Mini 885 - Boom, Game Gutshot/Abandoned by Mod!

[xvart]

EBWOP:

Are you treating 5cvm as confirmed town forever? If not, what would it take to get you to lynch him? Would you ignore all of your other scum reads on another day to lynch him? Or are you convinced you can divine 'scum reads' from a player who is actively claiming scum? What action could 5cvm do that you would consider scummy?

Absolutely not. Nobody is ever confirmed town in my book. To lynch him today it would take a fast approaching deadline and 5cvm the only person with a bandwagon. I am not convinced I can divine anything, but I think tomorrow will yield a better understanding of 5cvm's alignment, especially if Evilgorillaz is lynched today.

Hito, I should also mention that I find 5cvm to be less of a liability later in the game right now than you and others because he is voting for me. He can keep his vote on me all game and I know it won't hurt the town unless I get a bandwagon rolling on me, other than we can't get him to sway his vote to actual scum.

xvart.

[Civil Scum]

It is WIFOM, or a null-information setting as hito called it. But, since there's a chance that scvm did it and broke the game outting his buddies (and it's not a remote chance, its a somewhere-in-the-middle chance), I would test it and see if it ends the game. That's difficult for you to understand from my position?

Lot's of people weren't on the list. Lot's of people aren't posting. I can't say I have any considerable read on lots of players. You've only mentioned like 3 players in your last 5 posts. When I made the 'all players defending scvm' comment, that was my first post mostly, and I think I've gotten a better handle on it since then.

My concern is you have given the appearance as to being willing to vote for anyone, depending on how the wind blows. You've got your fingers in every cookie jar.

Is that an appearance to you? Cause it's obvious that I haven't been willing to vote for anyone. Other folks are far guiltier of BW'ing than me. Which cookie jars? WTF, cookie jar am I in right now.

You're never sure about anyone, so then you are a little suspicious of everyone. That's not unreasonable. I usually feel that way after a missed lynch. But saying that, and then suggesting that it's bad/scummy that I'm suspicious of "half the players", certainly you can see why this is a dumb fuckin thing to say.

You're climbing back onto the list here with this bull shit.

Come on XFART (I'll test what you said about insults if you don't mind), how bad are mis-reppng me right now? [/rhetorical]

Maybe...just maybe...you should have picked an easier/better target when you're trying to pull a shit case out of your ass... ??? You give this appearance, to me.

[Civil Scum]

EBWOP:
I should say "far far far" guiltier. Aranfan, for example. Who you seem curiously uninterested in...

Gorillaz post, his first in a while, is rather unsightly, but since I'm pretty sure that hito is scum, I'm willing to let it slide for now.

Anyone can read the game, xfart, and see you are making this BW accusation up. I haven't BW'd anything. You made it up, then you embellished. Doesn't look very good.

[Aranfan]

Not liking "Civil's" Ad Hominems on xvart.

The reason xvart doesn't like you Civil, is that you are suspicious of both those arguing for and those arguing against 5cvm's lynch.

[Civil Scum]

Sorry, last one quickly.

Also, I have to point out 'gone after others'. I do THINK outside of what I post, you know. But what do you mean by, gone after?

Like when you bluntly acknowledged that you never took the basis of your gameplay and went one logical step with it (a step which imo is one of the FIRST that a townie would have made).

Like here,

You're calling me scummy for not taking the next step and saying that people not voting him are scum. I disagree, because I think many players here don't understand exactly what makes a policy lynch tick.

after which you suggest that everyone (?), besides me (?), aren't voting with you simply because they don't understand the idea policy lynching.

I would very much like to hear those private thoughts that, you promise, exist.

Even though, you kind of already outlined what they were...

...because I don't suspect

everyone

not [voting for scvm] of being scum?

My emphasis. Just wanted to show hito's strawmanning again. I never said everyone, I said anyone. Blatant defensive strawmanning, oh well. I fear I'm becoming redundant. Although, I'd like to hear how bad everyone else thinks xfart's last post was.

