888: X-COM TFTD Mafia: Over!

[Edward Smilie]

RVS is not something that bad.

as long as you take the positive things and think...

i personally think dice = a reason to hide your vote reason.

vote Jaime Marcelle

[Edward Smilie]

basically a dice roll reason just the same like other crap reason to hide your real reason

but whether it is scummy or not is based on the case.

since we are on RVS, i still can get it away.

i say that coz if you are scum, you know who is the town i see some case where scum just use crap reason to vote your fellow scum or town

but most of them don't go to any real bandwagon.

to all : i was in another game and one of the player suggested the other player vote for himself.

in this case, i want the you guys to vote me..

what do you think if i say you guys scum if don't follow my plan?

[Edward Smilie]

just a thought and would like to hear your oppinion.

EBWOP : what do you think if i say you guys look scummier if you don't follow my plan compared to the one who vote me?

[Edward Smilie]

note to all ppl:

what i said before not actually a plan.

just something I want to know to start a discussion since 3 days ago I see low activities in the game

I just ask mod to replace me

my comp can't get fixed for some times and I can't login like usual again

I am really sorry...

good luck to all player/...

[Edward Smilie]

To all: the following are my thoughts on d1. I will post a summary at the bottom to alleviate the Tl/dr ness.

The first Jaime wagon I approve. Dicevoting = antitown.

By having someone pick something that's not there and start an argument about it, like in every game.

How is anyone going to pick something that's 'not there' if it's

verifiably

not there?

. It's just another random vote thats in reality not any more random then any other. In fact, how do

you know no one else voted on random.com or something but just wouldn't tell any of us? So no, I do not feel it is anti-town

or policy lynch worthy.

Also, how is this question helpful to the town?

You don't know people didn't dicerandom vote secretly. In fact, as scum i usually do. But to make it clear your vote is

100% random means there can't be anything else behind it. For example, masons will not vote for their partners, even

'randomly.' So when you roll a die in thread, it indicates that there is no-one in the game for whom you have reason to

avoid voting. If a random vote is truly random, and demonstrably so, it can have no effect on the game. Well, apart from

the fact that people jump on you for it, which ironically moves the game on a ton.

Well I doubt there would be no discussion... Scummy people get voted. Simple as that. ?

How can anyone who votes truly randomly be scummy or not, if the very act isn't scummy?

Andrew's post 32 contains a contradiction. Namely, he feels it 'isn't scummy' but does allow people to 'hide behind the

dice.' In other words, that dice voting allows the player to avoid making decisions, which is what the town needs to move

forward. Preventing the town doing what it needs to do = scummy.

/comfirm in.

LEON. Are you saying that people think they know who is scummy before they first post? and that every vote has good logical

reasons this early in the game? Thus you are impling that we are all supper cops have esp, and never vote in RV. RVS is to

start an early band wagon not to toss real votes on scummers around. However the scum will most likly not vote for one of

their buddys, but other then that rvs votes are as good as that.

Bleeping hell, this post is the strawman to end all strawmen.

You guys are going in circles. Leon is saying that there is some sort of reason for any vote someone

places, even if that reason is subconscious, and

maybe

you can draw something from that.

Jaime's point is equally valid, that the vast majority of the time judging a player based on an RV is stupid.

This post makes me think it's somewhat more likely that one or other is his scumbuddy.

Claude's 56 is filler.

Emile's 57 is an old favorite- a vote that calls for

other

people to 'start scumhunting' but doesn't say who emile

thinks is scum. (At least he says who he thinks is town, which is a start). Also- Leon, at least, appeared to be

scumhunting already.

Igor's post afterward is even worse.

start a wagon like in most games... That most of the time gets the game ball rolling.

Seriously, what did you think the votes on Jaime were? A bicycle?

Okay, it's later. Here's some more:

It was close between two people....while I hate twilight and new moon references, and wish to vote for the

one who made them, someone else deserves my vote more:

vote:Jaime Marcelle

For using a dice to determine your RVS vote to avoid responsibility for your actions.

Dice = anti-town

Otto was the one who started the whole dice deal. While you could make the argument that it was just as random as the other

votes, he still gains some scum points.

WTF? That was the most protown vote made to date! How in God's name can you say it causes someone to GAIN scum points?

Further in the same post, how is trying to spark discussion on an in-game issue scummy?

Stuart is awesome.

In 76, Emile then hedges like a mofo.

Sry I wasn't on much yesterday but I'm really busy so i have to make this post short.

vote Emile Buchard

Sigh... Please explain your votes before you put them on please. Why are you voting stuart? Smells like scum is not a good excuse. I have no idea what the heck you are doing.
.

There's nothing wrong with not explaining your vote straightaway.

I would think that the time for unexplained and baseless voting has passed.

Vote: Stuart Whyte

*SIGH*

Why the hell are people assuming that because a poster doesn't give a reason, he doesn't HAVE one?

I comepletely agree with Tracy. I will probably be voting for Stuart pretty soon because of his random vote out of the RVS and his horrible horrible reasoning. Stuart- How does he "Smell like scum"? However, before I put a (serious) vote on anyone I want to hear more about Edwards plan.

IDIOT. (Or scum, I'm not sure yet- but you've been wrong on every issue). Why would you assume it's random? It clearly
isn't.

Top suspects so far- Spencer, Jaime and Emile, easily. Stuart is totally town.

Okay, I've re-read, and the people who seemed to try and further the discussion without furthering the game are, in no particular order:

Stuart Whyte

So, so wrong.

And, oh look, the dead scum decides to jump this wagon. How utterly unsurprising.

