Mini 873 Plainview Game Over

[Gammagooey]

Hey guys, first game I've played on here, so I'll start this off with a

Vote:AlmasterGM

for having a Pikachu avatar when Jigglypuff is clearly superior.

[Gammagooey]

Hey guys, first game I've played on here, so I'll start this off with a

Vote:AlmasterGM

for having a Pikachu avatar when Jigglypuff is clearly superior.

Ok, seriously - how did you know I had a Pikachu avatar when I haven't made any posts in the thread yet? The fact that you posses this information means you went and looked at past games of the other players in this game, which is an extremely stretchy move as town when you're only on page one. NOBODY does that. I think it's more likely that you're scum scoping out your victims so you know how to avoid their scumhunting techniques.

Serious

Vote: Gammagooey

Who said the RVS wasn't useful?

Hey Almaster, you know how in just about every forum people bitch at you if you don't lurk before posting? I read through some games before signing up for my first one, and saw you in one of them.

A question though for you: I can understand being hostile at me because you think I'm scummy, but what's with your comment on archae? He seems to be agreeing with you, and you single him out and hope he dies first. What exactly is that about?

[Gammagooey]

Hey Almaster, you know how in just about every forum people bitch at you if you don't lurk before posting? I read through some games before signing up for my first one, and saw you in one of them.

A question though for you: I can understand being hostile at me because you think I'm scummy, but what's with your comment on archae? He seems to be agreeing with you, and you single him out and hope he dies first. What exactly is that about?

Yeah whatever, your excuse is noted. There's bigger fish to fry at this point anyway, like Mordy. As far as archae goes, I don't care whether he agrees with me or not - people agreeing with me doesn't make me like them. Moreover, as you should know if you've read some of my past games, I judge quickly and with extreme prejudice.

Almaster the game I read with you in it was Stratego mafia, and you definitely weren't this aggressive in there, is there a different game in particular I should be reading to see this prejudice you speak of?

And on archae, unless you two have pissed each other off in the past I don't see why two or three un-serious posts would tick you off that much. Answering muffin's question on why it did would be nice.

[Gammagooey]

I'm kind of wondering why no one has actually asked me about this instead of just making assumptions. I'm going to go ahead and try to clear this up now.

I prefer to use Jigglypuff while playing SSBB, and Pikachu is also in the game, hence my original random vote post.

I saw that Almaster had a pikachu avatar in the Stratego game, and I read through several other themed games before signing up for this one, including Majora's mask, Mind Screw 3, and Advertising Mafia. (Before Almaster says it:I'm pretty sure Spyrex was in at least one of those too)

Almaster made the assumption that I was looking through people's old games once I knew that I was in the same game as them, and decided this was scummy of me.

Although he was right about me having read through one of his games, assuming that I was intentionally reading through games with other players from this game in them was pretty dumb assumption to make. As archae said, that means I've seen at least ONE other post of his. If you'll notice, the queue for this game has one post by Almaster, with a nice little pikachu avatar included.

Summary:I have read through Al's stratego mafia game before I knew I was playing with him, and just skimmed through it again today with him saying that he is always quick to judge people as scum/not scum. I did not look for player's games just because they were going to be in the same game as me. Almaster made an incorrect assumption about why I had seen his avatar, and seems to continue pushing on me based on this incorrect assumption.

[Gammagooey]

fatchic, Lex, and peanut should lurk less. Try to post an opinion on at least two players soon.
So that I'm not a hypocrite:

foil's vote seems a bit weird to me, I would think that he would vote the person accused of what he thinks is scummy behavior (aka me) instead of the person who defends the behavior as a whole, and goes into detail about why he thinks it isn't scummy.

Mordy-I have trouble seeing the motivations for a mafia to stick his neck out and say that something is absolutely not scummy and draw attention to himself.

Muffin-Should also post more, the only thing you've stated for suspicions is that you're inclined to agree with two people.

China and archae- should try to fit their words into one post at a time herp derp, but at least they're talking, which is more than can be said for quite a few others.

[Gammagooey]

I also don't buy the case against AGM. I think he genuinely thought he had a case when posting it. I don't think he was faking that or anything. I do think that it was blown out of proportion and he was attacked a bit hard about it. That was good though since it quickly brought us out of the RVS.

What i dislike the most thus far....
Bob's bandwagon vote on to AGM. It was with terrible reasoning (A 1 liner, imagine that), and just looked scummy to me. He claims that AGM just can't believe that is a good case, thus votes him. Generally, this can be a good reason for a vote. The only problem is, he is voting for someone not pushing a good case on post 40!

Unvote, Vote archaebob

If it was just the first post of AGM that we were discussing, I would probably agree with you, as despite him being wrong, he might have thought he had something at the time.

The problem is that in the post after it, despite a short explanation by myself and having several people tell him that his logic is flawed, he not only continues to push on the case, but goes after Mordy for disagreeing with him based Mordy's explanation for why he doesn't think it would be scummy, which honestly seems like more of a mafia theory argument on what is a good/bad play than a defense or an accusation.

It seems to me that Almaster was trying to get people to follow him with no actual case behind his words, and I'm leaving my vote on him until I get an explanation.

[Gammagooey]

yay, posting. The only one without at least some suspicion mentioned in their posts is lex I believe, who will hopefully have something to say today now that Halloween is over.

Spyrex - herp derp deleted as he Ninja'd my post, and promised moar words.

Muffin - p89 really does seem like an OMGUS vote with a weak explanation attached, from my perspective China does believe that his FoS/HoSes show where he stands, and...

Muffin and archae - I don't really like the pressure to vote from you two on China, especially when it's day 1 with plenty of time until the deadline and he's made clear who he suspects.

Almaster - What in the hell are you doing with making a shoddy case, getting asked some questions, and disappearing. You even bring up your meta from previous games, I call you out on it being different in Stratego, and you still haven't gotten around to answering a) why it's different or b) a different game that I should look at to see the agressive behavior you've been showing here.

Peanut-My mentioning Mordy had 2 reasons 1) I was (and will continue to) trying to get my opinions on several different players out there, so that people will both know where I stand on certain people at the moment, and hopefully encourage others to do the same. If someone else were to post that he thinks the same of Mordy now and attacks him tommorrow, we know that the person has had a large change in opinion that SHOULD be documented with more posts.
2) foilist's vote was still on him, and I do not believe he would be a good lynch.

MORE WORDS shall occur after I shower and get some lunch.

[Gammagooey]

WARNING: MORE WORDS APPROACHING.

on archaebob in general: My gut says he's town. He's been asking a lot of questions, most of them good, and although I don't like him pressuring China for a vote I think he's trying to get reads on people and calling foilist out on both an incorrect vote and not changing it once he realized it was incorrect was the right thing to do.

on foilist - I still have a lot of trouble with understanding why you would keep a vote on someone you don't suspect instead of just unvoting, it seems like you were waiting for someone else to make a case against him to justify your vote instead of admitting you made a mistake and making an effort to fix it.

on foilist's case on Muffin - I do think that Muffin hasn't contributed a whole lot, with his main content being arguing with Chinaman. I'd like to see Muffin's response to that foilist's post as well as any other suspicions Muffin has before commenting further.

@Mod:

Do you think you could fix foilist's quote formatting in 125? it would make it a lot easier to read for anyone who hasn't gone through it yet. (lex,Spyrex,Almaster)

[Gammagooey]

Gammagooey: Obviously AlmasterGM's case on your is bad, but outside pursuing a bad case, do you find him otherwise scummy? Do you buy SpyreX's argument that "killing" is a scum-tell?

Although Spyrex might be right about the possible killing scum-tell, that's not why I'm voting him right now. I'm voting him because he hasn't answered questions about his case on me, and more importantly for this:

Moreover, as you should know if you've read some of my past games, I judge quickly and with extreme prejudice.

I went back over Stratego mafia to see if I could confirm that, and found that day 1 there he showed none of the agressiveness and hostility I saw here. He didn't even put down a vote in that until page 6. (Linkz:viewtopic.php?t=12168&postdays=0&postor ... &start=125) I asked him about this too, as well as if there was a different game I should look at to see early hostility from him, and he has yet to respond. Unless he has an amazingly good explanation for all this, my vote is staying on him.

[Gammagooey]

So yeah, fixed 125 for everyone and OMG WORDS. My

brief

(fuck it isnt) opinion on relatively new developments.

Almaster and lexprod STILL HAVENT POSTED YET RAGE RAGE RAGE.
(lexprod indicated that he was reading while I was making this. I still want opinions from him ASAP.)

Most of foil's defense about not changing his vote after he realized it was a mistake smells like horseshit. Although his defense does seem similar to the meta link provided, his reasonings and current reactionary voting are/is retarded.

I was going to say that I didn't see a whole lot of case on peanut aside from him voting for archae and defending foil. Then I read some more and noticed Spyrex quoting this from him.