And xfart also didn't have a problem with humble "knowing" scvm is a townie, or aranfan immediately writing scvm off as a jester. He just consistently wants to lynch gorillaz for some apparently uncertain reasons. Oh, and he's trying to build a fantastically shitty case on me.

[Civil Scum]

Not liking your usage of "Ad Homminem", since I'm not using it to further or support an argument.

[Civil Scum]

is that you are suspicious of both those arguing for and those arguing against 5cvm's lynch.

I'm sorry, these are mutually exclusive somehow? In theory or game mechanics? It's wrong for me to feel that way? You two are full of crap?

I recognized this "flaw" in my reasoning/observations:

I realize it can't be both sides of the scvm deal the way I'm looking at it, or totally one side etc, and I can't be sure which is which until people on either end start to die.

Unless my memory fails me, buttons backed scvm first. Gorillaz and xfart followed suit later. This looks better for buttons than either of those two, imo. And, aranfan, I was wrong before, it's entirely possible that xvart took that road to distance from hito who is over there by himself at the extreme pole of the issue, especially when it was a lynch that could still happen.

When are prods after holidays?
Brosius, humble, squirel

In the meantime, aranfan you can read posts that aren't on this page you know, you just click the other numbers at the bottom or top of this page.

Aranfan, thanks for clarifying xfart's thoughts! Now, what do YOU think about them? That seems curiously absent from lots of your posting. Are you onboard for everything, or do you simply mention it without disagreeing or agreeing with it?

[Aranfan]

Not liking your usage of "Ad Homminem", since I'm not using it to further or support an argument.

You are, however, using it to denigrate xvart and erode his credibility.

is that you are suspicious of both those arguing for and those arguing against 5cvm's lynch.

I'm sorry, these are mutually exclusive somehow? In theory or game mechanics? It's wrong for me to feel that way? You two are full of crap?

I recognized this "flaw" in my reasoning/observations:

I realize it can't be both sides of the scvm deal the way I'm looking at it, or totally one side etc, and I can't be sure which is which until people on either end start to die.

Contradictory opinions usually are mutually exclusive.

Unless my memory fails me, buttons backed scvm first. Gorillaz and xfart followed suit later. This looks better for buttons than either of those two, imo. And, aranfan, I was wrong before, it's entirely possible that xvart took that road to distance from hito who is over there by himself at the extreme pole of the issue, especially when it was a lynch that could still happen.

IIRC, Gorillaz was until recently the only one who defended 5cvm.

In the meantime, aranfan you can read posts that aren't on this page you know, you just click the other numbers at the bottom or top of this page.

Congrats, you have eyes. I generally don't post unless I've read the whole of the thread previous.

Aranfan, thanks for clarifying xfart's thoughts! Now, what do YOU think about them? That seems curiously absent from lots of your posting. Are you onboard for everything, or do you simply mention it without disagreeing or agreeing with it?

I'm on board with the policy lynch on 5cvm.

[Civil Scum]

IIRC, Gorillaz was until recently the only one who defended 5cvm.

And myself, and humble, and buttons, and xvart.
So, clearly the above contradicts this:

I generally don't post unless I've read the whole of the thread previous.

On top of which you only comment on recent posts. Meaning that perhaps you read everything, but you just don't care.

I'm on board with the policy lynch on 5cvm.

I know; it's very conveinent for you. Although I fail to see what that has to do with xfart's post or anything else I was talkign about.

You are, however, using it to denigrate xvart and erode his credibility.

That may be open to interpretation, but I don't think I am.

Contradictory opinions usually are mutually exclusive.

Nice simplification. Bravo, really.

[A_Squirrel]

Are you treating 5cvm as confirmed town forever?

No. I think I'll treat him as someone who claimed scum early game, threw around some bs and then seems to have sobered up.

If not, what would it take to get you to lynch him?

I don't know honestly.

Would you ignore all of your other scum reads on another day to lynch him?Or are you convinced you can divine 'scum reads' from a player who is actively claiming scum? What action could 5cvm do that you would consider scummy?

