California Trilogy: City of Angels - Off Stage (Game Over)

[MrJellyLee]

[PJ Posting]

The more I think about it, the more I think CKD is probably scum. I just can't get over the fact that the Advocates for Scene One were chosen "at random." Now, I am willing to say that the

characters

chosen were not random: Mr. Grey probably chose John Locke and Valentine ahead of time. But I still think that who got what role and what alignment would still be random.

Query:

If the Scientologists are a Cult, then why would Mr. Grey also allow the "Screen Mafia Guild" to get a recruit on Day One as well?

Even if there is an answer for that, what would have happened if a Scientologist got CKD's offer to become a member of the Screen Mafia Guild? I just can't see Mr. Grey allowing for that to actually be a possibility. I also think the same problem would arise if a member of SMG were given an offer to become a member of the SMG (which I have been talking about for forever and a day).

[VP Baltar]

I will admit that the thought of a third party scum group did cross my mind, considering how anti-town he had been acting, but I didn't really think it was that likely.

^This is what I am saying about non-sense. Why in the world would all of his anti-town actions automatically make you assume 3rd party rather than scum. Even if you think that the scum wouldn't put him in the scene as advocate (which I still think your logic is horrible on), how could you be so assured of that, that you would assume 3rd party over plain old scum.

[Mighty Orbots]

I would also like to see Elmosaurian taken off-camera by the stuntman. I think he's scum, and even if he is town, I no longer trust him to reason through any decisions that could affect endgame setup.

Working on some other games at the moment, but I just wanted to pop in and say I support this 100% obv. I thought he was scum Day 1 and there was absolutely nothing in his play on camera that convinces me otherwise.

Dunno where Troll is, we'll discuss and get back with ya'll.

-PZ

[Gaspar]

I did. I thought that was pretty clear; I did think Krew was probably pro-town. Not so much because of his actions, but because I thought that the scum wouldn't make him the advocate if he was one of their own.

So what you're saying is that you speculated on Scums' behavior rather than using a player's own verified anti-town behavior to make a decision on his alignment?

This sounds very unlike you, Yos. Can you see why I'm suspicious of you?

If we're assuming "Scientology" was not the "something else" group, like you apparently think now, then he probably didn't actually know which was the right door and which was the wrong door. If so, then that means there was only a 33% chance door 1 was right, and we just got really, really lucky there.

Not true, considering he still got partial information as an Advocate. You're assuming he did pick randomly, when I believe that was defintiely not the case. At the time, we thought he was anti-town. We know now that he was, at the very least, not Innocent. (I would go as far as calling him anti-town, personally.) So he was still not acting in our best interests. He didn't pick randomly, he was going to act against us because we were going to lynch him, and there is a very reasonable chance he DID know which one was right. Your argument here fails completely and utterly.

I thought he wasn't scum, BECAUSE I thought he wasn't part of the scum group pulling the strings. At the time, I was assuming there was probably only scum and town, so I was assuming that meant he was likely town.

Again, see my above point. I would never expect you to actually flip-flop on your stance based on trying to outguess what you think the Scums are doing. Seriously, this sounds completely contrived to me. ALL in-thread evidence suggests that Krew was not protown, yet you are telling us that you WIFOM'd yourself into thinking he was protown. Have I mentioned that I've got a bridge to sell you?

I will admit that the thought of a third party scum group did cross my mind, considering how anti-town he had been acting, but I didn't really think it was that likely.

I'll bite. Three questions:
1) How likely (rough percentage) did you think of the existence of a Third Party?
2) Why didn't you bring it up regardless how how "unlikely" you thought it was?
3) Did you consider Krew's actions/motivations if he

was

of a third alignment? If so, what were those actions/motivations?

[elmosaurian]

*cough-Elmo-post-cough*

(nods) Forgot about that. I stand corrected.

I would like to see some substantiation behind your claim that I was avoiding commentary on the leading wagons, when my

second post in the game

upon replacing made it clear what I thought about pretty much everybody, seeing as I made a full concordet vote list. Not only that, but I explained myself more fully in my

fourth

post of the game when GoofballsandBaloons directly asked me about my list.

I will fully admit: I wanted the town to focus more than they were on curiouskarmadog and Panzerjagger, because I honestly thought both Advocates were probably lying and I was flabbergasted that nobody was really talking about them Off Screen (where the focus was instead MafiaJin, Talilan and Hewitt).

I will also mention that Talilan was not "a relevant wagon” that required commentary for most of Day One since she was

On Screen

for most of Day One. But even then, I made it clear that I did not really suspect Talilan for questioning curiouskarmadog – which seemed to the main case against her – since

my

initial reaction was

also

to question curiouskarmadog.

Talilan was a relevent wagon, because there was a real chance they might have been lynched day 1.

And for the most part, with a deadline coming up, you really seemed to avoid commenting on the people we might actually lynch. Let me make a summery of all of your posts, as I read them in isolation. I apologize to everyone for this very dense paragraph, but I think it's important.

