Mini 839 -- Mafia Invasion! (Game Over)

[Cruciare]

9. Do you think this survey will be useful in finding scum?

No.

Vote: jammer

[Cruciare]

9. Do you think this survey will be useful in finding scum?

No.

Needlessly to say, I disagree heavily.
Establishing a baseline meta read on you will do me (and all of you should you choose to use these answers) nothing but good.
To contrast, not doing so will only make it harder for me/us to discern your alignment, which will make this game harder (and more importantly, give me a headache which may possibly cause me to flame you).

At the very least you could humor me. If you don't believe it will be helpful, it can't hurt. Can it?

Okay then Vi. If you can pick the three questions from that list you deem most important, I'll answer them. I really don't think my favourite fictional character would give you a 'baseline meta read', hmm?

[Cruciare]

You realize that with all the trouble you're giving me you could just answer the survey and be done with it.
The questions are direct and should not require much forethought, so it shouldn't take more time than any other post.

You're right, I could. Neither do I have anything particularly against answering the questions. That said, I don't have anything particularly for answering the questions either: I don't feel a need to sing my meta nor defend my alignment at this point in the game. Like Porkens said, the person writing the survey usually gets a free pass, so I'm just throwing the choice back at you.

I'm being difficult on purpose, don't take it personally, kay?

[Cruciare]

Like Porkens said, the person writing the survey usually gets a free pass, so I'm just throwing the choice back at you.

Clearly I'm not getting a free pass, and was not getting a free pass before you said anything.
I would also add that what Adel got in Tofu Mafia

hardly

qualified as a free pass; in fact, Adel was slammed pretty heavily for not answering his own survey days after he promised to do so - plus his survey was much more unreasonable than this one.

Your definition of 'free pass' is not quite the same as mine. Throwing out those questions lets you stand on the side of the interrogation table that I would rather be standing on. Usually I wouldn't particularly care which side of the table I'm on, but once someone declares themselves that they stand on the questioning side over everyone else (your telling everyone to answer the survey was such a gesture to me), I'd rather not simply obediently sit on the other side. Yes, I am selfish.

I'm being difficult on purpose, don't take it personally, kay?

Why?

It's my rebellious phase.

I don't feel a need to sing my meta nor defend my alignment at this point in the game.

Again, why?

Haha, this is a trick question. You say 'why' but you actually mean 'why not'. Almost tricked me there. I don't want to answer 'why not' until you can answer 'why': Why would I need to?

Also, you seem to be quite serious about this.

"How important is it for you that I answer those questions?"

[Cruciare]

I was in a game with Cruciare for all of four pages at the beginning of the year

.

Vi, I'm flattered you remember me from before I got stranded in the middle of the Amazon and had to wrestle with piranhas to make my way back. But that was definitely before this year. As for your questions: 1) No I didn't think you were mafia (at the time of that question) because you had yet to vote me, and 2) If you believe I'm scum from my play so far, then there's no particular reason why I could convince you otherwise.

Yes, since the survey has derailed this whole game into an obsessive discussion about it, shifting attention from anything else.
We cannot know about Vi's alignment, since evryone's attention is directed towards the aftermath of the survey.

In effect, this caused a general tormoil which is very harmful to the game in general, and the town in particular,by allowing the mafia and 3rd parties to stay relatively under the radar.

Since this effect is so extreme, I believe that such an action should be sanctioned by the most effective tool we have at our disposal: the lynch.
By lynching the survey initiator, we make a point about the validness of such actions in future games and are able to abandon this line in the present one.

The only other option I see is an appeal to the mod for the removal of Vi from the game. This will serve a similar purpose, but in my opinion he will not consent to this.

RedCoyote, if you consider this survey business enough grounds for removal from the game, please post a reply to the same effect.

P.S: Vi, if in the other game the survey was adele's, my point still stands. You did not invent this method simply to irritate others, you copied someone else's technique, a technique I find highly flawed and rude.

Also, Your alignment is no longer the issue. The only way to get out of the survey entanglement is to end it right here, either by a lynch or a stop to this line of discussion, which will not happen willingly, nor can it, under the circumstances.
Such a turn of events was predicted by Porkens in the passage I quoted.

You know, I was going to scold Vi for giving players an excuse to fill their posts answering some questionnaire instead of voting each other, but this post was A+++ comedy gold, bro. And I mean that in the sense that I'm laughing

at

you. Wow, mod involvement? If I had something in my mouth at the time I would surely have been here cleaning my computer screen instead of writing this post.

My tentative vote is locked on you until you can convince me that you're mentally 'unique' instead of scum. Haha "alignment is no longer the issue", pure brilliance. Your logic would crash a toaster, Y.C. Still, I'd like for you to clarify what the hell it is you're talking about, so let's play this 24 hour game, shall we? Please give me satisfactory answers to the following within 24 hours, or my vote will materialise.

1) What do you think is wrong with Vi's survey?
2) Why do you believe the town is in 'turmoil' right now?
3) What do you think having Vi dead would achieve?
4) Is this goal more important than lynching scum?
5) If Vi was confirmed town, would you still want to lynch him/her?
6) Would you rather lynch: A) Scum, or B) Vi?

[Cruciare]

Oh poop, there goes that line of investigation. I'll wait and see what the replacement says about everything, until then my vote will stay on Jammer. I'm wary of his subtle defending of Y.C. and attempts to jump on a possible TMJ wagon whilst anti-tunneling on the Y.C one. Also, he asks too many questions (no really, read his posts), a mild tell of scum trying to take an offensive position.

@Col: I do agree that Y.C. was silly, but why do you think he wasn't scummy?

As for TMJ, coming from a guy who called Vi "dumb head" in his first (?) post, all I'm getting is a null read. I've seen players like him before, and in most cases (when they're not pretending), that kind of behaviour was not indicative of their alignment. Questioning them also proved largely useless because their answers didn't make any more sense than their general behaviour. 82 did raise some eyebrows however, so I'll watch for his future commentaries.

Lastly

, I especially want to hear from James again.

(Whoops, here comes a fake edit...)

Do you want both TMJ and Y.C lynched?

sure.

That's funny, I would've thought that one's alignment would affect your willingness to lynch the other?

[Cruciare]

*I hate cops*

Wait, does anyone know what he meant by this?

[Cruciare]

As for TMJ, coming from a guy who called Vi "dumb head" in his first (?) post, all I'm getting is a null read. I've seen players like him before, and in most cases (when they're not pretending), that kind of behaviour was not indicative of their alignment. Questioning them also proved largely useless because their answers didn't make any more sense than their general behaviour. 82 did raise some eyebrows however, so I'll watch for his future commentaries.

@Cruciare: What kind of behavior from TMJ would indicate a scum-tell, if you don't mind me asking? I assume there's some tells you'd be looking for from an 'erratic' (for lack of a better term) player like TMJ. Voting patterns, maybe? You might not want to divulge your tells, but is there any way to get a read on erratic players, in your opinion?

It helps to get them to talk more on their own (without being questioned). Sometimes when you pressure them with lots of votes, they may start singing, but the problem is sometimes they don't. Until their words start having more substance, the best lead would definitely be their voting. There are no specific 'tells', but my subconsious scumdar usually goes off when I see something not quite right.

Just like how I'm very tempted to correct Vi's 'mistake' right now...

Vote: popsofctown

Well, that's what I'd like to do but I want to hear more from certain people before someone can hammer. I do hope they get here before my scumdar gets itchy.

Unvote

Don't get me wrong, I definitely want this guy lynched. His first post did not sit well, and his second was just a follow up of the 'blame TMJ' viewpoint. There's nothing Pops could tell me which would explain Y.C.'s rubbish, and my meter was already tilted towards the scum side anyway. If he flips scum then I may have some idea as to who his scumbuddies are. This is the right lynch for today IMO.

[Cruciare]

focusing only on the obvious target aside from himself

This was also the main reason why Pops' first post (my goodness, and his subsequent ones too!) didn't sit well with me.

Cruciare, could you elaborate on TMJ's apparent newbishness?
Is jammer still an issue?
Is it more important to hear from "certain people" or to hammer?

1) Newbishness isn't quite the right idea. As you should have seen from his play so far, his behaviour is generally unhelpful and somewhat 'ignorant', if I may use that term. I'm basing this off the fact that I've seen people who act almost exactly like him before, and in most cases it was not indicative of their alignment. Look, you called him out for saying something about people not being convinced. I don't know what he meant. I don't think any of us knew what he meant. Even after questioning him, do we yet know what he meant? Basically, I won't be looking too deep into his words, because for players like him words aren't a great help. However, comments like 82 that stand out in a bad way I will consider if Pops flips town.

2) I 'd rather not comment too much on anyone until after Pops has been lynched and his alignment revealed, but I'll tell you the truth about what I think of Jammer: he's been an issue ever since his third post. Let's just say that if for some wacky reason we couldn't get Pops lynched, I would be fine with lynching Jammer instead.

3) I'm hoping that most people currently voting for Pops don't suddenly have a change of heart, in which case Pops can be lynched anytime. With this assumption, it is more important to hear from certain people. It's funny that you make it sound I have some kind of hidden agenda; by certain people I meant those who had yet to post ever since Pops replaced in. =P

Vote: popsofctown

for L-2. Afatchic, please get your ass here.

[Cruciare]

I'll tell you the truth about what I think of Jammer: he's been an issue ever since his third post.

What did you think of Jammer's second post? I've been watching him ever since then because I thought his answers sounded too much like he was trying not to step on any toes.