As you've pointed out, 5cvm's continued existence will be somewhat problematic later on (for me at least). I don't look forward to picking between him and someone else, especially since after a quick read of him I can't confidently see anything significant in his posts along the lines of what humble in particular sees (and claims to indicate townie-hood). At the same time, I'm hesitant to rely on what others claim to see, and while I do see some sense to what 5cvm has done, I don't like it at all. This whole alt and bulling into the game business doesn't sit well with me at all. However, I don't think that you've gone about this particularly well. It's interesting to me at least, that you said:

I'm not here to look good. I'm here to lynch an anti-town player.

This just feels off--you seem to be pushing this way too hard as others have pointed out. You're correct to a point in that townies shouldn't be that concerned about looking scummy/bad/whatever, but the idea that you're here to lynch an anti-town player instead of scum is wrong. If your policy lynch fizzles (which doesn't seem to be that rare on this site) you should be willing to accept it and move on to scum hunting, and since you've presumably gathered information on other players through the policy lynch discussion, this shouldn't be as hard of a step as it seems to be for you.

Also,

Boxman, can we get a vote count?

[Evilgorrilaz]

Now a question for Evilgorillaz: would you say policy was a weak reason for a lynch?

At this point yes, given what 5cvm has recently posted.

Gorillaz post, his first in a while, is rather unsightly, but since I'm pretty sure that hito is scum, I'm willing to let it slide for now.

Really? Do you not see the obvious contradiction in Hito's post? He says he wants to get rid of the anti-town player, but he wants to do so in a way that protects scum. Am I the only one that finds that scummy?

[TheButtonmen]

My strongest scum read is still on Arafan by a large margin, followed by Humble. I’m wondering if Hito has any thoughts / suspects not related his burning desire to push through a policy lynch on 5cvm.

@ Civil;

Would you be willing to join the Arafan wagon?

[ChiboSempai]

I suppose I'll post after the new year, but there really isn't much to say tbqh. The day is just dragging on and on and on and on. Everyone has said their case like 20 times, and I can assure you that at least mine hasn't changed.

[hitogoroshi]

Okay, I'm fully aware there are other questions aimed at me but I have to do this one in it's own post.

If 5cvm is town, the best way to do so is to make the logical case, not to attack those not voting for him. If he is scum, the best way to do so is to make it as painless as possible for his scumbuddies to bus him so we can get on with it. Hence making a strong case. The fact that he has many active defenders could be scumbuddies; there's simply no sense in speculating on that though when we can check by lynching the anti-town player first.

What the hell is this? You are literally saying "SCUM GET ON THIS WAGON NAO BEFORE I WHIP YOU WID MAH F*ING CATS". If you call 5cvm anti-town for claiming "scum" this is just as bad. This is asking for a quicklynch. This is TRYING to protect the scum. This is trying to make your policy lynch crusade/case seem (as you put it) "strong".

Vote:Hitogoroshi

I was gonna respond with something short and pithy before I realized that it's actually some kind of out-there theory behind it. I really do need to explain it further, so here we go.

Scum want to kill the most pro-town players. That should be kind of obvious. Anti-town players help scum, pro-town players hurt scum. It's already easy for them to kill pro-town players with the nightkill; as such, whether or not you have ANY good pro-town players left is largely dependent on the town during the day.

Now, many people playing mafia think it's about being a renegade super sleuth who carves up the scum with beams of pure logic. (One wonders if the Sherlock Holmes movie will lead to an upswill to new members...) But there's a lot more to it than that, and the entire game is certainly not about trying to amass 'clues' to build a 'case'. One element is town composition. As our numbers thin we very much want to have good, pro-town players - and

players that allow themselves to be read, making them safer to bring along in a potential LYLO situation.

(gee, it is almost as though my accusation of deliberate unreadability is aimed at a certain player, ho hum.)

For a variety of reasons, D1 lynches are statistically worse than random. So we're not at all likely to hit scum. Now, what's the next best thing to hitting scum? Getting them to work for you.