Yeah, all the reasons Igor cites in 104 are crap.

LOl, I just went back to the first post and noticed Stuart ends up getting lynched off this. I mean, WTF? He was the most protown player.

Also, people are deliberatelt misreprensenting the earlier version of me.

He asked '

If I did this, how would you react?

' To which the possible answers would be, a) I'd go along with the plan b) I'd think you an idiot or c) I'd think you're scum. Which of these positions someone took would be interesting. He didn't actually SAY 'vote me please.' A lot of people said 'this is akin to selfvoting' without thinking why selfvoting can be scummy in the first place.

That post was just to show him how rediculous it was to not explain his vote. I wasn't trying to rolefish. in fact, I think the only way that could truely be considered rolefishing is if he actually is a secret daycop.

How the fuck does that work? Fishing to find out if someone has a role is scummy if he does have it, but not if he doesn't?

Also, I will put this in caps for the hard of thinking:

NOT EXPLAINING YOUR VOTE DOES NOT MEAN YOU DON'T HAVE A REASON. THERE ARE PLENTIFUL PROTOWN REASONS FOR NOT EXPLAINING THINGS, FOR INSTANCE, YOU WANT TO SEE WHO SEES WHAT YOU SEE. YOU WANT TO SEE IF PEOPLE WILL BLINDLY FOLLOW YOU. PERHAPS YOU WANT TO SEE IF THE VOTEE GIVES THEMSELVES AWAY BY SAYING 'WHY ARE YOU VOTING ME? IS IT ZOR, YOU WANT TO SEE WHO WILL SCUMMILY CLAIM THAT NOT GIVING REASONS IS SCUMMY.

Stuart posted his vote in response to a particular post from Emile, that I also thought was very scummy. However, no one actually bothered to look at that, and think about why someone might find it scummy. They just stupidly assumed he had no reason just because he didn't give one.

Sorry for not posting guys. Nasty weekend. Anyway, right now, I think we could do a lot worse for a Stuart lynch. His play his flat out anti-town, whether he's scum or not. Even if he does filp town, having him dead will certainly help us down the road.

vote: Stuart

This was simply untrue. Whyte was not antitown in any way. He was clearly a better player than all of Schulz, Marcelle, Buchard, and Remmington. Unfortunately, this game seems to have a critical mass of stupidity to ally with the scum.

162 would be rolefishing, if not made by a dead cop.

Bullet proof? Ok, 1) I don't buy that at all.

@Those who have played X-Com is there some invincible hero? I doubt it.

Nope, but the amount of armor characters have varies enormously. Some have none, some have massive power suits that let them take multiple shots and survive.

Spencer is coming across as more of a sincere but wrong type than Emile is.

. In this case, why on earth didn't you just invent a reason for calling Emile scum? A vote with hidden reasons and the refusal to explain is always dangerous to the voter and to his team.

This makes me feel actually ill.




____________________________________________________

To end of day one summmary:

Whyte was in the right on virtually everything. Those opposing him were a mix of idiot and scum. Leon is my best town read, Emile probs top for scum.

___________________________________________________

[Edward Smilie]

IDIOT. (Or scum, I'm not sure yet- but you've been wrong on every issue). Why would you assume it's random? It clearly
isn't.

The point of that was not weather it was random or not. The point behing that post was because of his baseless vote.

You're REALLY splitting hairs now. I said you assumed it was 'random.' You're saying I'm wrong because you weren't saying it was 'random' you were saying it was 'baseless.' The two are synonymous- you were accusing him of voting without a reason, no?

Not only that, but you USED the word 'random' to describe Stuart's vote, and said you were going to vote him over it:

will probably be voting for Stuart pretty soon because of his random vote out of the RVS

Contradict yourself much?

How the fuck does that work? Fishing to find out if someone has a role is scummy if he does have it, but not if he doesn't?

Someone wasn't reading my post... I wasn't rolefishing. I never said it wasn't scummy if he didn't have that role, I was using a rediculous role as an example.[/quote]

Uh, I read it just fine, thanks. You said:

I wasn't trying to rolefish. in fact, I think the only way that could truely be considered rolefishing is if he actually is a secret daycop.

The only way it could be considered rolefishing is if he actually was a daycop. That's what you said. Now, clearly a person who is rolefishing doesn't know whether the other player has that role in the first place. My point is that whether or not someone is rolefishing clearly isn't dependent on whether the person being fished (or not) actually has the role that may or may not being fished for.

Yet none of the reasons you gave work if he kept his vote on all day with no explanation even when he was at L-1 and would definately die if he didn't...

Well, yeah. But if you're getting attacked over something you're doing that you think is good and protown, it's human nature to dig your heels in over it. The 'fuck you guys, i'm protown, this is protown, and if you're dumb enough to lynch me over it, you get what you deserve' attitude. He was standing on principle. Standing on principle at the expense of risking lynch is townish- he clearly wasn't playing to survive. I don't think it was smart, but it wasn't scummy either.

Anyway, just to point something out: If Edward is scum I can easily see him using this post to protect himself "After rereading I think Stuart is pro-town" can be used to get town points for saying a confirmed townie was acting townish (especially since a lot of people thought he was scummy)

Well, of course a lot of people 'thought' he was acting scummy. I read him as hugely protown, and i'm not going to shy away from sharing that because someone might try to smear me over it. It would be a rather stupid scum to think he could get protown points by pointing out the townieness of an already dead town player, i think.

[Edward Smilie]

Is your reason for voting Leon just his alleged lack of contents?

