Open 171- Carbon 14, Part 2!! Over!!

[Scigatt]

Okay...wtf happened?

/confirm

[Scigatt]

What the hell happened. by the way? Last time I saw that game was last Friday.

Vote:dramonic

'cause screw you.

[Scigatt]

I don't always random vote in my games.

Who was scum last game?

Me and Khamisa. I made a bone-headed(poor vote tracking) post near the bottom of page 1, and dramonic was getting too close to it.(That's why my vote is where it is.) I haven't played since May or so, so I may have made that mistake even if I was town, but still, that mistake took my heart out of it. Also, perhaps as a foreshadowing, Amished forgot to indicate my partner's name in the role PM.

Mod, may I have permission to quote my old role PM?

[Scigatt]

WW. Don't know why I forgot to say that.

[Scigatt]

Newbie 763 (Town) - you random voted
Mini 775 (Town) - you didn't random vote
Mini 776 (Town) - you random voted for strategy reasons due to unusual game mechanics
Open 151 (Town) - you random voted
Mini 784 (Town) - you random voted
Open 158 (Scum) - RVS ended quickly; no random vote
Mini 778 (Town) - you random voted
Phables Death Note Mafia (Town) - your first post is post #243; no random vote obviously

I didn't look at games you replaced into, since presumably you replaced in after the RVS in those.

So basically you've only failed to random vote once without a good reason, and it was as Town.

Unvote

.

@Everyone except semioldguy: What do you think about this meta info?

Seems like a null tell to me.

[Scigatt]

Whoa, that wagon started way too fast for comfort.

Unvote
FoS:semioldguy

[Scigatt]

I unvoted because the dramonic vote was random and I wanted to get out of the random phase. It was totally unrelated to my suspicions on semioldguy.

[Scigatt]

which doesn't change the wagon-paranoia

It just seemed really fast(2 votes in 2 hours), and both of those votes were 'random' responses to Snow_Bunny's post. I was afraid that someone else would vote in jest to a lynch before they could unvote.

[Scigatt]

Why only an FoS instead of a vote?

I don't like throwing around serious votes too often, okay.

[Scigatt]

EBWOP:One more thing

FoS:Alduskkel

Again for being a little too eager on the wagon.

[Scigatt]

If my calculations are correct, next time I vote you're supposed to vote like me right after Scigatt

That doesn't make any sense...

[Scigatt]

I do find Scigatt's unvote a little jumpy, mostly because he wasn't even voting SB.

also, sog's lie about not random voting doesn't really strike me as scummy.

I told you, that unvote wasn't related to the FoS, it was to get rid of the random vote I had.

[Scigatt]

Hm, in the other games I read it's mostly just people fighting about very minor things, throwing votes around until someone gets tired of it and hammers (usually a townie...). So...

Vote: Khamisa

I disagree that Scigatt seems jumpy, and your last post seems like an attempt to misrepresent both Scigatt and sog.

Also, games move faster if people keep their vote somewhere rather than nowhere.

Good catch on the Khamisa-sog, thing. You can count on my support if I don't find something.

Anyway, what was the purpose of your post 56, dramonic? We are trying to get out of random voting and silliness, not extend it. (We do have a deadline, remember?)

[Scigatt]

It's called humor. Clearly you missed it, no matter. We have some stuff started.

Your post 24 was humour. If 56 is humour, then it's a really watered-down, crappy kind.

Also, for s.o.g.: No, we did not get any conversation in.

[Scigatt]

EBWOP:You know what, I really don't like that Khamisa was making her case without checking to see what the players actually did.(which, I think, would be the town thing to do, since you wouldn't want to misrepresent someone.)

Major FoS:Khamisa

, seeing as she is already at L-2.

[Scigatt]

My vote is so not changing.

What makes you so sure I'm scum?

[Scigatt]

Khamisa is at L-3 <<

Your overly-paranoid behaviour towards wagons (which your latest posts didn't help at all), along with your ignoring the fact that some conversation HAS happened. At to that that even your random votes is hindering your towniness (you tell me screw you cause I was on you first game and you were scum, what makes you think I can't catch scum again? Kill me quick much?) and we have a nice scum meltingpot

Ok!!!!

Vote: Khamisa

You won't escape this time!

I find it strange that you could miss that, seeing as it was the first official vote in the game and it was in the first vote count.

[Scigatt]

Right. People have to stop being overdramatic about putting someone at L-2. It is not a big deal, period. L-1 deserves scrutiny, and people not paying attention to votecounts certainly does too. But if everyone gets too scared to vote because more than one vote on a person is ohso evil, the game stagnates like whoa.

Here's me putting dramonic at L-2.

Vote:dramonic

(Remember that Khamisa was already at L-2, and my potential post 72 would have put her at L-1)

[Scigatt]

EBWOP:
*potential vote on post 72

[Scigatt]

Right. People have to stop being overdramatic about putting someone at L-2. It is not a big deal, period. L-1 deserves scrutiny, and people not paying attention to votecounts certainly does too. But if everyone gets too scared to vote because more than one vote on a person is ohso evil, the game stagnates like whoa.

Putting some at L-2 in the first 3 pages of the game can be a big deal. Yeah, it can be expected with the random votes, but still, it's really unlikely that all of those votes are really

random

.