Haha, I didn't really pay much attention to people's survey answers (cause you know, that would be quite hypocritical of me). I only went back to read that after his next few posts didn't sit right with me, so I guess even if I did see some kind of careful treading on those grounds, it would be from a biased point of view. Maybe it's just my inability to properly interpret it, but I stand by my view that people's answers to surveys don't actually tell much. Only one particular question was worth noting people's answers to IMO, though I won't say which one yet.

[Cruciare]

I'm not vanilla town, i'm doctor. Day 1 doctor death again.
I give up.

I'm not sure what the optimal play for us is in this situation, but I'm not buying it. If however lynching Pops today is not going to happen, like I said I would be fine moving my vote to Jammer. Would someone with experience care to share a little wisdom as to how to proceed?

DRK: Why do you think TMJ is Town (in line with this conversation about him being unreadable)?

Well, I have little direct read on him. His actions have been strange, yes, but I don't see any of them as more likely to come from TMJ-scum as TMJ-town. Based on that, I would probably put him as neutral. What puts him at town is my mind is largely that I think pops is scum. People started paying more attention to TMJ after the YC wagon began and pops himself is attempting to fuel the TMJ wagon. Based on this, he's leaning town in my mind.

I know I said earlier that I'd consider TMJ if Pops flips town (and thus implied that if Pops is scum, TMJ is town), but I realised that I didn't consider all the possibilities. This flew above my head earlier, but it's possible that TMJ is in another anti-town faction (assuming that Pops is scum, of course). From the way he said 'yay' and voted Y.C. almost immediately, we can at least see that if they're both anti-town, they're not in cahoots. I stumbled across another (ongoing) game he's in, and his play there is significantly more sensible than it is here. Just throwing out a possibility, but if Pops is mafia then TMJ could be town OR third-party.

[Cruciare]

My advice at this point is to make your own decisions, starting as of your last post.

Cruciare, what is TMJ if pops=Town? None of this "consider"ing mess. Take a stance.

If Pops is town, my entire scumdar would have to be flipped upside down. Which means that TMJ would be more scummy, as would everyone who was quick to jump on the Y.C. wagon, but not necessarily scum. I've said this before, but if it weren't for 82, my read on TMJ would be completely null. At the time, I wasn't considering him because I believe Pops is scum, I believed that lynching Pops was the most important thing that had to be done before I started looking deeply into other people. By 'consider' I meant actually consider starting to look closer into TMJ. There is not enough substance out of him for me to take a definitive stance. Perhaps simply because of 82, he should logically be placed on the scum side of the meter. However Vi, my scumdar is telling me that Pops is scum, and now you are telling that same scumdar to function on the basis that Pops is not scum. I can only fully consider that should I see in green letters 'popsofctown, Doctor'.

As for my decision, I still think Pops is scum (gosh, I might get tired of typing this). I understand that claiming a power role sort of wipes out your slate of scummy records and acts as a get-out-of-lynch-free-unless-someone-counterclaims card (objective vs subjective evidence and all that), which is why even if I am subjectively almost convinced that Pops is scum, it may not be wise to act on those suspicions when there is some kind of objective evidence otherwise. Right now, I'm weighing gut against logic, and gut is winning, which is why I have yet to unvote. Basically, my question is: In terms of optimal play, is wanting to lynch a claimed power role unreasonable or not?

Does this refer to TMJ? It wasn't clear in context.

Yes.

[Cruciare]

Checking in here, not much to say. I'd like to remind Afatchic that Y.C. said himself that he wanted Vi dead no matter what, and I quote, "alignment is no longer the issue". You got 'townie who thought he was right, and refused to back down' from that? Also, as Imaginality (I think) said before, Pops had a chance to claim when he was previously on L-1, and instead in post 118 he says "I understand if I get lynched here". Doctor? Are you sure? Speaking of Imaginality, the case on him is a stretch I believe. I'm not feeling Porkens' unsettlement over the mafia doctor speculation, although Vi makes some reasonable points (but far from top-priority material in terms of who we should be lynching).

Pops, if you would be so kind as to comply, I'd like to hear how important you think the doctor role is to the town.

[Cruciare]

I have exam overload the next few days, so I may not be posting much.

[Cruciare]

Right, the most vomit-inducing exams are almost out of the way. To be honest, the lack of notable objection to Pops' claim worries me, but my gut's still telling me that he's scumscumscum. A significant part of the reason being that he doesn't act like a doctor at all (the other significant parts being TMJ tunnelling and Y.C.'s ridiculous play). Again Pops, please tell me how important you think the doctor role is to the town.

[Cruciare]

Why do you want to do the scum's job for them?

I'm sitting here, reading this line, scratching my head because I don't know WTH you're talking about.

[Cruciare]

Doc is very important. I'll save whoever doesn't vote me. Promises <3

I'll use a die to make it fair

See, now I feel much better about lynching you, because you've been acting like you're not very important at all. Thanks!

Because the scum want to eliminate all the PR's, to prevent anything from stopping them at night. So either we lynch someone else, and make them kill the doc, or we kill the doc and let them have a free shot at night.

You seem 100% convinced Pops is actually the doc? :!:

[Cruciare]

And what do you think, you're trying to accomplish, telling the scum, who you'll NOT protect? If you feel a grudge at those who want to lynch you (I'm going to be one those people, if you'll keep acting this way), then save it for yourself, and don't make the job easier for the scum even more, than you already did by claiming, will you?

You sure are making

highly

suspicious comments today, Col.

[Cruciare]

@Col: Here's the problem.

And what do you think, you're trying to accomplish, telling the scum, who you'll NOT protect? If you feel a grudge at those who want to lynch you (

I'm going to be one those people, if you'll keep acting this way

), then save it for yourself, and

don't make the job easier for the scum even more, than you already did by claiming

, will you?

There is a very suspicious contradiction in the presence of both the points bolded above. I'll explain it better when I'm less tired, but basically my interpretation is that this could be an attempt to make yourself look good regardless of how Pops flips. Also, there is something not quite right with attaching the condition 'if you'll keep acting this way' in regard to voting Pops at our present situation.

[Cruciare]

I don't like this deadline. The closer to it we get, the weirder some people start to act. I'm starting to draw paranoid interpretations like Sigma's on various players, and it's making me feel uneasy. I may now be willing to lynch like half the people on the playerlist just so we won't have a no lynch.

@Mod: Your judgement that we won't need further extensions is probably based on the assumption of a near-unanimous Pops desperation lynch today. If that doesn't look like it's going to happen, would you consider extending it further?

I have absolutely no stake at all at what the players decide to do with day 1. The deadline has been two weeks since the game has begun, and I extended it by about a day for the

sole

reason that a replacement came into the game some 30 hours before the deadline. If a majority of players feel as though they need longer to come to a decision, I will extend the deadline once (per game day) with respect to that request.

[Cruciare]

I don't like this deadline. The closer to it we get, the weirder some people start to act. I'm starting to draw paranoid interpretations like Sigma's on various players, and it's making me feel uneasy. I may now be willing to lynch like half the people on the playerlist just so we won't have a no lynch.

Explain.

It wouldn't hurt you to be a little clearer, would it?

[Cruciare]

Do you think that a majority will not converge to lynch someone today?
Do you think it would be out of your skill level to campaign for the person you think is most scummy to be lynched? (Who is most scummy IYO, anyway?)
Who is on or off this "half the people on the playerlist"?

How is this terribly different from answering a survey?

1. I'm specifically talking about Pops, the one who has the highest number of votes currently. I think it's possible that he may not be lynched today. I'm seeing a lack of willingness to vote for a claimed doc. That said, I am expressing my willingness to move my vote as necessary to achieve lynch. If support for a Pops lynch is lacking, we can only lynch someone else if we have the time to reconverge.
2. Yes, I believe it is out of my skill level. I find Pops the most scummy, but the fact that he's claimed doc is an avalanche against my ability to convince other people to lynch him. Like I said, my wanting to lynch Pops is more gut than logic. Even logically, I am starting to have doubts about Pops, not because of Pops himself but because of how some other people are reacting to him. For example, the absence of notable objection to his claim. What do you think about this?
3. So I may have exaggerated about half. I can tell you that Pops, Jammer, and TMJ are definitely on there. You, DRK, Sigma, and myself are definitely not on there. Porkens is almost not on there. As for the others, I'm willing to lynch

certain individuals

under

certain circumstances

, but I won't say anymore. >_>
4.

IT'S ACTUALLY RELEVANT TO THE GAME.

Fun fact, your imperative 'Explain' reminds me of our national assessment standard here in New Zealand, and after a string of exams I'd rather not have to pull a thesis out of my ass from a one word question. This is my cynic's impression what it might look like.

[Cruciare]

For example, the absence of notable objection to his claim. What do you think about this?

I think there has been plenty of notable objection to pops' claim, as evidenced by people still wanting to lynch him.
Counterquestion. What would you expect scum to do when confronted with Townpops' claim?
To contrast, what would you expect Town to do when confronted with ?pops' claim?

I don't know if you remember, but when Pops first claimed, everyone except TMJ and myself eventually unvoted, and no-one voted him again until much later on threat of deadline. I have said that my objection was not one based on objective evidence, and TMJ isn't exactly notable. Given the general belief that A) There is a probably a doctor, and B) There is probably no more than one doctor, if Pops isn't the doctor, does the reaction after Pops's claim really make sense? Speculation about this can be potentially dangerous so I'd like to avoid talking about it too much, but do you understand what I'm getting at here?