Pretty much. But the point of my vote is to try and find scummy people. And yes Leon it is easy for me to back out on it...

You're REALLY splitting hairs now. I said you assumed it was 'random.' You're saying I'm wrong because you weren't saying it was 'random' you were saying it was 'baseless.' The two are synonymous- you were accusing him of voting without a reason, no?

The only way it could be considered rolefishing is if he actually was a daycop. That's what you said. Now, clearly a person who is rolefishing doesn't know whether the other player has that role in the first place. My point is that whether or not someone is rolefishing clearly isn't dependent on whether the person being fished (or not) actually has the role that may or may not being fished for.

Oh snap. I guess I wasn't reading my own post. My bad . That was bad logic on my part but still, the main reason of why I was "Rolefishing" was to show him how redicious he was acting.

Well, yeah. But if you're getting attacked over something you're doing that you think is good and protown, it's human nature to dig your heels in over it. The 'fuck you guys, i'm protown, this is protown, and if you're dumb enough to lynch me over it, you get what you deserve' attitude. He was standing on principle. Standing on principle at the expense of risking lynch is townish- he clearly wasn't playing to survive. I don't think it was smart, but it wasn't scummy either.

Here's the thing. He never even statedwhy he couldn't tell us the reason behind the vote. that just confuses people and doesn't contibute anything to the game. While this may have been confirmed as just him not being smart now. It was a very scummy play at the time.

I tend to want to vote edward to get him out of the way. We had some good town players talking about real issues and then we get this joker around. didn't he get replaced out...

I think this is the replacement. Didn't you read the mods latest post?

Also, I'm probably going to reread Emile and Leon in iso sometime in the near future and post what I find.

[Edward Smilie]

Oh crap, the long post I was writing got lost when my net connection went down. Dammit.

To precis: @Jaime, I don't think he was acting ridiculously. I think I would have voted without explanation there too. That vote came after a particular post of Emile's that was very scummy (go look it up). The natural reaction would be to think it was in response to that. He had a very good point in that all the people who said he was voting 'without reasons' just because he didn't share them were attacking him with craplogic.

@Igor: I'd say I've talked more about 'real issues' since i replaced in than you have. Any particular reason you see the need to call me a 'joker?'

[Edward Smilie]

Edward, do you realize how anti-town not explaining reasons are? Seriously, he flat-out refused to give any sort of reason what so ever. That is A1 anti-town play.

No, no it isn't. I would take a player like Fritzler, BabyJesus or JDodge who has the confidence to vote without needing to spell out everything they're thinking every day of the week over the newb who feels the need to justify every little detail of their argument.

The way the game moves is that you state your reasons for a vote and then other people debate those reasons. How are we supposed to validate his case if it's just "because he smells scummy"?

And this is precisely it. If other players are playing decently, they will take a look at the player being voted, and try to figure out why the vote was made. It encourages other players to think about the game more, in other words, which helps the town.

And Edward, how are we supposed to

know

he has a reason if he didn't tell us his reason. Also, please refrain from directing obscenities at other players--it ruins the spirit of the game.

Criticizing someone's civility is the resort of someone who's losing the argument. Also, I haven't sworn at anyone.

Also, you said

Whyte was in the right on virtually everything.

Whyte said that vote reasons were "anti-town", so using deductive reasoning, if Whyte was right on everything, then he was right when he said that vote reasons were "anti-town", no? Yet you gave reasons for suspecting other people. The word for that is "contradiction".

Note the word 'virtually.' I would not go so far as to say that it is never a good idea to make a case. But he is correct in that dicerandom voting is antitown, he is correct in that you were a good target for a vote at that point, and he is correct in that not giving reasons is not scummy. That's 'virtually everything' at least as far as this game is concerned.

I think I would have voted without explanation there too.

Now how the hell can you say that you would have voted without explanation as well if you don't know why Whyte voted without explanation or even if he had an explanation to begin with. Crap logic.

???

What I'm saying is, if i were in the game at the time, i would have voted you at that juncture on the basis of your post 70, which was really scummy, and i wouldn't have explained it straight away either.

Btw what was scummy about 70:

You called Otto and Leon scummy for attacking Jaime over his dice vote. Now, dice voting is antitown, for the reasons i and others have given earlier in the thread (and the recent MD poll agreed by 2-1, so it's a majority opinion but not an uncontroverted one). It's a post that cannot possibly move the game forward. Also, you call Leon scummy for 'asking questions and furthering the discussion' which is like the opposite of scummy. Voting people for protown things = scummy.

Edward, I think you need a referesher on what scummy is. Being scummy is something that either a. helps scum more than town or b. hurts town more than scum (Well, there are some conditions that break this but whatev). Stuart fell right under letter b. He hurt town a lot by not telling us what he was thinking and he didn't hurt the scum at all.

Thankyou for your patronizing tone. I agree with the definition entirely, but I absolutely disagree 100% that Stuart hurt the town by not explaining his vote.

In the end, who you vote for and when is far more relevant than what you say when you're doing it. Not explaining makes people think a bit more, and takes them out of their comfort zone. Both of these are protown goals.

In addition, it may have been a gut vote, and explaining gut votes is kinda pointless. He did admittedly hurt the town by getting lynched when he could have avoided it by not standing on principle, but angry players do silly things sometimes.

Alright, I guess I can agree with you that Emiles post was scummy but how do you know that that was the reason for his vote?

Well, I don't know, but I can be pretty sure. I mean, imagine you see someone commit a crime. Then you see them getting arrested. It's likely the two are related, isn't it? Emile makes a scummy post, and immediately Stuart votes him.