Since L-2 is only two votes, I don't think it's a very big deal. I'd be surprised if it took very long before a player was at L-2. This game is much smaller than most games, so I don't think the ame mindset regarding an L-2 wagon applies.

L-1 wagons are probably more dangerous though, especially early on, as a potential quick mislynch would be extremely helpful to scum, even if one of them is potentially outted with the lynch. As town we only have one mislynch before we lose.

Cass, can you tell me how this conversation pertains to finding scum?

[Scigatt]

How about you ask the poster instead of Cass?

noted.

Because Cass started that conversation, and despite that I thought it wold be good to show part of the conversation in a condensed form.

Is that the only complaint you have?

[Scigatt]

Oh, I'll be away for the computer for most of Friday. In case there's a lynch and I don't make it to D2, I'd just like to say that if we lynch scum or get a guilty investigation result, the 'useless' investigator should claim, so we can narrow down lynch options.

[Scigatt]

Well, I'm back. (Went to see a concert yesterday. Yay Pearl Jam!:mrgreen:)

A modification to the above would be that in mass claim time an investigator claims merely that he is an investigator and does not reveal which type of investigator he is unless we have three investigator claims. This way scum wouldn't know which of the claimed investigators to kill on night two and have a 50/50 chance of killing the wrong one.

I like that plan if we neither lynch mafia or get a guilty investigation. Otherwise, I prefer my plan.

[Scigatt]

Speaking of which, does anyone have any outstanding issues they'd like to deal with? If not, I suggest we move to making a lynch soon. The deadline's just over 4 days away(

Mod:Is that 2:30 pm or am? And what time zone?

), and we seem to to be stagnating here.

[Scigatt]

EBWOP:Actually only 3 days.(I forgot September only has 30 days)

[Scigatt]

For me, it's dramonic. His miscount in trying to discredit me(

very

scummy, considering one was in the vote count and the other was a serious vote he should have been paying attention to.) and his overstated and hasty case when I pushed him make him, IMO, a highly provokable town at best. (see posts 75 and 76).

My second choice is Khamisa, but I get the impression that that she is more extremely inactive than scummy. I'd rather have her get replaced.

[Scigatt]

EBWOP:More on Khamisa

While she did make that false case against you, which caused me to nearly vote for her, but after thinking about it, I think it was due to lack of time spent on the game.

[Scigatt]

Also, let me detail my case against dramonic:

First of all. I nearly voted on Khamisa, but then saw the she was at L-2(which was

easily

determined from page 3 alone) and FoS'ed her instead, not wanting to put her at L-1. In response, dramonic said she was at L-3(incorrect) and then tried to use that against me. (Note his argument on post 74 starts with "

Your overly-paranoid behaviour towards wagons (which your latest posts didn't help at all)...

" and that he's been fairly active throughout the game, unlike Khamisa.) Now what you have is dramonic either lying or overlooking something that no pro-town should(and no competent pro-town would), especially something that he was using for support for his case.

[Scigatt]

Right. People have to stop being overdramatic about putting someone at L-2. It is not a big deal, period. L-1 deserves scrutiny, and people not paying attention to votecounts certainly does too. But if everyone gets too scared to vote because more than one vote on a person is ohso evil, the game stagnates like whoa.

Here's me putting dramonic at L-2.

Vote:dramonic

(Remember that Khamisa was already at L-2, and my potential post 72 would have put her at L-1)

Why would you vote for him? Before this post you made no prior accusation or case against him. So, why the sudden vote? Votes without reason are bad, and specially in a game so small.

See post 75, which I wrote as an echo to dramonic's post in the first game(I couldn't resist). It was an implicit case and I assumed it was obvious what I was doing and I also assumed your vote was the one he missed. I also stated(indirectly) in the post you quoted that dramonic was wrong in his post 74.

Oh, I'll be away for the computer for most of Friday. In case there's a lynch and I don't make it to D2, I'd just like to say that if we lynch scum or get a guilty investigation result, the 'useless' investigator should claim, so we can narrow down lynch options.

There's something about this post I don't like. I'm not sure, but there's definitively something I don't like.

I can understand where your discomfort comes from, but was just thinking that just in case something happens on Friday, I would get a chance to detail plans for roleclaiming, which we will probably need to do D2. I don't see anything in my plan which would hurt town, though.

I also don't like the over paranoid reaction towards L-2. I mean, this is a small game. It's only natural to put a player to L-2 and L-1. The problem would be lynching it. If we were in a larger game, a L-2 would mean much, and a L-1 even more. But at such small game, I don't think that's the case. I'm not saying that we should just put someone at L-1 without thinking, but that doesn't mean you should avoid putting someone if you think that person is scum. Otherwise, it seems as if you're trying to cover up a partner.

L-2, maybe, but not L-1, When someone's at L-1 anyone not on the 'wagon could, in a moment of misjudgment, end the day prematurely with a bad lynch. In every other game I've been in, large or small, L-1 has always been a big deal, and often worthy of votes. L-2, I admit, is not that a big deal, and I was worried L-2 the first time because it happened really fast on random votes, and the second time it was my head on the line(so I had to deal with it) and the FoS on Alduskkel was almost an afterthought.

UnFoS Alduskkel and sog

, by the way. Also, when you say that you think I was covering for a partner, do you mean yourself? If I recall correctly, the only L-2s I reacted negatively to were yours and mine. (When I backed off voting for Khamisa my vote would have put her at L-1, so that doesn't count. I even approved that bandwagon at L-2(posts 64 and 72).)