As for your questions, I don't think Pops's claim would influence the scum's desire to get him lynched all that much, since they can, you know, kill him at night. The advantage of getting free choice on their nightkill instead is not large. The problem here is that Y.C. was, for a reasonable period of time, the only person being suspected (besides the occasional TMJ of course). If scum were being suspected then they would be more inclined to want to lynch Pops, but otherwise whether they want to remove the doc as soon as possible or look innocent by not supporting his lynch, I wouldn't know. Personally, I might go for the look innocent strategy, but preferences differ.

With town, the problem is that everyone's playing style is starkly different. Town play makes less sense than scum play, you know. Throughout my lurking here on MafiaScum, I've seen town react a spectrum of different ways when confronted with a claim. As such, I have no expectations whatsoever.

[Cruciare]

Several people now have said they find Cruciare scummy in some way. Maybe I am missing something. I'm willing to review my stance if something solid is brought forward.

There's something questionable about you hugging me like this. Isn't it a great coincidence that James said something about liking my approach here? D=

[Cruciare]

In about 10 hours, I will probably lose access until after the deadline. Those of you who are currently not voting either TMJ or Pops should put your vote on one of them

as soon as possible

. I'm pretty sure we're not gonna be lynching anyone apart from those two. I dread to have an L-1 at deadline because my vote - or anyone else's - was on the other guy's wagon.

By the way, I agree with the two posts above this one. I definitely endorse a Pops lynch over a TMJ one. I'd even rather lynch Jammer than TMJ to be honest, but that's not happening today. Whatever logic it is that prevents you from lynching a possible doctor today just so he can be nightkilled tonight, flush it down the toilet. If Pops is scum, we would lose a lot more by not lynching him today. Please guys, we need to hang some scum here. Vote Pops. Yes we can! [/shamelessappeal]

[Cruciare]

Right, by two posts I meant 313 and 314. Curse you Vi and your lightning cut.

[Cruciare]

I did say that I would be willing to move my vote as necessary, but Pops being so close to lynch (CLOSER THAN TMJ, HINT HINT) makes me not really want to, and I think others may feel the same. If this psychological lockdown persists until deadline, it would be quite bad. I think the only person who's seriously against TMJ is Pops himself, am I wrong? To the rest of you who are voting TMJ becase you are against lynching a possible doctor Day 1, please realise that if he really is the doctor he would most probably die tonight anyway. PLEASE DO NOT WASTE A DAY ON A COMPLETE GAMBLE LYNCH THAT DOESN'T TELL US VERY MUCH (I.E. TMJ).

[Cruciare]

Really want to hear from Cruciare and for him to explain why he thought yesterdays TMJ lynch would offer little in the ways of information. I also want his opinion on the two wagons now that TMJ did flip scum.

TMJ was like a near-complete shot in the dark. You're welcome to convince yourself that I'm wrong on this, but that's what I firmly believed D1. Had we lynched Pops, I believed that regardless of whether he came up scum or doctor (I didn't consider third-party to be honest) we would've learnt a lot from it either way. TMJ's lynch would only prove useful if he flipped scum, which fortunately he did. Had TMJ flipped anything other than scum, it would've told us virtually nothing. A TMJ town/third-party flip would also have given the scum a chance to WIFOM with not killing Pops. Like I said, the fact that TMJ actually did flip scum was a lucky shot in the dark in my opinion.

As for the two wagons, if you're talking about the TMJ and Pops wagons yesterday, my opinion now is that there is not likely to be any scum on TMJ's wagon. I'll explain this further on in this post.

How you feeling Cruciare?

Vindicated?
Embarrassed?
Hopeful?

I feel better now that we know Pops isn't pro-town, so a bit vindicated in that regard I guess. I was somewhat embarrassed at failing to seriously consider the possibility that TMJ was actually scum (like I said, I thought it was an almost completely random shot in the dark), and somewhat relieved that we actually did lynch him. Yet I stand by my stance that we were lucky with TMJ, and will glare at anyone who tries to say anything resembling 'I told you so'. My initial scum suspect list has been crossed out and replaced with a completely different one, and I guess knowing that a mafia framer is gone has made me more hopeful of victory, but not by much to be honest. If Pops had flipped scum, I think I would've been able to pin all his other scumbuddies, but that line of thinking goes out the window now. So I guess you could say I'm feeling 'enlightened' or 'rejuvenated'.

I think it's significant that midway through the day Cruciare tried to steer the lynch choice towards pops vs jammer rather than pops vs TMJ.

You misinterpreted me here. My stance D1 was to lynch Pops if possible, lynch Jammer if lynching Pops was not possible, and lynch TMJ if lynching Pops or Jammer was not possible. None of this A vs B thing. Also, it's not like I tried to seriously convince anyone of Jammer's suspiciousness, as I wanted to lynch Pops first before making a case on Jammer.

Later on, he softened his stance on pops to being based "more gut than logic" when pops looked likely to be lynched, while keeping his vote on pops. That seems like an attempt to position himself better for when pops flipped town.

My stance did not soften. My reasons for voting Pops before his claim were the same as my reasons for keeping my vote on him after the claim. The difference is that after his claim, it may be more logical to not lynch a claimed doctor D1 regardless of how suspicious I may be of him, yet my gut was telling me that my suspicions were right and I should follow through with them. Examples of logical reasons for keeping my vote on him would be if another person had counterclaimed doctor, if I myself were a doctor, or if I had some kind of investigation result on him (hypothetically), neither of which was the case. What ever it 'seemed like' to you, it was the truth.

Also, several times he ducked giving his opinion on something or gave vagueish answers.

If you would be so kind as to point out where I have done this, I will be more than glad to correct it.

As I mentioned above, I'm inclined to believe that there are no scum on TMJ's wagon. The reason is that not only did Pops claim doctor, TMJ was actually also scum. First let's consider the reasons scum would have for being off the doctor's wagon: looking innocent, aaand that's it. Makes sense. But now let's consider the reasons scum would have for being on their own scumbuddy's wagon when there is another easily lynchable wagon instead: umm, can anyone think of anything? Sure they would look innocent, but come on, does this really make sense in a game where their objective is to overrun the town? They'd have to be really confident in themselves to pull something like sticking to TMJ's wagon when Pops's one could easily have gone forward instead. And that's pretty unlikely in my opinion. It's like completely throwing away your advantage of being informed at all, like the first option in this thread. For further insight, see what this guy has to say. As such, I will clear all those on TMJ's wagon until anything comes up that suggests otherwise.

Now I want to

Vote: DeathRowKitty

. I know I said yesterday that he was one of the people I was not suspicious of at all (because a lot of his opinions mirrored mine), but with TMJ's scum flip, I now think otherwise. I'll make a better case on this (with all the specifics and all that - there are lots) when I'm less tired, but the general idea is that if you look at his play from the perspective that he is definitely scum, it makes perfect sense. And I mean PERFECT sense. For now, I'll just leave you with the fact that DRK's very first mention of TMJ was at

the bottom of page 6

, a full five days or 86 posts after initial suspicion on TMJ first came to light.

[Cruciare]

This still doesn't work for me. Yesterday you believed that Pops was scum and yet others were jumping onto a different wagon. If you truly believed Pops to be scum, wouldn't the competing wagon and those on it show you something? Lets pretend for a minute that Pops was scum and TMJ was town. After the TMJ flip are you really trying to tell me you would have had nothing to go on as far as Pops and his scum buddies?

Sotty, TMJ flipping town says absolutely nothing (or at least very little) about Pops. If Pops had been lynched and flipped scum, then I indeed would have plenty to go on as far as his scumbuddies. But how exactly does TMJ flipping town say anything about Pops? The town is the uninformed majority. TMJ being town may very well mean Pops was also town, in which case the people on the respective wagons would mean little. I did say that I believed Pops was scum, but I am uninformed - I can't be concretely sure about anything. Either I am missing something here, or you are. =/

Interesting, I want to see the full case as soon as you can get round to it. my opinion on DRK is that he was tunneled and in my experience that happens more as town than as scum because scum need to keep their options open a little more. I want to hear his opinions on all this now the day has started. Right now I am leaning town because of the tunneling. But the appeal for a quick hammer on Pops sticks in my nose.

The problem isn't really the tunneling (although that is a problem), it's how he first jumped on the wagon, how he (implicitly) declared it to be the 'one true wagon', how he pretty much ignored TMJ for the most part, and how he behaved after Pops's claim. Again, I'll do a close analysis of his posts and play when weekend comes (basically tomorrow). Yes I am procrastinating, because writing out my thoughts on every action DRK committed yesterday does look to be a lot of work. For now, I'd like DRK to answer Sotty's question about his top suspect.

@DRK

, I especially want to hear your opinion of Afatchic.

In other news, Vi is starting to make less and less sense.

@Vi

, read Sotty's point about how Pops vs TMJ went down yesterday and see if you can still claim the scum should've killed someone else. Remember that after you first voiced suspicion on Y.C., in like the next immediate post, TMJ said "yay" and jumped on Y.C.'s newly-created wagon. You yourself said this just a while back. Do you really think there is the slightest possibility that Pops and TMJ were scumbuddies before Pops flipped? Do you really think anyone might have believed as such if Pops was not nightkilled? I'd like to know if I understand your ultimate point here. Is it that Pops being nightkilled makes you think one of the seemingly 'nicely pro-town' (implied Sotty) people might be scum? Your last sentence is confusing me too.

