Mini 903 - Owarai TV (Game over... who won?)

[Amished]

Can I pre-vote VP since he's always scum?

[Amished]

Also: VP will be kinda iffy with his availability this next week (til Thursday). Just so you know.

[Amished]

LOL so win! The prevote counted. Best game ever.

/quit

[Amished]

How many games have you played in, Anon?

[Amished]

I'm hoping to understand your point of view. Obviously I saw your vote on Starbuck; so I was trying to help discern your intent. A newbie bandwagoning and a veteran bandwagoning are two very different things.

As such; there's no way to get a valuable third vote on anybody without a first.

Unvote
Vote: Anon

[Amished]

@Hell: Also, if you're worried about a bandwagon forming/growing quickly; why hop on and start to form a bandwagon?

I also see that you gave yourself an easy out off the wagon (no means a final vote). I thought that Anon explained his vote relatively ok; what more of a case are you looking for?

[Amished]

Is pressure for pressure's sake something you try to use a lot?

[Amished]

Rephrased question: How often would you say you vote solely to add your vote to a player? Rather than voting due to a scumtell?

To put it another way: how comfortable are you in reading reactions to pressure that's unwarranted?

[Amished]

Actually I tend to agree with Dev here.

Target: Why the (&%# am I being wagoned? I didn't even do anything! (which is true)
Attacker X: Clearly (s)he's flailing, "vote"
Attacker Y: Yeah, why would a townie be mad at 3 votes? "Vote"

Story ended with a townie lynched.

It's basically like a random wagon that doesn't really provide as much information about the rest of the town as actually scumhunting.

[Amished]

@Chau: Ask a question about why somebody did anything. That seems to work for me for the most part.

@VP: That .. style, I guess, just seems counterintuitive. My vote is for people I think are scummy, not for wagoning somebody I think could be town just so that I can unvote later and have a choice of scum that bandwagoned for a lynch or lazy town that doesn't bother to scumhunt himself. Definitely not something I have practiced, nor something that I'd really choose to work on to add to my repertoire.

Either way, that brings up something that I was trying to discern from Anon. I recognize it as an advanced tactic; but to conciously wagon when you have 3? games under your belt seems risky at best. I wanted to know how comfortable he was with it. Reading a game over and being in it and dealing with the reactions are completely different. Just like when you replace into a game and read the people that have died and flipped townie; you tend to wonder why they got lynched in the first place cause you know that they're town already.

@Raiv: Serious vote or Random?

@Malp and The Inquisition: care to join in sometime?

[Amished]

@Starbuck: Do you deserve to be quicklynched?

[Amished]

@Star: You haven't done much of anything other than question votes on you/create "sympathy" (Anon's vote/quicklynch comment)

[Amished]

*sigh*

I hate that argument. "Bandwagons get info for the town" means absolutely nothing, especially since the bandwagon wasn't even halfway to a lynch. Are we gonna look at the 3 man wagon later in the game and see that there's 0-3 scum there and discern something from that? What information do you really expect to get from just bandwagoning or being bandwagoned?

I just wanna /headdesk when I see that. If you want information, ask questions.

The thing that I didn't like about your quicklynch comment was that it felt like you were abusing the .. meta?.. against quicklynches (they're bad for the town no matter what, blah blah blah) for yourself to prevent you from being wagoned further. That post (59) gave me terrible vibes as it neither progressed the game by actually defending yourself nor questioned the people attacking you. I still don't think you actually asked Raiv what his motives were (you posted before I did after his vote). You did question Anon's vote on you though; and that came with less information in the game and therefore is less likely to have any sort of solid backing to it. I just noticed this discrepancy, why are/were you more concerned about Anon's vote than Raivann's?

@Raiv: What was serious about your vote? What was random about it?

[Amished]

And.... how did that affect how you looked at the vote?

[Amished]

Did you feel like we were still in the RVS when that vote was made?

[Amished]

@Starbuck: the early part of your post is what makes me wonder. We got out of the RVS rather quickly. It doesn't really matter when somebody has their first post, if they're following along they'll know the tone of the game.

[Amished]

@Star: What do you mean? Active lurking is about the worst thing you (proverbial you) can do in a game this size.

Also, lol @ chau, nicely done..

[Amished]

That if they (Raivann, in this case) knew the tone of the game, that they wouldn't put out an RVS vote and instead seriously vote since we were out of the RVS.

You feel we're out of RVS, so somebody following along would also think that we're out of the RVS, regardless of if their first post was the first one of the game or (like Raiv, Mal, or Inqui) they wouldn't put out an RVS vote.