I don't find Scigatt's case on dramonic that strong.

Here's what I was trying to get across:

Dramonic used incorrect information to make a case against me with the correct information within easy reach. Not only is this information easy to find, but this information is something any pro-town player should know, especially when using it to strengthen their case, and especially given the activity level of dramonic and the circumstances of the game.

If that isn't a scum tell, I don't know what is.

[Scigatt]

It's a pretty hard mistake to make, don't you think? Are you even bothering to do any fact checking?

See post 75, which I wrote as an echo to dramonic's post in the first game(I couldn't resist).

What do you mean here?

See post 50 of the old game. I tried to imitate that.

[Scigatt]

@Scigatt: Your case agaisnt me is awful. Basically your only reason is because I have made a mistaken accusation. Don't be ridiculous, your case is terrible and you know it.

It would have taken less than a minute to see that there were two votes on Khamisa, and you should have known about the 4-to-lynch(Your 'defense' on post 78 strikes me as after-the-fact BS.). Even if you didn't check, you should have known about the votecount and Cass's vote soon after. The fact that you were lacking here indicates to me that you were more interested in pushing a bandwagon then the truth.

[Scigatt]

Mod, Can you prod Cass?

[Scigatt]

Scigatt: so your saying dramonic purposely used incorrect information? That's not clicking in my synapses.

I'm saying he either purposely used wrong information or(more likely) didn't care enough about the facts to make sure they were correct in the first place. Either of those indicate his scumminess.

[Scigatt]

You're just grasping at straws here. Be a dear and get lynched.

Do you have anything useful to to say or are you going to keep spouting ill wishes at me?

[Scigatt]

heh, I don't consider your case on me any better than my ill wishes ^_^

Okay, then, I'll hold you to that claim.
What makes you think that a player using a piece of evidence as support for their case without taking care and a few seconds to verify that evidence(especially something as basic and important as votes-away-from-lynch) is not a rather revealing scum tell, or indicative of scum at all?

[Scigatt]

The psyche is the same, point for point.

Two things about that:
1.What are these points and what are they based on? If you have these points, why did you refrain from posting them, when someone asked? In fact, I've noticed that in your recent posts you have consistently refrained from stating any solid evidence for your claims. (The last time you did that was post l

Scigatt's case on me is something along the line of "I made mistake as scum last time, dram made the same mistake this time, therefore he is scum". First, this is hasty supposition, second I'm not being selective about my bandwagon analysis, unlike scum-gatt last game.

[Scigatt]

The psyche is the same, point for point.

Two things about that:
1.What are these points and what are they based on? If you have these points, why did you refrain from posting them, when someone asked? In fact, I've noticed that in your recent posts you have consistently refrained from stating any solid evidence for your claims. (The last time you did that was post l

Scigatt's case on me is something along the line of "I made mistake as scum last time, dram made the same mistake this time, therefore he is scum". First, this is hasty supposition, second I'm not being selective about my bandwagon analysis, unlike scum-gatt last game.

EBWOP:(accidently pressed Submit intead of Preview)
1.What are these points and what are they based on? If you have these points, why did you refrain from posting them, when someone asked? In fact, I've noticed that in your recent posts you have consistently refrained from stating any solid evidence for your claims. (The last time you did that was post 74, and we all know how well that turned out).

I'll cover the second part in the next post.

[Scigatt]

The psyche is the same, point for point.

Two things about that:
1.What are these points and what are they based on? If you have these points, why did you refrain from posting them, when someone asked? In fact, I've noticed that in your recent posts you have consistently refrained from stating any solid evidence for your claims. (The last time you did that was post l

Scigatt's case on me is something along the line of "I made mistake as scum last time, dram made the same mistake this time, therefore he is scum". First, this is hasty supposition, second I'm not being selective about my bandwagon analysis, unlike scum-gatt last game.

EBWOP:(accidently pressed Submit intead of Preview)
1.What are these points and what are they based on? If you have these points, why did you refrain from posting them, when someone asked? In fact, I've noticed that in your recent posts you have consistently refrained from stating any solid evidence for your claims. (The last time you did that was post 74, and we all know how well that turned out).

I'll cover the second part in the next post.

Continuing right where I left off(I'm a bit unhappy with what I accidentally posted, but it will have to do)...
2.Even if you do have evidence of a similar state of mind between the two iterations of this game, how do you know if that's due to me being scum or me being myself?

Scigatt's case on me is something along the line of "I made mistake as scum last time, dram made the same mistake this time, therefore he is scum". First, this is hasty supposition, second I'm not being selective about my bandwagon analysis, unlike scum-gatt last game.

Except for an irrelevant allusion to that last game in post 75 and post 122 explaining that, I have refrained from relating to the last game at the time when I was pushing my case on you. However, if you insist, I will try to take care of your concerns. You state that my argument is flawed because you weren't being selective in your criticisms. The fact that I was being selective does strengthen the case against me in that game, but that doesn't mean that a lack of selectivity hurts my case. The reason for this is that while in the previous game there was more than one L-1(what I was criticizing), in this game there was only one situation(post 72) where a player explicitly avoided voting to stay away from L-1(what you were referencing) when you made your case against that. It's kinda hard to be selective when there is only one option to select. I will agree that there is similarity between the two cases: A carelessness and almost willful ignorance of key facts in the pursuit of our interests. This tendency is neither optimal or desired town play. This is also reflected in your dearth of supporting evidence in your case against me in this game.