[Cruciare]

Forgive me guys, my computer was shredded apart by a horde of tigers and I'm in the process of gluing the pieces back together. But seriously, some unexpected school work has come up, and I may not be able to participate fully until the 25th or so. Vi, would you like to explain how 3 mafia + survivor means that two mislynches end the game? By my calculations, assuming the survivor isn't nightkilled or lynched (in other words, assuming worst case scenario):

3 8 1 Start
3 7 1 Mislynch #1
3 6 1 Nightkill
3 5 1 Mislynch #2
3 4 1 Nightkill
2 4 1 Scumlynch #1
2 3 1 Nightkill
1 4 1 Scumlynch #2
1 3 1 Nightkill
0 3 1 Scumlynch #3 - Town (and Survivor) Win

... the town can mislynch twice, lynch right three times and still win. Did I make a mistake somewhere? TMJ's comment about the remaining "player" and Vi's comment about it actually made me look through TMJ's past posts, and surprisingly, I could not find a single instance of plural usage. So the possibility of three scum isn't ruled out with me. Anyway, I agree with most of Porkens's 396, except I think that even with three scum, neither of TMJ's scumbuddies were on his wagon. I am open to convincing of otherwise, of course. My promised award-winning case on DRK will have to disappear into back drawer of my mind for a while, but seriously, upon TMJ's flip, DRK's D1 play became textbook scum. Just look at it (hey, that's what I did). Ignoring TMJ + inconsistency between 'hammer now' stance before Pops's claim and 'lynching claimed PR is bad' stance after Pops's claim + more inconsistency with behaviour near deadline = Scumdar Resonant Frequency Detected?

@DRK: What do you think of Afatchic?

[Cruciare]

Hmm I see, the survivor claims and votes no lynch, makes some sense I guess.

Why does it have to disappear?

Mainly because I've found that I just don't have the effort to write a wall of critical analysis. I've already mentioned the key points in one post or another, and the details will surface in bits should the need for me to regurgitate them arise. Since you seem very eager about this case of mine on DRK however, I'll comply to an extent and take this little by little. Firstly, I'd like to clarify if you can see a hint of logic in my words when I claim that DRK's D1 behaviour matches scum almost perfectly. I mean look at his D1 play from the perspective that you have a hypothetical guilty investigation result on him, and tell me how much sense it makes to you. (By the way, this is how my line of thinking generally goes after D1: look at people's earlier play from the perspective that they are 100% scum and evaluate which ones make the most sense.)

My stance wasn't inconsistent. It only appears that way to someone incapable of reading minds.

DRK, did you not consider the possibility that Pops/Y.C. was a town power role, or at least might've claimed a town power role when you took your 'lynch him now' stance on D1?

Can we get some thoughts from you on DRK, imaginality, and

Cruciare

afatchic

? seeing as how there's a good chance we'll be lynching one of those three today.

*Whistles*

Anyway, as much as my behaviour today so far suggests that I'm tunnelling on DRK, Afatchic is my second top suspect so I'm very eager to hear from his hopefully-more-useful replacement. Imaginality I'm not so sure about. I initially thought Vi's case on him was a stretch, but the more I look at his D1 posts, the scummier they become (but that could be my paranoia talking). DRK's D2 posts have sat somewhat better with my scumdar, so I may review my stance on DRK (and reread everyone's D1 posts once again) if Afatchic's replacement or Imaginality say some funny things today.

@Imaginality: What do you think of Afatchic?

[Cruciare]

I am very eager to hear your case on DRK. I am finding it extremely telling that you are now backing away from presenting one simply by saying “it's already out there.” You have promised this case several times and now you have said it has to disappear. It's one thing to be busy, it's quite another to disappear a case on someone you strongly believe to be scum.

Now you want me to look at day one as if I know DRK is scum... Isn't that a little backwards? Plus didn't you say that DRK opinions mirrored a lot of your own on day one? Does that mean your play is also scummy by your own admission?

1) The key points ARE already out there, in my own posts if that wasn't clear. Ignoring TMJ until the bottom of page 6, calling for quicklynch and then backing away after claim, etc.
2) I don't *strongly* believe him to be scum. I am uninformed, I'm still trying to figure it out myself. My reasoning is that his D1 play matches scum quite perfectly, albeit too perfectly which is why I'm starting to have doubts (note the order of progression: Vi starts Y.C. wagon, TMJ jumps on Y.C. wagon for no reason, DRK then also jumps on Y.C. wagon).
3) The case I speak of was not meant to convince you that DRK is definitely scum, rather it is the reason why I think he is scum. Again, I am always open to convincing otherwise, and I will not try to convince anyone of anything unless I am convinced of it myself. And I am nowhere near convinced that DRK is scum. When D2 started, after I reread DRK's D1 posts, the reason I didn't put out the case right there and then is probably the same reason why I'm holding back from putting it out now. Again, lack of effort. The case hasn't disappeared, I will just regurgitate it in bits if necessary. I say 'if necessary' because I myself am starting to have doubts about DRK. Please remember that my opinion can change. And again, I've already stated the key points.
4) Regardless of how backwards you think it is, it's a necessary viewpoint to adapt if you are to understand the reasoning behind why I think DRK is scum. Let me put that more clearly: It's how I came to the conclusion that DRK is most likely scum. I'm not one to analyse my own play, but the things I'm suspicious of DRK for are the bits in our opinion that don't match up. For example, if I too had ignored TMJ until the bottom of page 6, and I too called for a quicklynch on Y.C./Pops, and I too immediately backed off Pops's wagon when he claimed, and I too left my vote unused for a period of time after that, then yes, my play would be scummy by my own admission. But I didn't.

So if we're lynching off the TMJ wagon today you simply are ready to vote for anyone that isn't you? Good to know.

I'm

ready

to vote for anyone, yes, but I'd

prefer

to vote for the one that's actually, you know, scum?

My read is largely up in the air now, my suspicions of DRK weren't as strong as they were on the start if D2. People who aren't Porkens, Vi, Sigma, Col and Sotty need to talk more. Myself included technically, but I don't have much I feel I need to talk about until DRK/Imaginality/Ojanen say stuff. Or unless Sotty keeps me 'entertained', of course.

[Cruciare]

By AvB I mean that you were adding fuel to pops and jammer suspicion while trying to dampen somewhat the TMJ suspicion.

I admit I was trying to dampen the TMJ suspicions - I did not believe he was the right lynch D1, especially considering the reasons for which people were suspicious of him (like I said, I've seen that kind of play before and it was largely non-indicative of alignment). However as for my posts regarding Jammer, I don't know if it looks that way to you, but they were not in any way intended to add fuel to his suspicion. I just stated my own suspicions, and I don't think I actually made any real effort to convince anyone else of anything regarding Jammer.

Also, your last sentence is false, if anything you said you wanted to lynch pops before making a case on TMJ.

I'm not sure I understand what you're referring to here, could you clarify which of my sentences you interpreted to be false? And a small correction on that second part: I said that I'd consider TMJ if Pops flipped town.

Some examples below. I'm not especially interested in you clarifying this comments now, unless you think a particular post I quoted is in itself clear and unambiguous in which case feel free to point that out. I'm more interested in pointing out that you fence-sat or ummed and ahhed back then and that that is scummy.

They aren't offendingly unclear when I'm the one reading them (maybe that's because I wrote them), but I may understand where you're coming from. I can see that in Iso 9 and Iso 21 I intentionally

held back

certain points, was that what you meant? I can also see in Iso 11 and Iso 31 how you may have interpreted me as having 'ducked giving my opinion', and if that's what you're talking about then I have no excuse; I didn't have much of an opinion on TMJ at that time (blinded by my suspicion of Pops), and I made a promise about DRK I couldn't keep, which is fully my fault. The part of Iso 30 you quoted was a joke, by the way. I did indeed umm and ahh a bit, were you expecting an uninformed player to so easily come to a decision as to the fate of a claimed doctor? I may also have to contest your claim that I fence-sat depending on what exactly you mean by 'fence-sat'.

@Col: Actually, can I get your opinion on people apart from DRK?

[Cruciare]

What I don't like here is how Imaginality is like

everyone's

top suspect. That makes sense if there is only one scum left, but unlike Vi and others I personally believe there's more likely to be two. And before anyone points it out, note that me and Imaginality being scumbuddies is quite impossible from my point of view.

Let me get back to my comment D1 where I said there was only one question in Vi's survey worth noting the answers to - that was question 7: "How many scum do you think are in this game?". My reasons for looking at this question are different from Vi's "OMG setup speculation": it's the one question that can actually potentially differentiate roles and alignments. In all the other questions, people can just answer honestly, but in this one, town's answers may be swayed by balance speculation with regard to their role, and scum can't properly answer because it's like telling them to guess the number of jellybeans in the jar when they've already counted. Granted, scum can just lie here, but even then they'll actually have to make up an answer and attempts to give the most beneficial reply (not that I know what that is) may be evident. TMJ's answer was 3-4. Now that doesn't guarantee anything, but it sort of inclines me to believe that there are at least 3 mafia. Reasoning further below.

Afatchic's answer was 3 with a question mark. Col's was 3 or 4. DRK's was 3. Imaginality's was 4≥X≥3. Jammer's was 3 or 4, leaning 3. Porkens's was 3. Sigma's was 3. Vi's was 3. Me, James, and Y.C. didn't answer.

