Open 169 - [Alternating 9P] OVER

[RayFrost]

/confirmation

Let's see... in a game with haylen/mae/CSL and I recognize lynx by name, though I have never met 'em.

[RayFrost]

game begins?

[RayFrost]

vote: haylen

for always being in the sex room.

[RayFrost]

unvote, vote: RayFrost

Random Mastin-esque voting, yay!!

[RayFrost]

>.> I was only partially trying.

Claim: NK immune, mafia godfather with double voting and role cop abilities

[RayFrost]

Ray Frost claims: Tenchi's slave - you are doomed to follow all rules that tenchi states, and you must bow and scrape before tenchi in every post after RVS is finished, failure to do so results in modkill

seriously though

unvote

[RayFrost]

silly accusation toward: Haylen

you stole my puppy, that means you are obv scum!!!

[RayFrost]

[insert silly random action here] : haylen

Because Haylen is the only person I have spoken to on AIM.

[RayFrost]

^---- win vote

btw, what is the vote count >.>

[RayFrost]

jump down lynx's throat for the L-2 vote

Why'd yah do it?

do you think the person is scummy?

what makes you think that?

[RayFrost]

np

1. good man, good man

2. true

3. I don't really... except L-1 when deadline is a ways away and people could give a valid reason to hammer

[RayFrost]

blah.

I shall claim, then!

claim: Tenchi alt: the mod's alt, you are invincible

seriously though... I've never been that good in the RVS (getting into it and out of it... then again, this is only my second rvs)

[RayFrost]

unvote, sad vote: haylen

;(

[RayFrost]

unvote, vote: CSL

because Haylen is replacing out and he's also in a game I'm in

[RayFrost]

I sooooo do too. Amazing isn't it?

[RayFrost]

Yeah. We accuse each other for stupid reasons.

wanna know what'd be more amazing?

wait for it...




waiiiiit for iiiit...




if people posted

[RayFrost]

Well, it's 10:49, a lot of people are asleep. :O O:

11:51 AM here

[RayFrost]

Unvote

Unwilling vote: Maemuki

Obviously Evil Twins ARE Evil.

this and then the

"I love the RVS"

in a later post is, apparently, saying he dislikes the RVS...

[RayFrost]

I guess I missed that. We are kind of having a difficult time breaking the ice here.

Yeah.

I bet even mastin couldn't break the ice... oh wait... he doesn't >.> he just gets chased across it. <.<

anyway...

no idea where to go from here.

---

VOTE COUNT

(3) CSL - Maemuki, RayFrost, Paradoxombie

(2) Deuxieme Octopus - Khamisa, Lynx The Antithesis
(1) RayFrost - dank
(1) Haylen - Haylen
(1) Khamisa - Deuxieme Octopus
(1) Maemuki - CSL

Not Voting: ---

With 9 alive, it takes 5 to lynch
DEADLINE: September 23, 2009 6:30 PM PST

[RayFrost]

Yeah this is getting to the be the longest RVS I've been involved in.

OH NO maybe we'll be like this the entire game! I bet Scum would certainly like that.

We have a new goal in perpetuating the chaos the entire game and still winning. Go!

okay!

Claim: Mafia

Ray Frost votes: Ray Frost

[RayFrost]

Yeah this is getting to the be the longest RVS I've been involved in.

OH NO maybe we'll be like this the entire game! I bet Scum would certainly like that.

We have a new goal in perpetuating the chaos the entire game and still winning. Go!

okay!

Claim: Mafia

Ray Frost votes: Ray Frost

Nobody is jumping on this?

[RayFrost]

I don't believe mafia claims anymore.

Personal experience.

yeah... I'm in that game, remember?

Anyway...

unvote, vote: Lynx

because he describes worry about the RVS lasting the whole game but does nothing to help stop it.

[RayFrost]

FoS: Maemuki

for not thinking for herself on this and attempting to act accordingly.

[RayFrost]

unvote, vote: Lynx

because he describes worry about the RVS lasting the whole game but does nothing to help stop it.

For clarification purposes, is this serious?

If I say it isn't, that defeats its purpose. If I say it is, it is a ridiculous vote.

Conclusion:

it's a convo-start (attempt to)

[RayFrost]

unvote, vote: Dank

No reasoning for voting somebody helping get out of RVS = scummy (from his own logic, helping to get out of RVS is town points)

No reasoning for a vote in general is scummy.

What I perceive to be a distracting discussion about the values of RVS and the dangers of an extended one (game theory doesn't help find scum)...

[RayFrost]

unvote

Khamisa does need to post more, admittedly... but I don't consider the lack of posting to be vote worthy yet.

Dank

:

good point

To be honest, this is one of the few games I'm in that I didn't replace into... and I'm feeling just about the same: slow.

I'm having difficulty adjusting my play from the replacing in and having a few pages to read in which I can see a lot of things said and not said... once I've adjusted fully, I'll be able to do better.

Currently, I don't see any real tells, so I'm at a loss.

[RayFrost]

Currently, I don't see any real tells

But I do

Then you are better than I am.

[RayFrost]

We're not gonna get to that point if people aren't using their votes.

unvote, vote:RayFrost

Why the rush for me to vote?

I didn't make a post after it, so I am obviously considering who is and isn't suspicious. Pressuring me won't speed up my thought process.

As it is, Khamisa has yet to contribute content and has, instead, chosen to add fluffy flutter posts.

This lack of content and choice, earlier, of IoA makes her vote-worthy.

vote: Khamisa

[RayFrost]

It obviously did considering you voted Khamisa in the very next post.

It didn't influence so much as her post afterward =/

She was pressured to put some content in and choose to instead do more fluff.

[RayFrost]

Maybe it's only applicable to me, but I don't care about votes. We could pass around a million votes and nothing gets done; but one someone reaches five, there better be a good reason as to why that happened.

And supposedly I've been posting fluff. Give me something that I haven't noted already.

IoA = information over analysis

IoA = fluff.

fluff = scummy

IoA = information over analysis = fluff = scummy

You have done IoA posts more than anything else. Thank you, have a nice day.

[RayFrost]

Well, since RayFrost said IoA = Scum, and I hardly have any idea what to do...