If that post was the main reason he voted Emile don't you think he would tell us that instead of hide it all day? How hard would it be for him for tell us that that post was the reason for voting him. Also, you say that there are plenty of reasons someone would hide their vote (they want to see who would follow them, want to see what their reaction is etc.) yet now you say it is because of this post which has nothing to do with the reasons stated.

This is the thing- if he were scum, what does he stand to gain from standing on principle? That's what i mean by a 'fuck you guys' attitude. He believes 100% that not giving reasons is not scummy, and he will refuse to be bullied into it. I think a townie is far more likely to stand by a game theory position that is bringing him heat than a scum is. When town interrogates someone, they're usually looking for sincerity. Stuart came across as very sincere in his belief that not revealing his reasons was the best play for town. Whereas y'all went 'He disagrees with me on game theory! SCUM!'

Also, you seem to have your wires crossed. I said I thought

he made the vote

because of Emile's post. I think he

declined to explain it

because he believed it was the more protown way of making the vote.

Anyway, we're not going to get anywhere by talking about wether Stuart was townie or scummy.

It's relevant, because it impacts on how many scum were on his wagon. If the Stuart wagon was, as you contend, essentially reasonable, then reasonable townies would support it, and so Gerhard might be the only scum on it. If it is, as I believe, a crock, then it's more likely to have been pushed with heavy scum involvement, and have another scum or perhaps two on it. It looked from my pov like a wagon that KNEW it was wrong at the time.

Personally, I think the most likely split is two on, one off, so we're looking for one scum from each half of the game. I've already indicated that, based on what I read day one, Emile was suspect no1: I need to do more digging on those off-wagon.

[Edward Smilie]

Gerhard Krause:1 (Leon)
Stuart Whyte:6 (Igor, Gerhard, Jaime, Emile, Claude, Andrew, Otto)
Emile Buchard:2 (Stuart, Tracey)
Leon Dreyfus:1 (Spencer)

Not Voting:1 (Orski)

Noting end of d1 vote count. Some things strike me here:


1) Is Leon scum bussing his partner while there's no chance of him actually swinging, or is he genuinely gunning for him? I'm leaning the latter.
2) Both of those voting Emile were town, and are now dead. Stuart, of course, was run up in response to voting emile. In addition, he attacked Otto, who is town, and now dead, and defended dead scum Gerhard.
3) Of those off the wagon, I think Spencer looks worst.

However, if he does flip town we need to be careful not to let the people off the wagon off the hook, since at this point I think that that would be an even easier place for scum to hide.

Note scum on wagon directing attention away from wagon.

I think gerhard might (repeat might) be scum on the wagon from a very mild read, that is his fishing early on and mid way. Not good for a vote yet.

A very mealy mouthed bit of attack on Gerhard, could well be distancing. Especially since we hadn't seen the flip yet, and Igor seemed to think Stuart was scum, given that he was voting him.

Jaime's willingness to appraise people differently based on the flip seems townish.

296 makes it really seem that Jaime is just a n00b who hasn't even considered that there could be an argument for not providing reasons with one's vote.

Igor tries to blanket-absolve everyone on the wagon, including himself, (and poss. buddies?) except for the known town Otto, pinning the blame on Stuart himself. If Igor = scum, more likely all three scum were on wagon.

I don't understand why people think his claim was 'crazy' or pointless. He was at l-1, you claim honestly there.

Andrew is town. No, I won't elaborate.

Also, to snyone that knows about XCOM (since I don't know to much abot it) are there multiple alien races and if so are they at war with each other or something (if there aren't multiple alien races the kill is probably more likely to be a vig kill then an SK kill).

Please don't speculate about what town power roles might be out there. It's antitown.

Andrew's points vs Emile are good.

Igor with the antitown speculation as well.

Also, Gerhard seemed to be a VERY opportunistic scum: voting both Edward and Stuart when they were the most scummy people. He also attacked Orski (Edward's replacement) which leads me to beleive that whoever the replacement is for Orski is town.

Just to remind Jaime (and everyone else) of this.

Claude is giving me a middle-of-the-pack scum vibe.

Leon's 346 is good, an argument i've seen town use many, many times.


So:

On the wagon- most likely scum Emile, Igor. Claude is a possibility on the middle-of-pack thing.

Off the wagon: Spencer, since I know I'm not scum, Leon looks very town, and the others are dead.

I think I want to lynch on-the-wagon at the moment as I'd put my life on there being scum in the three listed, and possibly more than one.

Vote: Emile

[Edward Smilie]

2) Ok Edward, I would not vote you for external reasons or for reasons depending on the behavior of Ed I and Ed II, but I do not like the way you put me as a third possible FoS just because I included you in my list. You are free to FoS me whenever you want and however you like, but you want to give some more reason than a counter-FoS.

Erm, your listing me on some list or other has nothing to do with you being my third most likely suspect on the Stuart wagon. Read the reason I actually gave- that you give me the impression of 'middle of the pack' scum. It wasn't a counter-FOS.

Also, I'm sorry, but i will never agree to the condition of not calling someone an idiot if the stupidity of the argument merits it. I would never play on a site or with a mod that puts that kind of unreasonable restriction on players expressing themselves. Assuming someone has no reason because they don't share one is simply idiocy. It is. I don't see how a rational adult without any kind of agenda can reasonably conclude that.

For crying out loud, 'Village Idiot' is a well known piece of mafia terminology.