My immediate instict told me that those who answered 3-4 were more suspicious than those who answered 3, but the logic behind that isn't very strong, and would be a debate for another day. What's funny is that no-one even considered the possibility of 2 scum. For those who answered 3, it's reasonable as they interpreted the question as requiring a single digit answer, and 3 scum is far more likely than 2. Maybe I'm stretching here, but as for those who answered 3-4, those who believed it was acceptable to give a range, why not answer 2-4? If they're going to be all uncertain, why not include the possibility of 2 scum? It's like that possibility didn't consciously exist in the first place. Am I looking too deeply here?

No-one

(out of those who answered the survey) considered the possibility of 2 scum when they answered the survey.

I'd like to pose this question again to everyone alive: How many

scum

mafia

do you think are in this game

including TMJ

? Please answer 'probably 2', 'probably 3', or 'not a clue'.

Now let me get to my next point, the reason why I've been asking DRK and Imaginality what they thought of Afatchic. From my interpretation, they aren't very suspicious of him. As such I reveal my master diagram:

DRK: Suspicious of

Imaginality

, Not Suspicious of

Ojanen

, Not Suspicious of

Cruciare

Imaginality: Suspicious of

DRK

, Not Suspicious of

Ojanen

, Suspicious of

Cruciare

Ojanen: Not Suspicious of

DRK

, Suspicious of

Imaginality

, Not Suspicious of

Cruciare

Cruciare: Suspicious of

DRK

, Suspicious of

Imaginality

, Suspicious of

Ojanen

Please ignore the fact that my stance looks the worst (I'm pretty paranoid now). Anyway, I'm sure we can conclude that if Imaginality is scum and has another scumbuddy (I'm assuming there are two mafia left), it is not DRK or Ojanen (or me). That means it's one of the people on the TMJ wagon, which somewhat worries me. I've already expressed my doubts about any of the people on the TMJ wagon being scum, and the one exception Vi is the primary pusher for an Imaginality lynch so we can rule her out. The other

possible

exception Sigma is like the most unsuspicious player here, I'm sure we can all agree. The other two who aren't currently voting Imaginality are Sotty and Jammer/Charter, and I will be rereading those two. However the fact that both of these people could easily have prevented the lynching of TMJ-Scum does not change. Ojanen believes Jammer's actions may have been bussing, but I don't really agree. Jammer did stick out early D1, but he was the one person who had the chance to move wagons and hammer Pops before deadline (Iso 18). Think about it: If Pops had been lynched and flipped doctor, would we really have gone straight for TMJ the next day? Because scum thinking this is the only reason why they would be on the TMJ wagon. And I don't think we would.

Another question to everyone: What are the reasons for you thinking that there may/may not be scum on TMJ's wagon?

Therefore based on my two beliefs that 1) There are probably two mafia still alive, and 2) Chances are no-one on the TMJ wagon is mafia, lynching Imaginality worries me. By my assumptions, the only logical scumpair is DRK/Ojanen, but again, it is based on pure speculation, no solid evidence, I have nothing

strongly

against lynching Imaginality, etc. Anyway, these are my thoughts. I'd like everyone if possible to either agree with me or try convince me otherwise. I'm pretty unsure now.

[Cruciare]

I am pretty sure it is Vi and Cruciare.

I

know

for sure you're wrong here.

[Cruciare]

If imaginality were everyone's top suspect there wouldn't be a 4-3 split in the votes. As it is I will be shocked and amazed if Ojanen is scum.

People suspicious of Imaginality: Vi, Porkens, Col, Ojanen, DRK. People on the other wagon: Imaginality, Cruciare, Sigma. People suspicious of Vi and Cruciare: Sotty, Charter. I think my word choice 'everyone' is justified, and I've said something about everyone not on Imaginality's wagon. By 'everyone' I specifically mean you (Vi), Ojanen and DRK - 'everyone possible of being a suspect (by my logic) other than Imaginality himself'. And you guys are giving Ojanen way too much credit here, I'm not experiencing this ray of enlightenment most of you are after Afatchic replaced out.

If you have nothing

strongly

against lynching imaginality, why make the giant WHOAHEYOBVIOUSDERAILMENTPOST?

I'm

ready

to vote for anyone, yes, but I'd

prefer

to vote for the one that's actually, you know, scum?

Post is giant because I haven't posted in a while, and I felt the need to supersize.

There's one person that's getting the silent treatment in your wall - jammer/charter. Thoughts?

WITH RESPECT GENERAL, YOU ARE WRONG [/CHERDENKO]

The other two who aren't currently voting Imaginality are Sotty and Jammer/Charter, and I will be rereading those two. However the fact that both of these people could easily have prevented the lynching of TMJ-Scum does not change. Ojanen believes Jammer's actions may have been bussing, but I don't really agree. Jammer did stick out early D1, but he was the one person who had the chance to move wagons and hammer Pops before deadline (Iso 18).

[Cruciare]

You have a point about Jammer's Iso 17. Ojanen obvtown? I'm not seeing it. Whilst there has been nothing incriminatingly scummy about her posts, I don't see anything that points to her being obvtown either. My favourite post of hers is probably Iso 7.

[Cruciare]

Charter, what do you think of everyone else?

[Cruciare]

Charter, what do you think of everyone else?

Porkens and sigma are both obvtown.

I find myself agreeing with most of what Sotty is saying, so town on her.

DRK is kind of scummy I guess, but not as scummy as Vi and Cruciare.

Pretty much null on everyone else.

Right, what I should've said was "what do you think of Imaginality?". Something more than "null" would be nice.

[Cruciare]

DRK: Cruciare, Imaginality, Sigma, Porkens, Col
Cruciare: Charter, Sotty
Imaginality: DRK
Charter: Vi
Not Voting: Ojanen

Vi and Ojanen, I hope either of you do approve of a DRK lynch, else this'll be like yesterday where no-one wants to hammer the leading wagon. And the next wagon here is me, which is obviously quite bad.

(>_>)

[Cruciare]

Sotty, terribly sorry to digress, but could you list all the people you think are less scummy than Imaginality?

[Cruciare]

I just reread my role PM, and it's making me go "hmmm".

[Cruciare]

You're misunderstanding my "hmmm". What worries me is the bit about pre-season football, actually. He obviously thought that it was town-exclusive information, hence his attempt to confirm himself by even mentioning it. If he's scum and the pre-season football thing also appears in the scum role PM, why would he think that it's town-exclusive?

@DRK: Please state all parts of your exact role name.

[Cruciare]

How is Cruciare's play text book doc play?

It's not, really. I've said many many

many

times that my objection to Pops' claim was not objective. Vi obviously didn't get what I really meant. I am neighbours with Sigma, as he said. There was no need to counter-claim neighbours because two neighbour pairs is far from impossible. I wanted to claim yesterday because of the 'hop off the Imaginality wagon' attitude all of you seemed to have after he claimed, which is a pretty bad reason to drop suspicions IMO. But doing that with Sigma not around wouldn't have been very fair (for Sigma), and my preffered lynch at that point was DRK anyway.

Vote: Imaginality

Sotty, Imaginality, I propose we post all of our night-talk in-thread. I've asked the mod, and he said there's no problem with it. What do you say?

[Cruciare]

Me and Sigma were like in completely different time zones or something, so we didn't have as many talks. Did you guys have a QuickTopic? We talked through PM. =/

-----

Night 0:

1 sigma:

Hello neighbor. I'm trying out this fancy night-talk ability.

My role PM doesn't say anything about your alignment, which I assume means you could be scum. I've never played a mason/neighbor type role, so I don't know how it really works, especially for unconfirmed alignments. I guess we'll be trying hard to convince each other of our towniness during the night.

What's your mafia experience like? This is only my second game here. I won as scum in Newbie 806; check it out if you're interested in getting an early meta read on me.

2 Cruciare:

I've played to completion a few Mafia games (between 3 and 6 I think), only one of them on this account: Mini 662 which I won as scum. I think my play was pretty embarassing though, so I'm not sure I could honestly say "check it out". As for the other games, I remember I lost once as town in a Newbie game, lost once as scum in a Mini Theme, and won once as town in Texas Justice. I don't remember the others. =P

Your mentioning of non-confirmation of alignment is a good first impression of you, but my eyes will remain asquint. I've read a bit of your other game, and I have some idea of what you're like as scum (not a play style I like to be honest). I do hope you're not scum though. Anyway, I do think the night-talk is a lot like normal talking in the thread, with the exception of A) It's only the two of us, and B) It's at night when the general populace isn't talking. It could be useful for discussing lynch results and/or stuff for the following day, but if I can't trust you it does make it a little less useful (as we can't be completely open with each other).

It's my first time playing this kind of role too, so let's have fun. =D

3 sigma:

Read through your game quickly. Not sure why you'd say it's embarrassing; you guys won after all! I'll be interested to see how your play in this game differs from then and how it doesn't.

You mentioned that you didn't like my playstyle as scum -- in what sense do you mean? That the style I used personally irritates you, or that it seemed scummy? Or something else? Just curious.

Can't say that I've gotten any major town or scum tells from your response. I guess that being willing to talk is a minor town-tell, so that's a small point in your favor. Looking forward to talking with you after we've had some gameplay; it'll be interesting getting extra opinion's on the day's events.

4 Cruciare:

I'm particularly talking about your D1 play. It didn't seem scummy, but it was pushing too hard too early on in my opinion. I guess it made sense as scum, because you wanted to take an offensive position and it didn't really matter who amongst the townies was lynched. But it was like you were interrogating everyone, being very liberal with your finger-pointing. From a town point of view, there should be a sense of differentiation between other players' comments which show inexperience/ignorance/carelessness, and those which truly point towards scum.

-----

Night 1:

5 Cruciare:

Hello neighbour, it's been a while.