Vote: Khamisa

Information over analysis = information without giving analysis

Obviously, you can give analysis & information and not be scummy.

Merely stating information already known without any views or opinions upon it is scummy.

y'gitme?

[RayFrost]

Unvote

Haha, sorry. I'm just hyper and really weird all of a sudden.

Disclaimer: I'm in the same game that he's in that is causing it, but I am not experiencing the same high as him.

[RayFrost]

Why are you so sure its the other game that's causing it?

He pretty much said so in the other game.

Eh, doesn't explain away his lack of content.

[RayFrost]

It kinda of defends it, if you're putting a disclaimer to his poor gameplay.

I was putting a disclaimer for myself >.>

I am not supporting his actions

I was putting the disclaimer to say "if he makes wild accusations towards me, it's cuz he's got a mental voodoo spell on him due to the interactions in another game" .-. Hopefully, he'll contain his jokingness to that game and not bring it in here as well.

[RayFrost]

Again, you are directly tying his behavior to something in another game, which is a point he himself did not make. Yes, the disclaimer can serve as a disclaimer for your own actions, but, you had not shown any actions related to that game yet.

In reality, the only thing that disclaimer did was explain his stupid/poor gameplay and tie it to what happened in another game. That, is pure defense of another player.

Then I guess I shouldn't have posted it.

Anyway, his time limit for that disclaimer being active was about 10 minutes if he was going to use it as a defense.

As it is, it would only possibly explain why he is tossing his vote at khamisa without any support for himself.

The lack of content is something that is his own fault and is inexcusable.

[RayFrost]

Wait...am i in the right game?

lmfao.

there is a case on khamisa:

posting fluff content, doing IoA, and overall not aiding town.

posts just recap on what have been said and contribute nothing to scum hunting.

there is suspicion of CSL:

he voted khamisa for no real reasons

said he doesn't know what to do

unvoted and said he did it cuz he was "hyper"

and this is probably his 5th game or so.

[RayFrost]

Maybe it's only applicable to me, but I don't care about votes. We could pass around a million votes and nothing gets done; but one someone reaches five, there better be a good reason as to why that happened.

And supposedly I've been posting fluff. Give me something that I haven't noted already.

To me, notes are fluff, and that post is fluff. What wouldn't be fluff is a real vote, a real suspicion, or a real attempt to discover someone's alignment. You've been playing commentator instead of playing player. Like when you state how CSL voted badly and is in another game with you. Does that mean he's scummy? Would you be voting him if he had less votes? You're stating things you find significant but not pointing out any significance. So to me your play looks insignificant, i.e. fluff. I mean you haven't mentioned any suspicions yet, and you can expect that to look like active lurking by this point.

Thanks for betting explaining what fluff is

My vote on khamisa is still justified, and will remain until no longer justified.

[RayFrost]

Well, I made a stupid mistake, and suddenly, I'm the target again.

You're a target because you placed Khamisa at L-1 with the explanation that you have no idea what to do besides listen to Rayfrost who's alignment you have no idea about.

Not necessarily true. He could actually know my alignment... if you get my meaning.

I still think khamisa is a better choice over CSL.

[RayFrost]

why is khamisa the better choice?

Khamisa has consistently provided fluffy, contentless posts in the game despite repeatedly being told to provide some content and having what content is explained.

CSL has had

only

one instance of being anti-town, while Khamisa is

consistently

acting anti-town.

[RayFrost]

Has CSL not only "cosistently provided fluffy, contentless posts in the game despite repeatedly being told to provide some content and having what content is explained" but ALSO put in a very scummy L-1 vote?

CSL has done the same thing, and has been perhaps even more useless than khamisa. Though if you disagree, please tell me how CSL's been of more use/more helpful than khamisa.

hrmm... true enough, except the calls for content from CSL started recently.



I guess I'll go with CSL

unvote, vote: CSL

[RayFrost]

I believe I was explaining IoA to Khamisa, not CSl, so... the coaching is wrong.

I considered khamisa's play to be scummier than CSL because I'm having difficulty keeping the two games straight that I'm with CSL in. Off of memory, he'd have posted some scum hunting content. Actually iso reading him, I saw that he hadn't, thus you were correct in saying he was scummier. There goes the defense bit, I believe.

And I can't bus when I'm town.

[RayFrost]

^^You completely went along with a completely bullshit vote, and your reply was the answer to a question CSL didnt even ask. You merely fed CSL a reason for following your lead. That's coaching.

Explain how that is a reason for "following my lead," please.

From what I can tell, it is me telling him that his reasoning is invalid, even if I agree with the vote's placement.

Although I concede that I did tell him that, and not just khamisa, but you haven't shown how the other points are still valid.

[RayFrost]

Ray: Khamisa is scummy because of the IoA thing.

CSL: Ok, ray says Khamisa is scummy, so i'll vote khamisa for the IoA thing I dont really understand.

Ray: No silly, the IoA thing really does make someone scummy. Let me describe it more, so that your vote doesnt look quite as stupid.

Ray: Khamisa is scummy because of the IoA thing.

CSL: well, ray says I can't do this... so I'll vote for the person he is!!!

Ray: Dude, IoA

is

scummy, and you've just done it too. Breakdown of IoA is: blah, blah, blah.

would be more accurate

[RayFrost]

On mae:

lurking alone is not a scum tell for her... she lurks all the time. she still needs to post, though.

On haylen:

lurking is unusual for her, except she's had a lot of stuff going on as of late, moving and stuff. She really needs to post as well.

On Khamisa:

why does she stop posting after pressure moves away from her?

On CSL:

okay... wow. you are contradicting yourself, showing anti-town behavior, and seem to be putting minimal thought to your posts. as town, you are probably the best possible mislynch. as scum, you are obvious and need to be lynched. Your vote and FoS of me are blatant OMGUS, which shows that your initial buddying up to me with voting khamisa and then subsequent vote for me when it seems like I am under scrutiny is a rather obvious scum ploy to try and move attention away from yourself. My vote is sticking.

Dank/Lynx/Deux:

If you have any questions for me and stuff, I'm more than willing to answer them. You still need to ask them, though.