I am now reducing my options to Emile, Jamie and perhaps (PERHAPS) Igor. I believe we have a L-3 situation right now, so I am gonna place my vote as I did for Stuart, and hope it doesn't turn into a disaster again.

Vote: Emile

.[/quote]

[Edward Smilie]

sorry, English is my second language and I must have turned really stupid these days... I misunderstood your post, and I would like to ask you, for future reference, what a middle-of-the-pack mafia is. I am not familiar with the word.

By middle of the pack scum, I'm referring to a phenomenon i've noticed, where the scum are neither the people who are being aggressive, forcefully pushing cases, nor the people who are doing the strange or erratic things that often result in early lynches. They tend to be people who blend into the crowd- playing the cautious townie, if you will. Being polite, measured, and not distinctive in any way. That's the impression i get of you. You post a lot, but you don't say very much- but not to the extent when your active lurking would stick out.

[Edward Smilie]

That's technically not true, Igor. You were the first to vote- today. Andrew and Spencer both voted Emile yesterday.

Andrew- i see being patronizing as worse. You can't really patronize in the heat of the moment.

[Edward Smilie]

Criticizing someone's civility is the resort of someone who's losing the argument. Also, I haven't sworn at anyone.

Which is exactly why you should stop calling people "idiots".

Get a dictionary. Look up 'civility.'

What I'm saying is that people complaining about how I'm being 'rude' have lost the argument. Whether I'm rude or not has no bearing on whether I'm right. Have you never played mafia, seen a succession of REALLY BAD votes, and thought, 'What the heck are you guys on? This wagon is terrible!'

Now, dice voting is antitown, for the reasons i and others have given earlier in the thread (and the recent MD poll agreed by 2-1, so it's a majority opinion but not an uncontroverted one).

So if it isn't incontroverted issue, why are you making it such a big deal? Seriously, die or no die, does it really matter? The answer, is no, so long as it really is a die. Since we cannot verify this, then the case cannot really be proven either way--null point.

Yes, it does matter, and I've explained why earlier. Most people think that dice voting is antitown. They happen to be right. The dice vote was the scummiest thing anyone had done to that point, and pressuring people who do antitown or scummy things is what town should be doing, no?

I think I would have voted without explanation there too.

Now how the hell can you say that you would have voted without explanation as well if you don't know why Whyte voted without explanation or even if he had an explanation to begin with. Crap logic.

Is proven by:

Alright, I guess I can agree with you that Emiles post was scummy but how do you know that that was the reason for his vote?

Well, I don't know...

Need I say more?

No, you need to say less.

1) You have wilfully distorted what I said there by leaving out the rest of the argument. I don't

know

: I can reasonably enough assume that it had something to do with the scummy post it followed, because, well, that's what votes usually do. It may have been that he thought Emile's post was scummy for a different reason to mine, but it doesn't really matter. The point, as I've suggested many a time, is that it's completely unreasonable to believe that an unexplained vote is one which doesn't HAVE a reason behind it.

2) Whether I know for sure why Stuart voted HAS NO RELEVANCE WHATSOEVER to whether I would have done the same thing. I have stated that, if i were in the game at the time, and had the opportunity to make post 71, it would have been an unexplained vote for Emile.

@Igor: Call it craplogic all you want, but, over all the games where I've played as town, that tends to be where decent scum players are most often found. They don't want to stand out; they also don't want to be seen

trying

not to stand out.

Your counterexample doesn't work, logically: I didn't say 'The people in the middle of WAGONS are most likely to be scum.' If you had come out all guns blazing on Emile, and expended a ton of energy on wagoning him, and brought a ton of attention to yourself in doing so, then I might conclude you're more likely town because of it.

[Edward Smilie]

A few thoughts.

1. I don't like the way Emile is tossing FoSes around like confetti, and not committing to a vote. It may be a playstyle thing, but i see no reason for any player not to have their vote on their top suspect.

2. The 'I am town, you will be sorry if you lynch me' thing doesn't normally impress me any, but... I dunno, I'm getting a sense of frustration off Igor that normally comes from townies who think they're being misrepresented. I mean, he did misrepresent my position totally, but that might just be an issue of reading comprehension/ misunderstanding it than deliberately strawmanning.

3. The existence of the counterwagon, to me, implies that Emile and Igor are not BOTH scum.

4. Claude jumped third on the Emile wagon, then turned around about half a page later and jumped third on Igor. He was fourth on Stuart. There's a definite 'whichever way the wind is blowing' feeling I'm getting from him.

[Edward Smilie]

A few thoughts.

1. I don't like the way Emile is tossing FoSes around like confetti, and not committing to a vote. It may be a playstyle thing, but i see no reason for any player not to have their vote on their top suspect.

2. The 'I am town, you will be sorry if you lynch me' thing doesn't normally impress me any, but... I dunno, I'm getting a sense of frustration off Igor that normally comes from townies who think they're being misrepresented. I mean, he did misrepresent my position totally, but that might just be an issue of reading comprehension/ misunderstanding it than deliberately strawmanning.

3. The existence of the counterwagon, to me, implies that Emile and Igor are not BOTH scum.

4. Claude jumped third on the Emile wagon, then turned around about half a page later and jumped third on Igor. He was fourth on Stuart. There's a definite 'whichever way the wind is blowing' feeling I'm getting from him.

[Edward Smilie]

A few thoughts.

1. I don't like the way Emile is tossing FoSes around like confetti, and not committing to a vote. It may be a playstyle thing, but i see no reason for any player not to have their vote on their top suspect.

