Mini 912 - Little Golden Mafia (OVER)

[totallynotmafia]

/confirm

[totallynotmafia]

vote peanutman

....because I hate peanutmen

[totallynotmafia]

I think the whole plight hydra situation depends on the nature of the way they post, if they just log on individually and post without consulting each other then with two quite possibly different opinions there's a good chance Plight's posts are going to be riddled with inconsistencies, which means we're not going to be sure if it's because plight is scum or just the nature of the hydra.

If however they consult with each other before each post, and point out in the thread when they disagree on something then I think it would be fine. It's only the second page so it's kind of hard to say either way.

@Plight: with regards to what I've said could you clear up the way you two will be posting?

[totallynotmafia]

*sorry, phlight

[totallynotmafia]

@Plight: with regards to what I've said could you clear up the way you two will be posting?

We don't make every post jointly. If I had a particularly important post with which I wasn't sure my other half agreed (say, a long case, or a vote analysis) I would probably post it in Notes (our Notes page is primarily how we communicate) for him to look over it, and once the day gets going and we have some strong suspicions, we'll likewise discuss them and try to bring the other 'round, but other than that and until then, we just post.

Well if you are town I hope that you will put the same effort into avoiding inconsistencies as you would if you were scum, otherwise I can see it as being a disadvantage for the rest of us because of the greater potential of you being mislynched. Honestly though if I didn't know already, so far I wouldn't be able to tell you're a hydra.

With all that in mind, this post worries me:

I think the whole plight hydra situation depends on the nature of the way they post, if they just log on individually and post without consulting each other then with two quite possibly different opinions there's a good chance Plight's posts are going to be riddled with inconsistencies, which means we're not going to be sure if it's because plight is scum or just the nature of the hydra.

If however they consult with each other before each post, and point out in the thread when they disagree on something then I think it would be fine. It's only the second page so it's kind of hard to say either way.

@Plight: with regards to what I've said could you clear up the way you two will be posting?

So whatever messups they make, unless they say beforehand its bcuz they're hydras, we can take it as a scumtell.

This seems as if DS is setting up the precurser for that possible mislynch.

I also don't like this contradiction:

But it doesnt seem if there's been enough to end the RVS.

The RVS is meant to be ended. The faster it ends, the better. Why make it last longer than it needs to?

So it's alright to end the RVS, as long as it's not you being voted for? Care to explain that DS?

[totallynotmafia]

Yeah, I just made a post in my newbie game why I think inactivity hurts the town, I'm guessing I don't have to outline that here.

[totallynotmafia]

TNM, that wasnt a contradiction at all. There were few votes on me att of that post.

How do the votes on you have anything to do with the contradiction? The two statements are a contradiction regardless, what I was trying to say was that the first statement where you said you didn't think there was enough to end the RVS, that was right after Phlight voted you, which makes it look as if you're all for continuing the RVS if the first non-random serious vote is on you.

I'm not sure i know what precursor means, but if I'm right, then I don't see how that sets up a precursor. It's more of stating fact. I didn't say "if they make a contradiction w/o blah blah, we lynch them", but instead "we can take it as a scumtell". And wouldn't we?

But I believe the fact to be "we can take it as a POSSIBLE scumtell". After reading what you said again perhaps you meant the same thing by saying "can". Is this what you meant? Basically my point is that Phlight could still make inconsistencies as town as a result of two different people posting under the one name, so if we just take every inconsistency he says as a scumtell then it could result in a mislynch. Of course we can't ignore inconsistencies from him just because he's a hydra but I think it would be pretty careless to just go "theres an inconsistency, let's lynch him" which is what I thought you were more or less hinting we could do. Maybe it was just a problem with semantics, if not though I'd be happy to explain this further.

With all that in mind, this post worries me:

I think the whole plight hydra situation depends on the nature of the way they post, if they just log on individually and post without consulting each other then with two quite possibly different opinions there's a good chance Plight's posts are going to be riddled with inconsistencies, which means we're not going to be sure if it's because plight is scum or just the nature of the hydra.