[RayFrost]

gah... a doc claim...

unvote

I need to get my reads straight and rearranged now.

[RayFrost]

Unvote

damn if you are the doc, then you're as good as dead tonight now.

Well, that depends.


CSL: can you protect yourself at night?

If you can, you should probably do so in order to avoid the NK getting yah.

and if we have a watcher, it'd probably be a good idea to watch CSL. If he gets a "little visit," then we have confirmed scum.

Anyway...

My top two, thanks to the claim, are:

Khamisa

the lack of content is a bugger, along with it continuing, no given reads, generally not pro-town to avoid contributing to discussion/analysis/etc.

Mae

Mae's scum meta is something that I'm pretty certain both me and CSL know. I'd rather not point it out until

after

she starts posting, so I can catch her if possible. Her lurking is annoying, but a null tell.

[RayFrost]

A: We don't have a watcher. look at the OP.

B: No, sadly, I can't protect myself.

>.<"

I should really get in the habit of reading the possible roles more often...

And bugger on you not being self-sufficient.

I still want khamisa/mae to post their opinions and stuff.

[RayFrost]

...

Vote: RayFrost

...

...I meant to vote him, I realized I FoS'd him just now...

Are you serious?

Yes, I'm serious. Putting someone at L-1 is scummy. I'm claiming if you guys put me at L-1 again.

I'm not sure if this is what Lynx was getting at, but YOU DIDNT REALIZE YOU ONLY FOS'ED HIM? This strikes me as flat out bullshit. People have already brought up the fact that you unvoted an imaginary player without putting your vote on anyone else! Dank asked you straight up, and you responded. [posts 171 and 172] Usually when you drop a vote on someone, you provide some sort of reasoning, even if its just a well composed summary. But you provide nothing.

And this L-1 ultimatum?? I'm not buying it.

vote: CSL

fos

if someone is anxious to claim you could've expected it to be a powerrole, no?

He is hind-sight FoSing you.

Because CSL was anxious about l-1 and said he'd claim if he got there, he was an obvious powerrole is the logic behind it

Hing-sight is 20/20, and his reasoning is poor, so yeah...

[RayFrost]

Paradox:

your suspicion of deux came before his unvote, so saying that the unvote was suspicious as reasoning for your FoS is suspicious.

In addition, how was it a "pretty clear softclaim?"

I'm not seeing how, unless you mean to say that anybody can say "leave me alone, or I'll claim" and get you to unvote cuz they are probably a powerrole. In which case, you are an extremely cautious player that would likely not vote and find anybody that says another player should claim at L-1 to be suspicious...

am I following this correctly?

[RayFrost]

9. RayFrost – I do not like his play at all in the beginning. Vote hopping to yourself? Looks very scummy.

It was RVS. Mastin-esque style in the early game usually gets town out of the RVS preeeeetty quickly.

re Khamisa:

now that she's posted content, she actually has a very solid and scummy post. Woohoo.

vote: Khamisa

offering the idea of lynching the doc without giving any reasoning why that's a good idea and letting the rest make the decision so as to avoid having responsibility for the results = scummy

[RayFrost]

Is Kham at L-1?

Dunno... let's make sure there's no hammer (if it hasn't happened already)

unvote

Mod, can we get a VC?

[RayFrost]

That's clearly 3 votes, now 2. It's not hard to see.

>.> I don't have the patience to count the votes up.

[RayFrost]

Why wouldn't you have voted at L-1? Your vote clearly says you find khamisa most suspicious. Why not hammer?

You asking me & CSL or just CSL?

[RayFrost]

That's clearly 3 votes, now 2. It's not hard to see.

>.> I don't have the patience to count the votes up.

or wanted an excuse to unvote.

If I wanted an excuse to unvote, I'd just say "Not liking how quickly people jumped khamisa, considering my recent suspicion" and unvote like that

[RayFrost]

That's clearly 3 votes, now 2. It's not hard to see.

>.> I don't have the patience to count the votes up.

or wanted an excuse to unvote.

If I wanted an excuse to unvote, I'd just say "Not liking how quickly people jumped khamisa, considering my recent suspicion" and unvote like that

If you're not saying that then do you plan to vote again?

Yes. Not atm, though.

[RayFrost]

I'm trying to decide if khamisa is just a poor player or considerably scummy. He should at least have some sort of suspicions at this point.

Khamisa's name comes up as author in quite a few finished games on the site... so it's not newb play. (<3 search)

[RayFrost]

I'm trying to decide if khamisa is just a poor player or considerably scummy. He should at least have some sort of suspicions at this point.

Khamisa's name comes up as author in quite a few finished games on the site... so it's not newb play. (<3 search)

being experienced by no means automatically makes you a good player.

I never said it did. I was merely pointing out that khamisa shouldn't be given "newb" as a defense measure. (personally, I don't think anybody should, but eh)

[RayFrost]

hi, I shall comment on the recent happenings when I return from work. Just started a new job I also passed my driving test yesterday. Woot!

Hai Haylen!!!

Hope you post soon!!!

[RayFrost]

I put it out there to prevent any such defense... pre-emptive, since I get tired of it being pulled out over every little thing for newbies.

[RayFrost]

EBWOP: other newbies

[RayFrost]

I'm trying to decide if khamisa is just a poor player or considerably scummy. He should at least have some sort of suspicions at this point.

She didn't play like this when I've played with her before.

was she town?

[RayFrost]

Anyway, I'm a bit suspicious of the bw on khamisa. Yes, she's been more or less useless, but lets look at it from a practical point of view.

Suspicious of a bw on an (at minimum) anti-town player? so... who do you think is scum that's on the bw, then?

Khamisa is reasonably experienced. She's been in other games, and has been much more active, as others have pointed out.

As the antithesis said earlier... experience doesn't say a thing about skill levels

Is it actually reasonable to assume that less activity, while it does not help town, implies that she is scum? I find this to be a very elementary argument that has a load of exceptions to it. Reasons for khamisa's behavior could include lack of real life time, or quite possibly, a general disinterested townie mindset (since she has now claimed townie), which i'm sure all of us (I know I have) all been in. To be honest, on the list of her behavior, her being scum and blatantly not voting or contributing anything is at the very very bottom of the list.

less activity isn't the problem. NO SCUM HUNTING OR CONTENT is the problem. Don't misinterpret the case. She has refused, pretty much directly, to post any content or scum hunting or, really, anything of worth.