2. The 'I am town, you will be sorry if you lynch me' thing doesn't normally impress me any, but... I dunno, I'm getting a sense of frustration off Igor that normally comes from townies who think they're being misrepresented. I mean, he did misrepresent my position totally, but that might just be an issue of reading comprehension/ misunderstanding it than deliberately strawmanning.

3. The existence of the counterwagon, to me, implies that Emile and Igor are not BOTH scum.

4. Claude jumped third on the Emile wagon, then turned around about half a page later and jumped third on Igor. He was fourth on Stuart. There's a definite 'whichever way the wind is blowing' feeling I'm getting from him.

[Edward Smilie]

2. The 'I am town, you will be sorry if you lynch me' thing doesn't normally impress me any, but... I dunno, I'm getting a sense of frustration off Igor that normally comes from townies who think they're being misrepresented.

I don't know, I usually see this kind of act as a scumtell or, at best, anti-town. Defend yourself, don't just tell us you're a townie and that we're making a mistake. Is there anything specifically that you can cite about Igor as townie frustration?

Well, it's kinda anti-own alignment. I can't point out any specific word or phrase, it's the tone of his post. Town and scum self-destructing tend to do so in different ways- town tend to lash out indiscriminately, whereas scum are more... measured- they tend to direct their anger at their partners, or at a specific townie who they think is MoSing them.

[Edward Smilie]

Can you explain a bit more about this 'gambit' you pulled? What precisely was the gambit, what reaction did you expect, and what would this have told you about anyone's alignment?

As far as I can make out, what you did is made a non-sequitur argument: namely that because I felt scum often hid in that middle group of players who neither stand out as pro nor antitown, then because your vote was on Emile before anyone else's today, you must be town.

Which, to me, is kinda like arguing that it is raining, therefore Taco Bell provides good mexican food at reasonable prices. The two just don't seem related at all.

[Edward Smilie]

Jaime Marcelle wrote:
Edward wrote:
2. The 'I am town, you will be sorry if you lynch me' thing doesn't normally impress me any, but... I dunno, I'm getting a sense of frustration off Igor that normally comes from townies who think they're being misrepresented.


This is incorrect. Saying "I am town and you will lose if you lynch me" is anti-town. it is used to appeal to peoples fear like "Omg, what if he really is town". At best this is a null-tell.


Well, presumably any reasonable townie would be aware of the pitfalls of lynching town.

But more to the point, you're playing like an autistic hyperlogician. Yes, there is the possibility of it being an AtE. However:

This isn't a game of adding up pro and antitown things people do, and lynching whoever has the greatest negative outcome. Whilst certain things, like hardcore lurking, do require policy lynching, in the most part scumhunting is a matter of pyschological profiling. Empathizing, and trying to think 'why did they do that?' And Igor's actions give me the impression of a frustrated townie, rather than a flailing scum.

Do bear in mind this is a Deep South game: so scum can presumably scumtalk throughout. A scum therefore has his partner on hand to advise throughout the game, and would be able to get advice, and support, and so on from him/her at all times. They often also choose to run pretty much every attack they make past the gallery, to ensure it doesn't have a massive gaping flaw in it that will make that player look really scummy and endanger them.

If a scum in this setup pulls self-destruction/ appeal to emotion, it's likely to be a deliberate tactic- and it makes no sense to use it as a deliberate tactic when there's a strong alternative wagon. In fact, all Igor needs to do is say nothing particularly noteworthy, and Emile gets lynched here.

Igor appeared to self-destruct out of nowhere. This doesn't feel like a deliberate scum manipulation to me, as I said before, self-destructing VI scum tend to lash out at specific people, and not generally like Igor has, and therefore i think he's more likely town.

Same deal with Stuart. You completely failed to grasp that him not sharing his reason even when the alternative was getting lynched was not something that could possibly be advantageous for scum.

Also, I'm not keen to see emile wriggle off the hook again.
____________________
Short version: Yes, 'I'm town and you'll be sorry if you lynch me' CAN be scum appealing to emotion, but I don't think it is here.

[Edward Smilie]

@Emile: If a protown player sees another player make a compelling case against a third party, what should he do?

[Edward Smilie]

The problem with the 'everyone did it' excuse is that everyone can use it. Someone's scum.

I would like everyone else voting Emile (or for that matter, Igor) to answer this: Who is your best guess for that player's partner?

One thing that's giving me slight pause regarding Emile is my own difficulty in answering this.

[Edward Smilie]

@ Jaime- the bigger thing, I think, about Igor's post is that he didn't actually do anything to get Gerhard lynched, so it's easily possible it could be harmless distancing. He dropped it PDQ when the chance to wagon Otto instead showed up.

Going after scum early in a day, then wagoning to lynch (or rather, self-destruction to avoid it) a town player makes you more, not less, likely to be scum. Also note: Igor must have been professing to believe Stuart scum, since he was voting him, but suggested Gerhard as scum on the wagon before the flip.

Actually, @Igor, I don't think we've ever heard a proper explanation of that one.

[Edward Smilie]

@Emile: If a protown player sees another player make a compelling case against a third party, what should he do?

Depends on how compelling the said case is.

Oh, COME ON! This is just a blatant dodge. I've said it's compelling. IE, you believe it correct.

emmy have you noted that you have only voted for town players thus far? I voted for ger way back in the day.

You are assuming that you are town yourself, something that I highly doubt. [/quote]

No, he's talking about your perfect past record of attacking all the dead town, and defending the dead scum.

Otto suicided.

To avoid an inevitable lynch.

I would like everyone else voting Emile (or for that matter, Igor) to answer this: Who is your best guess for that player's partner?