I think this is where you got confused, EG, and assumed that I was working for the scum. Not at all, and it goes like this:

It is in the scum best interest to lynch pro-town players. However, I bandwagoned 5cvm with the intent of making the best move for scum lynching the anti-town player, aligning their incentives with ours for the moment. I know that the legion of detectives are in outroar, crying "but that way gives us LESS CLUES!" This is only marginally true - you may not learn as much from a blind follower, but you learn they're blindly following. And it's worth killing a player who's not giving up information, even if you have to create a situation where the scum (be they allied with 5cvm, or mislynching him) are allowed to share less about themselves in the process.

My response to the other stuff is coming sometime later (probably tonight but who knows). I will say right away to civil and button that they keep asking for my other scum reads and seem to be missing that I gave them in 445 the last time button asked (which itself was mostly a response of my ISO 44 response to the SAME question, posed by Civil).

[Evilgorrilaz]

I guess we are at an impasse Hito. I don't think 5cvm is nearly as anti-town as you make him out to be, and as a consequence his lynch doesn't seem so good for town in my eyes. Which means I think that your theory is retarded. (In that I see where your logic is coming from, but I disagree with that logic)

[xvart]

That's difficult for you to understand from my position?

Not difficult at all to understand. Sometimes I just need some clarification.

Lot's of people weren't on the list. Lot's of people aren't posting. I can't say I have any considerable read on lots of players. You've only mentioned like 3 players in your last 5 posts. When I made the 'all players defending scvm' comment, that was my first post mostly, and I think I've gotten a better handle on it since then.

You're right, it was your second post, which is something I forgot. I forgot the chronology since the original reason it was brought up when you said I misrepresented or over-exaggerated or whatever.

Is that an appearance to you? Cause it's obvious that I haven't been willing to vote for anyone. Other folks are far guiltier of BW'ing than me. Which cookie jars? WTF, cookie jar am I in right now.

First, what does BW stand for?

You're never sure about anyone, so then you are a little suspicious of everyone. That's not unreasonable. I usually feel that way after a missed lynch. But saying that, and then suggesting that it's bad/scummy that I'm suspicious of "half the players", certainly you can see why this is a dumb fuckin thing to say.

There is a difference between being "suspicious of everyone" and willing to vote everyone (or half the people in the game, as the case may be). And just because I may not think anyone is confirmed town does not mean my FoS list includes everyone. I question the motives and arguments of those I find most suspicious, and determine from that point who the least likely to be town and vote for them.

You're climbing back onto the list here with this bull shit.

I have no problem with that.

Come on XFART (I'll test what you said about insults if you don't mind), how bad are mis-reppng me right now? [/rhetorical]

My feelings are hurt terribly. Anyways, I don't think I am mis-repping you at all. I wasn't representing you at all. I found something you said and did curious and brought it up for discussion.

Maybe...just maybe...you should have picked an easier/better target when you're trying to pull a shit case out of your ass... ??? You give this appearance, to me.

An easier/better target? I'm not really building a case on you, at least it wasn't my intention. Like I've said before, I find it suspicious that someone would say I'm willing to vote for at least six people (regardless of the post number or page count), instead of throwing out a FoS on a number of people. Willingness to vote for a large number of people is not good since it is easily manipulated by scum since at least half the people on your list are town.

Anyone can read the game, xfart, and see you are making this BW accusation up. I haven't BW'd anything. You made it up, then you embellished. Doesn't look very good.

What have I made up? What have I embellished?

Although, I'd like to hear how bad everyone else thinks xfart's last post was.

I would be interested in hearing this, too. It sounds to me like you are grasping and trying to undermine my credibility. I would almost call it an overreaction, but we'll let the others be the judge of that. I wouldn't want to misrepresent you again.

He just consistently wants to lynch gorillaz for some apparently uncertain reasons.

I was pretty clear in my reasons for my vote for Evilgorillaz.

Oh, and he's trying to build a fantastically shitty case on me.

Again, I'm not building a case on you. I just pointed out what I thought was something suspicious.

Unless my memory fails me, buttons backed scvm first. Gorillaz and xfart followed suit later.

I don't recall "backing" 5cvm. I removed my vote for him because I realized my reasoning was not sound. I've also said that if Evilgorillaz flips scum I would be more inclined to believe 5cvm is town.