That sounds weird.

No matter the person, they'd know that we were out of the RVS. To then vote outside the RVS would make it a non-random vote. If it's not a random vote, it deserves to be questioned (heck, you even questioned Anon's semi-random bandwagon vote). But you didn't question Raiv about it; you just assumed that it was random while you didn't do the same thing to Anon's vote that came much sooner.

What about Raiv's vote made you think that it was totally random and didn't bother you beyond "getting quicklynched"?

[Amished]

Yeah, I had to ask him; which was my point. You posted in there before I could ask Raiv what the deal was with his vote. Nothing about out of the RVS and getting a random vote/ questioning if he just tacked that comment on and actually wanted to bandwagon you might be worth investigating? Rather than saying that it'd be fun getting quicklynched? Or perhaps asking why he's still in the RVS/what he thought of the previous page?

[Amished]

Raiv. Starbuck is active and has shown ability to scumhunt/question. Raiv I got nothing on.

[Amished]

Hiya Raskol

1. xRECKONERx
3. Devestation
4. VP Baltar
5. Anon
6. Raskol
7. HellnFire666
8. The Inquisition
9. Raivann
10. dramonic
11. chauchaudotcom
12. Starbuck

Hmm, it's not exactly a stellar list to start eliminating people from. Raivann still rubs me the wrong way, I'd have to go with him. If we start a petition, do you think we can get more votes for everybody that posts actively?

@xRx: What's the difference between Anon and Raiv?

[Amished]

You are? ...

(reads missed post)

.. really? For assuming that people would see that we're out of the RVS and they wouldn't do an RVS vote? Essentially for assuming that people read the game relatively similar to both myself and you (since I questioned you about this point).

Well, let's now take a look at somebody who just joined: Raskol, is your vote an RVS one? (hint: I'm betting it isn't cause he pays attention; and a 5 page game isn't hard to read from the start in any extended amount of time)

[Amished]

This is kind of an awkward question, but had you replaced in about a day sooner, would you have made about the same sort of entrance with the questions and the vote?

[Amished]

Sorry Raskol, I phrased my question wrong. If you had replaced in 2 days ago, now; would you have seen that we were out of the RVS and not placed a random vote?

chauchau seems to have the same line of thought that I do on the tone of the game as well. While the doubling up of questions is concerning; at least I'll be able to see if there's something that she doesn't catch and wonder why.

[Amished]

@Mod: Also, Sajin would be better than The Inquisition if he's waiting to come into the game >_>

[Amished]

My 82 followed by your 84 seems rather close. (Yes, 82 doesn't have a question, but I'm trying to lead her down my avenue of thought, evidenced by the later post of mine in 93. I missed your question in 63 the first time which is why I asked what I did in 72.

The questioning of Starbuck about her reaction to Raivs vote is the primary thing that we seem to be on the same line of thought about.

@Raskol: WRT post 108: You state that you have experience with 6 people here, but Anon is the only one you feel comfortable putting out a meta defense of. Why did you single him out, and how much experience do you have with him? Right now I'm guessing just 1 game since that's all you mentioned and that's your primary evidence for it.

[Amished]

@Raskol: If he (Anon) is playing differently from his meta (as scum) then either he's town or he's aware of his meta and is intentionally subverting it, right? How aware do you think that he is about how he acts as different factions?

[Amished]

lol true enough. I was hoping for a more ... substantial isn't the right word but it's close, lean on your read.

If you could pick it up in the first 3 pages though, what was so different that you saw?

[Amished]

I was not born with a sense of humor. At least not after the first page.

[Amished]

O.o That's a hell of a difference.

Unvote
Vote: Raivann

So far, he's basically done nothing original (bandwagon vote and the Raskol question). I think he's just copying people that he knows are protown.

[Amished]

His vote on a wagon, apparently for wagoning's sake (read: Anon in 21, Raiv in 58, and then with Raiv's reasoning in 99 (looking for responses by bandwagoning) pretty much exactly mirrors Anon's (likes to bandwagon in 29/40).

His question to Raskol (138) that Raskol asked to a couple other people (109).

@chau: My questioning of Anon in 30 isn't the start of a line of questioning about the whole situation I suppose?

For the thing about Raiv's vote: I knew we were out of the RVS. Starbuck knew that we were out of the RVS (which didn't actually matter as she questioned an RVS vote by Anon). Somebody that didn't have a post yet and replaced in (Raskol) knew that the game was out of the RVS. That's just people I asked. If so many people knew that we were out of the RVS, why would you put out a random vote? He even said it was serious *afterwards* for looking for reactions; and not random.