Post zero: You comment on on camera people; mafiajin, the two advocates. Post 1, you vote me for "talking about mechanics", but I was never in any danger of being lynched day 1, and I'm sure you know that; otherwise, you mostly comment about on-screen people. Post 2, you comment on voting Mr. Gray. Post 3, you don't really do any real scumhunting, except for a vauge threat to "bump DGB up your list" because of what looks like a weak theory disagreement with her involving scum being on vs. off the bandwagon (frankly, I would think you would be MORE surprised if you agreed with everything DGB said about mafia theory, lol.) You also have made some comments about KY being scummy, but have him oddly far down your concordant list. Post 4, you talk about the advocates some more. Post 5, you complain about KY, after he leaves the thread. Post 6, you comment on a misunderstanding of SL and say hi to thok. Post 7, you talk more about the advocates. Post 8, you talk more about the advocates, and take a brief break to argue theory with me involving mechanics discussion. Post 9, you use bad math in discussing the advocates (which honestly kind of already jars me, considering I wouldn't expect that from you) and then argue theory some more. Post 10, more about on camera. Post 11, you attack me for leaving a sentance unfinished. Post 12, more about the advocates and the on camera stuff, and an odd comment to gasper about how he should be willing to attack you. Post 13, with only 24 hours left before deadline, you still don't say anything about the fact Zwet is about to be lynched, except for a quick comment about posting pictures to the on-camera thread.

I don't have any specific problem with any of that stuff. What I have a problem with is what you NEVER did.

You never really talked about the Zwet wagon, the one that ended in a lynch, even though you had time to be active and post 14 very long posts in those last few days before deadline, probably hundereds of words.

You never talked about the other two wagons that looked like they might go to a lynch, the Gasper one and the Talilan wagon.

You kept your vote on me, but you never really attacked me that much; you mostly just argued with me on vauge, theoretical issues, like "the difference between pro-town and townie". You never really discussed the rest of my play, or my votes, or all the more important things I did, and you never really tried to make the kind of specific "Yos is scummy because..." argument that might have gotten more people voting me.

Basically, a deadline was coming up, it was a concordent voting thing, a situation where your vote could easily make the difference, and if not your vote, then your vote plus one or two others you could convince, and yet you avoided commenting on the most important issues of the time, instead discussing the on-camera stuff and keeping your vote on a place it was almost sure to be irrelevant to the final outcome (on me.)

I really do suspect that you may have been deliberately avoiding making commentary on the leading wagons, yes. For example, I have absolutely no idea if you suspected Zwet or not; you never even mentioned him, you left him tied with almost everyone else in your concordant vote basically the whole time, and even as it became increasingly likely he was about to get lynched you never really discussed that at all. You never said anything that even makes me think you were trying to figure out if Zwet was scummy or not, or if he if you thought he was more or less scummy then Gasper or Talilan, and I find that really odd.

[Gaspar]

Me again -- didn't see the posts on the new page, and I want to respond to MrJellyLee here.

The more I think about it, the more I think CKD is probably scum. I just can't get over the fact that the Advocates for Scene One were chosen "at random." Now, I am willing to say that the

characters

chosen were not random: Mr. Grey probably chose John Locke and Valentine ahead of time. But I still think that who got what role and what alignment would still be random.

I think that's what most of us believe.

For clarification purposes, here is the terminology I will be using:
"Character" refers to an On-Camera persona, such as Mr. Locke, Mr. Ito, Ms. Blue, etc.
"Player" refers to a MafiaScum account. Gaspar, MrJellyLee, CKD, etc.
"Alignment" should be self-explanatory.
"Role" refers to a complete description of a given player's part in the game -- Actor Name, Alignment, abilities, if any. It does NOT include Job information (as Jobs are not tied to individual Players/Roles).
"Actor" refers to the Actor Name in a role.

Here is my impression of how Characters and Alignments were chosen.

The Scene One characters (including Advocates) were chosen non-randomly. I believe that the Peter Wiggin/Locke vs Valentine connection is evidence enough of this.

Players were assigned Roles randomly.
Independent of Roles, Players were assigned Characters randomly.
The Assistant Producer Job was randomly assigned to someone of Innocent alignment. All other Jobs were assigned randomly. (This assumes that Grey is not the AP, which I must admit is an intriguing theory, though I don't consider it all that likely at the moment.)
These assignments can come in any order, with the notable exception that the Assistant Producer must be assigned after Roles were handed out (so the AP could be made Innocent).

No idea if this is actually how Mr. Grey set up the game, but that's how I would do things, and it seems to fit with what Grey laid out in the rules.

If the Scientologists are a Cult, then why would Mr. Grey also allow the "Screen Mafia Guild" to get a recruit on Day One as well?

Interesting question, and it gives credence to the idea that Scientology is the only scumgroup, and that CKD is lying scum.

Even if there is an answer for that, what would have happened if a Scientologist got CKD's offer to become a member of the Screen Mafia Guild? I just can't see Mr. Grey allowing for that to actually be a possibility.

If Krew was the only Scientologist, I don't think it would be that big a deal. "Third Party Alignment" becoming "Scumbag" seems reasonable to me.