I should say "far far far" guiltier. Aranfan, for example. Who you seem curiously uninterested in...

My strongest scum read is still on Arafan by a large margin, followed by Humble.

Can someone point me to the summarized argument on Arafan? I think it has been posted but I can't find it.

xvart.

[Civil Scum]

Sorry--I must have gotten the impression that you've been fixing to come after me.---> PROBABLY because your last five posts have been largely directed at, or about me. And I haven't liked it. (BW= bandwagon)

I don't recall "backing" 5cvm

Cause u were third on the BW I think, and then you were the first off? So you don't remember being embarrased about wanting to lynch scvm before gorillaz? (A logic I didn't like btw) And if the birthday "present" you gave hito on your birthday wasn't "stupid buddying", then I don't know what is, hito!

I find it suspicious that someone would say I'm willing to vote for at least six people (regardless of the post number or page count), instead of throwing out a FoS on a number of people

Depending on who you are, being suspicious and Fos'ing can be the same thing. I don't Fos much. You can sue me for that, but don't say someone's not using enough Fos'es AND is too willing to vote for too many people. Because that is a stupid contradiction. A contradicition of feelings in the accuser, I might add.

I'll show your mis-reping, okay ready?

That's at least half of the entire town population. My concern is you have given the appearance as to being willing to vote for anyone, depending on how the wind blows. You've got your fingers in every cookie jar.

Where'd you get the "wind blows" thing? Could you show where I've done that? (Don't bother even trying). And this cookie jar thing, jesus that isn't even close to presenting an accurate picture of my behavior, voting, or even thinking. So I'm 'too willing to vote for anyone, and am simply after the town's top suspect or next suspect?' This is what you said. And like I said, anyone can read the game and see that this curious picture you're painting is not true. Soooo whatever, I guess you might be right, I am overreacting... huh, it's a joke? It is a joke isn't it? Haha, good.

ALSO

Willingness to vote for a large number of people is not good since it is easily manipulated by scum since at least half the people on your list are town.

Here it seems like your concern is more that it allows the scum to manipulate a townie into doing their bidding, or giving them viable roads to take. You are trying to make me look bad from both angles using a theory argument. God damn that's stupid.

But hey, atleast you admitted that it's not scummy for my opinions to change with time.

Generally using garbage like this in trying to paint my behavior is

And civil, you're doing it again. You're completely ignoring 5cvm

Not true. Mischaracteriation. Bad Form. Almost as bad as strawmanning in defense (which always seems horribly desperate to me).

accept it and move on to scum hunting, and since you've presumably gathered information on other players through the policy lynch discussion,

this shouldn't be as hard of a step as it seems to be for you.

+++

Gorillaz: I haven't liked how hito has pushed the policy lynch. I didn't really understand the point you were talking about, hito cleared it up a bit. And I meant unsightly, in that it was your first post in a while and didn't contain a whole lot of substance (a la aranfan). Atleast you had an opinion in it though. An opinion other than 'scvm is the jester, let's move on.' Aranfan is a good lynch as well imo.

@ Civil; Would you be willing to join the Arafan wagon?

Yes, he's obviously full of crap. Incidentally, I'd also like to see xvart read and make up his own mind, and then vote for me instead of aranfan.

Votecount?
Prod humble?
Prod Brosisus?

I suppose I'll post after the new year, but there really isn't much to say tbqh

I disagree, there's just a couple people absent and a couple people not paying enough attention.

[Civil Scum]

Ah what the hell.

vote: aranfan

Just for things just on this page. Especially lying about reading the entire thread and saying that until recently only gorilalz had defended scvm. I would expect a townie to say something like 'it was the holidays' or 'i've been busy and haven't been keeping up with the game like I should.' I wouldn't expect a townie to say they've followed the game post by post and then be completely wrong.

Also, he confirmed his random vote in his third post. If the theory's correct that some of it is newb scum-tells, then I should point out this:

I shall now end the RVS:

Confirm Vote: 5cvm

And point out that the wiki page says that this is something that the scum rarely do. (But probably meant statistically, as in 'the scum are less often involved or less often involve themselves in discussion that ends the RVS') - Seriously, I cannot think of one other reason for aranfan to have said this.