Yes, there's two veins in there. Starbuck's questioning of one RVS vote and not another (since she read Raiv's as RVS as well) and Raiv's not reading all 2.5 pages of the game and knowing that we're not random. Can I not talk to a brick wall here?

[Amished]

@xRx: I don't really see a lot of parallels. You've bandwagoned, yes. However, with your Anon vote it also came with an unvote signaling to me (at least) that it was for a reason. You've also stuck with your bandwagon, while Raiv jumped off when he was questioned the slightest bit about it.

(What is your reasoning for your read on Anon *or* Starbuck, given your outright stance on them?)

[Amished]

About Anon: I don't like how he's disappeared, but there's a multitude of reasons for that. The ISO from the other game is enough to warrant giving him time in this one to see if he'll participate further.

[Amished]

Question for you then, Inquisition: What more than the RVS do we have to go on that I've been able to talk about? I've been asking questions about people's reactions to votes (starbuck comes to mind) and other's voting patterns (questioning Raiv's vote, as well as the unvote).

Also, I don't know how to take your false attack on Raivann comment. Either an attack is true or an attack is false. You can define it in a couple ways, but no matter how you slice it I don't see how you can call it a false attack if you're also going to say that we're partners.

Situation:

I'm town, my attacks are all true as they're made in good faith.
I'm scum, my attack is against Raiv and is false; making him town.
I'm scum, my attack is against Raiv and is true, making him scum.

There isn't a way that I'm scum and my attacks against Raiv are false and make him scum too.

/me goes off to wonder who's alt you are

[Amished]

EBWOP: The only other option is that you might think I'm 3rd party, but then I'm still scumhunting in good faith as the scum would then be a threat to me.

[Amished]

@Dev: I'm saying that Raiv-scum would know who's pro-town and who isn't. I put what I thought he was copying in early 145 (specifically he's copying Anon (and apparently xRx, but the reasoning for bandwagoning from Raiv looked really similar to Anon's early game reasoning) and copying Raskol's question back at Raskol.) The Anon thing is more serious than the Raskol thing as it's a valid question, but I wonder why he's not really come up with an original thought yet. Heck, his criticism of my RVS talk was a copy of Inquisition's accusations against me.

It still wouldn't be a *false* attack if we were on the same team. I'd know he's scum then; and my attacks are against somebody I know as scum. The closest parallel that I can think of is like a cop with a guilty investigation if that was the case.

[Amished]

Bingo Dev.

[Amished]

@VP: Not necessarily, but chau has been lining up with my viewpoint more than Raiv. If I can see where they're coming from, they're more likely to be of my alignment.

Also, I've played with starbuck for like 2 real-life days I think in Tar's Legacy of the Ancients mafia before I got daykilled by Xyl. No real interaction. As for the point of the questions, hopefully it'll get me information for later. If I can see how far somebody would think ahead (so far, impression is maybe 2 steps or so); if something goes "wrong" for hypo-Starbuck-scum I'll know how far I have to question to see if she's scum or if she's town and it's just a weird circumstance.

[Amished]

I've agreed with her questions as much as I feel she's agreed with mine. I haven't always asked them because she's asked them for me, we just go about it in different ways to get the answers we want. What of hers do you feel she's coasting by completely on?

[Amished]

Be more outlandish? What are your thoughts on a top suspect?

[Amished]

Without checking, Hell and The Inquisition have about the least amount of posts I think; so people are here...

[Amished]

[Amished]

Unvote
Vote: HellnFire666

<3 you too VP

Vote for 3 reasons:

1) I get terrible flashbacks of MMan claiming with ~halfway to a lynch. (HnF was at 4, xRx's unvote makes it

2) With 3 games of "mini normal" experience, you'd know enough not to claim unnecessarily; especially in *any* town role, especially not when at L-3 and there's really no deadline to worry about.

3) lol vanilla claim

A) xRx: How did any of that really convince you that he wasn't scum? I know it was a pressure vote to start with, but seriously? You couldn't upgrade it after that?

B) @HnF: Like (I believe) I stated before, if I can see where somebody is coming from, they're more likely to be of my alignment. Of cc.com's original questions, I pretty much would ask the same ones.

[Amished]

EBWOP: xRx's unvote makes it 3*

[Amished]

You play better when you're drunk VP lol

[Amished]

It's one of those things: As town you know you're innocent so you fight to the end cause you pretty much know some scum is against you (so you're trying to find them) but you also are trying to convince the people that are town on your wagon that you're town too.