I also think the same problem would arise if a member of SMG were given an offer to become a member of the SMG (which I have been talking about for forever and a day).

You asked me about this, and I presented a reasonable alternative. P'raps they would be able to recruit a player of their choice, or choose from a list. My biggest problem is that I don't see how that would necessarily affect Endgame, as Decisions are supposed to.


Yeah, I'm definitely starting to buy into the idea that Scientology is the only scumgroup, and that CKD is a Scientologist and was lying. If this is the case, though, I would have to disagree with your opinion of Elmosaurain and say that he was of the same alignment as Krew.

[PJ.]

@The lurker thing, for every scum that lurks their are most likely several town that lurk. Lurking really isn't a valid reason unless it is coupled with someone substantial.

On scientology, I think that is our scum group. There are plenty of scientoligist that can be in this game: Travolta, Katie Holmes, Paul haggis, and Jason Lee among others.

[Gaspar]

If this is the case, though, I would have to disagree with your opinion of Elmosaurain and say that he was of the same alignment as Krew.

Ignore this. I thought PJ had said that he believed it likely that Elmosaurian was of a different scum alignment than Krew. I just rechecked his post, and he only "wondered" about that possibility.

But I'll ask PJ straight up:
What do you think Elmosaurian's alignment is?
What do you think CKD's alignment is?

Reasons for both, please. <3

[elmosaurian]

I did. I thought that was pretty clear; I did think Krew was probably pro-town. Not so much because of his actions, but because I thought that the scum wouldn't make him the advocate if he was one of their own.

So what you're saying is that you speculated on Scums' behavior rather than using a player's own verified anti-town behavior to make a decision on his alignment?

This sounds very unlike you, Yos. Can you see why I'm suspicious of you?

(shrug) I use whatever information I have available to me, including the actions of the scum. I always do.

Now, I do like to lynch people acting in a really anti-town way, on the theory that they're either scum or else they're a townie VI who's doing more harm then good. If I was off stage, I very likely would have ended up voting to lynch him, for just that reason. That wasn't the choice I had to make here, though.

Not true, considering he still got partial information as an Advocate. You're assuming he did pick randomly, when I believe that was defintiely not the case.

Hmm. You're right, he might have gotten information as an advocate. All day yesterday, I was assuming he was either scum who knew everything or town who was telling the truth and knew nothing, but you're right, if he's a third party, it is possible he got some information as an advocate and then lied about it.

I thought he wasn't scum, BECAUSE I thought he wasn't part of the scum group pulling the strings. At the time, I was assuming there was probably only scum and town, so I was assuming that meant he was likely town.

Again, see my above point. I would never expect you to actually flip-flop on your stance based on trying to outguess what you think the Scums are doing.

Are you kidding? I flip flop more often then John Kerry at the pancake-cook-off.

This is especally true when I've been convinced someone is scum, then some new evidence comes to light that makes me re-consider.

Seriously, this sounds completely contrived to me. ALL in-thread evidence suggests that Krew was not protown, yet you are telling us that you WIFOM'd yourself into thinking he was protown.

No, not at all; I thought I had a lot of evidence he was not scum.

1. The fact that scum picked him seemed to be to be very strong evidence he was not in their group.
2. The fact that he seemed completely uninformed was very strong evidence he was not communicating with the scum; I assume the scum can talk at some point, either by day-talking or between scenes, and either way, if they sent one of their own into a high-risk gambit like that, I would expect them to prepare him better then he was. And don't give me that "Oh, scum would play dumb". Go back and read his posts, carefully, and then tell me if you think he was "playing dumb" or if he actually had no idea what was going on. I got a very, very strong vibe it was the second one.
3. A lot of people have commented on how everyone else picked door #1. I noticed the same thing; everyone seemed to be just assuming door #1 was the correct choice, for reasons that made little sense to me, and, because I was assuming that at least some people on camera were scum, it freaked me the hell out.

And everything that happened on camera was a matter of WIFOM, Glork. Of course I was thinking in a WIFOM type of way.

Now, I kept going back and fourth, mostly because I was having trouble seeing the whole thing where he used the stuntman ability to dodge a lynch at the end of day 1, and then claimed some kind of vague rumor that was wrong anyway, could possibly be pro-town. But I also couldn't see how he could possibly be scum.

I will admit that the thought of a third party scum group did cross my mind, considering how anti-town he had been acting, but I didn't really think it was that likely.

I'll bite. Three questions:
1) How likely (rough percentage) did you think of the existence of a Third Party?

Pretty small. Mith mentioned in the rules that it was possible for there to be a third party, but I usually don't assume there is a third party until I have reason to, and I'm still not really sure how a third party would work under the endgame rules anyway. I donno. 5%? Less?

2) Why didn't you bring it up regardless how how "unlikely" you thought it was?

Why? He was probably either town or scum, and the only effect talking about unlikely possibilities like third parties would be to muddy the issue farther in ways that are unlikely to be fruitful.

3) Did you consider Krew's actions/motivations if he

was

of a third alignment? If so, what were those actions/motivations?

Not really, because I didn't (and don't) have enough information to even speculate without knowing what any third party win conditions are.