As to your hasty supposition claim, as I implied above, that post 74 was merely the most striking part of that aspect of your game and thus I focused on this for my argument. Also, consider this is D1 in a Day Start game. All we have to go on is what we say and all we can do is go for the best lead. I think what I have is the best lead, and I'm not the only one who thinks so(Alduskkel, post 76, 130, etc. S_B, post 135).

[Scigatt]

Scigatt: Not caring =/= scumminess. If you believe what you are saying, what do you think of me accusing semioldguy of lying about random votes?

semioldguy: I don't see much in isolation that makes Cass noteworthy. I agree with his statemenets bout random voting and the difference between L2 and L1.

Look at what I said more carefully:"A carelessness and

almost willful ignorance

of key facts in the pursuit of our interests." By almost willful I mean that it almost seems like he purposely ignored the evidence, given the number of times he's been exposed to it as indicated by his activity level. You, on the other hand, have been extremely inactive, and I wouldn't be surprised if there were posts you haven't read yet in this game.

[Scigatt]

Scigatt, you're missing my point completely.

Selective attempts to stop specific quickwagons while ignoring others = scummy
Trying to stop all quickwagons (or in this case, calling people out on what I incorrectly perceived as wagon paranoia) =/= scummy

The fact there was only one wagon doesn't change that.

Okay...you say that stopping a quickwagon(or quick bandwagon) is not a scummy thing. Well, the closest we ever got to a fast, premature L-1 in this game so far is those two-votes-in-a-row L-2's on the second page. I was opposed to both of those 'wagons, as you can recall seeing as you the first voter on both of those bandwagons. Selective attempts to stop quickwagons may be suspicious, but nobody in this game, as far as I can tell, had done that, and my arguments haven't been based on it nor have I brought up(rather than responded to) the last game in a relevant way. The only reason I even talked about that is that you mentioned it and I wanted to address that concern.

Also, as a side comment: You say that it is not scummy to try and stop quick bandwagons. However, as I said above, of the only two dangerous bandwagons, I was opposed to both of them. However, it is my impression that it was my act of opposition to those bandwagons that is the greater part of your case. If that is the case, why are you still voting for me, if you changed you mind?

[Scigatt]

Scigatt: I fail to see why scum would purposely look over actual evidence that could lynch someone.

I'm not sure what you mean by 'look over'. Do you mean 'pass over' or 'look up', or can you rephrase that?

Anyways, unless Cass or someone else comes up with a new, very convincing case within the next 33 hours or so, there are only two real options for a lynch: you and dramonic. You know what your alignment is, and if you're town, you have to admit that there is a chance, however small you think it is, that dramonic is scum. You may dislike that choice, but that's your own fault for not being really involved in the discussion.

[Scigatt]

Khamisa, claim investigator or not-investigator.

FoS:Alduskkel

Don't give scum a prospective (non)-target.

[Scigatt]

Khamisa is at L-1 and the deadline is in 2 days. Don't tell me that a claim isn't in order.

You have to think beyond D1 here. Our strongest mechanism for narrowing our lynch options in D2 is the roleclaim, and I'd rather not give scum a better chance of f***ing with that with the NK.

[Scigatt]

Scigatt, how likely do you think a Khamisa lynch is without her claiming?

Slightly less than 50/50 is my best guess, if we assume that sog, you, me, and dramonic don't change vote. There is a (probably somewhat small) chance that Cass could vote dramonic, which would mean that Khamisa is pretty much in the clear. There is also a small probability that Khamisa will self-vote, with obvious results. After that it's a matter of S_B's final opinion and whether Khamisa votes at all. S_B did say that we have the 'biggest lead'(post 135), so I feel we have the advantage there. If Khamisa doesn't vote, however, all of that goes up in the air.

Also, I find the fact that Khamisa has continued to defend dramonic even when they were the only two plausible lynches perplexing. The only semi-rational explanation I can think of is that they are scum partners, but I find it unlikely that things lined up so well for town and even if that is the case and Khamisa is scum-partners with dramonic, it's a really bad strategy she is using.

[Scigatt]

Scigatt: I'm not denying that dramonic is scum. I just fail to see why scum would purposely pass over REAL evidence that could give them a more coherent case, and instead use false evidence that's more likely to be picked up by town members as, well, false.

I also claim

Townieee

.

Two things:
1.Where is this "REAL evidence" you speak of? If I recall correctly, dramonic has been very stingy about using quotes other than to respond to(i.e. not as evidence), citing post numbers, etc. for his case on me(i.e. for support of his 'psyche' claim(posts 115, 137)). His defense hasn't been much better, with a non-sequitur complaint about selectivity(posts 137,143) and at one point simply calling my case 'crap' with little to no reasoning(posts 120, 125, 129).

2.You still seem to be thinking that I'm saying that dramonic explicitly lied. Let me try and run-down my case:

Situation:dramonic used false(and easily verifiable) information to support a case of his.