As scum you know you're guilty so you go out and claim that you're town and "here's proof, see!" rather than really fighting. It's pretty damn reliable.

[Amished]

Have you seen many newbtown's claim .. 1/3? of the way through the day to the deadline and 1/2 way to a lynch often?

[Amished]

Unvote

So VP can get his answers

[Amished]

... That doesn't make sense.

If Hell is town, what does that tell you about Raiv's suspicion?
If Hell is scum, now what does that tell you about Raiv's suspicion?

Then reverse it:

If Raiv is town, what does that tell you about his suspicion?
If Raiv is scum, what does that tell you about his suspicion?

I don't see a definitive answer for any of these that can't be counter-argumented rather easily.

[Amished]

@Raskol: I was wondering what would make him (CoCo) claim like that; and it seems he kinda has a meta of that. He also claimed Doc with no votes on him after a blatant breadcrumb here

This game got a lot weirder with people catching up though.

[Amished]

Okay "Rosso"..

What changed your mind on Hell? You seemed to think he was newbtown before.

[Amished]

.. are you really asking how you acted pro-town to another player?

Think about the consequences of having that information public knowledge and come back some other time.

[Amished]

Ahh, yeah, I misunderstood the real intent then.

[Amished]

@Starbuck: That's the point of the question, to get a feel for you. It doesn't really matter if I have games with you in the past or not; I question you now so I can know what you're like now.

[Amished]

@Raskol: I think VP mostly agreed with my point on Hell's early claim as we have a couple experiences together where scum (and only scum, so far) have claimed way too early.

[Amished]

Does anyone have any other questions before hammering?

[Amished]

@Raskol: Inquisition's posts so far haven't really impressed me in content nor number; so I would hope that he posts more. I think xRx is scummier than Dev; but not by much and I think that we have caught scum in Hell so we should just lynch him. Anything else?

[Amished]

The only time I've seen a double voter was Starbuck (scum) in Tar's LotA game; though I don't see why a scum double voter would use it to hammer his buddy.

The name that comes up first from memory of trying to slow down the wagon was Raiv.

@Kise: I'm feeling better now; 50% of my time spent sleeping seems to help with being sick, thanks for announcing that for me.

@Star; xRx: The only way you can possibly say that I or VP scum is if we are either part of a 2nd scum group (AFAIK I'm the only mod crazy enough to pull that in a mini-normal) or if we wanted to uberbuss partner Hell on D1. When you believe that either of those are likely, you're free to waste your time on us.

I didn't expect to be around today, rereading.

[Amished]

Well, after looking back; I'll have to take my "don't see a voter lynching a buddy" back. Pg. 8, after the vanilla claim xRx immediately unvoted. I knew that was weird for a reason; unvoting for any claim from scum (especially an unconvincing claim) is a huge scumtell in my book. There really was no way that the wagon was gonna be derailed so I could see him hammering to look better/"take the edge off" (so to speak) even being a double voter.

Vote: xRECKONERx

[Amished]

Ok, Hell was gonna get lynched anyways, correct?

How else would scum try to assuage the "meta" of a double voter being scum? Jumping in on the end of a gonna be lynched scumbuddy seems like a great way to do that. Just look at your differing reactions at the two timeframes: Hell claims VT; you instantly unvote. We all don't believe it (rightfully so) so when there really is no way that the wagon was gonna turn around.

Hammering is a null-tell; really no matter who is being hammered. You being a double voter; coupled with your initial reaction to the claim and switch when it was inevitable that he was gonna be lynched is why I think you're scum and why I'm voting you.

Putting on a second vote is hard to understand from either alignment. Town you'd see that he's getting lynched anyways so by double-voting you're giving scum more information that's out there as they would know if they have a double-voter or not (and if they used it). You can't even play like a miller (which would be the obvious parallel, something that I would've claimed immediately in the day) as your avenue of playing so pro-town to draw a night-kill wastes a town power.

As scum it makes slightly more sense as putting out the information early and hammering a scumbuddy so that you don't look as suspicious for doing it would seem like a good idea. It also explains why you would be hesitant to claim your ability first-post style (a la miller).

Also, it's not *just* the fact that we voted him, we didn't believe him from the get go (when there was ample opportunity to dissuade it with you unvoting and Raskol saying that he looked like a newbie and all that). We never wavered in our stance cause we both saw the same scumtell and drove it home until Hell was lynched.

That, and let's just say I'm comfortable in my meta of VP.

[Amished]

@xRx: Fine, throw out the part of my argument about how I've not seen a town doublevoter; that's the absolute weakest part of my argument and probably the least relevant. The rest still does stand though.

