, I think.

[iamausername]

Yes, I am fully aware of those facts.

[iamausername]

Hey, Yos, question while we wait for rofl; why is it that when KMD says that elvis was scummy because he thought elvis was scummy earlier, that was horrible and scummy reasoning, but when elvis says that I am scummy because she thought I was scummy earlier, you don't seem to have a problem with that?

[iamausername]

The reason roflcopter should claim first is that roflscum could modify his claim to match what info iamatown has, but I don't see how knowing rofltown's claim would help iamascum cook up plausible false info to implicate rofltown.

elvis, do you disagree with this point, and if so, why? If not, why are you trying to get more information about my role before rofl has claimed?

[iamausername]

I'm an X-shot Jailkeeper (not telling you what X is unless someone gives me a good reason why I should), and I jailed rofl on N1.

I jailed him because I believed he was scum, and no one else did, so if I was right, good chance he'd be making the scum kill and I'd block it, and if I was wrong, good chance he'd be the target of the scum kill and I'd protect him. Seemed like the best choice all around.

Didn't jail anyone N2.

I'm aware that this wouldn't have stopped rofl getting an innocent result if he was a Hider, and for that reason, I wasn't going to do this counterclaim thing until I spotted this here:

i don't like the return to the vp baltar wagon. i think he's telling the truth about his role.

which is clearly specifically crumbing the Vanilla Cop role. Points for consistency.

I'm also aware that I could have been targeted by a Mafia Roleblocker on N1, and that this would have allowed rofl to get his result. However, for this to be true, you have to also believe that the scum did not decide to block rofl on N2, despite him having very obviously softclaimed an investigative role, and there being no other power roles exposed. That seems very unlikely to me.

Of course, if rofl is scum, you have to also believe that Yos is scum and rofl felt the need to protect him at all costs when he really wasn't in all that much danger, or that rofl decided to stake his survival on the hope that townYos is not a power role. The latter would be ridiculously stupid, so I'm discounting that and assuming the former. My theory is that rofl and Yos are Mafia Lovers, because I can't seeing him being that desperate to keep Yos alive if they weren't.

So, yeah, I don't have 100% damning evidence that rofl is scum, if I did, I would have just gone ahead and said so without waiting for a claim from him first. If you really think that necessitates a lynch on me, then I guess go ahead, but I don't believe that what I've done here has hurt the town.

By the way, we're not lynching rofl today. It would clearly be a better idea to lynch Yos, because he is definitely scum if rofl is scum, and on the off chance that rofl is actually telling the truth, we'd be lynching a vanilla rather than a cop.

Unvote, Vote: Yosarian2

[iamausername]

It's a little different. I asked KMD why he voted Elvis, and his only reason was "becuase I suspected her yesterday", which isn't actually a reason at all; it looked more like he was using consistancy as a defense in lieu of actual pro-town reasoning for a vote that seemed bad to me, and that seems scummy; it wasn't just that he used that as a reason, it was that he didn't seem able to come up with any other reason.

Elvis basically just said "I'm not going to trust Iamusername over Rofl without a claim, because rofl seems town to me and iamusername seems scumy". That seems like a perfectly reasonable statement to me.

I'm not talking about the fact that elvis didn't immediately trust my softclaiming, I'm talking about the reasons that she finds me scummy in the first place. Do you know what those reasons are? I believe if you look into it, you will find that it bears a very strong resemblance to KMD's "because I suspected her yesterday" case.

[iamausername]

As I said, you otherwise have to assume that rofl was gambling on the fact that you aren't a power role, which would be incredibly stupid on his part.

[iamausername]

Call me paranoid, but under what circumstances are you suggesting you could be wrong, iam (assuming you're telling the truth)? Was it just the roleblocker theory?

Yeah, just that. I don't think it's likely, because I don't see why rofl wouldn't have been blocked N2, but I certainly think it's more likely than scumrofl claiming certainty that townYos is vanilla when he couldn't actually know if that was the case.

[iamausername]

Yes, I'm totally setting up two mislynches in a row by repeatedly declaring that there is no way that rofl is scum if Yos is town. That makes sense.