I'm not just giving Foilist the benefit of the doubt, you have it as well. I'm not claiming you're scum, but my vote is on you because I still have my suspicions.

You're not claiming he's scum, and yet you're voting to lynch him.
I WONDER WHAT TYPE OF PERSON WOULD WANT TO LYNCH A NON-SCUM.

And now what you've all been waiting for...MORE ALMASTER RANTING!
I am very frustrated that he's been able to slide under the radar by lurking after being called out by several people and not answering any questions asked of him since Friday. It irritates the SHIT out of me. I was really hoping that leaving my vote on him would encourage him to actually post and defend himself. I will probably be changing my vote to foilist once lex actually gets around to posting, aka when we finally have opinions from everyone.
HOWEVER.
I still think Al is scum, and I think he deserves a lot more suspicion than he's gotten so far.

[Gammagooey]

Now that serious business is over with...(for now)

Currently on post 144 in reading, I can't be the only hungover player here.

GUYS I COUNTERCLAIM HUNGOVER BOTH OF US DEFINITELY CAN'T BE REAL.

[Gammagooey]

Spyrex I don't see the point in pointing that out, but as for the rest of it...
Well, I'll start at the suspects.

As a side note, I'm fixing some of your formatting too, because your reasonings aren't the only thing that

sucks

.

My current top

three

suspects are

MordyS and archaebob

. I'm currently going to

Unvote: Vote: archaebob

, with MordyS as a secondary suspect. There are 9 justifications for the archaeboe vote:

Pro tip:2 isn't equal to 3. Who's the person you thought better of putting in there? (bold+italics are my emphasis)

1) It hasn't even been one day yet and he's already indicting people for not posting. Forced pro-town.

Foilist 13 and cruelty haven't posted yet. It's still early, but I just wanted to put that out there, as a running list.
It hasn't even been one day yet and he's already indicting people for not posting. Forced pro-town.

Putting pressure on lurkers gets people to actually have some conversation to search through for scuminess, instead of people thinking they can get away with barely posting for most of a game, even though it's possible that they can more pressure=less likelihood.

2) Goes from apparent uncertainty / question asking to a vote without anything significant happening between the two posts. No substantial explanation, either.

AGM - why would you assume that any town player would do what YOU would do? Especially considering that this is his first game, I find it difficult to follow your suspicion of him.

Almaster has played in several games. Not sure how he could actually think this was a good case just now.

vote Almaster

What do you think happened? Because it looks like to me he read through your wiki page/games, saw that you had played in too many for him to judge it as noob behavior, and voted you.

3) Asks folist a question, waits 12 minutes (realtime), and then FOS's him without any explanation. What was he doing for those 12 minutes?

Foilist, you aren't reading the thread carefully. Are you trying to find scum, or trying to scrape by?

FOS: foilist13

Seriously? I'll let him answer this one on his own, but I've already got a pretty good idea of why it was and why I don't see it as scummy.

4) Starts talking about the wagon on me significantly after the fact.

What about this quote at all indicates that gamma gooey has been "researching" all the other players before the start of the game?

I will say that it wasn't really ever a wagon. But your vote was still on me, and foilist had just made his post that was accusing me for it, but voting Mordy. You hadn't dropped your case against me yet, why would archae stop ignoring it?

5) Contradiction: First, he indicts people who haven't posted yet and says he's keeping careful watch of who posts and who doesn't. Then, a couple hours later, he's saying we can't expect people to post that much.

It's unreasonable to expect people to post more than once a day. This game only got going at all earlier today, so keep that in mind.

See response to 1.

6) Asks for other people to comment without actually commenting himself : fishing for popular opinion before committing to any one direction.

I want other people to comment on this.

He had already voted for foilist. Seems like a direction to me.

7) Another contradiction.

@ AGM - where did you go?

I think we need to forgive the lurkers for now, given that it's halloween weekend.

Because asking a question that can be answered in one sentence and saying that there's an excuse for people who aren't terribly content heavy for now ARE COMPLETELY OPPOSITES.

8) References a nonexistent justification for a past vote as a defense. Remember, bob never gave any substantial reason for why he voted for me.

I voted for AGM because he had become scummier than my RVS vote. I don't see why that makes you think I'm scummy, and it is interesting that you haven't posted ANY content of any kind about anyone else.

This where you start getting just the tiniest bit of credit. He should have given more reasoning in his posts for voting you, but I can see why he'd think you're scummy really, really, really easily.

GRAND FINALE

9)

MOST IMPORTANTLY:

All his posts are just mountains upon mountains of white noise. There is literally NO scumhunting being done, just tons of questions and random comments that make it look like he's contributing when he is not. Seriously, go read him in isolation - he's so incoherent and random it's funny.

I suspect MordyS because of this post:

EBWOP: Early bandwagons are valuable because they immediately start clarifying people's positions, put pressure on players, and force conversation. And in the rare case that someone hammers on the bandwagon, that indicates an instant-scum, since only scum would hammer 3 pages in. A bandwagon does not mean an inevitable lynch. Though considering AlmasterGM's statements so far this game, I wouldn't mind an inevitable lynch.

1) How do they clarify people's positions? This is a false assertion - it doesn't clarify
2) It doesn't put pressure on anyone. I just derailed the bandwagon on me by ignoring it. Moreover, even if it does put pressure, how is this a good thing? Unneeded pressure can force premature claims and is just as likely to cause townies to mess up as it is scum.
3) Why do we need a bandwagon to have conversation? There's been plenty of conversation in this game thus far without your early bandwagon.
4) Early bandwagons aren't dangerous because of the possibility of the quickhammer - they're problematic because they can be hard to stop once they get rolling.

I think this is an attempt by Mordy to recruit followers to the bandwagon on me without having to deal with the obvious flaws in the actual case. By making the wagon a good theoretical idea, he can avoid having to answer any concrete evidence. In some cases, I'd pass this off as stupidity - however, Mordy has been around long enough that I think he should know better. Unexcused badlogic is scummy.

Archae is asking a lot more questions than he is posting opinions, and now that everyone has posted I think he should post some more opinions on people, but I have a pretty good idea of where they generally lie from his posts. Reading through his posts, they aren't incoherent, they're QUESTIONS used to gain INFORMATION, and sifting through that information and finding scummy and non-scummy people, and lynching the scummy ones. I think most of your reasons are bullshit. I do not think archae is scum, ESPECIALLY when compared to you.

You think Mordy is scum because of one post he made, in which he argues against you in what once again seems to be his opinion on what he believes and disbelieves to be good for getting scumhunting going. If that's all you can come up with after 9 pages of people attacking and defending each other, IT IS NOT A LEGITIMATE CASE.
I've already voted for you, but hell, I'll do it again for good measure.

Unvote

Vote:AlmasterGM

[Gammagooey]

Feel free to actually, you know, RESPOND to why I think the majority of your case is bullshit and that you are without a doubt in my mind the best lynch candidate for today. Or explain how actively lurking to get a bandwagon on you isn't a scumtell. Or, you could just say something that makes sense.

[Gammagooey]

^
correction: to get a bandwagon off you.

[Gammagooey]

If I actually wanted to lurk the wagon away, do you really think I would've said so to everyone's face?

I don't think you meant to. I think you slipped while trying to make a case against Mordy.

[Gammagooey]

In response to peanut and to a lesser extent cruelty-
I probably should have waited for archae to respond to it in more depth first, but I think that at least 80% of his case is bullshit, that he's the scummiest person here, and that he should be lynched. He decides to go with a case on the person that is tied for the most votes (after his vote is counted) and the one who isn't agreeing with him. I think that between Almaster and foilist, foilist is more likely to be a stubborn townie, where Almaster has made what are in my opinion are terrible cases on 3 different people so far.

As for your last question, I have already made my opinions on archae on foil pretty clear. I think archae leans town, and foil does not. Similar to Almaster, I don't like how you vote for the person with the most votes already on them who disagrees with you. And although you could be right about foilist being non-scum, defending behavior that you have admitted as being scummy seems very off to me.

[Gammagooey]

I've got a Java programming project due Thursday night, so I will have

Limited Access

for all of tommorrow and Thursday until after midnight. If you want to ask me something, now would be a good time.

[Gammagooey]

@ Gammagooey - what's your stance on peanutman?

Actually, looking over his posts I want him to answer one more question before I give a stance.

@peanut- You gave a response to you not claiming that the person you were voting for was scum that I find still a little weird, but plausible.
Given recent events, is archaebob still 1)your vote to lynch, and 2)who do you think is the most likely scum?

[Gammagooey]

I disagree with letting AGM go unlynched, but doesn't Muffin still have a case on him from a while ago he hasn't responded to? He absolutely does need to post.