I wouldn't know. From what i've seen he hasn't been saying anyone else is solidly town (the best I think he's said was that some people were leaning town) and I don't think there's anyone that thinks he's town.

OH. MY. GOD.

Is this seriously all, or even the main thing, you look for when looking for partners?

[Edward Smilie]

@Edward:

this is important:

in post 504 you imply once again that scum knew Gerhard's identity and killed him anyway? Or you think some other player killed him? Please articulate your answer: discussion has been way too elusive on this point, imo.

Uh, no, clearly I did not imply anything of the kind. Discussion has been 'elusive' because to speculate on what kind of roles could have caused the twilight results is antitown. This question just looks like rolefishing to me.

__________________________________________
I will return to Emile shortly, but I am becoming increasingly aggravated by Igor's ignoring of what I think are the main points against him:

1) Calling Gerhard 'possible' scum on the Stuart wagon, before Stuart's flip, when Igor was on the Stuart wagon so presumably 'thought' him scum;

2) Not explaining exactly what it was he was trying to achieve with his 'gambit.'

[Edward Smilie]

*Still Waiting*

[Edward Smilie]

*Still Waiting*

Waiting for Igor to respond to your 2 main points on him or something else?

That.

[Edward Smilie]

Emile had the chance. He posted after going L-1.

And on the offchance that Emile flips town, I'm going to be all over the possibility of a Jaime/Claude scumpair tomorrow. (On the converse, if Emile is scum, Jaime looks VERY town, due to the timing of his vote).

[Edward Smilie]

I'm beginning to get a little sucpicious of Claude for hammering before we even got a claim out of Emile. Anyway, if I see that Emile flips town I will definately be voting Igor while if he flips scum I'll probably vote Leon (maybe Claude. I dunno. But still, probably Leon).

Hahaha, flailing scum buddy.

Edward: Explain how you say he looks town by the timing of his vote?

Initial wagon builds on Emile. Counterwagon builds on Igor. Jaime switches at a crucial moment, giving the Emile rather than the Igor wagon the momentum to lynch.

Of course, the whole two scumgroup thing kinda torpedoes that line of thinking, since not being aligned with Emile doesn't necessarily mean not scum...

I'll do a proper analysis when it's not Christmas and i'm not embarking on a mammoth session.

[Edward Smilie]

One kill a night every single night says to me despite the different colors on Emile/Gerhart's reveal, there is only one scum group. That would mean either Gerhart was an SK or a traitor. There are a few issues around the traitor possibility that i'm not going to speculate on, since they imply the existence or nonexistence of certain town roles.

Even so, it seems more plausible than rival scumteams, which not only doesn't fit the flavor, but would also mean a ton of weird night interactions resulting in multiple killing groups accounting for precisely one kill per night.

With six alive, i would like people to comment on their perception of the benefits and drawbacks of no-lynching. I will do a re-read focussing on Emile's interactions later.

[Edward Smilie]

@MOD: The lack of votecounts in this game is making analysing a lot harder than it needs to be, fyi. Can you at least put in end-of-day votecounts?

Sure.

Well, I've done a quick re-read, and the big change is that Leon vaults into my top two, along with Claude, because he's made a big point of talking about how he suspected Emile all along, but NEVER EVER VOTED HIM, nor actually making any real kind of effort to get him lynched. In fact, let's look at the vote pattern from the end of yesterday (and you'll see why I think Jaime town).

At the time of the first votecount, the tally is 3-1 in favor of an Emile lynch:

:
Igor Schultz:1 (Andrew)
Emile Buchard:3 (Igor, Edward, Claude)

Not Voting:4 (Jaime, Emile, Spencer, Leon)

A page later, we have this:

Emile Buchard:2 (Igor, Edward)
Igor Schultz:3 (Andrew, Leon, Claude)

So, the Emile wagon is comfortably leading. Then Leon votes Igor, turning Andrew's lone vote into a wagon, and Claude jumps FROM EMILE-SCUM TO IGOR-TOWN, putting Igor in the lead, 4-2. At this point, it's looking solidly like Igor will be the lynch.

Emile-scum then scents blood, and jumps the Igor wagon, putting him at L-1. Andrew unvotes, then Jaime votes Emile, which completely changes the dynamic of the day. We had a flailing Igor getting more and more emotional and irrational, flailing in other words, but these two actions turn it from a procession into a two guys at L-2 competing wagons scenario.

Claude unvotes, Andrew switches to Emile (yeah, if he's scum, he's awesome) then Claude hammers, leaving Leon on Igor.

Present.

I still dislike Jaime, Igor looks a bit better. Still not a whole lot, so I'm leaving my vote there.

I never have liked Emile, so I wouldn't be sad to see him go today.

This was a quick hit, more will come.

When the chips are down, Leon takes the action most likely to save Emile (wagoning Igor) whilst still saying he suspects Emile. Also, with the revelation about Gerhard, the townie points I'd given Leon for that disappear.

[Edward Smilie]

And, not to be rude, but are you serious Edward? Your post is beyond laughable. You just skidded in your own backtracks. I have been in support of an Emile lynch.

I have been scarce this game, I'll admit that. I guess I'll read more than get back.

Edward gains a nice look for his brake slamming and nailing reverse.

Oh wow. Did you suddenly decide to enrol in the Igor school of logic?

Firstly, 'backtracking' is an argument I think I've only ever seen used by scum.