A hit is a hit, just that hito may end up with a free-ride from me D-1, and will have come up with some "scum reads" by the time D-2 rolls around. :/

[xvart]

And I haven't liked it. (BW= bandwagon)

Oh yeah, duh. Thanks.

I don't recall "backing" 5cvm

Cause u were third on the BW I think, and then you were the first off?

First, being the first off a wagon does not equal thinking that person is town; nor does it mean I am supporter of that person,

especially

when the justification for removing the vote was clearly explained.

So you don't remember being embarrased about wanting to lynch scvm before gorillaz? (A logic I didn't like btw)

So you think it is a better idea to lynch an anti-town townsperson to determine if someone else is scum instead of lynching a scummy player to determine an anti-town person is town? I think it's a terrible idea, but if you think it is a good idea to lynch townspeople for the sake of proving someone is scum, rock and roll. Contrary to what hito said earlier about being here to lynch anti-town, lynching scum is my only goal.

I don't Fos much. You can sue me for that, but don't say someone's not using enough Fos'es AND is too willing to vote for too many people.

I didn't say that. I said it is fine to FoS half the town but it is not okay to be willing to vote for the entire town. And I will further explain why in a moment.

Where'd you get the "wind blows" thing? Could you show where I've done that? (Don't bother even trying). And this cookie jar thing, jesus that isn't even close to presenting an accurate picture of my behavior, voting, or even thinking. So I'm 'too willing to vote for anyone, and am simply after the town's top suspect or next suspect?' This is what you said. And like I said, anyone can read the game and see that this curious picture you're painting is not true. Soooo whatever, I guess you might be right, I am overreacting... huh, it's a joke? It is a joke isn't it? Haha, good.

How the wind blows is an expression, as is having your hand in the cookie jar. By saying "depending on how the wind blows" I mean your voting list is so large and you were willing to vote so many people. You have set yourself up at the beginning to be able to switch your vote to half the town, so depending on how the wind blows you can vote for half the town if you wished. You've also got your hands in a lot of cookie jars, so to speak, because you made your intention clear that you would vote for half the town.

Willingness to vote for a large number of people is not good since it is easily manipulated by scum since at least half the people on your list are town.

Here it seems like your concern is more that it allows the scum to manipulate a townie into doing their bidding, or giving them viable roads to take. You are trying to make me look bad from both angles using a theory argument. God damn that's stupid.

It is a completely practical argument. With a voting list of six people around half (or more) of them are town. Sounds like a golden opportunity for scum since they know they can count on your vote on a large population of town-members. Now that in and of itself is not scummy, more anti-town, unless of course you aren't worried about scum manipulating your vote because you guys have already worked out your votes during the night phase.

But hey, atleast you admitted that it's not scummy for my opinions to change with time.

I don't think I ever suggested otherwise.

@ Civil; Would you be willing to join the Arafan wagon?

Yes, he's obviously full of crap. Incidentally, I'd also like to see xvart read and make up his own mind, and then vote for me instead of aranfan.

I don't understand this. You want me to read up on Arafan and decide whether or not I think he is scummy. Then you want me to vote for you instead of voting for Arafan (if my read on Arafan is scum)?

xvart.

[hitogoroshi]

It sounds buddy-buddy, but it's not hardcore buddying or anything like you are trying to paint it. Is any form of agreement buddying as well?

You're defending 5cvm for him. I was giving 5cvm crap because he's pointing out "Don't replace me! You're doing a great job arguing for me so I don't have to defend myself (which is good, because having claimed scum I cannot defend myself)." The fact that you are taking offense to this kinda proves the point.

@Tommy 448 - would you say the 'hilarious persona' makes it harder to read 5cvm?

If your policy lynch fizzles (which doesn't seem to be that rare on this site) you should be willing to accept it and move on to scum hunting, and since you've presumably gathered information on other players through the policy lynch discussion, this shouldn't be as hard of a step as it seems to be for you.

But your post made my point exactly on why I shouldn't give it up:

As you've pointed out, 5cvm's continued existence will be somewhat problematic later on (for me at least).