[Gammagooey]

Kays. In response to earlier archaebob, I currently think peanut leans slightly town. The biggest thing I had against him has a decent explanation and his suspicions are reasonable in my opinion, even if I don't agree with them.

As for changing my vote, I will consider it if he doesn't post by late tonight, but as of now he's probably at work and I would rather put my vote where my suspicion is.

[Gammagooey]

As for changing my vote, I will consider it if he doesn't post by late tonight, but as of now he's probably at work and I would rather put my vote where my suspicion is.

It's 11:30 now in my timezone, and he said he would post yesterday.
Pressure

vote:Muffin

[Gammagooey]

Interesting. Is everyone who is voting Muffin actually willing to lynch him if he doesn't start posting, or do you plan to wait for a replacement?

Honestly I'm assuming that it doesn't come down to that considering that he's been posting that he'll get around to posting every other day or so : /.

[Gammagooey]

unvote:Muffin

Re

Vote:AlmasterGM

Once again,

Limited Access

until Thursday past midnight (eastern time), but if there's something you really need a quick response to send me a PM and i'll do my best.

[Gammagooey]

I'm back, opinions of new stuff is as follows:
Obviously, I disagree with Muffin on Almaster.
Muffin is also a Damned hypocrite for saying that cruelty is staying in the shadows right now.

1: Constant pressure on people to give up info. I think the type of info bob is looking for is information that can ultimately damage the town.

Information on who everyone suspects and why is a GOOD THING. Said information is how you catch scum going from one opinion of a person to another without additional reasoning/interaction, as well as insuring that scum can't stay in the background and get away with saying later, "Oh, I always thought <person lynched> was <alignment>, I just never spoke up and everyone else went along with it"

And I may have to re-change my mind on Peanut.

2) It's not my wagon. I am simply voting on someone I'm not convinced of and need more to satisfy my suspicion.

This is the second time I've called you out on something like this, so I'll say it again. Why do you keep feeling the need to distance yourself from your vote? You already said that you think that he's in your opinion the scummiest person around.

@archae- yes, fatchic is terribly lurky, and it's annoying, and he/she's a liar for not posting before when he said he would. But i think that any shot of an "untainted read" from him has been out for a while, and that you need to get on with defending yourself so that the people voting for you can judge you for your actions and defenses rather than your lack of one.

[Gammagooey]

And I may have to re-change my mind on Peanut.

Peanutman wrote:
2) It's not my wagon. I am simply voting on someone I'm not convinced of and need more to satisfy my suspicion.

This is the second time I've called you out on something like this, so I'll say it again. Why do you keep feeling the need to distance yourself from your vote? You already said that you think that he's in your opinion the scummiest person around.

Maybe I haven't made it clear enough. In D1, I'm never sure of someone's alignment. Having been burned for believing I'd found an obvscum early on, I'd rather improve my play to prevent that. Lynching D1 is almost always the optimal play (as opposed to no-lynch) and, therefore, I place my vote on someone suspicious even though I can't be sure. But I still stand by my votes as a record of my suspicions. I would never even try to distance myself from my vote because, in all honesty, when does that ever work outside of RVS?

However, the key part of my statement that you quoted is the fact that it's not

my

wagon. There are certainly others who also have their suspicions on Bob.

I get the basic explanation, which is why I thought it was just a misunderstanding last time. What I don't get is why you keep mentioning it, as it doesn't convince me of any part of your argument, and the only reason I can see to put that in there is to make you look better.
A better question I suppose: How do you think statements like that help your arguments?

[Gammagooey]

Archae, your case does seem pretty reliant on foilist being scum for it to hold true, in which case foil should be lynched first anyway. I look forward to seeing this, "MOAR" you speak of.

My read on peanut is based on his following statements:

I'm not just giving Foilist the benefit of the doubt, you have it as well. I'm not claiming you're scum, but my vote is on you because I still have my suspicions.

2) It's not my wagon. I am simply voting on someone I'm not convinced of and need more to satisfy my suspicion.

However, the key part of my statement that you quoted is the fact that it's not

my

wagon. There are certainly others who also have their suspicions on Bob.

The first one, i can and did see as justified because he was using it to defend his "benefit of the doubt" comment earlier.
The other two add nothing to the argument, and are basically meaningless in terms of what the town is trying to do.

The town should be figuring out who the scum is, focusing attention on the scum, lynching them, and defending the townspeople who are being attacked by the mafia.
Those last two statements do none of those things. They are completely unneccesary, and I'm still waiting on an explanation of how they help his argument or the town as a whole.

[Gammagooey]

The town should be figuring out who the scum is, focusing attention on the scum, lynching them, and defending the townspeople who are being attacked by the mafia.
Those last two statements do none of those things. They are completely unneccesary, and I'm still waiting on an explanation of how they help his argument or the town as a whole.

Gooey, I hope you aren't just directing this at me. Sure, I've made some statements that don't follow your ideal of what should be said. But many others have done much more (such as Pokemon discussions, Mordy being scared of Spyrex because he's such an awesome player). I am definitely not the main person you should addressing this to.

Yes, other people have made posts not necessarily helpful to the town, but in my eyes humor is a null-tell, and I enjoy getting a laugh out of things now and again.
What you seem to have missed is that i specifically asked you WHY you posted that in there. I didn't say this in my last post to see if you'd try and make it as part of your argument, but now that you've said that it's not in one of those categories-The only reason I can see you saying that is to

try and make yourself look better

. That, unlike humor, is NOT a null-tell.

[Gammagooey]

cruelty, i can see why you'd think a list of people who someone thinks is town is a problem, but just the top 4 scum? Giving the mafia have a vague unordered top 8 townies from someone is nowhere nearly as useful to them as a top 4 scum is to the town for knowing where people stand, finding inconsistencies in scum stances, and most importantly having a confirmed townies outlook on the scum should they die.

Given your opinions on this, how would you suggest that the replacements/lurkers make their opinions known?

[Gammagooey]

Hay cruelty, asked you a question back on page 18 and never got an answer. One would be appreciated.

Given your opinions on this, how would you suggest that the replacements/lurkers make their opinions known?

On foilist- About zis:

A few players on here DO think I'm pretty well-confirmed town

He isn't confirmed, but I do think he's town, have stated this in previous posts, and Mordy and Spyrex have voiced similar opinions of him. I'm kind of wondering how you missed this.

Also, i'll probably post an unofficial votecount in a few minutes since Benmage isn't.

[Gammagooey]

COMPLETELY UNOFFICIAL

Votecount!

AlmasterGM (5 votes, L-2) MordyS, Gammagooey, SpyreX, foilist13, peanutman
foilist13 (2 votes, L-5) lexprod/Papa Zito, cruelty
Archaebob (1 vote, L-6) AlmasterGM

Not Voting (4) Sanjay, Muffin/Sociopath, phaerieM, archaebob

Pretty sure this is right, phaerie and archae unvoted on page 16 and i haven't seen a vote from them since.

[Gammagooey]

Last thing before i pass out for the night-(quotes shortened slightly for readability)

And actually, reading back, Muffin's "I'm inclined to agree with MordyS & spyreX, actually" was a comment in direct response to these two quotes:

You missed something important. It wasn't die. It was killed.

Now, semantics blah blah but - why would one assume killed over lynched?

There's one reason that sure springs to mind. Guess what it is?

Unvote, Vote: AlmasterGM

and

Researching fellow players before you start playing is absolutely not scummy. Making a serious vote based on it is bizarre, and sounds like railroading the newbie. Also, I find early bandwagons help clarify people's positions, so this couples a good reason (your quote above), with a good strategy (clarifying positions thru bandwagoning). As such:

Vote: AlmasterGM

Now, both of these posts were

votes

on Almaster, and for two different reasons! The whole point of each of those posts was not just disagreeing with Almaster, but disagreeing and saying he was

scummy

for his actions/opinions. So, if you say you are inclined to agree with those guys, wouldn't you thus be saying that you also think Almaster is scummy, for those two separate reasons given?

How does that then equate to:

I said only "I'm inclined to agree" because I don't think Alamaster's behaviour has been ultra super omg scummy. I think his argument is ridiculous, but having a ridiculous argument does not a scum make.

???

This is a seriously good question, and although Muffin got replaced Socio needs to give us an idea of what he believes Muffin was thinking when he made this.

[Gammagooey]

Mostly at Sanjay, but for anyone else who might have been wondering.

Why I think Almaster is scum, and the best lynch for today.

Let's start by going way back to the beginning with his accusation of me.
The initial post could have easily been a townie going after someone he thought was scummy, but in the post after it he attacks Mordy for disagreeing with him on whether early bandwagons are good are not.
It is made very clear that Mordy believes what he said about this, and is not a scumbag changing his opinion to suit his win condition.