[iamausername]

I just thought it would be better to lynch the claimed vanilla than the claimed cop, when there is still a chance that they're not scum. I still don't understand why you think rofl would take a gamble on Yos being vanilla when there is no reason for him to do that, but if you honestly think there's a risk of that then sure, it's better to lynch rofl.

[iamausername]

iam, why not being up role info earlier when Xyl was about to be lynched and you had pretty damning evidence against rofl?

this wouldn't have stopped rofl getting an innocent result if he was a Hider, and for that reason, I wasn't going to do this counterclaim thing until I spotted this here:

i don't like the return to the vp baltar wagon. i think he's telling the truth about his role.

which is clearly specifically crumbing the Vanilla Cop role.

This quote didn't appear until after Xyl was lynched.

A isn't very likely.

I agree.

B, he wouldn't have gotten a result.

If rofl is scum, this would not differentiate that night from any other night. scumrofl would not know he was jailed.

C makes no sense. "I'm gonna lynch the cop's innocent result in case I was RB'd". No.

If you accept the premise that rofl and Yos must either both be town or both be scum, it makes perfect sense. And I still maintain that it makes no sense for scumrofl to gamble on Yos being vanilla. There is absolutely no benefit to doing that instead of claiming regular cop, and there's no drawback to claiming regular cop instead. So there is no reason for rofl to take that risk, unless it wasn't a risk, because he already knew Yos would claim vanilla, because Yos is his scum partner.

The whole 'lynch Yos instead' thing was a stray thought that occurred to me while I was typing up my claim post, I thought (and still do think) it made sense, so I added it in. I am totally regretting that thought at this point because apparently it makes me scum, somehow, but whatever, if I have to be lynched first to start the house of cards falling, so be it.

[iamausername]

Yeah, but they're just generic "innocent result on Yos" softclaims, not specifically "I am a Vanilla Cop" softclaims. So there was no reason to assume that rofl wasn't a Hider at that point.

And I didn't bring up the more specific softclaim from today when Thesp asked, because I didn't want rofl to know I'd seen it, since I figured that might affect his claim.

[iamausername]

If I were in iamausername's claimed position I'd definitely be staking the game on rofl being scum. I wouldn't be thinking "well if he IS telling the truth and we only lynch vanilla yos, maybe we can still win somehow...". It's just so marginal. Also, if you think they're lovers why do you care which we kill?

If they're any sort of scum, it doesn't matter which we kill first. The point is that it's better to lynch Yos if they're

not

scum, however unlikely that may be.

iamausername, you said rofl would claim cop if Yos was town, so he didn't have to gamble on Yos not being a power role. But didn't you say he was already crumbing vanilla cop?

He didn't crumb vanilla cop until today, after there was a claimed vanilla for him to investigate last night. And all that means is that he had already decided to claim vanilla cop at the start of the day. It doesn't change the fact that that would be an extremely stupid decision if Yos was town.

I'm wondering if the scum team was trying to smoke out the hider.

What would be the point? Scum can't kill a hider directly, so knowing who it is wouldn't be in any way useful to scum.

IAUN refers to Yos and rofl being lovers as a reason for lynching Yos2

No I didn't. Those were two entirely separate trains of thought. Yos being rofl's lover is an explanation for why he decided to defend him so rabidly, it's got nothing to do with the reason I thought a Yos lynch would be a good idea.

[iamausername]

There's one thing that has been made abundantly clear at this point: everyone thinks my "lynch Yos" plan is stupid, so it's going to be rofl or me.

Unvote, Vote: roflcopter

[iamausername]

Informal poll - who thought before last night that roflcopter was softclaiming role information?

I did, and I am baffled as to how anyone could have not thought so when rofl and Xyl actually had a fairly long conversation about the fact that he was clearly doing so.

I mean, if you were a vanilla cop and you thought he might be telling the truth, you might want to check it out. But if you're pretty sure he's scum, you don't want to de-rail the bandwagon, waste and investigation, and then possibly have to claim in order to get the bandwagon going again when you find out he's not vanilla; that's a pretty high cost.

I agree with this, tbh. I don't think the fact that he didn't attempt to derail the BaB wagon after his claim is much of a point against rofl.