This post looks scummy to me. The facts are just wrong -- the mafia may want to play WIFOM games by not killing pops if he's the real doctor, as I've said before. Also, lynching PRs is a lot different from seeing them night-killed -- lynching a doctor gives the mafia a free shot at any other power roles or extreme pro-town players.

Seeing TMJ's alignment, I stand corrected. Before this, I did have an argument as to why Pops was the better lynch, but it's mostly obsolete now I guess. First of all, I personally don't think the scum would risk the doctor living for too long just to play WIFOM games. Now that TMJ flipped scum, they kinda have to kill him. See, if TMJ had flipped town and Pops did not die N1, think about what our response would be D2. Is he scum or WIFOM doctor? Would it ever have been conclusive? That's why I thought Pops was the right lynch D1, as opposed to the largely read-not-getting TMJ. I guess my view had been clouded by my biased desire to get Pops lynched, thus failing to seriously consider TMJ. You have a point about the free nightkill thing, however my logic there was that at that point in the game, the likeliness of scum hitting another power role was only somewhat higher than us lynching another a power role instead (yes, I'm saying TMJ could have been a power role). I failed to consider extreme pro-town players, so forgive me on that. But moving on. My entire scumdar has to be turned upside down now.

No doubt you are suspicious of me, but I'd like to hear your opinion as to the presence (or non-presence) of scum on TMJ's wagon, and which ones they would be?

6 sigma:

That was a nice flip:)

I just felt like your argument was downplaying the seriousness of lynching a pro-town doctor, which is why I'm posted. However, I'm with you on pops having been scummy, and I still feel that TMJ was a shot in the dark that we got lucky on. I think we probably have to assume pops is town for now -- I don't think pops would have fixated on fellow scum if he were scum like that.

Scum on TMJ's wagon? Probably at least one. Porkens and jammer are the ones who jump out at me. Porkens' late defense of pops smelled odd to me, as though he was trying to come in late enough to not affect the mislynch of town-pops, but still distance himself from that mis-lynch. Even if pops doesn't get mis-lynched, he also looks good being on the TMJ wagon, so no big deal. Maybe that's far-fetched, but his play is a bit odd to me.

jammer, as we know, has been suspicious for a while, and was fairly late onto the TMJ wagon. That said, he had a clear chance to hammer pops and didn't. Maybe he was afraid to make the switch, but I'm not certain his voting strategy made sense as a scum player.

I think there's a scum on pops' wagon, too, and I will probably be questioning that crowd more closely (imaginality, DRK, and possibly vi, who counts as a pops voter with her very late switch.)

Obviously you're part of that crowd too, but this conversation should fill my "questions for Cruciare" quota for now.

Who do you think might be scummiest of imaginality, DRK and vi?

7 Cruciare:

I think Jammer has gone down considerably on my suspicion list. The fact that not only was Pops (presumably) actually a doctor, but TMJ was also scum is why I'm unsure. It's understandable making yourself look innocent by not jumping on the really-scummy-yet-must-be-a-doctor (from scum point of view) wagon, but if the price of that is getting one of your own scumbuddies lynched when the doctor could easily have been lynched instead, scum would have to be really confident in themselves to pull something like that. If Jammer was scum, I would assume he wouldn't be on the TMJ wagon in the first place (Y.C.'s wagon formed first, long before the doctor claim), not to mention staying on that wagon until deadline. This actually applies to all the people who wanted a TMJ lynch over a Pops one, which is why I asked you about this. Jammer is a special case, because as you said, he was one of the people who had a chance to switch his vote at the last minute.

Porkens's last minute change of heart definitely raised eyebrows, but again, as scum he would have to be really confident in himself to lynch his scumbuddy over the doctor, especially having to make that suspicious wagon shift doing it. I'm leaning towards there not being any scum on TMJ's wagon.

As for Pops's wagon, DRK was initially very low on my suspicion list. A lot of his opinions mirrored mine at the time. However, looking back now, he was the very first person to jump on Y.C.'s wagon (Vi created it), and a quick Ctrl+F shows that his very first mention of TMJ was near the bottom of page 6 - meaning he hadn't even said anything about TMJ for quite a while. He has said that his non-suspicion of TMJ was based solely on his suspicion of Pops, which was the same with me until I considered the possibility of a third party. These similarities with my way of thinking is why I initially put him very low on my suspicion list. But putting his close mirror of my opinions aside, DRK does look like the most likely candidate for scum on Pops's wagon.

Imaginality is an odd case, because he was not quick to put his vote on Y.C.'s wagon, voted for TMJ instead, and after 5 days of absence shifted his vote onto Pops. I didn't get what the fuss over his mafia doctor speculation was about, but he may have been trying to say that Pops was scum without directly disproving his statement. That could be a mild tell of scum I guess, but it's a little stretch I think. I'm not very sure about Imaginality actually, 50/50 for me.

Vi, I don't think she's scum. Is she a 'she', by the way? Her arguments have been largely pro-town, and with the last minute hammer, she could have just pretended like she wasn't there at all if she was scum. However, if there is scum on TMJ's wagon, Vi is logically the most likely candidate. Scum who didn't want to be on her scumbuddy's wagon, but realised that the other wagon wasn't going to happen and switched her vote at the last minute to make herself look good. This is different from Porkens's case because if Porkens had agreed upon the Pops wagon, it would actually have gone ahead. Still, Vi's pro-town arguments incline me to believe she's not scum.

My next problem is Afatchic. He makes promises and doesn't keep them, but that's not the big problem. He has made a total of 9 posts, being absent during important periods of time, especially near deadline and that 5 day period which he claimed was only 3 days. He was going to say something about TMJ, but ended up not saying it. His last post was on Jammer, almost as if saying that he doesn't want to vote for the doctor OR his scumbuddy. He was also far more sure about Pops's doctor status than any uninformed player should be. All in all, quite worrisome. His only redeeming factor is that he was not opportunistic with the initial Y.C. wagon, even before the doctor claim. What do you think?

8 sigma:

My point with Jammer is that he didn't really get on the TMJ wagon until very late in the game, and he left himself open to switching later on to pops. That said, he had the chance to switch and didn't, which we've already said, which gives him some town points. I'm still a little wary of him, honestly, but there are definitely better possibilities.

I understand your points with Porkens as well, but my gut feeling is that he's got as good a chance as anyone on the TMJ wagon to be scum.

What it boils down to is this -- I'd think Mafia Framer is an important balancing power role (assuming there's a cop) and it seems unlikely that the mafia would willingly lynch that framer when there was another very possible lynch candidate. Just because of sheer numbers, though, I'm wary of giving everyone on that TMJ wagon a get-out-of-lynch free card. Like I said, I think porkens is the most likely candidate there if there is a scum on that wagon.


The best place to start scum-hunting tomorrow, however, is probably on the pops wagon, which brings us to the next couple folks.

Interesting point about DRK never mentioning TMJ until later in the day. He definitely is worth questioning.

I agree with you that vi's been driving the town pretty hard. I think I'm going to research her meta and see if she's been extremely active before as scum and is a strong player in that respect. The evidence as far as her late switch to TMJ goes means that she could very well have been avoiding the bus until it was inevitable. Sotty also made some good points about her vagueness on pops until the end of the day. Basically, I'm inclined to research vi because if we discount her generall pro-town activeness as being more playstyle than town-tell, the evidence definitely points to her somewhat. So, count me as more suspicious of vi than you are.

I said earlier that I'm inclined to lynch afatchic for his deadline-lurking, and I'd forgotten about the "really convinced about pops' doctor claim." Yet, when I look at his posting on TMJ, the only time he really mentions him is to say that he thinks his erraticness is newb null-tell. Check his iso 4. So basically, he wasn't suspicious of anyone and lurked his way through day 1. The more I think about it, the more he looks like the best candidate to scum-hunt tomorrow.

Summary:

Top 5 scummy players:
afatchic
DRK
porkens
vi
imaginality


I've left you off here because you've made a lot of good points in this night-talk session. Your last post looks really bad, and that hurts you somewhat. That said, I'm inclined to give you a temporary pass on the basis that you went way out on a limb there, and scum don't tend to do that -- as scum, you should have known that TMJ could get lynched and leave you looking terrible. You're definitely not the most likely scum out there... for now.

Any thoughts on me? Any actions you'd like me to defend before morning, or are you pretty convinced of my towniness? Anything on my points above?

9 Cruciare:

You and Vi were the two players I wasn't suspicious of at all D1, and my reason for not suspecting you is similar to my reason for not suspecting Vi. The point about Vi's last minute wagon switch applies to you as well, but as with Vi, your arguments have been largely pro-town, and I'm not really suspicious of you at all (or at least as unsuspicious as I can possibly be without being on the 'informed' side of the players =P). When I say 'pro-town arguments', I don't really mean 'extremely active' or 'driving the town', but rather that there's nothing particularly disagreeable or eyebrow-raising in their posts, and that the general content of said posts appear to serve towards the town's victory (as interpreted by me). I actually think Vi's vagueness is more of a town-tell, as it is the pro-town players who are more inclined to have doubts as to who should be lynched, especially faced with a roleclaim. Vi's push of Imaginality was a bit weird though, so you're actually above her on my towniness list.