[Amished]

Why not think: "If I was town, there's no way in hell I'd claim that early for being halfway to a lynch" like VP and I did.

[Amished]

@xRx: Why should that matter? I've never seen a town double voter, but I weigh what I would do if I was a double voter for each alignment.

Also, I'm highly skeptical about the mod changing anything midgame; especially in a mini where if you're in the queue for as long as it normally takes to get a game to mod; you have plenty of time to decide what each special role does, especially considering the invite to play PM that I got from Kise talking about natural scumhunters rather than a lot of power roles or anything to follow.

[Amished]

@VP: About Kise: Yeah, but switching it at the last second and halfway through the day are two very different things. Especially a relatively important day ability like double voting; it's something that you would really go over; both on your own and with a reviewer. I know I pretty much followed everything that Vi said when she reviewed my mini, and I went over WinCons, setting up the mentor ability (we came up with that before ViPod), pretty much everything.

To then have confusion over something that's going to be active from the start of the day is what I have the biggest problem with. I know I switched daytalking like 1 day into the game cause I didn't really think about N1; but that's due to a night ability after getting everything set up that I would know comes into play during the day (which was admittedly nothing).

Regarding your other point, you know I can get a damn good read on you, almost (now) to the point of reading your mind. After what we went over for MMan in NY91 and another game; and what I said and what you quoted for emphasis about the claim, I knew you'd follow through. I didn't have the time I normally have so I didn't push it cause I knew you would. Obviously I believed in it as I voted right away, and never backed down. If more people would've backed down then I would've probably spoken up more to drive it to a lynch.

I think xRx was saying that he thought he could PM another vote in private that wouldn't show up or something, instead of his vote counting twice like apparently it works now.

[Amished]

Sorry, my flu on Tuesday/Wednesday left me with another bout of illness (bronchitis or something) over this past weekend.

@Starbuck: There were enough people having "doubts" (either real or put on) about Hell that if I were his partner it would've been very easy to pull the "I just have a newbie read on him" or whatever and not put my vote there. Instead; after his tell I was the first to vote for him and push for his lynch because of it.

So yea, I went with the group and everything to make myself look good over his lynch.... /headdesk

However, I feel your {Star} stance on xRx to be a spectacular display of fence-sitting. You only talked about your experiences with a double voter (which have been largely scum); and the wiki saying that it's mostly town. You don't go to analyze the rest of his play this game, you just analyze the role, which obviously we've had examples of both alignments so that's highly ineffective and a largely useless post.

Oh, VP commented on it, good deal.

I think that this bit by VP about chauchau is the most damning:

So you believe that he confessed to being scum, but you don't vote him? sounds more than a little fishy.

Two posts after that, you vote Raivann for a bullshit reason that turns out to be wrong anyway...wtf? CONFESSED SCUM YOU SAID.

With a confession, you vote for who confessed. You don't look for connections until after the flip, you don't look for a secondary suspect, you wait until you can vote for him. I had a gut-town on chau; so that made me not look at her all that closely later on; but I've been wrong before.

Dram, xRx: Both of you are guilty of this as well. If you don't agree fully with the case being put against chauchau, or think that there's a better suspect; why aren't you putting your case out there? Especially you, xRx, being a claimed town-PR, you're a prime target for a scum killing and as town, you'd want your case put out there.

Chau's latest post (422) really rubs me the wrong way as it's something that I've noticed before. You {chau} have put out a case on somebody that other people have found suspicious. Obviously you put the time into defending yourself, but why haven't you put out something really attacking another player today? It would only take a bit more time, BUT you've waited until you see some other people support your choice for a "top suspect".

[Amished]

@Star: Yes, but providing examples is all that you did. You didn't lean one way or another in any meaningful way, you didn't try to correlate your experiences or what you researched to what xRx was doing here. You said "it could be this or that" (essentially) and moved on. No stance other than "I'll have to think more about it" which isn't a stance at all. We all realized by that point that as a group we've seen both town and scum doublevoters; you didn't add anything to the discussion by bringing that up.

@chauchau: Yes, there will be more than one scum in the game, but when you have a "confessed scum" why would you feel the need to vote for anybody else? By all means, question whoever you want, but to vote for somebody else over somebody you felt to be 100% scum just doesn't make sense.

[Amished]

@VP: I agree with Raskol. Under severe pressure and defending herself with her own actions all day so far, L-1 is a lot different than L-3 with like a page and a half of pressure.

[Amished]

Mod: I'm having intermittent access, so sorry I haven't been as active as I normally hold myself to.