If however they consult with each other before each post, and point out in the thread when they disagree on something then I think it would be fine. It's only the second page so it's kind of hard to say either way.

@Plight: with regards to what I've said could you clear up the way you two will be posting?

So whatever messups they make, unless they say beforehand its bcuz they're hydras, we can take it as a scumtell.

This seems as if DS is setting up the precurser for that possible mislynch.

Or stating the obvious? Do you disagree that if Plight makes a contradiction, even if only resulting from using a hydra, that we can take it as a scumtell?

See my above response to DS, I agree if by that you mean we can take it as a possible scumtell.

I also don't like this contradiction:

But it doesnt seem if there's been enough to end the RVS.

The RVS is meant to be ended. The faster it ends, the better. Why make it last longer than it needs to?

So it's alright to end the RVS, as long as it's not you being voted for? Care to explain that DS?

I don't see how this is a contradiction, and I also don't see how its saying what you claimed.

Do you honestly not see that contradiction? In the first statement he is saying that the RVS needs to go for longer (which is after the first real vote, on him) and in the second he is saying that RVS should be ended as quickly as possible, and "why make it last longer than it needs to?" That's a contradiction, he has changed his opinion on something in order to suit the situation. He's clearly not happy for the RVS to end with the only serious vote on him, and then later he says that he thinks the RVS should be ended quickly in order to defend the accusations from Panzer.

Limerick, I picked up on totallynotmafia's comments as well.

Well if you are town I hope that you will put the same effort into avoiding inconsistencies as you would if you were scum, otherwise I can see it as being a disadvantage for the rest of us because of the greater potential of you being mislynched. Honestly though if I didn't know already, so far I wouldn't be able to tell you're a hydra.

This it total fluff to me. Wouldn't you want every town member to avoid inconsistencies? And how is a hydra at a greater potential of being mislynched?

Yes, but don't you agree that two people, with two different brains, and two different opinions, posting under the one name are more likely to present inconsistencies than anyone else? And that they would go to more effort to avoid these inconsistencies as mafia rather than town? These are the reasons that if Phlight is lazy as town he is more likely to be mislynched, judging from his posts so far I don't think that he will be lazy about it though.

This seems as if DS is setting up the precurser for that possible mislynch.

Wasn't DS just saying what a few others have already said? That basically being a hydra is not an excuse.

See my above response to DS. I'm happy to drop the phlight discussion as long as we're all on the same page. Mainly just so I never have to say "inconsistency" again.

Yeah, I just made a post in my newbie game why I think inactivity hurts the town, I'm guessing I don't have to outline that here.

I also find this hypocritical. You post to make a point about inactivity without contributing anything new.
I try to play this game in a way that all my posts contribute to the discussion in one-way or another. Stating that there's inactivity and that's it not helpful for the town in a non-newb game doesn't seem productive to me. If things are dead, re-read the thread, post new questions, follow up on leads however slim they may be. But don't post about inactivity while essentially being inactive in the same breath.

How is that hypocritical when the last substantial post before that was made by me? And what is the length of time the thread has to be inactive before you're allowed to comment on it?

[totallynotmafia]

DS, you're just further contraditicting yourself because there WAS a serious vote on you - the one from phlight. If you really believed the RVS should be ended as quickly as possible you would have ended it right there, by continuing to randomly vote you're only prolonging it. Even if you thought that the quickest way to end the RVS was to randomly bandwagon and get serious votes on you (which is just downright silly) there was no need to because you already had the serious vote from phlight. I believe you continued randomly voting in order to continue the RVS so that the attention would be taken away from you.

And there's another contradiction because you say the random bandwaggoning was to attract serious votes on you, which means you must think randomly bandwaggoning is a scummy way to act. But then you say this:

I immediately bandwagoned onto any random vote I could. Would scum do this?

I'd like to see votes from some of the fence-sitters like totallynotmafia who giving the wagon lip service but no votes.

Well he said he could defend himself so I gave him the chance but his defence has only resulted in more contradictions so:

Unvote, vote: DedicatedScribe

If you are town then you seriously need to rethink the way you play because you're not helping at all by trying to get votes on you.