KY implied that there was one specific door that would have helped the mafia, one that would have helped the town, and one that would have helped the third party (well, he said "the cult"). It's possible that that was true.

But, no; I was having enough trouble dealing with what to do when I thought there was a 55% chance he was town vs the 40% chance he was scum; I wasn't going to even think about what it might mean in the 5% chance he was third party.

[MrJellyLee]

[PJ Posting]

Oh, goodie! For my dearest elmosaurian,

1.) When I first replaced in, I did not really understand how quickly the deadline was coming. This should have been made clear in Post 488. So sue me: I should have focused more on what was happening Off Screen. However, I certainly was not ignoring Off Screen.

2.) As I explained a number of times, I wanted to make sure people had my opinions of the players On Screen precisely because

I was going to be On Screen for Scene Two

, and I was not aware that the thread would not be locked in between Scenes. As such, I thought that would be my only real opportunity to say anything about them until Scene Three, assuming (i) I even lived that long and (ii) was not stuck back On Screen for Scene Three, etc.

3.)

Again

, while many people were discussing 1/3 of the players On Screen (MafiaJin, Talilan, and Hewitt), practically nobody was discussing CKD or Panzerjagger. I found this a rather appalling omission and wanted to make sure there was commentary on that matter. Obviously discussion of On Screen players was not taboo.

4.) I think I commented on the Off Screen events about as much as I would expect any replacement in the game could. I did talk about zwet (see: my fourth post in response to GoofballsandBaloons), I was not going to talk about Gaspar (since I generally do not like listing why I think people are likely to be Town: the only two people besides myself in that category were, in fact,

Gaspar

and GoofballsandBaloons), and I

did

talk about Talilan (specifically to say that I was not a fan of the case against her because I feel I would have acted similarly if I had been On Screen).

Simply because I don’t denote a giant heading of “I Hereby Proclaim My Thoughts On X” does not mean I am ignoring them or not talking about them. It just is not necessary to devote detailed analyses to everybody.

There's all three of your "wagons."

Furthermore, I very much

disagree

that you were not likely to be lynched. Gaspar was never a lynch target

at all

until after Talilan replaced in the game; at that point I think he had

zero

(or at most one) votes while you constantly had

one

that was from me. The fact that you did not

end up

acquiring a larger wagon means nothing.

Commentary should not be restricted to whoever happens to have the most votes. I do not play that way, and I in fact will often turn my eye to places where I think the town is playing with a blind spot (for example, when I cautioned the town against assuming Mighty Orbots is town, as I think he focused far too much on photos / musical tracks).

5.) My argument about you on “vague theoretical issues” was precisely because all of your posting seemed to

centered

on theoretical issues. I did not find things really

wrong

with your “logic,” but I felt you were trying to make logical assertions about the set-up whilst ignoring making commentary on players. How am I really supposed to present a case about that? I think the best I might have been able to do would have been something like Mighty Orbots' Post 266, which I think gets across what

I

was seeing in your posts fairly eloquently, despite the fact that you clearly dislike that post.

Blamma-lamma.

~

Pre-Post Edit:

But I'll ask PJ straight up:
What do you think Elmosaurian's alignment is?
What do you think CKD's alignment is?

Reasons for both, please. <3

I am personally not convinced there are two scum groups to begin with. I think all that matters is that I think both Elmosaurian and CKD have a good chance of being scum. I don’t see why it matters what type of scum they are if our job is simply to lynch down to 2 [Something Else]’s.

[elmosaurian]

If the Scientologists are a Cult, then why would Mr. Grey also allow the "Screen Mafia Guild" to get a recruit on Day One as well?

Interesting question, and it gives credence to the idea that Scientology is the only scumgroup, and that CKD is lying scum.

...

Is this really what you think? You really can read day 1 and come to the conclusion that CKD is lying scum?

That makes no sense to me at all. I can't imagine in a million years a scum CKD randomly inventing the whole "I could turn scum" thing if he was scum. And to top that off, you're suggesting that not only did he lie about that, but he lied about that and then used the WRONG SCUM ROLE NAME in his claim, even though you think he HAD that scum role name, and even though he would basically be caught lying as soon as we lynched a scum?

This is why I have a hard time believing you are town, Gasper. You're suggesting the most absurdly improbable ideas here, and why? To try and discredit CKD, who I consider to be almost confirmed town?

Yeah, I'm definitely starting to buy into the idea that Scientology is the only scumgroup, and that CKD is a Scientologist and was lying.

Yeah, I can't imagine pro-town Glork "buying into" that idea, at all. Not in a million years.

[Gaspar]

I am personally not convinced there are two scum groups to begin with. I think all that matters is that I think both Elmosaurian and CKD have a good chance of being scum. I don’t see why it matters what type of scum they are if our job is simply to lynch down to 2 [Something Else]’s.

I myself am trying to decide whether there are one or two scumgroups. Furthermore, I think it is relevant, because [Something Else] is described as the "primary non-innocent alignment," though it is noted that there "may or may not" be other alignments.