It just doesnt make sense if you think about it for a little bit. If you're scum, you blend in. You don't blatantly stand out from fear of making a mistake and not contributing anything. A first time player of both mafia scum and mafia in general who has no clue of the game and its enviroment may do this, but an established player like khamisa most certainly will not.

"Too scummy to be scum" logical fallacy. Experience doesn't dictate ability, as already said, and her hide can't be saved by her being oh so scummy making her town.

Khamisa has been very anti-town and has not been helpful to the town. I think the chances of this behavior being a result of her being scum are very low, and I do not believe in policy lynches, so I will not be voting her atm. I do suspect some mafia have jumped on the bw however, since its setting up to be an easy lynch with a good deal of support, even though the reasoning, in my opinion, is pretty bad.

Going after somebody that is anti-town is better than jumping on a potential townie that is seemingly pro-town in the hopes of finding scum, especially when anti-town can also mean scum. Higher probability.

Regarding rayfrost, i'm going to

unvote

for now, because I haven't been following the game that much lately. I'll catch up and let you all know my suspicions a bit later.

You haven't been following the game much, yet you have a seemingly thorough defense of khamisa? Contradictions are scummy, my friend. Your seemingly thorough (but still terrible) defense of khamisa and general shading of the bandwagon as scummy have been noted. Thank you and have a nice day.

Also, Haylen: Post.

Agreed

All comments are bolded within the quote.

[RayFrost]

Ray: Antitown means a player doesnt help the town. Scummy, means a player is mafia.

Explain to me, how khamisa's behavior has been scummy, as opposed to antitown.

Anti-town can also be an indicator of scum.

It's scummy behavior for outright stating she

will not

post content / thoughts / etc. In addition, Khamisa has yet to really post any of her own logic. She just followed your own suspicion of me. Either you are both scum, or she's scum buddying up to you (that's my read of that). The fact you are pushing so hard

against

her lynch when she isn't helping town at all is off.

In addition, it's best to deal with the anti-town players (As they are more likely to be scum than even neutral read players), especially since there is a greater chance of hitting scum by going with such reads.

[RayFrost]

It's scummy behavior for outright stating she will not post content / thoughts / etc. In addition, Khamisa has yet to really post any of her own logic.

"It's scummy" doesn't answer my question. Why is it scummy over antitown? Why is mafia more likely to not post content than disinterested town?

In addition, it's best to deal with the anti-town players (As they are more likely to be scum than even neutral read players), especially since there is a greater chance of hitting scum by going with such reads.

I happen to find policy lynches scummy. Notice how i follow this up with a reason: Policy lynches allow a town player to be lynched for an irrelevant reason to their alignment, and bring mafia further to their win condition. It's an excellent strategy to try to paint someone as scummy when they're actually unhelpful disinterested town, which is a very common occurance on these boards.

You also say anti-town players are much more likely to be scum. Could you explain that too?

>.> I honestly don't know why you'd join a game if you weren't interested, so... yeah. That seems like an illogical option to me.

It isn't a policy lynch. Policy lynches would be if I

always

lynched khamisa because khamisa is always anti-town regardless of alignment, or something like that. In addition, I honestly believe khamisa is scum. I'm saying that it's a

win-win

situation, since we either get rid of scum or we lose a scummy, anti-town player that wouldn't be of help to the town.

If you are an anti-town player, you are helping scum in their win condition and harming town. The only reason you'd want to do that is if you are scum, which makes it more likely.

[RayFrost]

Ray:

Um, what? A policy lynch is lynching someone for being unhelpful, annoying, anti-town whatever, but NOT scummy. That is what the khamisa lynch is to me.

Its a win win situation? We don't know khamisa is scum. If we get rid of an anti town player and get mafia closer to their win condition, thats a win for town? What alignment exactly are you?

Khamisa has been scummy by being anti-town.

If I think somebody is scum, and they aren't being in any way beneficial to town, then it's a win-win, in my mind.

One way, they flip scum and woot, we killed scum.

The other way, we kill a townie that has been virtually useless and will no longer be distracting or a target for scum to use in the future (say, lylo).

In essence, assuming we mislynch today and tomorrow (but don't lynch khamisa), then we are letting khamisa fly by through lylo on the off chance that being so anti-town, unhelpful, and harmful to town is actually all

such

a townie thing to do. So, basically, letting khamisa fly by on being "too scummy" to be scum. Hence the logical fallacy comment that you have conveniently avoided replying to.

[RayFrost]

Hi paradox!!!

why don't you weigh in on the dank & me debate?

[RayFrost]

Ray's strong insistence on what he basically calls a policy lynch pulls me back in his direction once again. I really don't like how he's saying that town wins if khamisa happens to be a townie and we mislynch. I'm sorry, a mislynch of a townie does not help my win condition. She is not sabotaging our game, she just has a more cautious playing style, a style which, like paradox said, matches other games. I honestly can't fathom mafia purposefully playing this kind of game on d1; it makes no sense to me.

Ray's last few posts were very interesting. He really wants this lynch to go through, on what I think is a very weak case. He seems to be really grasping at straws to explain her scumminess, when all it is is just antitown. Again, his points of 1. lynching an unhelpful townie as being good for town, and 2. anti-town = scummy really seem like scum trying to hang on to what looked like an easy lynch as it might start to slip away.

Of course, i'm not proclaiming Ray as scum at this point, there's plenty more to analyze, and it'll be interesting to see what happens next, but Ray is prime suspect at the moment. Call it blatant defense of khamisa if you'd like, but this makes alot more sense to me than a khamisa lynch.

vote: RayFrost

Would very much like to hear from the rest of you about the latest discussion we've been having.

Hi dank!

Busting out the chainsaw for your friend so soon?

So... your case on me is pushing the lynch of somebody I think is scum and, even if they aren't, wouldn't help town anyway. Okay, I admit that I'm aggressively pushing the case of my biggest suspect. What a shock.