He then disappears for 6 pages (it was Halloween weekend). In the first post with actual content, he accuses archaebob with a case that I think was at least 75% bullshit, and attacks Mordy again for for his opinion on early bandwagoning. He also states:

I just derailed the bandwagon on me

by ignoring it

The fact that he's using it in his case shows that he's somewhat proud of this, but the biggest problem is in italics. You can't ignore something if you don't know it exists, and he is saying that he

did something

. If he wasn't intentionally lurking to get the votes off him, why is he saying that it went away because he ignored it instead of saying something like "The bandwagon disappeared while I was away"? To me his stating that he has done something to cause this indicates that he was aware of what was going on in the thread while all this was happening, and CHOSE not to post, in order to get votes and attention away from him.

When I call him out on his case, he does the following:
Post 1)Say I'm scummy for doing so
Post 2) Refuse to respond to my rebuttal, reiterate that I'm scummy, invoke WIFOM with

If I actually wanted to lurk the wagon away, do you really think I would've said so to everyone's face?

Post 3)Ask if I'm joking, among a bunch of other responses to people.

Yet, you end your own post with, "Unexcused badlogic is scummy." THE EXACT CASE I HIT YOU WITH. If attacking someone for apparent badlogic is scummy, then my case on your was excellent! Even if you felt your case wasn't badlogic, you admit in the beginning of your post:

CAPS PLEASE!! The key term is "excused." My initial argument was based on my observations of how I thought people would approach and play the game. After an unofficial poll was taken, I let the argument go because it was clear that my opinion was wrong. I don't see how I can be held accountable for this given that, unless I had done research prior to the game, there would be no other way for me to know whether the argument was wrong or not.

I don't think this is nearly as damning as the earlier stuff, but he states that he can't be held accountable for his actions, even though he could have asked me how I knew what his avatar was instead of jumping to conclusions.

So if you admit the general consensus is that it's not a scumtell, and that general consensus is enough to get you to drop the case (OH MY GOD, BEAR WITH ME, THIS IS ABOUT TO BE AMAZING), then you admit that to a normal member of the general consensus, your case on Gammagooey was bad. If to a normal person (SAY ME, OMG, I HOPE YOU'RE HOLDING ONTO YOUR SOCKS), that case is bad, and as you yourself wrote, "badlogic is scummy," that means (HERE'S THE PITCH) that I was totally justified and validated in your own words for holding you as scummy and voting for you. By your own calculations, my vote on you was completely justified and you deserved it.

OMG MORE CAPS PLZ!!!!!!!!!!!!!1 Your vote for me and my vote for Gamma are not the same. My vote: There was no way for me to know the truth or falsity of the matter at hand without making the argument in the first place. After the results came in, I let it go. Your vote: 13 pages later, you're clinging to a statement I made on page 1. You have no other arguments against me. LOL.

As in the last post, he defends himself by attacking Mordy's use of capital letters, attacks the argument being late despite that he hadn't been there for half of the pages mentioned, and implies that that the argument is hilarious, keeping in line with suggesting mine was a joke.

In the interests of fairness, in between that and the next quoted he makes a few not-completely-terrible posts.

This game is too complicated. I might go back and re-read, but this thread is more muddled than the original text of Beowulf, so I'm just going to wait for a wagon to formulate and then decide whether I like it or not.

States his intention to stop scumhunting and just vote based on whoever else is being voted. Already got called out on this by others.

I love when people actually take it seriously and are like OMG U R SO SCUMMY IM VOTING 4 U.

More saying that other peoples accusations of him are funny and not to be taken seriously.

There's some more stuff about applying logic retroactively, which he should have had logic for to begin with, but my mind has been made up on him for long enough now that I'm pretty much disregarding it.

He has made terrible, bullshit cases, he lurked the attention away from himself, and stated that accusations against him are jokes, and not to be taken seriously.
He has claimed that he can't be held accountable for his actions.
I disagree.

[Gammagooey]

So, Almaster is claiming doctor. Let's get some amusement out of this and assume it's true for a second. That would mean:

Almaster has a RADICALLY different style for playing as doctor than cop

He soft-claimed vanilla townie despite in fact not being one

and conveniently has a non-confirmable but very useful role that makes him a poor lynch.

In short, I don't habeeb it.

[Gammagooey]

I'm probably going to be repeating myself with this, but oh well.
-I agree with Mordy/Spyrex that foilist is more likely to be the village idiot than Almaster.
-I think that looking at Almaster's play his doc claim DOESN'T MAKE SENSE. Seriously, I can't fathom that he would play doctor that much differently than he played his cop game.
-I think Mordy saying he'd hammer is much more likely a miscount than a TRIPLE-voter claim. I've never seen that before and in a mini it would be amazingly powerful. Or he just wants to be the last one to switch over, but I don't see how being the last one to vote him does anything.
-I'm wondering what's taking Socio so long to read this over and post some content.
-I'm realizing I started every statement of this post so far with I/I'm.

But you know what? If Foilist13 flips town, I think Archaebob is right. I think at this point, we'll learn a ton.

Was this a typo? Considering almost all of archae's arguments are based on foil flipping scum, I don't see how him flipping town would prove what he's saying.

About Sanjay:

And...THAT...realization...is ultimately the main thing that causes you to unvote AGM and put foilist to L-1.

Even with Sanjay's vote, he's at L-3. (12 people=7 to lynch, Sanjay gave foil his 4th vote.)

You allowed me to get up to L-2, and never took your vote off until you decided to jump on AGM. This is not consistent with your earlier statements, and I don't believe that it came from town.

I just went through Sanjay in isolation, and I never saw him voting you. Are you blaming him for leaving China's vote on you too long?

Sanjay's defense also makes quite a lot of sense to me.

@archae-Discrepancies. 'SPLAIN PLEASE.

[Gammagooey]

OH, that one was about peanutman and not Sanjay. I hereby follow Sanjay's advice, but I still request explanation for the L-3 vs L-1.

[Gammagooey]

Mordy, how did archae imply that the next vote was the hammer exactly? his stating that it was L-1 was after your statement.

archae, I just think that Almaster is likelier scum, and even with my and Mordy's vote it would still only be L-1. I'd rather not vote him and show the current non-voters that his lynch is inevitable just yet, a decision by an individual voter that he's scummier than Almaster is better than a vote for foilist because he's the pre-determined lynch for today.

[Gammagooey]

I can see where Phaerie is coming from, everyone except Sociopath has stated their opinions in general, and there hasn't really been any new content aside from archae's case on Sanjay, which happened Today.

People not posting in a certain amount of pages doesn't mean much when it's mostly just a rehash of previous posts.

Having said that, SOCIOPATH. You've had a week to catch up, can you at least give us a defense for Phaerie's case against you even if you haven't completely caught up yet? It's on page 19, and is regarding stuff much sooner(pg 2-6ish i think) than that said by Muffin.

[Gammagooey]

Oh, rule change/amendment/whatever.
I'm already voting Alm, but it looks like this will be decided by the people who haven't voted for either of foil/Almaster yet.

I support mandatory voting so we can see individual choices on who people want to lynch.

[Gammagooey]

This is the above quotes bastard brother who, together, have started a bank robbing spree and collect the skulls of squirrels.

I think i may have missed one too many classes in metaphor interpretation 101.

Vote : Archaebob

However, from a technical standpoint, I would lean towards voting Foilist simply because I think that if AGM is lying about being a doctor, as has been stated by others already, we can take care of him later and, worse off, scum use their lynch on AGM, protecting all other townies for another day.

Peanut, you are either scum or you have missed the point of this entirely. We have had THIRTY PAGES of who overall is scummiest and why. Right now the lynch is between Almaster and foil barring some amazingly convincing last-minute analysis, and the goal of this endeavor is to gather opinions on Almaster and foilist and the logic/thoughts/bullshit behind said opinions when they're backed by a vote to lynch.

[Gammagooey]

Oh look, another useless vote with barely any actual opinions of Almaster and foil. As much as Socio needs to post, two days before deadline after 30 pages of discussion is not the time to pressure vote.

Phaerie and Papa have said they'd rather vote for foil than AGM, so I'm gonna be a sad panda and concede that AGM isn't getting the votes today.

Vote:foilist13

Assuming that I can count properly, that's L-1. Claim prease.

[Gammagooey]

Seriously, think about the timeframe even if everyone just follows you without question.

Around 12 hours for the votes to change
12-24 hours for Socio to notice and post
12-18 hours of discussion of who to lynch.

Given that we still can't come to an easy consensus after THREE WEEKS, what makes you think it can happen in about a day.

[Gammagooey]

I've already given opinions on Almaster and Foil. They haven't changed. Read the game plz.

I can see a LITTLE on Almaster, but foil? this and you listing him a bunch in your page by page analysis is all I can find of you commenting on him:

Case 1: MordyS vs. foilist13 (100, 131) - hmmmmmm these are pretty good points, especially this early.