Explanations that have been proposed by you and me so far:
Explanation 1:dramonic didn't care about the game.(Untrue, if his activity level is suggestive of anything)
Explanation 2:dramonic cared about pushing the case, but not so much for facts.(scummy, and IMO probable, hence the vote and case.)
Explanation 3:dramonic outright lied(unlikely)

[Scigatt]

Also, I find the fact that Khamisa has continued to defend dramonic even when they were the only two plausible lynches perplexing. The only semi-rational explanation I can think of is that they are scum partners, but I find it unlikely that things lined up so well for town and even if that is the case and Khamisa is scum-partners with dramonic, it's a really bad strategy she is using.

Another explanation that'd I'd see for this, that I didn't realize until you put it this way, is that Khamisa is town and honestly sees dramonic as town also (whether she is right or wrong is irrelevant to my point)

In one of my Newbie games I replaced in as one of the two top suspects near and impending lynch (much like our situation now). I was town, and I did not find the other lynch target to be scummy at all and was confident he was not scum. They lynched him anyway, instead of me, and I was right. I easily could have been wrong though. Other stuff with Khamisa doesn't necessarily add up though

Maybe...
However, except in a lylo situation, I can't see where it makes much sense to keep arguing, likely in vain, than to go with the other lynch. Personally though, I can't see that what she is doing as making much sense, whatever her situation is.

[Scigatt]

What are you doing?

[Scigatt]

So, with no more vote changes, it's dramonic to go.(dramonic has been as L-2 since post 84, but the Khamisa bandwagon has only been at L-2 or greater continuously since post 108)

[Scigatt]

Major FoS:dramonic

Why the hell would Khamisa-scum hesitate to vote for you if you were town?

[Scigatt]

V/LA for a few days.

I am at the hospital right now, had a really bad back muscle spasm, but they've got me drugged up and feeling better and I'm hoping they send me home within a day or two.

We should probably hold off on any lynches until everyone is here.

[Scigatt]

Agreed. Id be up for a SB lynch once everyone is here.

Back up there. Note the following things: All of us except S_B and sog have made posts pertinent to finding scum in D2. However, there have been no cop claims yet. Alduskkel's post 196 clearly rules him out as cop. I'll claim now that I'm not cop. I don't see it likely that you are cop(though if you are, you should probably claim ASAP, even with an innocent result. That goes for everyone, in fact.). That leads me to think that S_B or sog is the cop. (I'm leaning a bit towards S_B, seeing as sog did post D2, but I wouldn't be surprised if sog just forgot about it, with the drugs and all.) It's exactly for this reason that I wanted to hold off on lynching until everyone is here.

[Scigatt]

Why should the Cop claim with just an innocent result?

IMO if the Cop has an innocent result they should claim if they're about to by lynched or the person they know is innocent is about to be lynched.

Hmm...let me think about this. I was thinking that if the cop claims with an innocent we'll have 2 confirmed town. If we lynch wrong today, we'll still have 1 confirmed town on D3.

[Scigatt]

Well true, if the Cop has an innocent result then we'll have at least 1 confirmed innocent on Day 3 (if we get there), whereas if the Cop doesn't claim then we could potentially end up with no one confirmed on Day 3.

So I guess I'm okay with the Cop claiming as long as they didn't investigate Cass.

FYI, I haven't claimed not-Cop. But if I am the Cop then I investigated Cass. I wish you hadn't claimed not-Cop, Scigatt.

Does anyone seriously believe that Alduskkel-cop would investigate Cass?

Anyways, I mentioned that about you and claimed not-cop because I wanted to defuse the possibility of an S_B lynch. Even if she isn't a cop, at first glance she doesn't pair up well with Khamisa, despite her suspicious behavior.

Also, I agree that if the cop investigated Cass they shouldn't claim unless they are in danger of a lynch.

[Scigatt]

Oh. Right. Got S_B and Cass confuzzled.

And it's 1:00 A.M.

As you stated, S_B was on the site without posting(post 185). This was when sog had his vote on Cass. If she was obliged, she could have gone into the thread and voted dramonic, virtually guaranteeing his lynch. The fact that she didn't do that indicates to me that she isn't partnered to Khamisa.(It would have saved her partner and put suspicion on me and you D2 if she had done that(because then dramonic would be town))

[Scigatt]

EBWOP:

Anyways, for similar reasons, I don't see sog as linked to Khamisa(he might have changed his vote with little suspicion(posts 174-175), though his case is a little iffier). To me that leaves Alduskkel and dramonic. Considering Khamisa's actions in arguing dramonic's wagon(post 163, 126, etc.), and the fact the no one has a plausible explanation for her behavior if she is scum and dramonic is town, strongly suggests my next action.

Vote:dramonic

[Scigatt]

Unvote

for now.

Let's wait for everyone. If dramonic isn't the cop, will the real cop please claim? (Even if you did investigate Cass)

[Scigatt]

If dramonic isn't the cop, will the real cop please claim? (Even if you did investigate Cass)

I'm pretty sure dramonic isn't a dumbass. He's obviously the real Cop.

1.Note that right before his claim, he was at L-1, and even without that he was the leading suspect.
2. The only person who could plausibly counterclaim dramonic is in the hospital.

In fact, even before N1, I suspected sog of being an investigator. (his end-of-D1 tactics reeked of trying to deflect the NK)

I'm open to the fact that dramonic is cop. However, it doesn't seem likely to me, considering Khamisa's actions anfd her connection to dramonic.