Also, I've pushed cases that are far worse than this one (check my first game, for example: pushed for a lynch on somebody I had no evidence against... got fought down, but it turns out they actually were scum, and they got lynched at a later date) as town, so yeah.

[RayFrost]

Hi paradox!!!

why don't you weigh in on the dank & me debate?

Khamisa is likely to be the best lynch in my mind, but I share dank's concerns.

Dank's concerns that I'm scum that's being hyperaggressive, reaching, and overall making a complete and total idiot of himself if this goes wrong? That about sums it up, except I'm town.

[RayFrost]

Your counterargument is that your cases are typically crappy?

Nope.

My counterargument is that you finding me scummy for doing this weird thing called

pushing for the lynch of the one I find to be the scummiest player

is, in fact, a crappy case.

[RayFrost]

Do notice rayfrost tossing aside the two page discussion about khamisa being scummy vs antitown, in favor of saying i'm voting him just because he's confident in his case.

It's very interesting.

Do notice dank has argued the semantics between anti-town and scummy for two pages with me and is somehow using said semantic to call me scummy.

It's very interesting.

[RayFrost]

Do notice rayfrost tossing aside the two page discussion about khamisa being scummy vs antitown, in favor of saying i'm voting him just because he's confident in his case.

It's very interesting.

Do notice dank has argued the semantics between anti-town and scummy for two pages with me and is somehow using said semantic to call me scummy.

It's very interesting.

You're reacting quite a bit to one vote. No need to lose composure.

Eh, I'm calm. I'm just defending myself blow for blow

[RayFrost]

Do notice rayfrost tossing aside the two page discussion about khamisa being scummy vs antitown, in favor of saying i'm voting him just because he's confident in his case.

It's very interesting.

Do notice dank has argued the semantics between anti-town and scummy for two pages with me and is somehow using said semantic to call me scummy.

It's very interesting.

You're reacting quite a bit to one vote. No need to lose composure.

Eh, I'm calm. I'm just defending myself blow for blow

But then your response feeds the conflict, rather than alleviating it. Looking town isn't the town's primary responsibility, it's scum's.

fos

Ummm... this has nothing to do with "looking town" at all, for me. I'm pushing my case for khamisa while dank is pushing his case fo rme. I defend myself while trying to attack khamisa, and dank is attacking me while defend khamisa.

They are intertwined, so to separate one part from the other is difficult at best.

[RayFrost]

RayFrost, can you please outline everything about Khamisa's actions that you think is deserving of the title "anti-town? "

Here:

little posting (null tell on its own, but scum tell in combination with other tells)

fluff posting when little posting is given (fluff =/= stuff)

outright refusal to give content (so... outright refusal to help town scum hunt)

IoA via recapping with no stances/opinions/etc (until recently when pressure started getting heavy)

only finding the people dank found suspect suspicious with no original reasoning (buddying at minimum)

proposing the lynch of a claimed doc without really giving it support (tossing out bait for dumb-town to latch onto for a framing kind of thing)

that about sums it up.

[RayFrost]

Ray: Do you think Dank and Kham are the scum?

I find it more likely with dank's method of defending kham and kham just following dank's logic, but... =/ it's a really iffy case and I wouldn't push it until we had a flip from one of them.

[RayFrost]

How about you though? What is your opinion of the interactions so far between me and dank as well as the case on kham.

[RayFrost]

I obviously support a Kham lynch. I'm not really sure about you and Dank but I'm leaning on it being a town-v-town argument.

What makes you think town v town?

[RayFrost]

So you don't think it could be distancing/bussing (both of us scum) or scum trying to save their partner (one of us scum)?

[RayFrost]

Wow... the thread's gone silent.

Khamisa, dank, para, deux, LtA, empking, haylen...

anything new to add? Got anything to say?

[RayFrost]

Wow... the thread's gone silent.

Khamisa, dank, para, deux, LtA, empking, haylen...

anything new to add? Got anything to say?

I'm waiting for Khamisa to actually speak up.

Problem with that:

if she lurks for an extended period of time.

Would you go for the lynch if she didn't speak up and it was near deadline?

[RayFrost]

Haylen tomorrow.

elaborate?

Agreed.

[RayFrost]

Haylen tomorrow.

elaborate?

Agreed.

She's been active lurking the whole game. She has potential for tomorrow's lynch regardless of Khamisa's alignment.

Trying to set up a lynch for the next day without solid evidence is rather suspicious. Do you have proof that haylen is, in fact, active lurking and not inactive?

re empking:

I've stated my opinions and stuff, so I don't really know what I

can

add.

[RayFrost]

Trying to set up a lynch for the next day without solid evidence is rather suspicious. Do you have proof that haylen is, in fact, active lurking and not inactive?

Her posting is lacking. That's worthy of my attention.

Proof that she's active? Well she said she'd post in her other game. But I wouldn't even have mentioned that point besides that you asked for it. I don't need "proof" to suspect someone. It doesn't have to be innocent until proven guilty.

If we went with guilty until proven innocent, we wouldn't get anywhere due to the paranoia involved with it. It's not really possible to confirm yourself without flipping or having a flipped sane cop that stated an innocent result on you (even that isn't solid due to millers and godfathers).

Anyway... I'm still for a khamisa lynch. I'm willing to look into haylen, but don't expect a clear feeling of scum on that.

[RayFrost]

Where would we get without paranoia? How can one be overly suspicious when every player is a suspect?

People who aren't paranoid look like scum to me.

I'm not paranoid.

I stand with a neutral read on every person to start with. I don't lean either way until something catches my eye that flips my read one way or the other.

If I assume all are guilty before anything, we'll have cognitive bias (imo).

[RayFrost]

Well it's impossible for us to know if it really was a mistake so of course it'll most likely be scrutinized further. Khamisa was going to be lynched regardless today though. The only one who was openly opposed to Khamisa's lynch was Dank. Everyone else approved basically save Haylen who has provided nothing today. I agree that she should be pressed tomorrow, but automatically a contender for a Day 2 lynch...I don't think so.

Agreed.

As it is, now we can wait for the flip.

It's kinda annoying the khamisa never actually bothered to provide content... =/ and didn't seem to be reading the thread very well

[RayFrost]

Haylen's been busy as of late (not trying to defend her, just saying), so I won't vote her for that.