Case 10: Sanjay vs. Foilist13 (356) - This is actually quite good, but I'm not sure how this proves he's scum... could he be just embarrassed town?

Personally, I'd like to see your own thoughts instead of just your comments on the cases of others.

[Gammagooey]

I'm not going to lie, I'm pretty suprised right now, from one vote to L-1 in the time it takes me to finish my classes.

Unvote:

foilist for now, Papa you have pretty conclusively kicked my timetable's ass so far, so I'm pretty sure I was wrong about calling your vote useless. Mah bad.

[Gammagooey]

This game is shenanigans. For clarification, my vote at deadline will be as follows, unless we have ANOTHER power swing, in which I will stare at my computer and go "hurrrrrrr?" for a while in disbelief:
Almaster>Sociopath>foilist.

AGM for what I've already said, Socio for lurking and having a pretty good unanswered case on his predecessor by Phaerie, and foilist last because game-wise, he's consistent with his town meta, even when that meta can't really be considered pro-town.

Speaking of meta, archae you were the one to originally bring this up, and despite your first-hand experience in the game you still appear to think he's a better lynch than Socio AND Almaster. Did something happen to make his mitigating meta marginally less mitigating? (explanation must include alliteration)

[Gammagooey]

Wat.
COMPUTING.
ALL LEADS POINT TO SOCIOPATH.
BEEP.
I'm going to make the naive assumption that he's reading through and making an amazingly revealing mind-bogglingly good post RIGHT NOW. Should I be proven wrong yet again, I'll hammer tommorrow afternoon.

[Gammagooey]

Archaaaaaaaae.

Speaking of meta, archae you were the one to originally bring this up, and despite your first-hand experience in the game you still appear to think he's a better lynch than Socio AND Almaster. Did something happen to make his mitigating meta marginally less mitigating? (explanation must include alliteration)

Still needs an answer.

[Gammagooey]

While I wait for archae to respond, might as well go off on a tangent for a bit.

@cruelty, archaebob, and peanutman-Has your opinion of foilist changed with Sociopath's flip?

[Gammagooey]

Yay, I get answer. I am dissapointed by a lack of alliteration though.

So what I'm thinking right now. Archae could be scum, but I doubt it. For one thing, he did seem pretty townie to me for most of yesterday except the very last bit.
The much bigger thing is that I honestly can't think of a scum-partner for him that makes a whole lot of sense to me. Pretty much everyone else who I'm finding scummy was voting for archaebob at some point during yesterday when there were much better choices to lynch at the time.

So right now, I'd have to guess that the remaining mafia are 2/3rds of Almaster, cruelty, and peanutman. Almaster's doc claim still doesn't make sense to me, and he's still alive, so grr.

However, after going through peanutman and cruelty, I barely even see them mentioning each other in the entire 30-something page debacle.

Peanutman and Cruelty-Since it's so conspiciously absent from day 1, what are your opinions on each other.

[Gammagooey]

Yeah, I was pretty much a non-contributor to the Sociopath lynch, the only part I had a part in was saying I would hammer if he didn't post by the next day.

At the time of Papa's posting his vote for Socio it read very similar to peanutman's vote on archae to me: votes that I thought weren't going to have any effect on the lynch and were in my opinion more likely to be a dodge for giving opinions on foilist and Almaster to avoid any repercussions of speaking out for one lynch or the other.

By the time I got back on that day, Sociopath had gone from Papa's sole vote to one vote away from the lynch. I was obviously wrong about Papa's vote being useless, so I stated my opinion on Socio vs. foilist, and was waiting for Socio to post any defense or claim he might have had when Almaster hammered.

Cruelty and peanut, I'd still like to see your opinions on each other, and cruelty your opinion on foilist with the info from Socio's flip would be good too.

[Gammagooey]

I'm going to bed now, I'll have more tomorrow I think. Specifically, I'll address foilist and peanut.

What happened to this exactly?

Still want cross-opinions from cruelty and peanut, preferably before you have an excuse with thanksgiving weekend.

Cruelty's reasoning for that post seems off to me as well, I can understand being a little irritated at hammering before Socio had claimed or because it didn't come with a reasoning to give info to go on. But to pull the trigger? I don't see why that matters when there are other people saying that they would hammer after a claim.http://www.mafiascum.net/forum/posting.php

[Gammagooey]

Huh, part of the URL got copied to the end. Disregard it if you please.

[Gammagooey]

Okay, now that I have answers, here's what I've been thinking.
I'm pretty sure foilist isn't mafia. When he came under attack his first offense was on Muffin. If he's scum, why would he try to get the pressure off himself by putting it his own godfather, when attacking a random townie would do the same thing without risking a godfather lynch if people listen to you.

I pointed out that cruelty and peanut never spoke to each other yesterday. If they're both scum trying not to draw attention to each other, bussing at this point where everyone suspects both of them would be pretty much suicide. Neither of them wants the other lynched today. Hmmm.

Going back to Almaster- I still think that if he's a townie his play yesterday was absolutely terrible, but there's the tiniest chance that he's just what he said he was: a terrible, terrible doctor. His play today has been much better though, and I really don't think he would bus right now, so if cruelty comes up scum there are people I'd rather lynch before him. Side note: SpyreX was one of the only people still willing to vote him after his claim. WIFOM and all that, but it's still something to think about.

Peanutman's defense at the beginning of the day seemed a little scummy to me (trying to put suspicion on people because they're voting for him, not stating his own suspicions until some of the heat is off) and claiming that he had a big part in lynching Socio when he didn't even vote for him is glory hogging at best, and scum trying to get town cred at worst.

Cruelty didn't contribute much at all yesterday, didn't mention Muffin/Socio until very late in the game, and similar to peanutman is pushing on archae who I think just made a townie mistake (reasoning was a few posts back if you want it). In addition, he's still stating that foilist is scummy even though Socio's flip makes him just about as confirmed as a village idiot as he can get. He also has inconsistancies in his reasoning for being irritated at AGM and changing from not wanting to lynch AGM yesterday to wanting him lynched now.

I will vote for any of these three dudes. However, if cruelty is scum I think AGM looks a hell of a lot better given my bussing is suicide theory, making peanutman the last maf in my eyes (doesn't work the other way around:if peanut is scum, either Al or cruelty could be the last maf). I'm thinking cruelty gives us the most info from the lynch and has a high chance of lynching ze scum.

Vote:cruelty

[Gammagooey]

I loled, and clearly Phaerie is batgirl using your metaphor. (Two batmans would just be SILLY)

[Gammagooey]

@town, what happens if I flip town? Specifically, what information can you gain from that?

If you flip town, I think AGM is scum. I'd rather be wrong about lynching you than a claimed doctor though.

cruelty and peanut never spoke to each other yesterday.

I never really interacted with you or Mordy either. Not sure how valuable this is as evidence given that a big part of your case is my lack of contribution. This point seems contradictory.

Yes, but we asked you questions even if you didn't ask us any. I didn't see peanut ever even mention you except in a quote by another player, and although I do think I missed a few mentions when I was looking through yours earlier (searched for peanutman instead of peanut the first time) the only time I see you directly state your opinion on him is this:

I should probably also note that I don't get a huge scum-vibe from peanut - I can see some of your points (not all), but I'm not positive that what you have is ironclad.

It's not that you didn't mention him much or vice versa, it's that neither of you brought up the other, which makes sense for scum trying to lay low.

He also has inconsistancies in his reasoning for being irritated at AGM and changing from not wanting to lynch AGM yesterday to wanting him lynched now.

How so?

I haven't changed my tune re: AGM at all. I'm not really sure what your issue here is anyway - you specifically say you find AGM scummy; I'm not allowed to? Prior to the Muffin lynch I thought that foilist was highly scummy + an informative lynch, I'm not as sure as I was about that (although I'd still support his lynch, I wouldn't be as eager to do so as I was yesterday) and instead believe that AGM (someone you also find scummy) would be the better lynch (of the two). How is that a problem?

I just don't see what exactly the logic is from
AGM=scummy but shouldn't be lynched to AGM=scummy and I want him lynched. For all I know you have a great explanation for this, but I don't see it yet. Admittedly, this is more of a lack of explanation thing than an inconsistency.

re: archaebob, shrug. I don't want to get into a battle over his motivations/actions without him actually being present, otherwise it's nothing better than idle speculation.

I'd also question why you only mention me and peanut in your positives from a scum flip paragraph at the end of your post. Would we gain nothing from an AGM flip?

Pretty much everyone said AGM was scummy in one way or another yesterday. I don't really see what info it would give us except for "AGM is <alignment>"

[Gammagooey]

So I probably shouldn't be posting at 6am anyway, but I reread your post and can see you hinting at why you want him lynched now as opposed to yesterday, but for clarification:

Prior to the Muffin lynch I thought that foilist was highly scummy + an informative lynch, I'm not as sure as I was about that (although I'd still support his lynch, I wouldn't be as eager to do so as I was yesterday) and instead believe that AGM (someone you also find scummy) would be the better lynch (of the two). How is that a problem?