If our job is to lynch down to 2 [Something Else]s, and "Scientology" is of a different alignment, then knowing whether Elmo/CKD are "Scientology" or "[Something Else]" is EXTREMELY relevant. It absolutely matters, because [Something Else] refers to the PRIMARY Non-Innocent Alignment, not "EVERY Non-Innocent Alignment."

So I'll ask again.

Do you think Scientology = [Something Else]?
What alignment do you feel Elmosaurian is?
What alignment do you think CKD is?

[MrJellyLee]

[PJ Posting]

No, I don't think it's relevant because I sincerely doubt that we would think somebody is scum and yet

not

lynch them in the hopes that they are scum but

not

the "primary" [Something Else]. All I really care about is lynching scum.

Here is as good as you're going to get:

~ If CKD is a Scientologist, then there probably is no Screen Mafia Guild to begin with, which would make elmosaurian also a Scientologist.

~ If CKD is a Screen Mafia Guild, then elmosaurian is probably also a Screen Mafia Guild, precisely because of his confusion of "do you think KY Krew was scum?" upon seeing a revealed Scientologist.

Whether or not I think there are 2 different scum groups is largely contingent on CKD's alignment.

~

Also, I am going to point this out. The lack of a nightkill on Night One tells me very little about whether there is a Mafia Group in this game. Please see Verbose Mafia 2, where each member of the mafia was given one kill individually, and as a result, the Mafia largely saved their kills until endgame and then used them all on the same night to clinch the win. If this doesn't make it clear, I am not convincd there is a Cult to begin with.

[Gaspar]

That makes no sense to me at all. I can't imagine in a million years a scum CKD randomly inventing the whole "I could turn scum" thing if he was scum. And to top that off, you're suggesting that not only did he lie about that, but he lied about that and then used the WRONG SCUM ROLE NAME in his claim, even though you think he HAD that scum role name, and even though he would basically be caught lying as soon as we lynched a scum?

Since you are apparently so fond of outguessing the scums, consider this scenario.

CKD and KY Krew are both Scientologists, which is the only Non-Innocent alignment. During Scene One, CKD proposes the whole "recruit me to their team" idea, knowing full well that a cult-like recruitment fits in with the flavor, and gives his fake "Parital Information" credibility.

Krew bungles up Scene One by stunting when asked for a role claim, and tries to get everyone to follow the wrong decision. Basically, he outs himself as scum, and everyone knows it.

AFTER this happens, CKD makes up a different Scumgroup called the Screen Mafia Guild, knowing that KY Krew is likely to be lynched as "Scientologist" during Scene Two. Meanwhile, his scumbuddy Krew says "I think there's a cult" knowing full well he will be lynched as a Scientologist.

During Scene Two, KY Krew is lynched as a Scientologist while the town goes "what about the Screen Mafia Guild"?

Expected Outcome: General confusion with the seeds of a cult firmly planted in the general town's minds. I think that the Scientologists expected us to buy into the three-party system much more than we actually have.


Everything makes sense. Scientologists made Krew an Advocate so he could WIFOM the crap out of the Scene Two decision, because they really didn't want to give the town an easy Scene Two. His alignment, which directly conflicts with CKD's alignment, confuses the town into not knowing what to believe -- which is EXACTLY what has happened.

I'd bet my left foot that not one single townsperson can say for sure that they know:
A) How many alignments there are
B) Whether "Scientologist" is the [Something Else]/"Primary Non-Innocent Alignment"

In this respect, the proposed scenario is not only plausible, but has worked nearly PERFECTLY for the Scientologists.

[elmosaurian]

2.) As I explained a number of times, I wanted to make sure people had my opinions of the players On Screen precisely because

I was going to be On Screen for Scene Two

, and I was not aware that the thread would not be locked in between Scenes. As such, I thought that would be my only real opportunity to say anything about them until Scene Three, assuming (i) I even lived that long and (ii) was not stuck back On Screen for Scene Three, etc.

I have no problem with you talking about on-screen people. What I have a problem with is what you DIDN'T say, not with what you did.

3.)

Again

, while many people were discussing 1/3 of the players On Screen (MafiaJin, Talilan, and Hewitt), practically nobody was discussing CKD or Panzerjagger. I found this a rather appalling omission and wanted to make sure there was commentary on that matter. Obviously discussion of On Screen players was not taboo.

Nope, not at all.

4.) I think I commented on the Off Screen events about as much as I would expect any replacement in the game could. I did talk about zwet (see: my fourth post in response to GoofballsandBaloons),

This is what you said about Zwet in that post.

I do not know enough about zwetschenwasser’s meta to really say if his play here is inconsistent with his play as town. Here, I have found his posts unimpressive, and not helpful or of maximum utility (see: his picture post On Screen), but so far I have not gotten a feeling his posts are more likely to have been written by scum than by town.

Basically, in what is a statment that looks incredibly "on the fence" to me, you basically said "I don't like his play, he's not been helpful, but I'm not really sure he's more likely scum then town".

And that's it. That's all you said about the guy that was lynched. And like I said, you set up your concordent vote in such a way as to basically avoid commenting on him at all, by putting him and everyone else who was likely to be lynched on exactly the same level.