[totallynotmafia]

Hmm...interesting, there is something that backs your claim up somewhat, I don't want to say anything more yet though because I don't have any experience with masons so I don't know if it's detrimental to the town for them to be outed or not.

[totallynotmafia]

Still waiting for DS....I'd love it if his story was "The all-alone, friendless little mute boy", and right now he's thinking "oh shit."

[totallynotmafia]

So now I guess we wait to see what the replacement has to say...

[totallynotmafia]

I just don't see how we can possibly move forward until we hear from DS's replacement. All we got from DS was that he was a mason, and everybody has posted now so if he's telling the truth, the other mason doesn't want to be revealed. I agree the inactivity sucks but we wouldn't be in this position if DS hadn't disappeared right after that claim, if you're going to blame anyone blame him.

Having said that I think I see where you're coming from, I still need to hear from DS's replacement before I would even consider changing my vote though.

[totallynotmafia]

Ahaha I think I had that book when I was little (the country mouse and the city mouse). All things considered I have no reason not to believe that claim.

Unvote, Vote Panzerjager

Well many of us believed DS was scum, and given his play, for good reason. Out of everybody voting for DS though, PJ was the one who was pushing for a claim before DS was even at L-1, and trying to talk others into joining the wagon. After DS's claim, all PJ said was to lynch him, claiming that doing so would help us in LyLo. I'd like to hear what PJ has to say about this, and the claim.

[totallynotmafia]

Having said that I think I see where you're coming from, I still need to hear from DS's replacement before I would even consider changing my vote though.

From here, StrangerCoug checks in, confirms he's a mason (without addressing the questions of his own alignment or if he can confirm his partner's) and distances himself from DS's actions. This is enough for you to go from "even considering changing your vote" to immediately jumping on Panzerjager by parroting my post 143. In what way has StrangerCoug answered your questions/concerns about DS? Did you see my vote on Panzerjager? Did you mean to basically lay out the same case as me in your own words? I just fail to see your line of thinking from 151 to 155, I must have missed something. Please explain.

I thought you were the other mason. I think it's okay for me to say that now because now I'm not so sure you are, if you were you probably would have picked up on the subtext in that post ("I think I see where you're coming from"), I was trying to hint that I picked up on you being the other mason without actually outing you. When you defended some of my accusations on DS earlier it stood out for me a fair bit, and I thought it could be scum defending another scum. Then when DS claimed mason, I thought that it may actually be a mason defending another mason, and that's what I was referring to when I said that there was something that somewhat backed up his claim. Then when you started getting frustrated when people were waiting for DS to post it clicked that it may be because you are the other mason, and hence already know his claim to be true. Coug's country mouse claim then solidified the whole thing, it just makes sense that country mouse and city mouse would be masons. Like I said before, I have no previous experience with masons, so I hadn't even thought that the allignment may not be town.

I can see why you guys think I made the change to PJ quickly, but I have been thinking for a while now that if I was wrong about DS and he flipped town, that that would mean that PJ had quite a high chance of being scum considering the way he was egging on votes and pushing for a claim. I didn't intend to parrot your post peanutman, the reasons I gave are why I beleive PJ to be scum, I can't help it if they are the same as yours.

[totallynotmafia]

Well he must be a jester or something, otherwise as wolf said that's just stupid unhelpful play.

BTW I thought PJ had put himself at L-1 too because Trumpet said it was L-2 after his vote when it was actually L-1. I don't know if that was deliberately to confuse people or a genuine mistake.

[totallynotmafia]

Time to pursue my other suspect from when I replaced in.

Vote: totallynotmafia

I know what I am, but you were awfully quick to jump off my wagon when all I claimed was my story.

The scum's also clearly power-role hunting. We don't know what the two recently dead are yet, though.

I don't get why people (especially you) think it is so strange that I believed you - country mouse and city mouse make sense to be masons, if it had been a story without such an obvious relationship then I would have been dubious. If you are scum then it means that you either went through the little golden books and found country mouse and city mouse, hoping nobody else would have it, or you ARE country mouse and your scumbuddy is city mouse, which would be the dumbest claim ever because if your scumbuddy is lynched and comes up as city mouse, you're screwed. The first scenario is possible I guess, but involves a fair bit of luck, and is much more of a stretch than if you are telling the truth and you are a mason.