Are you saying the reason that you thought he shouldn't be lynched yesterday is because you thought foilist was scummier at the time?

[Gammagooey]

It's not that you didn't mention him much or vice versa, it's that neither of you brought up the other, which makes sense for scum trying to lay low.

I don't really buy points like this. It's speculating on why something that never happened, didn't happen. I mean, I understand your point and I realise why you think it's scummy, but I also don't put much stock in trying to explain the reasons that X didn't occur. It means that there's absolutely no fact involved, and you're delving entirely into unprovable territory.

the only time I see you directly state your opinion on him is this:

That's fine. But then, given my day 1 playstyle (lack of contribution), how is this a valid point? I don't believe I stated opinions on many people at all, I don't really think you can point to one person I didn't talk about and condemn me for it.

Pretty much everyone said AGM was scummy in one way or another yesterday. I don't really see what info it would give us except for "AGM is <alignment>"

Right, so why would my flip illuminate AGM's alignment? I don't really understand this - we battled a little but I don't think that was absolutely, positively town vs scum. I think he's scummy as all hell, but I concede a small possibility that he's the worst doctor ever. I think you said as much as well, meaning that my flip wouldn't completely condemn or absolve AGM regardless

Quotes are together for readability.

Cruelty, I understand that you didn't mention a whole lot of people yesterday. But when two of my top three scummiest players aren't speaking to or about each other, yes, i find that suspicious.
In addition, peanut wasn't nearly as quiet as you, and still didn't say anything about you anyway. Here's a general list of when peanut first started talking about a player, without counting going back to a person he already mentioned.
AGM
me
archae
foilist
Mordy
SpyreX
Sanjay
tiniest mention of Phaerie
---Papa Zito starts the Socio wagon---
Papa Zito
Muffin/Sociopath
actual content on Phaerie
---Day 2 AND i ask him directly for his opinion on you---
cruelty

If you flip scum, I don't see what excuse peanut would have for mentioning you last and the flipped godfather only after a wagon gets rolling on him. In addition, if you're scum despite AGM's play yesterday he just helped to lynch another scum, meaning if he's bussing he's pretty screwed anyway. (1 maf vs 7-8 townies generally doesn't work out well for the scum)

If you flip town, I don't see AGM being town after his scumtastic play, terrible claim, and being on a townie wagon.

[Gammagooey]

@Gammagooey, regarding your list of who I talked about, am I to assume that all other players who haven't questionned/mentionned another player significantly is also a scum-pair? I haven't done it yet, but I'm sure there would be other absences in people's reads and posts. I think it's more interesting to completely ignore someone/something that is on the radar, than to not address something not on it (i.e. Cruelty wasn't really on it Day 1).

Dumb question is dumb, but I'll answer it anyway.
Of course people not saying/mentioning another player doesn't automatically make them a scum pair. But does a scum pair have a better motive than townies to not mention each other a whole lot? The answer is a definite yes.

Cruelty, you haven't voted yet. Are you waiting for anything in particular?

[Gammagooey]

@ ze archae- reasoning is in post 901 and 911. reasoning for why I think foilist is likely village idiot is also in 901.
question for ze archae- cruelty was the 4th vote on your bandwagon way back in the day(1) and only recently decided to vote peanutman over you. If you think cruelty is town, why do you think he made those decisions and who is your #1 suspect.

6: You like it because it clears you. I'll also note that GG only states there's information from a cruelty scumflip. He doesn't even mention what happens if I flip town.

My response to your earlier post included a small bit:That AGM would be absolutely mafia in my eyes, and if you flip town we also have suspicions from a confirmed townie on multiple players, notably on archae and peanut.

3) His defense is exclusively arguing semantics, OMGUS statements, and poor logic.

I don't think his defense is that bad, although he seems to be completely ignoring what I said about his flip giving info on AGM earlier. However, cruelty was very reluctant to give opinions on players and generally didn't say much of use throughout the day. You don't get a lot of scummy posts from lurking scum (a la Sociopath) because they aren't making opinionated posts that people disagree with and examine further.

Cruelty and foilist, could you stop insulting each other? Thinking someone has flawed reasoning in a mafia game doesn't mean you should act like a dick to call them out.

[Gammagooey]

Archae, responses to you are in order from your comments in your earlier posts.

I'm aware that mafia can in fact use reverse psychology to try and confuse townies. However, if you look through the posts and reasonings provided to us, you can get some damn good clues on whether people would do so at a given time or not. When foilist was being attacked, it was two real-life days into the game and been called out for doing scummy things very early. I don't see someone who hasn't been thinking enough about his posting to vote for the wrong person AND make a case on the said wrong person suddenly gaining a burst of clarity and start manipulating the situation in his favor for later.

I made a list of when peanutman mentioned everyone as well when cruelty asked me about the same thing. If you missed that too, please read what everyone has said in the past few pages instead of just asking for things people have already gone through.

AGM has played better today in that his suspicions of cruelty at least seem reasonable and he hasn't gone off and made cases like yesterday's which in my opinion were mostly rediculous.

You're using WIFOM enough that I think I need to say this. You seem to be using WIFOM in a way different way than I do. I generally think of it as "keep in mind that the mafia could always be using reverse psychology". You seem to think of it as in "This information has the possibility of being reverse psychology. We should ignore talking about it completely." Just because something COULD be reverse psychology, does not mean it is likely or that the information is out of bounds. I refuse to throw out information that we can discuss further and determine whether the mafia actually chose to use reverse psychology in a particular instance or not.

The main inconsistency is here:

I wasn't enthusiastic about the lynch, no. It didn't thrill me with joy because honestly I didn't think Muffin was scummier than foilist/AGM on day 1. I could see the logic behind the case, but it seemed less than ironclad.

Huh, guess I wasn't around for the end of the day.

AGM's last 4 posts have contained 1 inane sentence and 3 unexplained votes, he's been scummy all day and HE gets to hammer? Sigh.

Why would you be irritated at someone else getting to hammer instead of you if you weren't enthusiastic about the lynch in the first place?

The secondary one wasn't really an inconsistency as much as a lack of explanation, and he explained that he thought foilist was scummier at the time and no longer thinks that, so I dropped it.

If AGM is mafia and his partner gets lynched, I am 99% sure the mafia will not be able to win given AGM's previous behavior. Bussing for other mafia would also be crazy risky given it would leave them at 1 mafia to 7 townies.

Any of the three main suspects mentioned in my 901 would give IMO a high chance of lynching scum, and cruelty's flip would reflect heavily on the other two's alignments. In order of preference right now it is cruelty>Almaster>peanutman.

In response to cruelty's

2: I said it in response to someone (foilist? Don't remember who, don't think it matters) but I'd be highly concerned if you took my suspicions and ran with them purely because I flipped town. That's terrible logic and as such makes this point void.

I think you're referring to me, but having your suspicious does not mean blindly acting on them. However, it DOES mean that those suspicions are reasonable for a townie to have, and should be discussed accordingly.

[Gammagooey]

Oh hai.

archae-So you think cruelty is town. I don't agree with that, so to rephrase Almaster's question, Who's the best lynch and why?

[Gammagooey]

I was actually posting when he posted that, added the oh hai to acknowledge it.

Seriously though, does anyone have questions for me? I've already stated my opinion and don't see a whole lot that needs my statements on it.

[Gammagooey]

I was actually posting when he posted that, added the oh hai to acknowledge it.

So it took you 5 minutes to rephrase a question I had already asked?

I was going to ask WHO'S THE MOST BESTEST LYNCH AND WHY but thought that could be borderline insulting to archae and didn't want to start with all of that again, so I reworded it.

[Gammagooey]

Archae, short version on you and Sanjay is I think you're being paranoid, and that Sanjay is probably town.

In your other game, Sanjay was able to get away with putting suspicion on and helping to lynch the cop because of his previous pro-town behavior, right?

Right now it's kind of the opposite: You're ignoring his helping to lynch the mafia godfather because of what you believe to be scummy actions, despite that said actions have actually made the town quite a bit better off.

I can see his posts coming from town, and the only point I really agree with on your list is that Sanjay's defense was weird. If I had to say why it's weird, I'd say he's a little overconfident. I don't think that makes him scum though, and my views on foilist (who you're basing most of San's case on) are still that he's the VI.

Last thing:If Sanjay is scum, his actions will hurt the town at some point or another. I haven't seen that happen yet.

[Gammagooey]

@archae-If you think foilist's case was spot-on what do you think about Phaerie's? Of the two cases on Muffin I thought Phaerie's was a lot more convincing.

[Gammagooey]

Deadline's sooner than I thought it seems.