I don't look forward to picking between him and someone else,

especially since after a quick read of him

I can't confidently see anything significant in his posts

along the lines of what humble in particular sees (and claims to indicate townie-hood). At the same time, I'm hesitant to rely on what others claim to see, and while I do see some sense to what 5cvm has done, I don't like it at all. This whole alt and bulling into the game business doesn't sit well with me at all.

emphasis mine.

A hit is a hit, just that hito may end up with a free-ride from me D-1, and will have come up with some "scum reads" by the time D-2 rolls around. :/

Dude, I told them, then reposted them, then linked to the repost.

But you know what? I'll post them again. And even throw some new ones in to boot~

I think xvart and Civil are both town after their tiff here. Civil in particular is pretty self-focused. Look at the numerous charges of 'misrepping' - scum virtually never are out to twist your arguments in the way he's describing. By that same token, it's also a poor charge for scum to lobby on others, and as such it's usually the domain of a townie who simply can't believe that other people have the views they do about your argument, and they MUST understand it and are just trying to twist it! Scum don't do that and, generally, don't accuse others of doing it.

Tommy and Button are both pretty scummy in my eyes for asking lots of questions and not posting lots of content. News flash - just asking questions is NOT good scumhunting, it's a privilege you earn when you've posted a lot of analysis and you want clarification on something that hasn't already come up.

Chibo is giving me a lazy-tell more than anything. There has been a lot of words thrown about and it's a pain to slog through. If he picks up activity D2 I won't worry so much about it, but if he's this lackluster tomorrow I am going to give him all kinds of hell.

By that same token, it's safe to say this day has gone on far, far too long. So let's lynch someone and be done with it. It looks like the choices are EG and Aran are the candidates for today - ISO'ing them both shows that neither one is really posting all that much content. It kills me to choose it this way, because I still want to policy lynch 5cvm tomorrow and I think Aran would be up for it, but EG is at least confrontational while Aran is just coasting (ISO Aran for the whole effect, I assure you it's spectacular.) And he doesn't seem like he'd post more content when pressure is applied because pressure has been on him most of the game with little response - so

unvote, vote Aranfan

.

PS: Although I'm totally up for a buttonwagon if you guys are.

PPS: If I get nk'd you guys are lynching 5cvm tomorrow, kay? Kay.

PPPS: Civil you forgot to answer this:

Are you treating 5cvm as confirmed town forever? If not, what would it take to get you to lynch him? Would you ignore all of your other scum reads on another day to lynch him? Or are you convinced you can divine 'scum reads' from a player who is actively claiming scum? What action could 5cvm do that you would consider scummy?

[Aranfan]

I have not been responding to the pressure on me because I cannot see anything to

respond to

. I have no idea what the case on me is based on.

[Civil Scum]

I said it is fine to FoS half the town but it is not okay to be willing to vote for the entire town.

Alright, so where I have

shown

willingness (ie- when I HAVE voted for half the town) then maybe you have a point against me with this.

And you're right about giving scum "options", or expected votes, but so does every innaccurate or misled suspicion any townie has. And you're not right saying that I am anti-town for this reason, otherwise all voting, all posting of thoughts, and all Fos'es would be anti-town.

I don't worry much about getting menipulated because it doesn't happen very often to me.

You have set yourself up at the beginning to be able to switch your vote to half the town, so depending on how the wind blows you can vote for half the town if you wished.

Or I am suspicious of a lot of people and don't know what's going on.

I'm not sure at this point if you are willfully reaching, or are just too intent on finding me scummy. I think you should cast your x-ray vision elsewhere for a bit and see what you come up with.

Are you treating 5cvm as confirmed town forever? If not, what would it take to get you to lynch him? Would you ignore all of your other scum reads on another day to lynch him? Or are you convinced you can divine 'scum reads' from a player who is actively claiming scum? What action could 5cvm do that you would consider scummy?

I don't know.