[Scigatt]

Scigatt, I have no benifit to claim cop if I'm scum. If I'm scum I'm going to eb counterclaimed and we'll lynch one cop. If we get the wrong one, we lynch the other. It's lose-lose for scum.

Assuming that you are scum(for this entire paragraph), you likely would have lost already, or very soon, had you not claimed. What you did was to buy some time, time in which you hoped anything could happen.

[/assumption]I gave you the benefit of the doubt by unvoting. However, there are things that bother me about you(Khamisa's protests, mostly, but also other things like the somewhat peculiar timing of your claim(post 216 instead of 214), both of those occuring after Alduskkel said it was okay to claim with a useful innocent result(post 204), and your D1 slip.), so I'm keeping a 'rearguard' suspicion on you. I will look up other suspects, though.

[Scigatt]

Let me look over the tread and reorient myself for a while.

[Scigatt]

As I said before, I was Werewolf. While we are on this topic, here's me old role PM(which I promised a long time ago):

You are a werewolf goon, along with your partner XXXXX who is also a werewolf goon.

Each night you may submit a name to me through PM or in quicktopic to be killed. The last name submitted will be the person chosen to die.

You may only talk with your partner during the Night Phase. Communication at any other period of time is risking a mod-kill depending on the severity of the offense. Seriously, only talk at night.

You win when you become at least half of the town, or nothing can prevent the same.

The link to your QuickTopic is here:
http://www.quicktopic.com/43/H/cegMFYWs5a3

You may talk during confirmations, I will let you know in QT when discussion has to cease.

Please confirm in thread here:
http://www.mafiascum.net/forum/viewtopic.php?p=1855839

Also, I was the one who requested that N1 be extended.

[Scigatt]

why?

I was starting up a new game and I didn't want to have to get it up and running and play this game at the same time.

[Scigatt]

To get me started on suspicions, I decided to look into the NK. Here's Cass's pbp, including other players' significant mentions of her(tell me if I missed anything.)

39:Sees random vote meta as pointless, skips random vote.
57:Says she's having some problems getting into the game.
63:Calls out Khamisa for misrepresentation, votes her.
64:I commend her, pledge provisional support.
82:Comments on bandwagon over-reaction
84-87:Responding conversation to that comment
88:Me calling her out(for what I perceive to be trying to deflect my case, tbh)
89, 91:Responses to that.
99*:Mentions complication of investigator death, scolds S_B for keeping random vote
136:sog mentions that Cass has taken little ground
150:sog asks about Cass replacement
152:Cass responds to prod, happy with her vote, gets to reading
165:sog asks Cass about read
172:Ald. lists Cass as 3rd/4th suspicion(note that this is a response to a comment about the female players' activity)
176:sog talks about Cass as his main suspect, but says can't change wagons
177:sog votes for Cass
181:sog explains his intent to prod Cass

Now, looking at the final posts, it seems that Cass was an obsession of sog, with sog saying that she was his prime suspect. Also, note that sog was generally the highest-regarded(i.e. most likely town) player at the close of D1(anyone disagree?). In otherwords, sog was NK bait, but somehow he still lives. There are two explanations for this with the setup we have:
1.sog is well-disguised scum.
2.sog is honest but misguided town whom the scum wanted to use to cause a mislynch.

It is obvious now that sog was misguided in his suspicions, but it kinda hurts hypothesis #2 when

his main suspicion is NK'ed!

I can kinda see S_B or Ald. killing Cass, especially if they thought post 99 was an investigator tell(The only one I could find, note the asterisk), but to me a Cass NK seems to point to sog-scum. Now, before I make my vote, does anyone have any comments about my case?

[Scigatt]

Sog is an intelligent man, I highly doubt he'd leave such an obvious trail to him. I think we have more chances that SB killed Cass, hoping to divert the attention on Sog. She IS pushing for us to read his ISO, which would lead to an analysis like this.

Pretty sure it's between Aldu and SB. Fortunately, we have two days (including this one) to kill the scum.

I'm not sure S_B would have taken time to think like that, given her apparent indifference throughout this game. Also, this seems like WIFOM to me, although I may have been to one to take it over that line in my previous post, and I may be mistaken about that. Anyways, I have some other opinions, and I'm not ready for D2 to end just yet.

P.S.:What is an ISO?

[Scigatt]

ISO, for Isolation, is the integrity of the post made by a single person, which can be accessed in the bar just below the quick-submit button. ISO # refers to the number of a post in that person's ISO.

When did they add that?

[Scigatt]

A posy-by-post analysis of a single player can be used to make anyone look scummy and are often themselves scummy. Isolation reads and post-by-post analysis of a player can be helpful, but it leads to ignoring much of the rest of the game and the larger picture as well as interactions between players.

I like Alduskkel's post analysis because it doesn't fall into the trap of isolating a single player, it looks at the interaction between players.

@Scigatt & dramonic
Speculation on night kills is not often fruitful and leads to lots of second guessing and whatnot. It could be argued that killing the towniest player is not the way to go in this setup, especially since scum being lynched day one means the nightkill must either hit one of the investigators or the target of the good investigator or it is auto-lose for the scum.

I'll grant you these two points.

@Scigatt
Before lynching me I would like the other two non-confirmed (since they both are most suspicious of me) to post detailed cases on me and why they find me scummy. Tomorrow (since dramonic will surely take the hit tonight) you can review the two cases of the remaining players to help determine which seems genuine and which seems forced.