And what was the point of saying "I know what I am"? Stating the obvious a fair bit there, I should hope everyone knows what their role is.

If I have a role that targets, I targeted Phlight in the last day/night cycle.

If I have a role that inspects for alignment, the result was "innocent".

If I have a role that tracks or a role that watches, no one targeted Phlight and Phlight targeted no one.

I was going to ask Trumpet of Doom about his little mix-up with the lynch count but I guess I don't need to now.

Vote: Trumpet of Doom

[totallynotmafia]

If I have a role that targets, I targeted Trumpet of Doom in the last day/night cycle.

If I have a role that inspects for alignment, I didn't receive a result.

If I have a role that tracks or a role that watches, no one targeted Trumpet of Doom and Trumpet of Doom targetted BridgesAndBaloons.

I would like for everyone to hypoclaim in the above fashion in their next post. Whether you do have a role that targets or not, claim that you do and claim a result. Vigilantes, if any, should consider lying, lest they become obvious. This gives very little information to scum and means that if/when an investigative role dies, we'll have all of their information.

If I have a role that targets, I targeted [X] in the last day/night cycle.

If have a role that inspects for an alignment, [X is guilty/X is not guilty/I didn't receive a result.

If I have a role that tracks or a role that watches, [Y] targeted [X] and [X] targeted [Z].

I can clearly see why this plan makes sense, Phlight! Since everyone is hypoclaiming, the scum won't know who to kill!

Fixed.

Trumpet of Doom doesn't want a hypoclaim because he's scum. Although I didn't claim a result on him that implicates that he's scum (I hypoclaimed one, which is quite different), you can see the way that he absolutely freaked out. That's much more indicative of scum than my hypoclaim results.

....hang on, hang on. Voting for someone after a hypoclaim result is a lot different than just a hypoclaim rseult by itself. Just want to make sure we're on the same page, otherwise this hypoclaim stuff is stupid.

[totallynotmafia]

Okay

Unvote

, seeing as that was based on what I thought was an actual track. Can someone tell me what the chances are of two trackers being in a game of this size? I'm guessing not very likely.

@Phlight: I could see the value of the hypoclaim in that if everybody claims a result, scum have no way of knowing who is telling the truth and if an investigative role does die then we have their results. My problem is that voting for someone after you've hypoclaimed that you have tracked them to somebody's death is basically implying that your claim is true, at least that's the way I took it. Please explain why you voted for Trumpet after your hypoclaim.

@Trumpet: When you voted for PJ you went out of your way to say that he was on L-2 when he was actually on L-1. If you were scum it seems like a pretty good tactic to me, somebody too lazy to actually check the votes could come along and vote for him thinking they were putting him on L-1 when they were actually hammering, and stating what the vote count is in your post implies you've actually checked it is true, otherwise why bother saying it? Please explain.

[totallynotmafia]

Fuck, I feel stupid now, what Trumpet said about hypoclaiming is correct - the potential for role-fishing is enormous. Now that I've "claimed" to have an innocent on Phlight, if I do anything to contradict this (suspecting or voting for Phlight), scum can rule me out as cop.

Phlight, I'd like to see an example of where this hypoclaiming has worked in another game and actually benefited town.

[totallynotmafia]

Vote: Phlight

The hypoclaiming was extremely suspicious, but the fact that he hasn't defended it is even worse. If he was town and it was something that would actually benefit town he would have been able to do this.

My theory is that he probably discussed this with his scum-buddies last night, as a way of claiming an investigative role without actually claiming (so he could later say if counterclaimed "it was just a hypoclaim"). When the mod first put up kunk's and B&B's deaths they were just listed as town, and so Phlight may have taken this as that they were vanillas and hoped there wouldn't be a tracker in the game. I took the vote after the tracker hypoclaim to be implying that the track was true, but after the mod updated the nightkill post it screwed his plan completely. Then of course there's the potential for rolefishing of the hypoclaim push, which is an added bonus.