Also, I would have been mindful of the fact that I had a perfect chance to breadcrumb my role, and if I didn't make some comment about vanilla roles, that it would make my role much less believable when I had to claim. And the last thing I want to do as a power role is make myself less believable. Yet, rofl said nothing.

This is a very good point, on the other hand.

I wouldn't feel the need to breadcrumb that I have a vanilla cop role. It's way too conformable of a role; more so then a normal cop, even.

And this is a terrible response to that point, because what matters is whether

rofl

would feel the need to breadcrumb. And since he

has

breadcrumbed it today, I think he would have a hard time convincing anyone that he wouldn't.

Why are you arguing so hard against a 1for1 scum trade? They probably just need two more mislynches to win, so a 1for1 trade if they get town lynched first seems like a good idea to me.

It wouldn't be a good idea unless there was a strong chance scum was going to be lynched without the 1 for 1 trade, because a 1 for 1 trade is clearly worse for scum than a 1 for 0 trade. Do you think there was scum heading for a lynch today before I forced this situation? If so, who?

---

If there wasn't a chance we might be in lylo tomorrow, then I could maybe see lynching someone else, but that just seems like a terrible idea as is. (Blah blah hypocritecakes. I wanted to lynch Yos because I firmly believe that rofl's alignment would be confirmed one way or the other by Yos's flip, which would clearly not be the case with anyone else.)

If we do lynch someone else though, can anyone give a good reason why it shouldn't be Pooky?

[iamausername]

Here's the thing. If me and rofl were both town, you can bet that scum would be going all out with the "one of rofl and iam MUST be scum" idea. Why wouldn't they? It's two free mislynches right there. So, the fact that there is a significant amount support for the idea that maybe me and rofl are both town makes it less likely that that is actually the case, I think. And it wasn't exactly very likely in the first place.

People who prefer rofl lynch: iam, elvis, SC, ekiM
People who prefer iam lynch: rofl, KMD, charter, Pooky, VP, Tajo, Yos
People I can't tell: zu, Thesp

IAUN. Gut.

Still roflcopter, by a good bit.

So I win 8 to 5. BOOYAH.

Can we just get on with it already?

[iamausername]

I am starting to think a massclaim is in order. We already have a number of claimed roles, it's close to lylo and we might be able to break the setup if we coordinate night choices.

This might be a good idea, but on the other hand, with less than a week until deadline, I don't know if there's time to get it all organised and process the information well enough to make a good plan, so it might be best saved for tomorrow.

I am confused as to how I am not being lynched at this point. Like, It thought it was going to happen

before

tajo backed up rofl's claim, so I do find it odd that it isn't happening afterwards.

...what's that? A horse? For me? Let me just look it in the mouth. Before I accept this GIFT HORSE.

Anyway, given that rofl, Yos, charter and VP are apparently ALL TOWN (or tajo is pulling the most insane scum gambit the world has ever seen), and I have been wrong about every damn thing, I don't know what to think any more.

To everyone voting KMD; not a bad choice, but why not Pooky?

Unvote, Vote: Pooky

[iamausername]

I don't see what's insane about Tajo's move as scum. He claims to have role info clearing rofl and a bunch of other people (probably mostly scum, maybe not all to get the town ones good will). The lynch is steered to a third party scum know is town. Tomorrow is probably LYLO and scum with the help of a townie or two lynch iamausername or another townie for the win.

Unless I'm missing something obvious?

Well, when you put it like that...

tajo's behaviour has been completely consistent with his claimed role, though. And I have never seen an entire scumteam protect each other to anywhere near the extent that the hypothetical tajo/rofl/Yos/etc. team have been. That would be crazy ballsy play when you know there's a vig about. If one dies, they probably all will.

And, speaking of that vig; in the event of a town lynch today, I would suggest that you consider shooting tajo tonight. I think shooting anyone else would be a risky move, because hitting town could potentially mean game over. But if you hit town tajo, you won't actually hit, because of his role. Wheras scum tajo will die just as well as anyone. Turns it from high risk/high reward to low risk/high reward, what's not to love?