My top 3 scummy players at this point are: DRK, Afatchic, Imaginality. I'm not including people on the TMJ wagon on that list because of the logic associated with lynching a scumbuddy over someone else who easily could've been lynched instead, as we've discussed. You say that you're wary to overlook them due to sheer numbers so that's understandable, but I guess I'm more willing to give them a free pass due to my belief that being on the TMJ wagon at that situation doesn't make a lot of sense for scum. I've put DRK above Afatchic because if you look at his play from the perspective that DRK is definitely scum, and that he knew TMJ was also scum (trying not to draw attention to him), and that he didn't initially know Y.C. was a doctor (and so jumped on an easy wagon), and that later he understood the implications of lynching a claimed doctor (see his reaction to Pops' claim and long period of non-voting thereafter), it makes a lot of sense. There are holes all over Afatchic's play too, but as I said his redeeming factor was that he didn't jump on Y.C.'s wagon. Everything else about him was pretty scummy, though. Either way, I'll be going after these two on D2, and to a lesser extent possibly Imaginality.

-----

Night 2:

10 sigma:

Geez, what a clusterfuck that flavorfail was.

First thoughts:

So, we have another neighbor pair. Doesn't make me suspect imaginality any less, honestly. I could use a good iso review on him though.

ojanen seems like town to me so far. Still don't like afatchic's previous play, but I wouldn't look there first tomorrow.

vi looks dodgier to me too then previously. Given her attacks on imaginality, though, I'd be surprised if they were both scum. having looked at vi's meta, it's definitely within her capabilities to post as much as she does and still be scum -- I think it was Tofu Mafia where she was scum and played really well.

jammer/charter: I'm still having a lot of trouble getting past jammer's opportunity to hammer pops D1. I'll have to look at ojanen's case again and see how much I agree with, because I think there's definitely some reason to suspect him. I liked some of charter's points on vi, but he doesn't feel as pro-town to me as ojanen, our other replacement. I really don't like charter's vote on DRK.

Cathart hasn't made much of an impact on this game, has he? His early bus on TMJ looks pro-town, but he hasn't been nearly as active as others.

I still think you're town. it's more gut-read than anything, though. If imaginality flips town tomorrow, I'll have to take another serious look at the case on you.

Do you want to claim neighbor tomorrow? Wasn't really sure how to get into the discussion when imaginality's claim came out.

11 Cruciare:

I actually wanted to claim neighbours yesterday, but you were kinda missing and it may have been unfair for me to claim. In any case I definitely want to claim tomorrow.

I agree that Vi is starting to look highly suspicious, and the timing and content of her 541 is too convenient. I don't think her play here matches her play in Tofu, though. She was far more wordy in Tofu. I assume you've read Tofu? Like how she heavily bussed her only scumbuddy early in the game? That's why I think her flip-flop attitude regarding TMJ/Pops at D1 deadline doesn't match Vi-Scum. Still, like I said, she's starting to look scummier and scummier recently.

Charter, I'm not sure really. I put him down as most likely scumbuddy for Imaginality (I still think there are two scum left), but I'm getting gut-town vibes from how he went after Vi and me. His vote on DRK stuck out, but I'm not sure if I can declare it *scummy* per se. About the D1 wagons, I said that the only reason scum would be on TMJ's wagon was if they thought TMJ was going to by lynched soon anyway. And then Vi pointed out that Jammer mentioned something to the effect of 'we're going to lynch [TMJ] eventually anyway'. So that's a point against Jammer/Charter.

Ojanen's still not entirely clear with me. She just hasn't done anything that points to obvtown IMO. I've already pretty much arrived to most of her conclusions about Imaginality when I was rereading D1, and she's kinda stretching the Jammer case. I've also been looking at her comment about town-aligned players having different role names, trying to see if that comes from town or scum perspective. The mod did say everyone has the official vanilla PM, but DRK said he was townie, you said you're villager, and I'm neither of those two. In any case, I'm not feeling these town vibes everyone else seems to be from Ojanen. I'm sure there's scum amongst Imaginality, Vi and Ojanen.

Speaking of Imaginality, I find it weird that he felt the need to breadcrumb neighbours when Sotty could've just confirmed it. You're right in saying that his claim doesn't make me suspect him any less. I'll probably want to go after him first tomorrow. Sotty's not very suspicious of Imaginality, so I wanna try question Sotty about how innocent she thinks Imaginality is. Maybe get her to post all of Imaginality's night talk if possible, so we can judge for ourselves.

Col? I'm not suspicious of him at all, TBH. He has been quiet though, not sure if that means anything.

12 sigma:

My power was out last night.

Fine with you claiming -- I'll back you up on that when you do. I wonder how much we're allowed to post neighbor NT? Seems like there shouldn't be any issue with that. When you ask about getting imaginality's night talk, you may want to post a mod question in-thread. Or ask him now, even.

I haven't read Tofu too closely -- I just noticed that vi was really wordy as you said. I don't think the meta matches up, as you said (I didn't realize she bussed her partner early) but she's definitely a capable player, and I wouldn't be surprised if she's scum in this game.

Yeah, that imaginality breadcrumb was strange. i guess the issue here is that I wouldn't think imaginality and vi are both scum. vi does have a history of early bussing, apparently, but I can't really see her doing that when TMJ was already drawing heat early. TMJ would be a much better bus target. So, I don't think they both can be scum.

ojanen is tough to figure out -- I really didn't like afatchic's play, but I like hers. Not sure how to reconcile those two.

to sum up the scum-meter, then...

Likely scum: imaginality
Could be scum: vi
Null: charter, Col
Gut Town: you, Ojanen
Likely Town: sotty, porkens

and I think there's a scum in the null category or further in the town side of the meter, which means I'm probably mis-reading somebody.

13 Cruciare:

I'm asking the mod now.

About Tofu, I don't know if it was particularly early per se, but I know it was what got Adel (her partner) lynched D2 if I recall.

I dunno about Vi and Imaginality's mutual scum status. I wouldn't put it above Vi to double bus, especially considering her TMJ hammer was last-minute and thus not as innocent-looking as it would be if she had voted earlier. But I'm not entirely sure about Vi in the first place. She was gut-town until recently. It's worth rereading Vi, I think. Especially her D1 arguments and their timings (the timing of her case against Imaginality may be interesting to note).

My scum-meter would go:

Likely Scum: Imaginality
Could be Scum: Vi, Ojanen
Null: Charter
Gut Town: Sotty
Likely Town: You, Porkens, Col

14 sigma:

A couple of things:

imaginality's 499. He didn't get much grief for this at the time, but I don't see how it's acceptable for him to basically try and out vi as a cop. I don't see how it's pro-town at all, despite his arguments. Am I the only one thinking this, since no one else really picked up on this?

what do you think of this passage in ojanen's jammer-accuse post?

And with Tjoe, his actions could be becouse he is newish(or something), as Cruciare said. I want to hear more from him.

Takes this stand on TMJ and makes sure to credit Cruciare for the scum-defending.

15 Cruciare:

What I find funny about 499 is that he actually picked up on Vi's subtly-hinting comments. I definitely didn't come to the conclusion of 'Vi is cop' or anything remotely like that when I read her posts. He also says scum would almost certainly have picked up on it (which is why he outed the Vi-Cop possibility in the first place), but I as town certainly didn't. What's suspicious to me about that post is not so much the fact that he tried to out Vi as the cop, but that 1) Before that post I didn't take any of Vi's comments to mean 'Vi is cop', 2) Imaginality claimed that scum would certainly have picked up on it, and 3) Imaginality himself actually picked up on it whilst I didn't. Obviously this entire thing is based on me as town not picking up anything, and I'm not sure whether that's because I'm not scum actively looking for the cop or I'm just not prone to these details. Did you pick up on Vi-Cop before Imaginality mentioned it? Trying to out the cop is of course not pro-town (to be fair Imaginality's reasoning was not entirely bad if you look at it from a certain point of view TBH), but the points I mentioned above are far more suspicious to me.

That passage in Ojanen's Jammer-accuse post is one of ones that I would consider a really big stretch. Seriously, she's pushing it there. Even I once said 'as Imaginality said' when referring to Pops not claiming when he was first at L-1. Ojanen's not looking at the possibility that Jammer could be uninformed there, nothing anti-town about it at all IMO.

16 sigma:

No, I didn't pick up on imaginality's points about vi being a likely cop at all.

I agree with you about Ojanen's point being a stretch, but I was curious about your opinion on that, especially since she invoked you as a result of bringing it up. Something to keep an eye on, I think.

[Cruciare]

... Oh wow, guys.

[Cruciare]

So, assuming Vi was town; which neighbor

are we lynching tomorrow

should we have lynched today

?

This is the correct question, TBH. Porkens, what's up with your "I don't see the case on Vi" + "let's get this on the road Vote: Vi"?

[Cruciare]

@Porkens, Charter: I kinda want you two to claim. Or at least tell me that considering the setup so far and your roles, is it more likely that we have two scum left or one?

[Cruciare]

What does everyone think of Charter?

[Cruciare]

Cruciare, why are you asking about charter?

Because I want to know? Must I really answer this question before people start complying? Is it so difficult to give your opinions on Charter? Why did three people just blatantly ignore me?

[Cruciare]

I'm very suspicious of him. What about you?

[Cruciare]

The last time you mentioned Charter, you said he was Null for you. What changed?

Three people died. Now Porkens, what do

you

think about Charter?

[Cruciare]

Cruciare, why are you suspicious of me? Why has people dying made any difference?

Well Cathart dying made little difference, but Vi and especially Ojanen dying (and flipping town) were very significant in making me suspicious of you. I'll say more once Porkens answers me, or at least says something about anything relevant.

I don't think charter is scum

Not entirely related, but can I ask why you think Sigma is scum over Charter?