If I'm right I wouldn't rule out Trumpet of Doom either, bussing a scumbuddy with the claimed track would be a smart move, as it then confirms Phlight as tracker for the rest of the game.

I've also been suspicious of some of the people who haven't really contributed much (Macavity, lobster, wolf, dramonic) so I looked at them all in ISO, and the one who came off as most likely to be scum is dramonic. The only thing he's contributed really is votes on bandwagons.

FOS dramonic

If I said that we know each other to be town and we actually don't, I'm effed. If I'm scum that fakeclaimed my buddy to be my mason, I'm effed. I may not be the sharpest knife in the drawer, but I'm not as idiotic as Phlight portrays me.

Well it was DS who claimed mason, not you, so if you were scum you really had no choice but to go along with it. I'm by no means ruling out the possibility you could be scum by the way, I think that would be stupid, but like I said the claim is good and I disagree with Phlight when he said:

Oh, and also: you're not a confirmable role until you're dead.

SC can be confirmed while he's still alive if his mason partner is Nightkilled and comes up as citymouse.

I think peanutman is right about Kunk's death, the two different flavours suggest two seperate kills. The "ran over" flavour piqued my interest because on the cover of country mouse and city mouse they are both in a car, this doesn't necessarily mean anything because there are other stories about vehicles but it's just something that I think is worth pointing out.

[totallynotmafia]

What's popcorn? I'm happy with whatever SC wants.

[totallynotmafia]

I'm Little Girl from A Sleepy Story, Vig. Sorry for putting us in LyLo, I was pretty sure dramonic was scum and hadn't considered the consequences of being wrong. I killed kunkstar mostly because of selfish reasons, everybody seemed to think all the scum were on PJ's wagon, but obviously from my point of view it was just as likely they were on mine and so I wanted to prove a point and hopefully save myself from a possible mis-lynch the next day, and kunkstar was the third on my wagon so I thought he would be the most likely to be scum. Anyway, I can put people to sleep at night, but I'm guessing that's probably a bad idea to do from now on. There's another aspect to my role but I think it would be beneficial to keep scum in the dark about it, but if everybody (well, SC really) thinks its better to reveal it then I'm happy to.

Your go lobstermania.

[totallynotmafia]

Heh, my first power role and I get accused of being a serial killer, I guess it's my own fault really for being so trigger-happy, and I'm not really sure how to refute it. From my perspective, the only way there could be a SK in the game is if there's a SK who hasn't killed yet or scum group who hasn't killed yet, which I highly doubt.

As far as everybody's claim, the only one that I can see that might be linked to the "ran over" flavour is sam the firehouse cat (possibly a fire truck), or maybe Big Bird had a ride on a tractor or something when he was on the farm. Next time I'm at the library I'll try to find all the books, it's kind of hard to tell just from the front cover.

[totallynotmafia]

TNM, you explained your kunkstar kill, but not your dramonic. Why did you think dramonic was scummy?

I've also been suspicious of some of the people who haven't really contributed much (Macavity, lobster, wolf, dramonic) so I looked at them all in ISO, and the one who came off as most likely to be scum is dramonic. The only thing he's contributed really is votes on bandwagons.FOS dramonic

I was tossing up between dramonic and Trumpet last night, Phlight's case on trumpet was pretty good in the new light of phlight being town, but I was worried it could just be another case of town attacking town, especially because the initial attack came from the fake hypoclaim. Dramonic however hadn't really contributed anything to the discussion but had still managed to vote on both mis-lynches so I was pretty sure he was lurking scum. A quick re-read has made me wish I'd shot Trumpet last night, and if it was deadline now I'd probably vote for him, but I'll do a thorough reread soon and post my thoughts.

In the meantime:

@lobstermania: you're ISO is pretty short and there's not a lot to go off, so who do you think is scum?

[totallynotmafia]

Ok, my thoughts for the moment:

ToD:

My top pick as scum:

1) Phlight's case on him (post 212) makes a lot of sense (except for the bussing bit).