Simply because I don’t denote a giant heading of “I Hereby Proclaim My Thoughts On X” does not mean I am ignoring them or not talking about them. It just is not necessary to devote detailed analyses to everybody.

No, but if you were town, with a deadline coming up (and you did realize eventually it was coming up), and you had enough time to make 14 long posts, to type out hundreds of words, I would have expected you to make the time to pick which of the main bandwagons you wanted to support heading into a lynch. You really never did, at all.

Furthermore, I very much

disagree

that you were not likely to be lynched. Gaspar was never a lynch target

at all

until after Talilan replaced in the game; at that point I think he had

zero

(or at most one) votes while you constantly had

one

that was from me. The fact that you did not

end up

acquiring a larger wagon means nothing.

Right. THe only vote I had on me was the one from you. I never, at any point, had more then that. And you didn't even really seem to be trying hard to drum up support for more votes on me.

I mean, I could see you deciding I was scum, focusing on me, and really trying to get me lynched even to the point of ignoring all other wagons; I could see a pro-town person doing that. But I don't get that vibe from your posts, either.

5.) My argument about you on “vague theoretical issues” was precisely because all of your posting seemed to

centered

on theoretical issues.

That was certainly not true. I had posted a great deal about my off-camera suspects, which were KY, Gasper, and Talilan. You even acknowledged that in one of your posts, but you never attacked me for my scumhunting at all, or even commented on it really; just for my early game theoretical discussions.

I did not find things really

wrong

with your “logic,” but I felt you were trying to make logical assertions about the set-up whilst ignoring making commentary on players. How am I really supposed to present a case about that?

That's...actually almost exactly why I suspect you, interestingly enough. Except, I did make commentary on players.

I am personally not convinced there are two scum groups to begin with. I think all that matters is that I think both Elmosaurian and CKD have a good chance of being scum. I don’t see why it matters what type of scum they are if our job is simply to lynch down to 2 [Something Else]’s.

I can't really imagine why either you or Glork seem to think that there's any real chance of CKD being scum here.

[Gaspar]

No, I don't think it's relevant because I sincerely doubt that we would think somebody is scum and yet not lynch them in the hopes that they are scum but not the "primary" [Something Else]. All I really care about is lynching scum.

I think we'll have to agree to disagree here. If I were certain that "Scientologist" and "Screen Mafia Guild" were both anti-town alignments, I would much rather go after an SMG than a Scientologist. I think that if there are three alignments, it is also necessary to seek to know what nature each alignment is. Whether Krew was an SK-like role, an other Neutral role, an alternate Mafia group, or a leader/member of a Cult drastically changes how I would look at the game, no matter what. If you're telling me that you'd play a setup with Mafia/SK the same way you'd play a game with Mafia/Cult, I will seriously go to Mississippi (It's Mississippi, right?) and throttle you.

[Bagel Eating Cowfrog]

Hmm..panzer slips by with another piggyback post.
I'm getting scum vibes from elmosaurian, panzer, and glork. Much more sure on the first two though

[elmosaurian]

Since you are apparently so fond of outguessing the scums, consider this scenario.

CKD and KY Krew are both Scientologists, which is the only Non-Innocent alignment. During Scene One, CKD proposes the whole "recruit me to their team" idea, knowing full well that a cult-like recruitment fits in with the flavor, and gives his fake "Parital Information" credibility.

Krew bungles up Scene One by stunting when asked for a role claim, and tries to get everyone to follow the wrong decision. Basically, he outs himself as scum, and everyone knows it.

AFTER this happens, CKD makes up a different Scumgroup called the Screen Mafia Guild, knowing that KY Krew is likely to be lynched as "Scientologist" during Scene Two. Meanwhile, his scumbuddy Krew says "I think there's a cult" knowing full well he will be lynched as a Scientologist.

During Scene Two, KY Krew is lynched as a Scientologist while the town goes "what about the Screen Mafia Guild"?

Expected Outcome: General confusion with the seeds of a cult firmly planted in the general town's minds. I think that the Scientologists expected us to buy into the three-party system much more than we actually have.

Lol. Is this really the theory you're going with?

That is so unnecessarily complicated, I'm not even sure where to start.

Let me just start with this, then:

1. I can't imagine a scum lying about the whole "recruit" thing to start with. It dosn't "give him credibility" or whatever; at least, not obviously so. Most likely it just spreads doubt and confusion about the person who claimed that. Especially since if CKD making that claim did anything, it just made sure the town picked the right door.
2. After he did, I can't imagine he would then suddenly invent a different scum group that "tried to recruit him", because that would have to screw him in the end.
3. If nothing else, if in your theory we get to a 3 man or 5 man endgame and have a bunch of dead scientologists and no dead "screen actors guild" people, there would come a time when it was 100% obvious that CKD was lying and there were none.

IMHO, the "Expected result" from doing that would be "CKD gets lynched in endgame, very likely losing the game for his scum team in the process." No small amount of short-term confusion it could cause in the early game would be worth that. And the fact that that WOULD be the expected result would become more and more obvious over time.