@Cruciare: Do you want to no lynch? If so, I think you should go ahead -- I wouldn't hold my breath on getting anything from Porkens. If not, I'd like to hear why.

I'll probably end up going for no lynch, but I'm hesitating a little. I feel it's quite important to get the full opinions of the one who has the highest chance if dying tonight so that we'll know exactly what kind of support will be missing tomorrow. Sotty and Imaginality wanting to lynch you doesn't help. Either way, I want to wait for Porkens. Deadline is pretty much a no lynch anyway, so I see no reason to hurry.

[Cruciare]

That Sotty nightkill was incredibly weird, I'll have to ponder on it. I almost thought that it would be a no-kill or at least Porkens for sure, but Sotty? Hm. I had wanted to lynch Imaginality today, but now I'm starting to question that. Of course, with all four other people supporting an Imaginality lynch, Imaginality as scum could've seen a Sotty nightkill as his only way out, so I'll think on that. If Imaginality isn't scum, a Sotty nightkill is more likely by Porkens than Charter IMO, but Charter/Jammer's play has never sat well in my eyes. Ojanen dying was also a point against Charter. But again, the Sotty nightkill was incredibly strange, so I'm not entirely sure how to proceed today. Leaning more towards a Charter lynch, if anything.

Imaginality, I'm slightly reluctant to post our night-talk because its contents were largely on the line of 'get Imaginality lynched' (I mistakenly thought it was LyLo N3 and therefore didn't consider the possibility of no lynch), and now that I'm starting to think otherwise, it looks quite embarassing in retrospect. I'll post it when I'm, uhh, finished mourning over Sotty's death.

Yeah

... >_>

@Charter: What can you deduce from Sotty being nightkilled?
@Porkens: When you joined the pussy out wagon, were you aware that you had the highest chance of dying that night?

[Cruciare]

/Prodded. Sorry for my absence, got attacked by Nazi zombies, etc.

Well with this stunt Porkens is pulling, I'm paranoid and thinking scum killed Sotty since she was pretty sure I was town in order to get me lynched today. I've been thinking Porkens is town all game, but that went out the window.

Not really the answer I was looking for. When Sotty died, you immediately said 'I still think it's Imaginality' with zero consideration as to who died last night. What's the logical connection between Sotty being nightkilled -> 'I still think it's Imaginality'?

@everyone: How much value do you place on the innocent investigation of Porkens? It seems like almost everyone is discounting this pretty strongly, but I don't see any particular reason to think that we have a GF in this game, and I'd be really surprised to see a non-sane cop.

I agree with Imaginality on that the last scum is unlikely to be a normal goon for balance purposes (and I no longer find it likely that there are two scum left). Whether the last scum is a godfather or something else, I wouldn't know. A non-sane cop is very unlikely given we have a dead framer. I take the innocent investigation on Porkens with a grain of salt. That said, Porkens is probably closer to the bottom of my suspicion list for other reasons.

@Imaginality: Who out of Charter and Porkens would you prefer to lynch today? Also if I may pose the same question: What can you deduce from Sotty being nightkilled?

[Cruciare]

Huh, I was gonna wait for Charter to answer, but I'll just present what I can deduce from Sotty being nightkilled now.

Possibility #1:

CharterScum killed Sotty.

Likely reason(s) for killing Sotty:

The best way to address this question is, why didn't he kill Porkens instead? He even said himself that Porkens was going to be nightkilled anyway. The reasoning given by Imaginality is plausible. Also the fact that even though Porkens was investigated innocent, people still suspected him whereas no-one suspected Sotty. The other option would be because Porkens mentioned that in a three man LyLo, he wouldn't vote for Charter, so CharterScum killed the next person on his to-kill list. The last reason could be because Sotty was the only one who didn't support an Imaginality lynch.

Viability of the above:

Imaginality's reasoning is I believe of an inconsistent level of depth with CharterScum killing Ojanen, which too obviously pointed towards Charter's doing. The second reason is more likely; when he said that Porkens was going to be nightkilled he assumed everyone else shared the same view, and upon noting otherwise he changed his mind. The third reason is the most probable, after all an almost-confirmed innocent saying that he wouldn't vote for you in LyLo could be too tempting to resist keeping alive for CharterScum. The last reason is not very likely and shows a very shallow level of logic; even without Sotty's vote Imaginality could still have been lynched, and Sotty dying actually worked against an Imaginality lynch as we see today.

What I would've done in their shoes:

Probably no-kill. If Porkens hadn't said that thing about voting the other guy I would probably have killed Porkens, but something like that could be too tempting for even me. I'd prefer to kill Porkens over Sotty, because Porkens was the 'expected' kill, and had things gone down as 'expected' Imaginality would've been lynched without hesitation. Sotty said she wasn't suspicious of Charter either, so I see no need to cause unnecessary WIFOM. I might even consider killing Cruciare or Sigma over Sotty or Porkens. Still, no-killing would've left the town with no extra information and would probably have been the best thing to do. Then again, I'm not Charter and I don't know CharterScum's level of thinking.

Possibility #2:

ImaginalityScum killed Sotty.

Likely reason(s) for killing Sotty:

Make people start thinking that Imaginality could not possibly have killed his only ally, and therefore come to the conclusion that 'Imaginality is not scum'. Also, doing pretty anything else would lead to him being promptly lynched today, so ImaginalityScum may have seen killing Sotty as his only way out.

Viability of the above:

Quite viable. Especially the second part. Killing Porkens would have led to Charter, Sigma and Cruciare hopping on the Imaginality wagon. Charter for sure, Sigma probably as well, and though Cruciare expressed suspicion of Charter instead, with people not supporting a Charter lynch Cruciare would also go for an Imaginality lynch. I'm not so sure of the details that entail from killing anyone else, but in the end I'm pretty sure Imaginality would still be the lynch target anyway. Therefore killing Sotty was the only way that suspicion would fall off Imaginality. The point against this is that I don't find it likely that ImaginalityScum would kill his only ally, leaving the rest to WIFOM. I'm not sure if trying to survive two days in a town where everyone else is suspicious of you is a position ImaginalityScum would want to be in.

What I would've done in their shoes:

I'm not sure really. ImaginalityScum is a pretty hard position to win from either way, so I would probably have killed Sotty too to maximise my chances as a suicide gambit, since I realise that doing anything else is quite hopeless unless I am confident in my abilities to pin suspicions on other people, which ImaginalityScum may or may not be. Killing either Cruciare, Sigma or Charter is not an entirely absurd move either, but again I'm not very sure at all what I would do in this situation.

Possibility #3:

PorkensScum killed Sotty.

Likely reason(s) for killing Sotty:

Sotty is the least suspicious person besides himself.

Viability of the above:

Ridiculously low, now that I think about it. In addition to this being some pretty shallow logic, it would've been far more beneficial for PorkensScum to no-kill. The reasoning of 'expected' nightkills also applies here, Porkens was the expected kill, but PorkensScum obviously wouldn't kill himself and no-kill is also expected IMO, in fact I expected a no-kill more than a Porkens-kill. There would be no need for Porkens as scum to derail the train from the 'expected' path (which would've led to Imaginality being lynched) into the WIFOM we have now. Unless of course PorkensScum actually thought this far, in which case he would be quite the genius and deserves to win for completely screwing me over. Anyway, viability of PorkensScum killing Sotty is nearing nonexistance.

What I would've done in their shoes:

No-kill, definitely. Anything else is sub-optimal play, IMO. I wouldn't have been so smart to think ahead like twenty steps and pull something as ridiculous as killing Sotty, and I doubt Porkens is that much of a genius either. Porkens even said that he was unsuspicious of Charter prior to Sotty dying, so the point of killing Sotty in the first place was so that he could make that 180 degree change in opinion and try to lynch Charter instead of Imaginality? Why? Makes no sense to me.

tl;dr Charter is the best lynch today, and if we haven't won by then, Imaginality goes up the noose tomorrow. If Porkens or Sigma are scum, then they have played well. If there are two scum left, they're pretty good at bussing each other and/or the setup is heavily unbalanced. Deadline is pretty far ahead so I won't vote yet.

[Cruciare]

Cruciare, you do realize that no killing, as scum, is almost universally a terrible idea, correct?

No, I don't realise this. I think no-killing is a perfectly reasonable move for scum. Why do you think otherwise?

And yes, I guess I am assuming scum have the option to no-kill. I don't see a good reason for the mod to force scum to kill in a normal game, but I see the possibility. If scum couldn't no-kill, Porkens becomes a little more suspicious (this was my initial thinking when I said a Sotty nightkill is more likely by Porkens), but the 180 on Charter still doesn't make sense so my lynch preferences won't change.

Vote: Charter

[Cruciare]

It saddens me to know that we actually could've won. Porkens! I'm blaming this entirely on you.
Anyway, good job Sigma. I already congratulated you at some point in our night-talk.
Ironically Charter was right about setup speculation screwing it up for us in the end. Boo, three scum!

Well played scum. I'm glad I chose right between charter and Porkens, but I think even if we'd lynched charter today, it probably would have been hard for us to get sigma lynched tomorrow anyhow.

This is not true. With me, you and Porkens on Charter's wagon, him flipping scum and us not winning yet, it'll be hard

not

to lynch Sigma tomorrow. Porkens' vote switch to Imaginality was a bad call, as Sigma said, if there are two scum left Charter

has

to be one of them, moreso due to the absence of a quickhammer. If there was only one scum left then we had two chances to get it right anyway, so I guess it was our mistake too for hesitating to vote before Porkens changed his mind.