[RayFrost]

Haylen has 19 posts on mafiascum since her last post in this game, and is participating in several other games she's in. Therefore, the excuse she gave here no longer applies. I'm forced to believe she is deliberately avoiding posting content in this game, which makes her scummy like Khamisa, eh Rayfrost?

This vote is purely motivation for Haylen to participate, and stop pretending she can't when she's posting in other games.

vote: Haylen

Also, Ray: Haylen's exhibiting the same exact behavior, well, even worse behavior than khamisa. Khamisa had an excuse for her behavior as well, which you didn't buy. A careful review of Haylen's posts show her excuse is fail, and imo, even worse of an excuse than Khamisa's. I find your carefulness voting Haylen interesting, considering the actions you've said you find scummy.

Umm... you find the fact that I'm more cautious after mislynching for these reasons I thought scummy (and turned out wrong) to be scummy?

That is really confusing. Do you mean you'd prefer I was an idiot that didn't learn from my mistakes?

[RayFrost]

So do you now believe that not posting content is no longer scummy?

It is, but it's not vote/lynch worthy in of itself.

[RayFrost]

Vote: Paradoxombie

for pushing towards DO over the CSL situation where his logic was purely based on how, obv in hind-sight, it was obvious that CSL was a PR from his anxiety. The sudden surge with the quick cut off on it when pressured by other players to explain how the logic works makes it seem like scum trying to toss out bait for the town (especially since he didn't vote) that backed off when it saw the idea wouldn't go through.

[RayFrost]

Lynx, what about my interactions with dank is "interesting," and what do you mean by "interesting" in this case?

[RayFrost]

Lynx, what about my interactions with dank is "interesting," and what do you mean by "interesting" in this case?

Well I feel the manner in which you have reacted to his attacks and the way he has carried out these attacks indicate that the both of you are not scum. Either both of you are town or one of you is scum. I don't sense any bussing here.

To make sure I understand you...

you find it more likely that he and I are town v town in our argument, but, if there is scum in this, only one of us is scum?

what, specifically, about our interactions gives you that read? I'm asking so I know where you are coming from on this. (and to see if I do/don't agree)

[RayFrost]

Okay, gotcha.

You think only one of us is scum, if any, but you don't know for sure which of us it would be just yet if there were any.

[RayFrost]

I've barely been here for a month... =/ I've got two completed games, and I'm in ~14 currently. Thus, I do have a lot of posts but very little actual experience.

I know mae's meta cuz I've played with her. I haven't played with Khamisa, and both empking and para posted kinda contradicting meta on khamisa as well.

Now that mae's replaced out, there is no meta defense there. I'm dealing with somebody I've read elsewhere on site but never been in a game with (empking).

Me being sure of a lynch is cuz I have what I consider to be a good case. If I feel my case is true, I will be confident and will run through a brick wall with it.

I honestly didn't consider the para case to have as much merit as the one on Khamisa. I felt Khamisa was scum. I was wrong. I've solidly pushed for mislynches of townies before with just as much confidence, and it's causing me to try and play more cautiously. It's not

just

this one game.

re Deux:

My avatar is of a girl cuz of an avatar bet that I lost >.>
Also, for me, Anti-town and scummy are not mutually exclusive and, in fact, often go hand in hand. You may disagree, but that's how I feel toward that.

[RayFrost]

re Deux:

My avatar is of a girl cuz of an avatar bet that I lost >.>

I wasn't poking fun, just pointing out Haylen's flawed logic.

Also, for me, Anti-town and scummy are not mutually exclusive and, in fact, often go hand in hand.

You may disagree, but that's how I feel toward that.

I'm really not digging this post. The part in italics is extremely deflective; the conflict between those two characteristics (anti-town and scummy) is a major part of the case against Ray. It needs to be defended.

I believe the both go hand in hand, but I realize not everybody believes that. Also, would you mind explaining how that's deflective? ._." I'm not seeing it.

[RayFrost]

Hrmm... I'd like it if para responded to my suspicions of him instead of dismissing them as "from a while ago" or anything similar to that vein.

If we go with "that's from a while ago" for things, then it'd void his case on DO, dank's on me, Dank's/Lynx's on empking... etc. It's not viable to dismiss something based on how long ago in the game it was. Mafia requires looking at past things as well as current things.

[RayFrost]

Hrmm... I'd like it if para responded to my suspicions of him instead of dismissing them as "from a while ago" or anything similar to that vein.

If we go with "that's from a while ago" for things, then it'd void his case on DO, dank's on me, Dank's/Lynx's on empking... etc. It's not viable to dismiss something based on how long ago in the game it was. Mafia requires looking at past things as well as current things.

still waiting for this

[RayFrost]

RayFrost, where do you stand on all this?

I find the case on empking to be points for bugging him to contribute more, but to actually get him lynched over (especially after the khamisa stuff)... not really.

Soooo...

Poke Of Doom: Empking

post content, please.

[RayFrost]

That's nice, basically quote my last post as your own, then tell Empking to contribute more content. Hypocritical, no?

FoS: Ray

RayFrost, if you had to lynch someone right now, who would it be?

I didn't realize I was quoting you, but eh... it's the truth of the matter: the stuff on empking is more "contribute" than "lynch"

If I had to lynch somebody... probably para or empking.

Para cuz he's the only one I feel I've got at least semi-solid suspicions of that haven't really been defended againt.

Empking cuz he's distracting and making it harder for town to concentrate elsewhere.

Tbh, neither are exactly excellent in reasoning, but those are my top choices,

if I had to lynch somebody

[RayFrost]

Tbh, neither are exactly excellent in reasoning, but those are my top choices,

if I had to lynch somebody

First of all: Have you heard the theory that saying "to be honest" is a scum tell, since it implies that you're generally not being honest, and that this is an exception? What would you say to that?

Second: The fact of the matter is that you

do

have to lynch someone. Not because you have absolute power or anything, but because that is how the game is played. You need to decide on someone who needs to be lynched. So let's question your targets right now. First para, who's been absent for a little while, making it all the easier to allow your "case" on him to sit stagnant without being questioned. What exactly is your case against Para, or if you don't want to call it case, can you remind everyone why you find him the most suspicious so far?