[iamausername]

We really can't come up with the best plan when there's still a few people who haven't claimed.

charter, ekiM, zu and Thesp; we are waiting on you. When ~75% of players have already claimed, clearly a massclaim is happening. Any further resistance to the idea is just halting progress.

I don't like the lynch tajo plan, because I think he is town, and I think SerialClergyman is scum derailing the lynch that was about to happen on his buddy Pooky. If someone can demonstrate how an absolutely 100% guaranteed town win can come from lynching tajo, I'll support it, but I don't think that's going to happen.

[iamausername]

Aside from that, I hesitate on a pooky lynch because there is too much support for it and pooky is a soft target.

^ SerialClergyman has successfully derailed the Pooky wagon on the basis that Pooky can't be scum because no one was trying to derail his wagon. Think about it.

[iamausername]

Iam - if Tajo is town, I am TELLING rofl to investigate pooky. Why the fuck would I do that as pookys partner? Not to mention I am a confirmable role.

Two words: Mafia Roleblocker.

Also, the only way to confirm you as Bodyguard is to kill you. By that definition, every role is a confirmable role.

[iamausername]

If Tajo townflips you can assume I'm telling the truth

Why on Earth would I do that?

[iamausername]

The alternate way (breadcrumb, then try to use yourself as an info role by targeting people you're not sure of) is much riskier; there's a high chance the scum figure it out, kill you, and then the town finds your breadcrumb, jumps to the wrong conclusion, and mislynches your target.

I think this is the comment he's talking about, Yos.

The town wouldn't mislynch the target, because the target would have been killed along with hider, or the hider wouldn't be dead.

[iamausername]

tajo lynch is dumb as hell if you think he's town.

If we lynch tajo today, we're still going to have to rely on good old-fashioned scumhunting to figure out who is scum in the remaining pool of unconfirmed players. By starting to rely on good old-fashioned scumhunting right now, and trusting your town read on tajo, we get an extra chance to lynch among the pool of unconfirmed, which means we can actually afford to get one wrong even if there's five scum.

The choice here is this; do you have more faith in your ability to read the seven people who aren't confirmed by a town flip on tajo (or six, for those of us in that group who are town), without getting a single one of them wrong, or do you have more faith in your ability to read tajo?

Because for me, it's easily the latter.

IF YOU THINK TAJO IS TOWN, VOTE POOKY.

[iamausername]

Noting that Iam wants to no lynch.

I don't know where you are getting this. I want to lynch Pooky.

[iamausername]

Deadline is tomorrow. A Pooky lynch isn't going to happen.

He only has one less vote than tajo, and Yos and rofl have both stated that they prefer a Pooky lynch to a tajo lynch. I'm not going to write it off as a lost cause yet.

[iamausername]

Wait, two votes less. Still perfectly achievable.

[iamausername]

KMD, I've never said that I won't switch to tajo to avoid a no lynch. I'm just not going to do that when there is clearly still hope for a Pooky lynch.

[iamausername]

Yes. No lynch loses us a lynch just the same as a tajo lynch, and I can't see us getting more confirmed innocents out of it.

I think zu might have just unwittingly explained why rofl wasn't blocked on N2.

[iamausername]

I question this argument from Yos:

Right now, if tajo flips town, we have two confirmed townies from him (charter and rofl), and from rofl, we have two confirmed vanillas (me and VP.) With Tajo and rofl dead tommorow, we only have 3 confirmed townies left, out of a pool of 11 people. (4, if you count KMD, who I also consider confirmed). If there are 5 scum, then that means there will still be 2 unconfirmed town people left, and with 5 scum-votes out of 6 votes to lynch, the odds are, town will end up lynching one of them and losing.

Is it really going to be that hard to lynch right when our odds are 4/7 or 5/7?

We won't just have to lynch right once, though. We'll have to lynch right every day for the rest of the game (if five scum; every day but one if four).

[iamausername]

Unvote, Vote: roflcopter

Other lynches I'd support right now; zu_faul, VP Baltar and Yosarian2.

Hell yes.

I blame Mini 775 for my ridiculous "what if i was blocked N1" paranoia. That was really very stupid though.

This may just be the most fun game of mafia I have yet been involved in, I deem the /in-vitational experiment a huge success.