Especally since he, in your hypothises, he could have just said "Yeah, the scinetologists tried to recruit me" and still got that "fake partial information credibility" you're talking about; if anything, it would be that much more convicing once we had a dead scientologist.

Neah, that scenario you've created is nothing but smoke and mirrors; the more you think about it, the less sense it makes, especially for a highly competent player like CKD.

I'd bet my left foot that not one single townsperson can say for sure that they know:
A) How many alignments there are
B) Whether "Scientologist" is the [Something Else]/"Primary Non-Innocent Alignment"

I'm sure you're right (with the probable exception of CKD, of course). And I'm also sure that, if you're scum, that lack of certain information what you're counting on.

I've seen you do this as scum, Glork. I've seen you do a lot of hand waving, create convincing sounding scenerios, all directed at creating a logical sounding reason to start mislynching people. You have it set up so you can use this as a reason to either go after me (which dosn't actually make any sense; I'm sure you know that I wouldn't act like that if I was scum with KY in any case; but of course it dosn't have to) or to go after CKD, depending on which looks like the easier target.

I knew people, and probably you, were going to go after me today no matter what; I realized that my posting in the other thread looked strange, even though it was probably right.

But I can't believe that you, as town, would really consider any of this as the most likely scenario.

I'll be interested to hear what CKD has to say about all this.

[Gaspar]

I'm practically tearing my hair out here, because suddenly the setup seems blankly obvious to me, yet PJ appears unwilling to consider setup implications, while Yos is just pointing his finger and going "You're scum if you think this." I feel like I've made a major breakthrough, and nobody seems to be willing to listen to me.


Two other responses to Yos:

Now, I do like to lynch people acting in a really anti-town way, on the theory that they're either scum or else they're a townie VI who's doing more harm then good. If I was off stage, I very likely would have ended up voting to lynch him, for just that reason. That wasn't the choice I had to make here, though.

You didn't have to decide "lynch Krew or not," but the matter of Krew's alignment has a direct and very significant impact on how he treats the whole Door #1/Door #2 thing. I realize you said you'd take Door #2 regardless, but the fact is that you used "Krew may be trustworthy" as reasoning, and I don't buy that at all. It's complete bull.

Are you kidding? I flip flop more often then John Kerry at the pancake-cook-off.

I didn't say I don't expect you to flip-flop. I said I don't expect you to place hypothetical speculation over hard evidence. The "based on trying to outguess the scums" qualifier is essential to my point, and you just completely ignored that.

[MrJellyLee]

[PJ Posting]

Criminintly. You are complaining that my position on zwetschenwasser was "on the fence"? I'm terribly sorry, but that is precisely because my position on zwetschewasser

was

on the fence. I basically considered him to be lurker that gave me nothing to work off of to determine whether he was scum or town. Simply because you

want

me to have a definite leaning one way or the other is not going to

make

me have a definite leaning. As you can see from my Concordet:

Vote: elmosaurian, Thok, [Bagel Eating Cowfrog, KY Krew, Mighty Orbots, Rawr Hydra, Shadow Lurker, zwetschenwasser], Gaspar, GoofballsAndBaloons, No Lynch, Mr. Grey, MrJellyLee

... zwetschenwasser was put with a fairly long list of people who I had little or nothing to say about, and who I did not really have a leaning on. If you are going to complain about my lack of a leaning on zwetschenwasser, then why aren't you complaining about my lack of a leaning on BEC, KY Krew, Mighty Orbots, Rawr Hydra, and ShadowLurker? Is your sole criteria the fact that he was a "wagon"? Why should that even matter to me?

As far as I understand it, whether or not I was officially voting for you would not have really mattered precisely because we are playing under a Concordet system, and hence my vote would still be counted according to the order of the players in my list in the case where we do not hit a majority (which in fact turned out to be the case).

~

Pre-Post Edit:

If you're telling me that you'd play a setup with Mafia/SK the same way you'd play a game with Mafia/Cult, I will seriously go to Mississippi (It's Mississippi, right?) and throttle you.

For this particular game

, that

may

be the ideal play. All we are playing for is the 7-player endgame.

I personally think if we continue to hit scum at a reasonable pace, and continue to get [Good] results On Screen, we will be in a very nice position by the time we get to Endgame. If any kinds of [Something Else] count for the [Something Else] trigger, then I just want to focus on killing scum. If worse comes to worse, all we

really

have to do is make sure we keep 6 townspeople alive.

However, I will say this: the best argument for the presence of a Cult seems to be the fact that Mr. Grey should have taken into account the possibility that the town will No Lynch every single day. Even if there were a

seven

player mafia (I use this number because it strikes me as absurd and to make a point) with a kill every night (I assume seven nights?), they could only get the town down to 6 players.

At the very least, I do not think that if there is a Cult it is the

only

scum-group. That would essentially require the Cult to have started the game with 4 players.

Why?

Assume the game starts with a 3 player Cult as the [Something Else] and that's it. Now assume the town lynches a Cult Member on Day One. This would automatically trigger the best end-game for the Town.