My problem with the earlier post you've mentioned several times was that it was anything but substantial, and I didn't like the free-pass you gave to people bailing on the lynch, or outright defending scvm (humble! Gorillaz! and several others that I will not renumerate here) on the reasoning that they just didn't understand the policy lynch. Which is why I didn't bother responding to any of those links.

For those questions, I'm thinking about it, and thinking about your post, and squirrel's feeling that he wouldn't want to choose later, but is not going to choose now (I feel a little the same I think). I'm really not sure yet. It may depend entirely on what happens with the D-1 lynch and more discussion.

[Boxman]

Happy End-of-the-Holidays, everyone! And now, here's the end of holiday vote count (as requested).

Also, prodding 5cvm, Humble Poirot, and Scott Brosius.

Vote Count 11 of Day 1

Aranfan (4) - TheButtonmen, ChiboSempai, Civil Scum, hitogoroshi
Evilgorrilaz (3) - Humble Poirot, Scott Brosius, xvart
hitogoroshi (1) - Evilgorrilaz
xvart (1) - 5cvm
5cvm (1) - Aranfan

Not Voting (2) - A_Squirrel, Tommy

Current Deadline: January 8, 2010

[A_Squirrel]

Anyone want to tell Aran what he's being voted for? As far as I can tell it's a combination of stupid moves, like attempting to get magis lynched before he could be replaced, and general coasting?

Also, honestly, I think I'd prefer to deal with 5cvm today rather than later. If it gets down to a lylo situation he will definitely be a problem for me. Obviously some of you are seeing things I'm not if you're comfortable with letting him go.

Vote: 5cvm

[Tommy]

@Tommy 448 - would you say the 'hilarious persona' makes it harder to read 5cvm?

Yes. Sometimes it can be hard to tell whether he means what he says. His refusal to answer questions also makes things difficult.

Now, ChiboSempai ignored my question about his attitude to xvart.  The reason I asked it was that I wanted to test a theory that his jester-hunting chat was a smokescreen to distract attention from xvart. His evasion of my question gives that theory more weight. Still, it seems more likely that ChiboSempai is town.

Evilgorillaz seems to have changed his position on policy lynches. This makes his 447 attack on Hitogoroshi a little more suspicious.

The argument between Civil Scum and xvart hasn't really helped me. xvart says Civil Scum is scummy for suspecting too many people at once. Civil Scum says xvart is scummy for attacking him. Neither side is convincing, but neither seems insincere.

Evilgorillaz's 464 seems to accept that Hito is wrong rather than scummy, but his or her vote has stayed on Hito nonetheless. Can't see that this makes any more sense if Evilgorillaz is scum, though.

My overall read on Hitogoroshi is town. His single-mindedness was scummy when it looked like the 5cvm wagon was going to work, but the rest of his contributions strike me as real attempts to badger the town into giving a good performance. If he's scum, he plays it pretty straight.

I like A_Squirrel's contributions so far. I think he/she is town.

xvart and A_Squirrel have asked for a recap of the case against Aranfan, and Aranfan claims he doesn't know what it is either. Here's my summary.

When he confirmed his vote for 5cvm in 48, I don't think he gave a strong enough justification. He was taking 5cvm's arsing about at face value, and that made me begin to suspect him.

81 was his first U-turn. He unvoted and said "I am convinced that 5cvm can only be a Jester." This level of certainty seems false, and it's repeated in 105.

169 is justly famous:
"I say we lynch the lurker so as to save the mod trouble, and to rid the game of some dead weight."

I think this is most likely to be an awful scum mis-step. It's certainly anti-town to lynch a player just before a replacement, since you're voluntarily giving up any information you might have got from the new player. Aranfan's case was fishy too - he tried to equate lurking with not playing.

214 is a good example of his lack of interest in finding scum.

255 is another U-turn. He joins Hito's bandwagon and votes for 5cvm with no explanation. It's unclear whether he's still certain 5cvm is a jester.

317, 318: Aranfan explicitly defers his answer to Humble Poirot's question for five days, rather than answering it immediately. The move referenced an earlier trick by Hitogoroshi, but Aranfan never properly explained why he did it.

I'm nearly ready to vote. I need to do a bit more work to make sure I have a read on everyone.