[Amished]

While I agree with the sentiment that both dram and dev are scummy, Dev definitely looks worse in my eyes. Post reasons or it's impossible to really get a read on you.

(BTW: Dev is worse for me due to the reaction to pressure and the knowledge that if town; his "lynch me and see if I care" wagon won't lead us to any scum due to his claim; which is the hope of all townies that are lynched)

[Amished]

Because I haven't felt it necessary to move it since I had it on Reck.

[Amished]

My oh my, shifting wagon.

I'm not voting Rai because I don't have a solid case in any form on him. I am almost certain that he is scum, but I cant just say "he's scum, vote him!"

-snip-

I'm glad that you're now confident enough to convince us that he's scum in your eyes. OH WAIT.

However, I want to know what disagreement you feel like you're having as you really haven't gotten "mad" at anything to really disagree with that I've seen.

I dont believe you to be scum VPB, just as much as I dont believe Amished and Rek are scum.

However, I was pertty sure you were town in Goma too and look where that lead us X_X

Though I do like this bit of reasoning (*cough cough*)

I thought you were town when you were scum, so now that I think you're town, I think you're actually town. This doesn't say a damn thing in my eyes.

[Amished]

Give a case on Raivann and we might even lynch him today! Or don't and we won't.

[Amished]

Starbuck: I like your ISO Day 2 case better than your D1 (which basically could be summarized by "dram never mentioned me {Star} and had me at the top of his scum list for no explanation").

I think unaccounted for scum reads are almost as bad as unaccounted for town reads. I didn't think about dram as much d1 in that regard probably cause I thought chau was town and I knew I was as well. Apparently to slip by me you just have to buddy the shit outta me -_-

Dram, consider this post to be a pseudo-vote. It would put you at L-1 and I'd like you to claim now.

[Amished]

Unvote
Vote: Dramonic

Catch you on the flipside, folks. (get it, *flip* side? hahahahaaaahhhh ... sorry..)

[Amished]

ninja hammered! You bastards!

[Amished]

Oh right, you need to unvote before it counted, I wasn't ninja hammered. Good deal.

EAT IT RECK! >_>

[Amished]

I haven't paid as much attention to this game as I should've, so I apologize for that. After the Super Bowl I'll read through and probably post a case.

[Amished]

Ok, rereading during the CBS commercials during the Super Bowl:

@xRx: In 174 (page 7, last post); you thought that one of The Inquisition or VPB was scum. Obviously we have Inq flipping town; what of the early game did you feel was scummy about VPB and how does that affect your view of him now?

Hrmph. Anon avoided the hell situation pretty adroitly too. (Looking at the fact that he was voting starbuck for the longest time then followed Raskol onto Inq near the end of the day as well.)

So far I disagree with Anon suspicion. There's only one line where Anon seemed to make a blatantly stupid comment; and I'm relegating it to that instead of scummy.

@xRx: I saw that you had a scum-meta-feel of Starbuck at the start of day 2. Now, I don't really care what the meta part of it is; I want you to put your read into *this game* terms if you feel it still applies.

WOOT PICK 6 FOR SAINTS!

@VP: I just saw your concise reasoning for Anon being scum (fought HnF wagon hard) in 384 again. I just reread that whole thing and I got more of a hardfought defense from Raskol. How does Anon compare to Rask in that situation for you? Surely that's not the only reason for your suspicions either, care to explain further?

SAINTS WIN!

Oh dammit. Well that failed. I read through thinking that dev was the lynch yesterday and not dram. I had a nice case put together for dram too... /facepalm

Starbuck's D2-iso case against dram (even though it was on the wrong target) seems sincere and from a townie. As I thought that one of xRx or Star was scum abusing their relationship with each other; and I finally have a strongerish read on one of them; I can narrow it down to xRx.

@VP: Obviously I missed a bunch on dev since I thought he was dead and confirmed town. I think that your stance on Anon is wrong, but what's your case on dev since you're more sure of him?

[Amished]

So Dev, why aren't you voting for xRx now if you were sure he was scum before? What made you reconsider/change your mind?

[Amished]

EBWOP:

xRx: That would've required the mafia specifically to try to play you (and realize that you were the double voter) and have cc.com not reveal herself to be the cop (which was the obvious NK choice). When I read through, I saw Raskol say that he thought that Inq. was the double voter; so maybe they thought along those lines as well.

I definitely didn't get the feel that you were being played; and really didn't get the feeling that anybody was pressuring VP all that much either.

[Amished]

I agree completely with your assessment of Raskol on the sincerity of his defense.