...so that I can vote for whomever is the least persuasive writer. Because everyone knows good writing=townieness.

I of course think this will lead to Snow_Bunny, who hasn't committed to anything on her own this whole game. Her defense is based on WIFOM, saying that if she were scum that she could have stopped Khamisa's lynch isn't a good argument. She has changed her story as to why she didn't post at the end of the day which became. Initially it was because she "didn't have much to say" and "had nothing useful to add" which turned into that she "had suspects" and "had no motivation whatsoever to start a discussion so near the deadline."

Note:I trimmed out parts clearly addressed to S_B.

You know, it's even easier to make someone look scummy when you quote snippets without any references. If you're trying to convince me of her guilt, at least put some post numbers to the quotes.

Now, if we look at previous roles(which you insisted on doing(p.233), but never wrapped up.), you can see by process of elimination(me and Kham were scum, dram and you were investigators) that she was a townie in the other game. Also, we know that she is either townie or scum in this game. Also, you say that she wasn't as appealing as the first(you say that p.233, she says it p.58 and possibly elsewhere). Therefore, you are asking me to believe that S_B-scum in this game was less into the game than S_B-townie last game. Unless you can give me a good meta reason to believe that isn't unlikely, I can't in good conscience vote for S_B's lynch.

Anyways, here is my current suspicion list, 'cause I feel like posting it.(most scummy on top):
sog
Alduskkel
S_B

I really don't like the middle-ish part of sog's post, and dramonic's explanation(p.253) is striking me more as WIFOM now. I don't think currently that S_B is scum due to reasons stated above. My next course of action is to reread Alduskkel, but I'd also like to see everyone chip in to the conversation.

[Scigatt]

Am I really you're 2nd suspect? I don't think S_B's meta here is that good of a tell. Maybe she likes playing scum less. Maybe she just finds it hard to get into a game again. I don't know. But so far the only evidence presented against me is that I couldn't prevent Khamisa's lynch, so I just find it weird that I'm you're 2nd suspect, especially given S_B's antics (or rather a lack thereof) at the end of Day 1.

I have a somewhat town read on S_B. I have a somewhat scum read on sog. I have no read on you yet. It's that simple.

[Scigatt]

Are we waiting for semioldguy or something? Because this game is stalling...

Sorry, but I haven't been giving much attention to this game recently. I'll try to get to rereading you ASAP.

[Scigatt]

Well, I wasn't gonna post anything until after the move, but since it seems like that won't occur for a while, here's some notes on Alduskkel I took and my reactions:

-He votes for sog on random vote suspicions, then backs off after doing a meta.(p. 26-39)
-He votes for me, then stops posting for a while. The meta checks out, though.(p. 45-75)
-His first post afterwards, right after my post 75, goes with the case presented there. After his first questioning of dramonic, he only makes one post with solid evidential support(p.117), while I do all the heavy arguing.(p. 76-149)
-As my case is winding down, he asks for Khamisa to claim investigator. I have a minor argument about it with him. (p. 154-160)
-Right afterwards, he runs with my idea of a Khamisa-dramonic link.
(p. 161-167)
-Note for p.172:Khamisa's vote was in confirmations, thus shouldn't have counted.
-He spends the first part of page 8 probing sog for his vote changes(p. 175-182)
-The rest of that day is him talking about S_B who avoided posting in this game. (p. 183-191)
-When D2 starts, he is still onto on dramonic and S_B.(p.196)
-I start arguing with him about cop claims and he makes a really bad one and others call him on it.(p. 204-215). At this point he also starts to look at S_B and gets a little confused.(p. 207-210)
-After I make my vote, he makes a vote to dramonic at L-1, after which dramonic claims cop. Ald. backs off.(p. 215-217)
-He posts a pbp of Kham. and her links. He reverses his position on S_B and votes sog but backs off due to uncertainty.(p. 220-224)
-He begins to question S_B, but sparingly.(p. 213-243)
-Finally, he decides to make a stand on sog, trusting his gut(p.251)

Things that make him look scummy that I can think of right now:
-His post 161(Seems like a distancing post to me, and the timing seems odd too(right before he was asking for a claim).)
-His quick reversal of opinion on S_B from scummy to inattentive without any posts or new cases on her
-The fact that he 'coasted' on my case without contributing much for a good portion of D1

Things that make him look more town that I can think of right now:
-The fact that he caught S_B in the forum
-The fact that he did some work looking for sog's rvs meta.
-His serious thought about how others could have stopped the lynch.

Overall read: Slight scum, put him not ahead but close to sog with what I can see now.

Also, I have some comments on the most recent case on S_B, but I want sog to respond to my post 259 first, and that'll probably happen after the forum move.

[Scigatt]

...so that I can vote for whomever is the least persuasive writer. Because everyone knows good writing=townieness.

No, because if they write nothing it gives you one less day/lynch to get a read on and writing nothing means that the scum can't slip up. You shouldn't be looking to or let yourself be persuaded, you should be looking for scumminess.

Maybe, but that doesn't mean the better their case is presented the less scummy they are. I don't see how one could get anything out of your proposal other than that, as scum has just as much motivation to make a good case on you as town does and they are working with the same evidence.

I did not post anything near the deadline because I had nothing useful to add.