I'm pretty okay with a peanut lynch.
His "not my wagon" on archae comment way back when still bugs me. His defense at the beginning of the day that attacked the people voting for him, for voting him (no mention of their previous behavior in the posts) is pretty bad, and he is trying to take entirely too much credit for Sociopath's lynch when he wasn't even voting for him. I hate cruelty's non-participation until the day he's one of the most popular lynches, but he has played better than peanutman today and if I'm right about cruelty peanutman is one of his most likely maf partners.

Vote:peanutman

[Gammagooey]

Oh, forgot the unvote.

unvote

Vote:peanutman

[Gammagooey]

Unless there's a counterclaim I think peanut is probably telling the truth.

unvote

Peanut did you make any breadcrumbs to support your claim?

[Gammagooey]

Archae and cruelty-What are your thoughts on the cop claim?

Peanut-Unless you think you're insane and want more certainty, I wouldn't investigate Phaerie, her being suspicious for having the best reason to vote Muffin doesn't make sense at all to me. Personally I'd investigate archae, he seemed really pro-town to me for most of day 1 but his behavior at the end of it and the beginning of day 2 combined with one of my scum reads being an uncounterclaimed cop are making me doubt my read on him.

[Gammagooey]

I think this is what archae is talking about, actually finding this was a huge pain in the ass, so I'm just gonna quote it for everyone else while I read over stuff.

A lot of people have posted since I started typing this. I'm just going to pretend that they didn't if that's okay.

@Sanjay - I've got a vague town read on you right now. I haven't seen anything that looks to me like a scum slip so far, but that doesn't mean I'm not looking.

@Archaebob - I'm not saying that there are questions that have gone unanswered other than the ones you just posted, but his choice has been to simply disappear and hope that I get myself lynched, where as I am actively trying to defend myself.

And if you are not tunneling, then what other players have you seriously considered besides me and Almaster?

@Almaster - Why shouldn't we lynch you? Is it just because you've said you were the Doc, or is there something else you have to offer?

Ha ha, foilist13. I can't believe you are accusing someone of tunneling in the same post as you continue your ridiculous policy of only having eyes for AlmasterGM.

Here's a question: Why did you consider it important that

I

considered your timeline plausible? I didn't notice it at first, but I think this is a scumslip on your part. Here's why?

Why is me finding something you said is plausible a point in your favor? For all you know I'm scummy scum trying to get the town to do my dirty work by having them lynch the power role so I don't have to. From what you know of my scum meta, I know you can trust me to

never

do that as scum, but you never know if I have changed my scum meta. I think you listed me finding your defense plausible as a point in your favor because you know my alignment.

This probably would have been a better zinger if you had said you have a neutral or scummy read on me, thus making you valuing my opinion totally bananas. But oh well. I think it is a good point anyway.

Anyway, AlmasterGM's recent defense is a little head-scratching, but it actually makes me feel better about lynching foilist13 than AlmasterGM. If nothing else, it takes away the only reason foilist13 had for us not lynching him.

Vote: foilist13

I want to see one of these two flip and I'm just fine with it being foilist13.

[Gammagooey]

To start out, neither of cruelty or archaebob actually answered my question on whether they think peanut is real or not. Yes, it does matter, and I will explain why as soon as you answer the question.

ARCHAE VS. MORDY

-Archae's only real defense of foilist was that quote, and he could have changed to voting AGM at pretty much any time, instead pretty much tunneling on foilist.

-Above is the thing archae was talking about. Sanjay did vote for foilist, but archae didn't understand why he didn't notice the post that it was based on earlier and made some not completely thought through theories about how and why Sanjay is scum.

-Archae, from what I can tell, you thought Sanjay was mafia for voting foilist later than you thought he should have for thinking foilist knew Sanjay was town because he was scum. I am not at all suprised that someone would be confused by this.

-Archae you've just gone from a town read on two people (Mordy and Sanjay) to a vote for one and an HoS on the other. Not only this, but it was immediately after another complete reversal on Chinaman/Sanjay in which you said you got a pro-town read after you went back over day 1.
What in the hell? More explanation for the double reversal on Sanjay is definitely required.

-Right now I don't think Mordy's reasons to vote you were the best but your reaction makes me just "bwaaa?" You really do seem panic-y in your first defense, and although your recent post explains your new read on Mordy I still haven't seen why Sanjay deserves the HoS too.

[Gammagooey]

Since there were more posts, the second item under Archae vs. Mordy is on the previous page, not above the post.

[Gammagooey]

Warning:This is probably the longest post I've ever made. Be prepared.

So I'm gonna go back to the beginning of this whole mess to show my perspective. My summaries/interpretations of posts are next to dashes - my opinions in parenthesis below them.

---Page 44-The beginning---

-Mordy votes for Archae primarily for him defending Socio before his lynch.
-Archae says there's something very scummy about Mordy's post.
-Archae responds with mostly questions, but defends his defense of Socio, saying it's consistent with his play.
(It is consistent, but you ignored Phaerie's read on Muffin and Papa's read on Socio when you opposed his lynch, as well as SpyreX's statements that his lurking was isolated to this game, not the entire site.)

-Mordy responds to the questions on the case, and adds in comments about defending foilist, and asks about statements between archae and Muffin.
(I don't agree with the foilist portion)


---Page 45-Shit gets scummy---

Archae attacks Mordy for relying on PZ, states that PZ was lucky, not good, attacks the opinion of SpyreX, makes a not-so-subtle suggestion that Mordy could be mafia-

That is, assuming you are town. I'm becoming increasingly more convinced that there is someone on that wagon who KNEW it would work, and was onboard for that very reason.

calls Socio's lynch lucky some more, says that Mordy's at least one scum off the wagon theory is terrible for being conjecture and states that it's criminal to use it against him, responds to question about the Muffin conversation.

(This is where archae starts to look panic-y. His post curses several times and it seems generally angry at Mordy's accusations, although I'm not at all suprised at the foilist "This is a fucking joke" the rest seem like an overreaction to me. The "down-right criminal" comment also seems just bad to me, I would expect that if someone thinks I'm scum with enough conviction to push for my lynch to say all their theories about me, and although some would be dumb they can and should be disproven by reasoning, not attacking the theory for being a theory itself.)

-Mordy responds to archae's previous post, goes on about defending foilist, states that archae's post was OMGUS, and states that archae has been more scummy than cruelty today.
(The stuff about foilist is generally wrong, but I can see why he would think that. Archae's post doesn't actually explicitly state that Mordy is maf as would be expected in an OMGUS post, but it's implied pretty clearly IMO. Today (game-day), archae has been scummier than cruelty. Yesterday (day 1 in-game) it was the other way around.)

-Archae addresses my question about the cop, but doesn't actually answer it. He states that he's a lot more suspicious of Mordy than he was before, but needs to reread.
(Question dodging, but honestly with all the other stuff the answer probably wouldn't have mattered compared to all his other posts so far, so meh.)

-More foilist is possible maf partner with archae accusations and rebuttals.
(meh.)

---Page 46&47-Mordy slips up, Sanjay enters the picture---


-Mordy says archae is reacting badly to being attacked
(agree)
-Archae asks about Mordy not commenting on his cases, Mordy responds and states that archae is trying to discredit him and he should attack people archae legitimately thinks are scummy.
(If archae is town, I'm pretty sure he legitimately thinks Mordy is scum, in which case there would be no reason to stop trying to discredit Mordy, dumb statement but not really that scummy.)

-Posts that I think I should quote instead of summarize.

I tried to read archaebob's cases on Sanjay, but totally didn't get them. Can you explain the thing about Sanjay knowing foilist13 was scum because he knew Sanjay was town and therefore because he didn't vote foilist13 that means he's also scum? Cause that case made my brain explode.

In fact, you haven't made any complaint about it either. If my case made your head explode, why didn't you mention it when you first read it?

Because I didn't pay much attention to it the first time you posted it. I glanced over it, it wasn't compelling, and since my attention was elsewhere I didn't follow up on it. I'll spell out why it's dumbassery tho. The crux of the case is that Sanjay easily should've realized foilist13 was scum because foilist13 "knew" Sanjay was town and only scum could know that. Of course you ignored the possibilities that, a) foilist didn't "know" Sanjay was town, but had a town read on him, b) he did "know" Sanjay was town, but Sanjay didn't realize he "knew" it and assumed he had a town read on him. That's why it made my head explode.

Well, I reread the thread. It was actually worse than I thought. At least the way I initially read it, archaebob was making a case. A bad case, but a case. On reread I see that he actually just made up a reason for why Sanjay voted for foilist13 that had nothing to do with what Sanjay actually said. Reading Sanjay in iso it makes perfect sense why he switched to foilist13. Anyway, how close are we to lynching archaebob-scum?