Anon really does need to post more, I mostly remember his contributions in the early game where I questioned him for his bandwagon of Starbuck. I couldn't tell you another thing he's really said since that point.

Looking at Dev in ISO (now that I realize he's alive): look at ISO 11. He attacks xRx for voting for HnF. He then does call the fold in 12 (and votes for HnF) and does then later vote for xRx for rather bogus reasons. He's definitely my top suspect. Being dead (or pretending to be >_>) won't clear you for long -_-

Vote: Devestation

Also, I do like that you're building your own case. Hop on and let's lynch us some scum

[Amished]

@Anon: Actually I believe that VP is on the wrong track with you. I want more content to be sure though so I look forward to your reread.

As for Starbuck, she looks a lot townier after her case on dram yesterday from my perspective and I think that sentiment is shared with a couple people (or maybe just VP.. not sure).

Where's Raivann? He's still alive (I know, I checked). Starbuck is too, so I'd like to hear more from her as well.

[Amished]

Post 512 is the biggest thing that I can point to for my Starbuck town read.

Her points against Dram feel legit to me. Her tying of dram's thought processes together to form a compelling case does not feel forced (basically *not* a "this is a wiki scumtell, he did it, he's scummy!"). Linking suspicions and non-votings; links of suspicions without explanations, this is all stuff I would expect more from a townie than a scummer. She could just be good scum but I don't believe that as much as I think the whole post is genuine and that she's town.

For your case against her, it looks like you're using HnF WIFOM to tie them together (HnF never mentioned w, x, y, and z; y and z are town, that means that one or both of w and x are probably scum) doesn't fly for me. Neither does a meta case (read that she's more confrontational and she's not here). Needless to say you're not exactly bringing compelling evidence here against her.

[Amished]

... okay.. It's still the same player slot (and still the same player since you only vote for somebody that you're 100% sure is scum) but okay... ???

Care to do something else while waiting on xRx for a new day? Question another suspect perhaps?

[Amished]

.... wow. Here's hoping we're all right; but I'm pretty confident in this flip anyways. I had forgotten that xRx was a double voter too as that stopped being a determining factor for his alignment basically as soon as that whole issue was clarified..

VP, you said you woulda lynched me in endgame if my plan had kept going the way I wanted it to in LOST. I'm not that capable. Actually, I don't know of another game where I was scum that had to fool you. NY91 I was town (you scum), ViPod I was town (you scum), LOST was scum, but I covered that. Quick and Dirty I was scum but you voted for my slot at the end of day 1 if I remember correctly.

Last man standing, both town, you ended up mistrusting me there towards the end (which I helped win for you, btw....); MM's pie E7 you were scum (again). I think that's all the games we've played as seperate people. I haven't had much opportunity to even try to fool you now that I think about it.

And you wonder why I call you scum in every game that I play with you.

[Amished]

@Raskol: ... ok? I'm the person who called out HnF's scumtell first; but whatever. Why do you think that?

As for me, I was really banking on Dev flipping scum. I still have a town read on Starbuck; I can never read xRx; slight town on Raskol. That leaves Anon and Raivann for me.

I wouldn't doubt either of them and Anon defending a townie that had a lot of suspicion on him anyways is a relatively easy way to get town-cred cause you know that they're town anyways. Null-tell at best.

[Amished]

And why is it logical?

[Amished]

I can live with that.

[Amished]

Vote: No Lynch

[Amished]

After you calling her scum all game; I don't know how much sway you have with her... Anybody?

[Amished]

Reck.. already claimed.

I'm just a vanilla townie.

[Amished]

... He's a double voter. Nobody else counter-claimed (nor died as a DV) and we hammered several times with him on the wagon and not the required number of "bodies", so to speak.

If he *was* scum and there was another scum left, the game would be over as they'd control 3 votes and this day wouldn't have started.

[Amished]

..... really Anon? Suspicion for being "that good"?

I think I've been wrong about you. I thought you were town as well (look back at VP Baltar's accusations towards you .. Day2?); but now you come with some craptastic WIFOM about me being scum? And you just so happen to bring an accusation against me in the same way that you try to clear yourself, through the words of a townie.

You know what, I'm actually glad that you brought both of these points up, I think there's an excellent chance that you wanted to kill Raskol just so you could have a way to try to clear yourself; and find a way to cast suspicion on people that (I don't believe) you've had all that much suspicion of before.

Don't forget that this is all after you said that "the play is Starbuck". You've singlehandedly accused everyone but xRx in two posts.

[Amished]

EBWOP: Almost forgot, you didn't claim, Anon. Or are you waiting for confirmed-town xRx to claim again?