Neither Khamisa's nor dram's wagons were appealing to me. What else I was going to say? I unvoted her because my vote was purely random. Would you have preferred my vote to stay where it was? Why?

My bad. No,

I had suspects, but nothing regarding the coming deadline. And truth be told, I had no motivation whatsoever to start a discussion so near the deadline

, specially after coming out from my sickness. Blame me if you will, but as someone else said, if I was scum, I had the chance to help Khamisa and probably myslynch, and I didn't. What does that tell you?

She changes her story in a matter of hours. If the second post was the reason, she shouldn't have felt the need to hide that reason from the town.

Personally, I don't find those excuses mutually exclusive. Especially given the situation she was asked to post in(two established bandwagons close to deadline), new suspicions are next-to-useless to town, as you essentially admit yourself on post 176. The only use such suspicions might be is for some NK-WIFOMing, and the fact that you keep harping on this makes me more suspicious of you.

Now, if we look at previous roles(which you insisted on doing(p.233), but never wrapped up.), you can see by process of elimination(me and Kham were scum, dram and you were investigators) that she was a townie in the other game. Also, we know that she is either townie or scum in this game. Also, you say that she wasn't as appealing as the first(you say that p.233, she says it p.58 and possibly elsewhere). Therefore, you are asking me to believe that S_B-scum in this game was less into the game than S_B-townie last game. Unless you can give me a good meta reason to believe that isn't unlikely, I can't in good conscience vote for S_B's lynch.

Because people play differently under different roles and different people have different role preferences. I most prefer townie and was happy with the re-roll because I didn't have to be cop anymore (even though I was essentially townie in that game I couldn't have known that)

More information can help to get better reads on players. It doesn't always, but avoiding more information seems much less likely to help. I think Snow_Bunny's differences from last game in addition to her behavior alone in this game BOTH point to her being the remaining scum.

If you wanted more information, I don't understand why didn't follow through or do that meta that I asked. You make a guess as to why she was less active in this game, but without a meta all that is is mere speculation. The fact that you say you want "more information" without living up to that just makes me want to lynch you.

Vote:semioldguy

[Scigatt]

Well, on the off chance that you do stay alive, don't forget to investigate someone.
Scigatt: You never responded to 268.

It seemed odd because that was the first post after I made the Khamisa-dramonic link, and he seemed a bit too eager to concur.

[Scigatt]

I hope you,re not too pissed I'm town Scigatt

Nah. Gave me a chance to exorcise some mafiascum demons. Besides, it's always fun to make a Québécois a little uncomfortable, and anyways there was no way you'd be NK'd N1.

[Scigatt]

Scigatt, you're calling me scummy for agreeing with you. Need I say more?

I'm calling you scummy for riding on my case. Also, we don't know that sog isn't faking it(that's what I'd do, in any case), and I'm too lazy right now to do that kind of meta. Also, first part of his post 284 is total BS.

[Scigatt]

Why is the first part of 284 BS? It's legit, if WIFOM.

'cause if you did that you'd be obvscum and I'd have lynched your ass in D3.

[Scigatt]

I could have easily gotten away with hammering S_B in 251.

That was before I made my scumlist.

[Scigatt]

EBWOP:At that point you had every reason to believe that sog looked townier than you in my eyes.

[Scigatt]

Okay then, why didn't I hammer in 260? I said in 251 that I could "still easily see SB being scum" and had expressed suspicion of her for active lurking. I could have easily switched then. Maybe I'd say,

Meh, maybe going with my gut is a bad idea. SB hasn't provided any good explanation for her active lurking, so Vote: Snow_Bunny.

Just as an example.

Did you think that I wouldn't be able to see the connection? That would have been a weak post anyways, and I'm pretty sure you know that.

[Scigatt]

hooray!!!

[Scigatt]

I didn't play very well.

I almost killed dramonic, but because I thought he would be a likely investigate target. I actually thought that he wasn't the cop and in the end made my decision to kill Cass because I thought she had a chance of being either a cop or an investigate target.

dramonic, your reads on me are usually very good. Though the two of us haven't appeared in many games, my alt has played a few games with you and you've always been pretty spot on about my alignment in those games.

If I was town I would not have lynched you on day one dramonic. It wasn't something I could see myself doing as town and thought that it would have given me and my partner away.

I think on day 1 you actually played fairly well. All I have to say is that in D2 you'd have had a lot better chance attacking Alduskkel than S_B. Even as I was dropping the hammer I was anticipating lynching him D3, and at one point in D2 I was considering voting Alduskkel and making a stand on him, but your case against S_B in post 270 reminded me of a similar experience I had and that was enough to push me towards voting for you.

[Scigatt]

I think I would have been much better off if I had just not done any of the vote switching toward the end of day one like I did and stayed steady with my Khamisa vote but not lurking into the end of the day. That'll teach me to drink and post.

If you're gonna beat yourself up about it, despite the fact that both me and the mod think you played fairly well D1, you should have voted for dram on post 174 and stayed there. That would put us in lylo and with no info as to which investigator is effective D2. Even if someone got a guilty result, on D3(if the investigators were different), your town cred along with the possible backlash against me and Ald. could be a deciding factor.

[Scigatt]

Also, if I may bring this up, Mafia 102 is always looking for potential replacements. After the move I'll be doing a massive cleanup and some replacements would help.