2) His votes on DS's and PJ's wagons were both "I agree with such and such and so I'll vote too" votes, so he's jumping on wagons without having to make his own case which may be questioned after the mis-lynch.

3) After DS's mason claim Trumpet was saying that DS should say who his mason partner was. His reasoning was that with two confirmed town they would draw the nightkills away from possible cops or docs, but it's just as likely that it would narrow down possible cops or docs for the NK (with the other mason outed that's one less person who may be a cop or doc), and this may have been what ToD was thinking. Essentially he's dressing up his rolefishing in a pro-town way.

Peanutman:

Playing a really good game if he is scum as he's coming off as fairly pro-town, at least to me. The one problem I have is when we were all waiting for DS to clarify his claim, Peanutman started getting impatient and voted for PJ. Now, I initially thought this was because Peanut was the other mason, which would make perfect sense...but now that we know he's not it makes that behaviour quite strange...why would he be voting for someone else when everything was left up in the air and DS could have easily been scum with a poor claim...why the need to get the suspicion generated on someone else in this period? Perhaps Peanutman is scum and hence knew that DS's claim was true, and thus felt the need to get the suspicion moving on somebody else, all the while under the guise of being pro-town as he said inactivity is what the scum want.

MacavityLock:

He seems to think I could be scum, or is trying to put that idea in people's heads. I guess I can understand people suspecting me of being SK, I can see how that would make sense, but thinking I'm scum means you're thinking I took a massive risk in what would be a good position in LyLo...hoping that a vig or sk wouldn't CC and screw the whole thing. This makes me think he's trying to get a townie to vote for me and then scum can jump on and win, but I guess it could also just be a townie exploring all possible scenarios. There's not a lot to go off with you either Macavity, so could you post who you think is scum?

Lobstermania:

Could be getting an easy ride through the game as scum because theres been enough townies on each wagon that he hasn't even had to vote...like I said I need to hear some actual scum-hunting from him.

Right now I'm torn between a possible Tod-lobstermania scumgroup or a Peanutman-Macavitylock scumgroup.

I've been wrong five times already in this game though so I'm in no way confident. SC, I'd really like to hear what you think.

[totallynotmafia]

Firstly SC I don't know how to convince you that I'm not a SK but I guess I'll worry about that more when we're out of LyLo.

Secondly I'm pretty sure scum lied about their stories as none of those books have an obvious connection to the ran over flavour. However this makes me suspicious of Peanutman as scum would have to pick a fairly obscure book in order to avoid being CC'd, and Big Bird seems a bit obscure to me. I think it would be silly to place a vote on this alone though.

Thirdly lobster's post makes me more confident about the ToD-lobster scumgroup scenario, but I'd be much more willing to vote for Trumpet over lobster as I've already been wrong about one lurker in this game.

So I'm still most likely going to vote for trumpet, let's see what he says when he gets back.

[totallynotmafia]

lol I did watch Sesame Street, I never read it though!

[totallynotmafia]

The thing I noticed most about TNM is his quickly changing his mind, quite often throughout the game. I definitely read his play as scum, and I agree that SK is pretty likely.

I thought you were saying before it was just as likely I was scum as SK, changed your mind after nobody took the bait?

In general: Does anyone else see a problem here?

This kind of question puts up a red flag to me, it's like you're trying to convince others of someones scumminess rather than just make the case yourself. Scum did the same kind of thing in my newbie game when trying to make a case on me.

Counterargument: If I was trying to rolefish, I wouldn't have argued so damn hard against the hypoclaim. I'm a beast when I can get everything broken down to a logic puzzle (see D6 of Suzumiya Haruhi for a shining example from me-town), and a hypoclaim would have given me so much to work with as scum that there's no way I'd want to pass up that opportunity.

This is a very poor counterargument because:

1) You were being voted by Phlight after his hypoclaim, so not voting for him after that would be like an admission of guilt.

2) It seems to me that a mislynch on Phlight is just as good if not better for scum than any rolefishing you may have attained from it.