You call Empking distracting. What would you say about his play is distracting? What is he distracting us from?

First, I don't really see how that's valid. To say "to be honest" could mean that you are admitting something you don't want to admit as true (such as your biggest suspect really IS town thanks to a cop investigation, for example) or something similar.

Second, I'm saying I don't feel solid enough to have either of them lynched

right now

. Also, I'm not sure how para, who's posted quite recently, has been "absent for a little while." Would you mind explaining that a bit more? the basics of the "case" are available here

Well, he' trying to take credit where credit isn't due, causing lynx to focus heavily upon him, which leads to the large multi-page argument between them that is leading nowhere, which means that town's thoughts will likely be distracted by the large display and allow some (potential) scum tells to slip by due to lack of attentiveness.

[RayFrost]

Ray is very careful to qualify this last post with "If I had to lynch somebody". Are you suggesting we don't lynch anyone with no protective roles? This is a very scummy thing to say so close to the deadline. You should be scrambling to figure out who to vote for and to make a good case on them, and instead you're saying meh, no one's really that suspicious, I dont

really

want to lynch anyone. Very scummy.

I wasn't aware of how close deadline was (I don't pay attention to dl all that much). I've seen people get voted for saying they'd lynch somebody based on less-than-solid evidence because they didn't make it explicitly clear that it was an "if I have to" response.

Paradox: Ray made an argument against him, poked at it a bit. He says the suspicions are solid and havent been well defended against. Yet he doesn't follow it up. Ray's basically let this "good" case drop, and instead of pushing paradox further, just announces that he had a good case on paradox, but not worthy of a lynch. Good scumhunting.

I said semi-solid for one. For two, I'm not sure how I've let it drop when I said I was waiting for his reply. Aaaand... I suck at scum hunting. Congrats, you caught me out on my failure

Empking: First three posts I quote all have Ray quickly learning from his mistake with khamisa. Its not worthy of a lynch, is the refrain we hear. Well guess what, suddenly, it is. The empking lynch ray suggests does not reflect any of the cases lynx or I have made on emp, just that he's been "distracting".

eh, this is part of why I said "IF I HAD TO LYNCH SOMEBODY." It's not something I'd advocate as a really good idea, and I made it clear that, in a no-lynch or this person situation, I'd be willing to drop the hammer on empking.

1. He is getting warranted attention, "distracting" means that he's getting attention that shouldn't be there. Do you not want us to focus on empking? Should we ignore his behavior? If we should, why are you suggesting lynching him?

I'm saying that

too much focus

is being put on him and lessening the consideration of other players (though I have maintained my seat in the spotlight). I'm not saying he should be ignored, just that focus should not be placed purely or even mostly on him.

2. Though Ray carefully qualifies this with his "if I had to lynch somebody", he is quickly suggesting yet another policy lynch, just like the one he helped build D1. After reminding us again and again that he learned his lesson, he's quietly slipping in the idea that maybe he can get another policy lynch in. Scummy.

ummm... I'm not pushing for empking's lynch. Empking is a neutral read for me. I'm

not

in support of a lynch, but it is one of the few I'd be willing to do the hammer for if it was that or nl.

In short, the combination of "If I had to lynch somebody", not pursuing the one legitimate case he made, and sneakily slipping in the idea of another policy lynch make me pretty sure Ray is scum.

responses in bold within quote

oh, and I think I forgot something...

vote Paradoxombie

[RayFrost]

If there are 7 players in a game, and you give two you would lynch, you are advocating a lynch for either of those players, as opposed to the 4 others. The reasoning on the empking lynch is just a policy lynch, so please explain how you're not advocating another policy lynch after spending several posts admitting the khamisa mistake you made.

1. not actively calling for it

2. not trying to convince anybody it's a good idea

3. have openly stated it's not the best reasoning and, thus, not a good idea

4. I prefer the para one by far

5. not voting for emp

[RayFrost]

My question is this: Why did you include empking, rather than just leave it at paradox?

I've made it a habit to list both first and second choices (in the case of the first falling through)

[RayFrost]

...

if it falls through, then I have no better options other than simply going for a no lynch. No lynch is bad. In fact, I'd prefer my own lynch over a no lynch.

Are you saying is that I should simply go for a no lynch over the emp lynch?

[RayFrost]

RF: Do you want me to ignore Lynx?

Not ignore... nor should lynx ignore you.

You should both not concentrate 100% on each other, though.

[RayFrost]

I'm starting school tomorrow, J-time, so I'll likely have

limited access

, though I should have time to get on every day, no guarauntees.

[RayFrost]

Something else that piques my interest: Ray, you say that your read on Empking is NEUTRAL, but he is your 2nd highest lynch candidate, AND you don't support policy lynches? I'm lost.

Relative reads. I have a stronger town read on everybody (save para) than I do on empking. If I did a LoS right now, it'd have para leaning scummy, empking neutral, and the rest of you leaning to mild town.

[RayFrost]

Para:

To be frank

oh, can't say that... DO will find me scummy for it

I wanted your answer because I don't follow your logic on how you can, in hindsight, say it was

obvious

that he was the doc. It was reaching pretty far, imo, so I felt it was worth mentioning and pressuring you about. Your defense of me is appreciated, though I'm not completely sure about the why of you doing it. I'm keeping my vote on until you explain it, btw

DO:

If you have a hypothetical LoS with

nobody

on the scum end, with one neutral and one leaning town with the rest all town reads and you were told to say the top two you would want lynched and why, would you pick the neutral and leaning town or would you jump to the town reads and toss them in?

If you'd toss the town reads in, then by all means explain how that works out, logically.

Lynx:

how does a self-deprecating attitude give off a town read? O.o I'd like it if you explained that to me, since I'm not following you there.

[RayFrost]

oh, so it's an experience thing?

and btw...

Some games I was in have finished (or I've died) if you want some meta on me

[RayFrost]

does "fine" mean you'd push for it or just that you'd be willing to perform a hammer at deadline instead of a NL?

aaaand... I have suspicion of dank, but it's kinda edged due to the fact it's partial OMGUS, I think lynx and DO are town, and empking is a neutral read. the only reason I'm pushing you is I have

something

to bug you about. As it is, all I could do with emp is rehash the same old same old, and I have nothing solid on dank other than tunneling (null tell).