[Amished]

Anon, what are your thoughts now?
Is it still me that you are looking at?
Town, what are your thoughts?

.. This is your breadcrumb?

Oh, I get it, first word going downwards. "Anon is town".

Since you like breadcrumbs, did you breadcrumb your real role early on? Or was it just after you became the cop?

[Amished]

*bump so the topic stops being weird*

Also, the day ended, it was pretty clear that the "bunch of hippies" comment was the last post for the day; why didn't you send your investigation in then?

[Amished]

Nah, I never pay attention to sigs. I've been a cop where I could send in a primary and a secondary option like 4 days before the deadline cause I was going on vacation. That's definitely a possibility.

I don't understand your role though, did you know that you were a backup the whole game or only after cc.com got killed?

[Amished]

Soo..... why didn't you breadcrumb before your lone result?

[Amished]

Here's hoping, I keep getting the suspicion that Starbuck could be scum and cleared her partner Anon with a recent gambit. Hopefully see you tomorrow.

[Amished]

xRx: You're a double voter. Confirmed. If you're scum you'd win as you could hammer. Has to be Starbuck.

Doesn't matter if I vote or not, it's in your hands.

/me waits for the "guilty" on me. All I can really hope is that you see that I've tried to scumhunt to the best of my ability throughout the game and see that I'm genuine with it.

[Amished]

*sigh* another loss

[Amished]

Wasn't I already hammered?

[Amished]

FUCK THIS SETUP.

Also, cg's to Kise for missing my switched N5 Night action (I wanted to kill Starbuck and get some "Anon is GF" bullshit into here)

Whatever, I'm not happy about how this game turned out.

[Amished]

But the night wasn't "over" as the scene wasn't up yet. (Beat the scene by 5+ hours)

Might be a good decision to make for future modding; anything in before the scene counts.

[Amished]

Cop+Doc+DV would've been broken, nobody would've (or should've) believed that. Heck, 3 goons vs. cop + DV was pretty balanced I thought; without the backup.

[Amished]

*bump for thread glitch*

[Amished]

I hate it when something that shouldn't have been in the game makes me lose. Raivann wasn't playing that badly, nor was I.

Heck, with me strongly against lynching cc.com, we got the cop to claim. You tell me how that's solid town play that should've gotten a win out of this situation.

[Amished]

I think at the time starbuck coming out would've solidified that one of us was lying. There's not many mods (especially not any that have your experience with playing, Kise) that put that many PR's into a game; especially with the original PM about this being a game of natural scumhunters.

[Amished]

xRx: Would you have believed that Anon was a GF had I actually killed Starbuck on N5?

[Amished]

K, gg town (setup) then. Makes me feel better in any case.

[Amished]

Raivann didn't play *that* bad; aside from lurking.

[Amished]

Yeah, so he's not outside his meta which is a point *for* him, actually.

Granted, he's scum *a lot* of the time, but still inside his town meta of being scummy no matter what. If only people would control for that when I'm Raiv's scumpartner >_>

[Amished]

Yeah, Raskol; the only reason you were killed was cause of your "I think the scumteam is Amished and Raivann" comment. What the hell did you see in us?

[Amished]

You were killed in the hopes that I could fool xRx into thinking that Star was a gambiting scum (and that a backup cop was broken to the balance of the game).

I thought that killing xRx would be useless as Star's "buddying"/investigation of you would make you vote me and star would obviously vote me.

So it was down to killing you {Anon} or Star. I wanted to kill starbuck the more I thought about it; but it really ended up not mattering.

I think the scum played wellish after the hell debacle and that they got really unlucky with starbuck making a perfect breadcrumb that automatically removed all the suspicions I had on her. The town also played good enough to win this, imo. Althoug, the Dev lynch was pretty fail.

Contradictory logic. Scum got unlucky to lose; town played good enough to win (so what happened to the "luck"?)

[Amished]

But.. I win if I lynch you. It's a secondary win condition that sacrifices an innocent townie for a scum. Anyone who's anyone knows that 1:1 is a good deal. However, if I'm lynched, I take out half the remaining town, rounded up and then get replaced by a hated scum.

Vote: Anon

[Amished]

EARLY CLAIM! Just like HnF, he's scum. Moar votes plx.

[Amished]

Well done then; I don't really think any of that I could've changed a whole lot other than maybe attacking Raiv more; but with losing Hell early I wanted to keep us more intact.

[Amished]

The gambit to lynch you should've worked out for us, Hell. It's just a learning experience and I hope you decide to keep playing here