3) Defending one situation with that of another seems pretty scummy to me also, it's like you thought about the Phlight hypoclaiming thing after and thought "Well if anyone ever accuses me of of rolefishing I can use the phlight situation to defend it."

I'm pretty sure I'm gonna vote for Trumpet, how do we know how long we have til deadline?

[totallynotmafia]

SK was part of scum, last I checked.

By scum I meant mafia.

That's what a case is supposed to do, yes?

Yes, but it's the appealing to other people with the question I don't like. It's like what Phlight said, it seems more like you're playing to an audience and trying to convince everyone that someone is scum rather than actually trying to find who the scum is.

Really? Because apparently Phlight believes the exact opposite. And if it came down to his word vs. yours, I'd probably go with his.

I mean that whether you are town or scum it would have been stupid to go along with the hypoclaiming after he fake-claimed you, which makes your counterargument moot. And what the? That doesn't make sense to say you would go with his word...he was saying that you were scum for the way you reacted...so what exactly are you saying? The more you defend yourself the more it seems like you're just trying to win an argument, and pulling up anything to explain your actions.

Scum want to find and kill PRs. Not that I'm egotistical or anything (okay, I am), but I'd like to think I'm one of the best players on the site at deducing who does and who doesn't have PRs from something like that. And considering that in Phlight's next-to-last post before they got hammered, they said that at least two of a three-player set that included our two masons and myself was scum, I'd absolutely leave them alive to try to get at least one town-driven mislynch.

But the whole scenario of you going along with the hypoclaim is ridiculous because in everyones eyes at that point he was basically saying he had proof you were scum, I cannot imagine that anyone as scum would ignore that and go along with the hypoclaim.

I can't tell what you're trying to say here. I "thought about the Phlight hypoclaiming thing" after... what?

I'm thinking that at some time down the track after the whole hypoclaiming thing you may have thought back on it and thought "that would be a good counterargument to use in case someone accuses me of rolefishing."

Basically the thing I have a problem with is instead of explaining the accused mason rolefishing you defended it with something completely unrelated saying that if you really wanted to rolefish you could have done it with the hypoclaiming. That's like someone defending a murder by saying well if they really wanted to murder someone they could have done it some other time but they didn't. That's a terrible defence imho, and one that I think scum would use when they have no way of defending the initial action.

[totallynotmafia]

Sorry Trumpet but I don't really care about your other games, I haven't been playing for long enough to know if metagaming works, my opinion at the moment is that you can just pull up any old game where you were town to give an example where you've acted the same way...and considering as scum you'd be trying to act as town as possible it just doesn't hold any value for me.

When I asked for the name of the other mason, I genuinely believed it would be pro-town to have that information out there.

Why the need for the qualifier "genuinely" in there? I believe you now, I think you're scum and you "genuinely" thought it would benefit town for the other mason to claim and that's why you brought it up - to look town. Perhaps I'm picking up too much on semantics but in my second newbie game where I was scum (until I had to replace out) I was accused of a scum-slip which wasn't actually a scum-slip at all it was just mis-interpreted and I felt like saying "I genuinely meant..." but I thought the word "genuinely" would give me away.

I also fail to see how speculating on the setup makes someone scum, even if you think it's counterproductive that doesn't necessarily mean they are scum. Reading back over your case on Peanutman it looks like you've really stretched to make a townie look like scum (or possibly really stretched to bus a scumbuddy) as none of it looks like genuine scum-hunting, rather it looks more like trying as hard as possible to put a case on someone because you're on the chopping block.

I will be very surprised if you're town.

Vote: Trumpet of Doom

And I'm pretty sure I have no choice but to do this so:

Dear God,

God Bless little Macavity, and keep him safe and Locked,
Although his name confuses me like wearing sandals with socks.
God Bless little peanutman and keep him always salted,
God Bless little SC too, for against DS we revolted.
God Bless little lobstermania, and God Bless his mum,
God Bless little Trumpet though I think he's lying scum!
God Bless Mum and Dad and Gran and Sis and Bro and Pop,
But I ask Dear God - nay beg of you - please make this madness stop!

Amen.

Night-night!