[RayFrost]

does "fine" mean you'd push for it or just that you'd be willing to perform a hammer at deadline instead of a NL?

aaaand... I have suspicion of dank, but it's kinda edged due to the fact it's partial OMGUS, I think lynx and DO are town, and empking is a neutral read. the only reason I'm pushing you is I have

something

to bug you about. As it is, all I could do with emp is rehash the same old same old, and I have nothing solid on dank other than tunneling (null tell).

This is a horribly lame rundown. DO and Lynx are town. Empking (your second lynch choice) is neutral. Paradox is suspicious because of "something", and you're not even building a case/pushing him to figure out if those suspicions are worth it. I'm suspicious, but you can't even name a reason as to why?

well, if I was gonna put it bluntly on my suspicions for you...

you protect khamisa poorly, initially find me suspicious for weak reasoning and then continually applying pressure to me and ignoring all other possible subjects, even pointing out that a person is scummy yet still only focusing upon pressuring me. This hyperfocus is something I know can come from town as well as scum, making that null...

you pressure others for finding me even remotely town and maintain that I'm scummy even if they point out things they feel are not solid points, yet you maintain they are without really giving proof they are scummy things.

Your complete obstinance and refusal to consider

anything

other than me implies you are focusing upon me to give you an excuse to not pay attention to any of the other players except in relation to me.

[RayFrost]

I find the fact para has avoided responding with his logic/reasoning for what I've got my vote on him for to be scummier than the act that I voted him for. Although I find the fact he was pushing for DO over something as weak and arbitrary as hindsight stuff to be suspicious, the fact he didn't explain it afterward (as it made no sense) is scummier.

[RayFrost]

Lynx: Are you saying that a given player will point out the fact that they suck less often when they're scum? Why do you think that is?

No I'm just saying more specifically with newer players. Usually when they highlight that they're not too good at scumhunting it comes largely from townies in my experience. It's a town tell to me. This isn't the only reason I've read him as town.

If it isn't the only reason, would you mind pointing out the other reasons that you have available for it?

[RayFrost]

Unvote: Haylen

Looks like she legitimately wants to post.

Vote: Para

It looks to me like Para is buddying to RF. (See: His continued defence of Ray Frost.)

scummy post is obv.

Votes para to buddy with me, as far as I can tell, as well as giving minimal reasoning for the vote...

Dank:

I'm against the newbie card being played for or against

anybody

, so don't let that stop you from applying pressure to me, got it?

Lynx:

If I understand you correctly, you are saying the fact I don't trust you and don't take your "town reads" out of hand to be a town tell? If it is my general attitude toward scum hunting, I would like it if you explained what that meant, exactly.

Also, what was your reasoning for a town read on me

before[/i] the question as to your reasons? Obviously, you can't use my words to explain the reason you thought I was town before I said them.

[RayFrost]

If I understand you correctly, you are saying the fact I don't trust you and don't take your "town reads" out of hand to be a town tell? If it is my general attitude toward scum hunting, I would like it if you explained what that meant, exactly.

I'm not sure I like this post. Lynx was very clear about why he thought your skepticism gave him a town read, which makes this post seem a lot like very forced overkill. I don't know if this is necessarily a scummy post, but it seems to me like you're trying very hard to play the part that Lynx has concocted for you.

Do you actually not understand something about Lynx's comments or what? I think, however, that when Lynx responds to my post, all this will be cleared up.

I like to clarify to make sure I understand things when the person seems like they will actually explain it instead of sarcasm, rudeness, etc

-snip-

I'm thinking about putting my vote on Empking instead of Ray, but here's the problem: right now, Ray will be lynched if all votes remained the same up until the deadline. If I unvote, Emp becomes the lynch, by default. The problem with unvoting then, is that even if I change my mind and go back to voting Ray after that, Emp remains the one to be lynched because of the rules of the deadline (unless of course someone else votes Ray.) This is why I really need something huge to move my vote from Ray, because, for all intents and purposes, after that, it's gone. This last post from Empking may be just scummy enough to do the trick, but I'm going to play it safe here - we've still got 3 days till the deadline. So now Emp...here's your chance to convince me.

and if I vote empking... you're reasoning here would lose all its value. As it is, I won't jut yet. My understanding here, though, is that you find me to be equally scummy when compared to empking. I would like it if you listed off the reasoning for finding both me and empking scummy and say how each thing weighs in your mind on the scumminess scale.

bold stuff is response(s)

[RayFrost]

FOS

DO

you seem to be FOSing DO quite a bit... what's your reason this time?

[RayFrost]

EBWOP:

quite a bit as in "at least once a day" >.>

[RayFrost]

Rayfrost; How is voting the player defending you buddying up to you?

you mean voting the player I'm voting for flimsy reasoning

isn't

buddying up to me?

unvote

I don't need to put my vote on you (and it's a bad idea, since, IIRC, it'd be the hammer), so I'll leave mine off.

[RayFrost]

Ray, Emp's already been lynched.

DO, that way a pretty hasty hammer before Empking could even respond to Dank. That makes 2 flimsy hammers from you.

FOS:DO

oh... that explains Para's FOS. nevermind on that question, then.

that is pretty bad for DO... =/ I'll deal with it tomorrow, gametime.

[RayFrost]

Lynx, what were your investigations both nights? What was your logic and reasoning behind each investigation?

[RayFrost]

Lynx, what were your investigations both nights? What was your logic and reasoning behind each investigation?

Since he would be an even night cop, he would only have one investigation, and I think he made it pretty clear who it was and why(though I guess it could have been clearer)

I'm leery of any claims made by anybody. I'd rather, y'know, get full reasoning and the like. Plus, last time I trusted a cop claim... it was scum fakeclaiming in order to get a mislynch and win... in lylo

[RayFrost]

rofl, hayl.

My reason for being leery of claims is the amount of fake ones I see I'd rather vote after I have a person respond to suspicion of the claim, as it helps in determining its realness.