(Everything below here is my opinion)

This is pretty bad, and currently the #1 reason why I should doubt my town-read of Mordy. The case should have been scummy to Mordy regardless of who posted it given Mordy's opinion on it, and attacking archae for a case that wasn't his and stating that Sanjay's iso made perfect sense why he switched to foilist given that Mordy was attacking Sanjay's case doesn't make sense to me.

However. (This incorporates my thoughts on past page 47, as I think I've gotten the main points for my reads on both players)

Archae was attacking Mordy before this post was made and I don't think it was based on good reasoning.

I understand why Mordy wouldn't find it as scummy that Sanjay did it given that it seemed more like a tiebreaker thought between AGM and foilist than the entire reason why foilist is mafia, although I would think it would still be at least marginally scummy to Mordy.

And the big one: Based on Mordy and archae's actions before this whole thing got established, I have a much stronger town read on Mordy. Although I don't think that given random people making Mordy's mistake it would be considered one more likely to be made by town than scum, Mordy making the mistake as a townie is still plausible to me, and between you two I would vote for archae to be lynched, based on his sudden suspicion of Mordy for suspecting him rather than because of his previous actions, giving up his newly-found Sanjay town-read based on Mordy's case confusion rather than Sanjay's actions (I don't see why even if Mordy is scum that he can't be using a townie's case mistakenly instead of his scumbuddies), and with archae's reaction to Mordy's accusations and previous defense of the mafia godfather I think archae is more likely to be scum.

[Gammagooey]

Anyway, how close are we to lynching archaebob-scum?

Not close at all. Right now a lot of the arguments back and forth are "your shit is bad, so you must be scum." Setting all that aside however, MordyS comes out far scummier than Archaebob.

@MordyS - You are attacking Archaebob for being hysterically defending himself, i.e. nervous scum I assume. However in reading, you come off far more anxious than he does, and the quality of your posts has diminished over time. Actually you sound a lot like Almaster did yesterday.

Many Archaebob's cases rest on assumptions, which he states in them. That means that there is no contradiction, and they are meant to be conjecture, not damning evidence. So far his cases have been better than yours.

I don't have time right now to go back and check the validity of Archaebob's statement about you never seriously mentioning Sanjay, but until I do I will take it to be true. That in and of it self is an extremely strong connection between you and he. The only reason not to take a position on another player is if you are trying not to attract attention to them. That's it.

My Cruelty suspicions were never as strong as I would have liked, but they were the strongest. That is no longer the case.

It now seems as though this is realistically between MordyS and Archaebob, and I am inclined to choose MordyS.

unvote, Vote:MordyS

@Archaebob - There is a lot of content here. Post what he left out, and some of this MOAR. If you are holding on to it to make sure that MordyS digs himself into a hole, then fine.

@MordyS - How was that a manifesto against Archaebob? You didn't post any points against him, you just defended yourself against specific points of his. I don't even think you called him scummy, there was just a bunch of OMGUS, and insults. It's hard to be convincing when you sound like an asshole.

This is why I'm not voting for archae right now. Voting because of cases based on other player's assumptions without checking those assumptions is TERRIBLE, and Mordy's accusations of archae were before archae's of Mordy, meaning that Mordy is not OMGUS'ing, and he has made some pretty clear points against archae. For the record, I still think foilist is town and

THE

village idiot but I absolutely do not want him in LYLO.

[Gammagooey]

Archae and Papa, read foilist in iso from 114 to now please. Some highlights include:

-voting for Mordy using someone else's reasoning without checking it that turns out to be false (the mentions of Sanjay vs. other players) (115)

-stating that Mordy's arguments are all OMGUS and insults when Mordy voted and made a case first (116)

-And repeating that he thinks OMGUS is a big part of Mordy's case despite Mordy's clear list of points on the same page that details why he thinks archae is scummy. (118)

Papa, do you think that if foil was investigated and turned up inno his arguments as a confirmed townie would be useful?

[Gammagooey]

Because you and archae seem to be ignoring foilist's comments at the moment, and I don't think that if he is town, he would be a useful and intelligent member in LYLO. Quite honestly, I think he's a liability to the town regardless of his alignment.

[Gammagooey]

Because you and archae seem to be ignoring foilist's comments at the moment, and I don't think that if he is town, he would be a useful and intelligent member in LYLO. Quite honestly, I think he's a liability to the town regardless of his alignment.

Er. You're making a huge assumption about game state here. Why is Lylo even entering the equation at this point?

And I can't see why a confirmed town Foilist is a liability. If you don't like his arguments you could just ignore them but you'd at least you could take them at face value.

Because I'm trying to take into account the worst-cast scenario here. Best case, archae is scum, gets lynched, and we find the last scum member tommorrow for an awesome win. But assuming the best-case scenario is the one that's going to happen is dumb, and I think that just about anyone else would be much more useful to have their opinions as confirmed if they are investigated and turn up town.

[Gammagooey]

Cruelty, in all honesty I think archae has a higher chance of flipping scum than foilist, but in my opinion foilist is playing abysmally and I just don't see him being helpful in the future, whereas if archae is town I think he can make some helpful contributions and find scum.

Papa if you think I'm trying to discredit him do you agree with what he's posted? Do you think he's playing well? At the beginning of today I thought he was a townie that had made some dumb mistakes but had learned from them and would make some contributions and be useful later on. I no longer think that is the case.

[Gammagooey]

...Yeah, I might be overreacting a bit to foilist's recent posts as compared to the rest of the day. Voting based on someone else's incorrect assumptions and saying stating that Mordy's case was OMGUS twice when I don't think it even fits the definition just screamed terrible play to me.

Foil, if you're town please, please check out the arguments to make sure they're true before voting in the future. I still don't think you've played well, but it's probably also not as bad as I've made it out to be.

I do think archae is the most likely scum right now, so I'm going to go ahead and

Vote: archaebob

.(reason for thinking he's scum is in my iso 71)
I believe that's L-1.

[Gammagooey]

Wait what? I thought that you really were a cop until you pulled this stunt with your extreme reluctance to vote day 1.
I've got both of my last two exams today, so I'm going to go ahead and claim now since I probably won't be on again until tommorrow.

I'm a

Roleblocker

. I targeted AGM night one, and Sanjay last night.

I chose AGM because he was scummy as hell the day before, and if he was a member of the mafia he'd probably be making the kill based on the mafia thinking that the claimed doc wouldn't get roleblocked.

I blocked Sanjay because I figured Mordy would get investigated and Sanjay's willingness to vote but not hammer seemed weird to me, and that archae might be right about part of his actions in his foilist vote earlier. I didn't (and still don't think) the whole "just noticed something a few pages back" scumtell is a good argument, but I could see him giving up his weak foilist vote for the opportunity to get in early onto the godfather lynch.

Vote:peanutman

As for his scumbuddy, cruelty would still make a lot of sense to me but given peanut's sheer balls to fake a guilty right now he has a LOT of confidence in his scumbuddy to win the game for him. It seems a bit of a stretch to think that cruelty would get an easy win from this with my comments on him and peanut yesterday.

[Gammagooey]

Bah, humbug.
Good luck and merry christmas everybody, see ya when the game's over!

[Gammagooey]

We actually won o.O. I was pretty sure we were fucked for a while there after Mordy's early vote and foilist voted for Papa afterwards.

Stuff I've wanted to say for forever:

-The whole Almaster's avatar thing was exactly as I said it was

-IMO, we (scum) really really should have killed Almaster after his doc claim, despite his scumminess, but I convinced Papa not to so durr

-I'm STILL a bit mad at Socio for not ever posting seriously in the thread, my personal plan was to go along with the easy mislynch day one and then bus him day 2, but Socio's inactivity and lexprod getting replaced led to that changing with Papa's bus at the last second

-I think the biggest reasons to suspect me were arguing against Socio's lynch d1, although under the guise of "it's a deadline vote not a pressure vote" and actually something else almaster pointed out, when it took me 10 minutes or so after Papa posted his inactive list to respond, it took me that long because I had to change my post to fit better, it originally called out Peanutman for inactivity but I'd just look like a hypocrite if I posted that right under Papa's list having me not posted for a few days.

-If Papa got lynched, I expected it to be on the last day for his lack of activity, there wasn't a whole lot of content there until the last two days or so, there wasn't much chance of him getting lynched before then.

-I don't really blame Mordy for messing up here, and I see exactly where he's coming from.

-Foilist, you changed your vote to Papa after a much smaller scumtell IMO than Mordy's shenanigans, and very soon after Mordy posted which people the scum SHOULD be voting for, you change yours to the "correct scum position" with just a few sentences. Yes, Mordy made the wrong choice in the end but you certainly didn't make it clear you were town.

-Poor Furry got like one sentence before getting night-killed

[Gammagooey]

Oh right, the Socio bus.

I was going to join it if it looked like it was picking up steam, but a combination of classes and a sleep schedule that had me passing out at 10am prevented me from getting back on until after 5 votes were already up there.