[Side Note that is Not Game Relevant: I am sorely tempted to say I would play the same just so you would actually come down to see me (since you did not even come to see me in Kansas City despite my being there on the same weekend as you for Flayming Man... sigh). I think even a throttling might be worth it.]

[Gaspar]

I knew people, and probably you, were going to go after me today no matter what; I realized that my posting in the other thread looked strange, even though it was probably right.

This is interesting, considering I don't think I expressed any anti-Elmosaurian sentiment before I got irritated at your On Camera Post 244.

Elaborate on what you mean by "no matter what." What scenarios are you referring to, and why would each one lead players to go after you specifically? Why did you specifically feel that

I

would attack you?

[elmosaurian]

Elaborate on what you mean by "no matter what." What scenarios are you referring to, and why would each one lead players to go after you specifically? Why did you specifically feel that

I

would attack you?

Because I was saying things that everyone else in the game completely disagreed with, it was largely based on reasoning I was convinced was correct but was a combination of gut and WIFOM, and that always gets you attacked. IF KY flipped town, I expected to get attacked for "knowing too much", and if KY flipped scum, I expected to get attacked for "defending scum".

Basically, whenever I do stuff that dosn't seem to make obvious logical sense, I expect to get attacked for it by people who think they know my meta, even if I end up being right.

This isn't really relevant to anything, though.

[elmosaurian]

If you are going to complain about my lack of a leaning on zwetschenwasser, then why aren't you complaining about my lack of a leaning on BEC, KY Krew, Mighty Orbots, Rawr Hydra, and ShadowLurker?

Actually, I am; I'm complaining that you didn't really say much about almost anyone off camera, except for me.

But the reason it's especially bad was because Zwet was lynched, and because he was pretty clearly heading for a lynch a few days beforehand; it wasn't a surprise. And you didn't seem to care. Nothing in any of your posts makes me think you really cared about who got lynched at the end of day 1, and that's deeply troubling to me.

Town people tend to care about the alignment of who gets lynched.

(anyway, I'm going to bed now. I'm sure I could keep arguing forever, considering I just managed to pick a fight with PJ/MBL and Glork at the exact same time, lol, but I have to go.)

[Gaspar]

Pre-Post Edit:

If you're telling me that you'd play a setup with Mafia/SK the same way you'd play a game with Mafia/Cult, I will seriously go to Mississippi (It's Mississippi, right?) and throttle you.

For this particular game

, that

may

be the ideal play. All we are playing for is the 7-player endgame.

I personally think if we continue to hit scum at a reasonable pace, and continue to get [Good] results On Screen, we will be in a very nice position by the time we get to Endgame. If any kinds of [Something Else] count for the [Something Else] trigger, then I just want to focus on killing scum. If worse comes to worse, all we

really

have to do is make sure we keep 6 townspeople alive.

Okay, this makes immense amounts of sense, and I really can't argue that as long as we're making good decisions, "Keep six Innocent people alive" is a reasonable goal.

My current philosophy is "I want to try to figure out the setup as soon as possible while lynching players who appear scummy in general."

At the very least, I do not think that if there is a Cult it is the only scum-group. That would essentially require the Cult to have started the game with 4 players.

I'm not sure why this is unreasonable. A cult with limited ability to recruit is plausible. You yourself pointed out that a lone scumgroup with a limited set of abilities has been done, and CT1 had a handful of roles with two-shot abilities. Guessing the exact, specific setup is nigh-impossible, but I think we can definitely work towards the nature of the setup... and that knowledge can be invaluable to us.


Elmosaurian, a question: Given what the rules describe about Good/Bad Decisions impacting Endgame, and given what CKD claimed about the outcome of the "Bad" decision, how do you feel about "becoming an SMG" reconciles with "altering endgame"?


----------

My current thoughts on the game setup/alignments.

Right now, I don't think that there is both a Mafia and a Cult (even a limited one). Like I said, it doesn't reconcile with what I believe the rules state about setting up Endgame.

If

Krew is an SK/Neutral, and there is a Screen Mafia Guild, I think that Elmosaurian is a part of the SMG, and I'm on the fence about CKD's alignment.

If

Scientology = [Something Else], then CKD is definitely a Scientologist, and Elmosaurian is very probably a Scientologist. In this case, I have no idea whether I think they're some kind of Mafia or Cult. I'm not sure I can arrive at a conclusion on this without progressing the game further.

In either case, I guess my other suspicions largely hold. I haven't actually thought about how these new setup revelations impacted my earlier suspicions, but I'll work through that over the next days/next Scene.


Right now, I defintiely want to see either Yosarian or CKD lynched tomorrow, with a fairly strong preference towards Yos. Naturally, I feel that Talilan makes a reasonable other lynch, but our focus should be on figuring out this Scientology/SMG business.

[elmosaurian]

One last thing before I go. Glork, what do you think about my analysis of PJ's play at the end of day 1? I find it pretty odd you never even commented on it.

Do you think he was really trying to figure out who the town should lynch before deadline there? Did it seem like standard pro-town PJ play to you?