[totallynotmafia]

DocPotter, what do you mean it's the wrong format, could you explain it more?

Also joke claiming like that just makes me suspicious of you.

[totallynotmafia]

1) Macavity, striking people is scummy to me, it seems like an excuse to vote someone after three (which could be fairly trivial) reasons instead of building a case on someone. The way you said "and that's strike 1" implied that strike 2 and 3 were not far off, no matter what Doc said.

2) I really don't think the titles of the book are valid reasons to think someone is scum. Doc, once you've read through the whole thread please give reasons other that the book titles on who you think is scum. I really don't like the fact you said the title is enough to vote Macavity.

3) Also Doc, what do you mean by king making? And don't worry we certainly haven't lost yet (if you are actually town), and if all goes to plan we should be okay tomorrow.

4) It doesn't worry me at all, but why do people keep calling me TNF? Thought it was worth mentioning because Peanutman was doing it as well

[totallynotmafia]

Sam the firehouse cat is the only book title to mention a building.

BWAH HA HA! I live in a building!

lol, yeah that was terrible reason.

I'd really like to hear what Trumpet thinks about all this.

[totallynotmafia]

Bugger! Congrats Peanutman and Macavity, I was so torn on who was scum I ended up drawing Trumpet's name out of a hat, I thought I had a 2/3 chance of hitting scum when really it was only 1/3 because Peanutman was bulletproof. Regardless of pulling the name out of the hat my head was still saying that Trumpet was scum, and because of Peanut's actions while we were waiting for the mason claim I was pretty sure they were scumbuddies. In hindsight I wish I had stuck with my initial thinking that scum wouldn't bus when they were so close to winning meaning that there would be town amongst Peanut and Trumpet, and thus Macavity would be the safest bet as scum. Actually though in the end Peanut pursuing lobster instead of trumpet looked like distancing to me, so well done on the Peanut.

I had a whole gambit planned where I was going to admit I was the SK the next day and that because I said my prayers the day before I was now a vanilla townie just to make sure the remaining townie wouldn't vote for me in lylo. I thought I pretty much had the game in the bag as long as I hit scum last night but that's because I hadn't even considered that scum might be bulletproof...I'm not sure how that would have gone down in lylo.

It's pretty funny because I knew that speculating on people's stories was useless when I began it because I had received a fakeclaim too - little cottontail - but I brought it up hoping that a townie would point out that scum often receive fakeclaims, and that they would hopefully think "well SK's usually receive fakeclaims too so if he was the SK he would know that speculating on people's stories is stupid so maybe he isn't the SK". I'm really surprised nobody brought up the possibility of the mod giving out fakeclaims.

Anyway, well done scum and thanks RBT for modding. I think town screwed themselves over a bit by constantly acting so scummy...all my votes throughout the game were genuinely thinking that that person had a high possibility of being scum. This is my second game and it's taught me a lot, namely that in future scum-hunting I should do a Costanza and go with the opposite of my instincts.

[totallynotmafia]

Gah, TNM, I decided to not hide Night 1 because I guessed I wouldn't seem pro-town enough to kill off. Didn't even consider an SK.

You were pretty much doomed from the start because I was nervous about playing two games with you at the same time, plus you were on my wagon so if you flipped scum that would reduce suspicion on me, and also from your limited posts I thought you may be a cop so yeah there were just too many reasons to shoot you.

By the way, you totally caught me

Yeah, too bad I have an uncanny knack for finding excuses for mafia but pursue town relentlessly until the bitter end!

TNM's claim surprised me, because I would have figured that he was obviously an SK for his N1 kill. Lynching him D2 would have bought the town another day. Same would be true of killing scum N3.

Yeah I was really debating claiming vig or just plain townie (at one stage I really wanted to claim Sk and go BWAHAHAHA THERES NOTHING YOU CAN DO ABOUT IT!) but seeing as I had a decent amount of suspicion on me from my quick change to PJ (which I posted while drunk btw, I couldn't use that excuse in game though because I had taken the time to spell everything correctly) I figured vig was the best claim seeing as that way nobody could lynch me and I could hopefully NK my way to victory.