Secondly, could you explain how or where I've backtracked? I've changed my mind on one thing. Your likelihood of being scum. This change has been predicated on three things:

1) The credit you got for attacking Gerhard goes away, now we know that Emile and any potential partner(s) did not know Gerhard was scum

2) The credit you got for opposing the Stuart wagon is greatly diminished because a) We've now found a second scum player on the wagon and b) lots of other, more important shit has happened since then

3) You were not on a scum lynch, despite making favorable noises about it.

Oh btw, to isolate one point:

I have been in support of an Emile lynch.

Exactly my point. You said you were in support of an Emile lynch, but you took the exact action most likely to save his ass. Surely you can see how saying you support someone dying, but never actually doing anything to bring that about, the guy getting lynched in spite of you and flipping scum kinda looks bad?

If that post is a typo, and you meant to post 'never' I can find posts contradicting that.

Basically, your decision to give me 'a nice look' immediately after I announced my suspicion of you... I've never seen a more blatant omgus in my life.

[Edward Smilie]

Leon, calling it your vote OMGUS is not a copout. I don't like the term, but I think it's been a very long time since i saw a purer example of it. That I expressed suspicion of you is literally the only possible explanation of your newfound suspicion of me.

There's no 'backtracking.' There's no bad logic, and there's nothing that doesn't make perfect sense from a town POV (Town players SHOULD always be willing to change their mind based on new evidence). All there is is me saying you are one of my top suspects.

I'm liking Andrew, Edward and Claude.

Pre suspicion of you, you 'like' me.

Edward gains a nice look for his brake slamming and nailing reverse.

Post suspicion of you, I 'get a good look.' What is this 'brake slamming and nailing reverse?' I've started suspecting YOU. That's the only thing that's changed.

[Edward Smilie]

I'm very confident Jaime is town.

I'm a little worried about Spencer, since that role has basically lurked through the entire game. Perhaps not intentionally, but we've got virtually nothing to go on here, and that ain't good. That's not really someone you want around in potential lylo.

[Edward Smilie]

@ Spencer: Please share your notes. I want to get a bead on your thought process.

perhaps it wasn't all that useful, and perhaps wasn't even a great trap, but a town-aligned figure should not react that bad to an accusation they can easily deconstruct.

I couldn't disagree more. Town players tend to react much, much worse to really bad accusations than they do to reasonable ones.

Imagine the following exchanges:

I think Edward looks quite scummy. Although he was on that scum wagon, I think that's a bus the scum could easily afford to make.

I take your point, but I'd also like to point to (x, y and z) who did the exact same thing. Why are you singling me out?

I think Edward could be playing the reasonable townie, whilst manipulating everything behind the scenes.

Get a grip. There's no evidence for that other than rampant paranoia, or you being scum trying to discredit me. How the hell can you manipulate 'behind the scenes' in a game like this? Everything's in thread, dumbass.

I think Edward is being too defensive.

'TOO DEFENSIVE' IS NOT A SCUMTELL, YOU F***ING TOOL!

As you can see, I would be more annoyed, less civil, and more determined to utterly destroy the accuser, the less reasonable the attack was. I suspect most people would be the same.

[Edward Smilie]

Well, I would state that the role Jaime played in the Emile wagon is a 'significant' pro-town action. I'd like Leon to explain why he thinks otherwise.

[Edward Smilie]

Three points, Spencer.

1. I don't get how in hell you can say things like 'The Igor wagon was dying when Jaime left it.' It had been put to L-1 all of three posts before. It was the leading wagon. This seems a ridiculous leap.

2. Why would you not think Gerhard was mafia, unless you are informed to the contrary? There are not multiple competing alien races in Terror From The Deep. There's humans, and there's aliens. That's it. Tentaculats are part of the same alien coalition as Gill men, etc.

I also want to know why this belief is scummy, because to me it's a sign of being uninformed majority.

3. Opinions on nolynch?

[Edward Smilie]

And claiming now because it's endgame, and it's worthless to try and hide roles at this point.

!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!


100%, ridiculously antitown thing to do here if Leon is town. The one thing we don't want to do heading into an NL is TELL THE SCUM WHO IS AND ISN'T A POWER ROLE. Nor do we want to make it easier for scum to massclaim, by making more roles available to them before they have to.

I'm sorry, I find it hard to see any reasonable townsperson doing this. Dumb or scum.
____________________
@Jaime: Could you please elaborate on why you thought the word 'merely' looked out of place?
____________________

With regard to my 'backtrack,' well, as I said, firstly you got credit for attacking Gerhard early on, which disappears with Emile's flip. Secondly, you looked town whilst you appeared to be anti-Emile. However, at the crucial point in the game, having said you wanted Emile dead, you tried to save him. Consider these two positions:

a) I think Emile is scum, and Leon is attacking him
b) Emile is scum, and Leon was talking about how he suspects him, but all the time pushing an alternative wagon.

Can you not see that these two views lead to different conclusions about the likelihood or otherwise of you being partnered with Emile? When a town player says they suspect someone, and are given the chance to wagon him, they usually do, don't they?

[Edward Smilie]

I can't see why you'd have done it for any other reason- If you really wanted Emile lynched, you'd have voted him, no? Therefore, all i can say is that you must be lying when you said you wanted him dead.

If you want me to believe otherwise, you have to give me an explanation that doesn't sound ridiculous, of why someone who suspected Emile would choose to wagon Igor over Emile. Because it makes perfect sense for a scumbuddy trying to save emile to counterwagon Igor. Give me a town scenario that makes as much sense.

[Edward Smilie]

And Edward, you are grasping at straws hard. I can't support two peoples lynches right?

No, you can't. BECAUSE WE CAN ONLY LYNCH ONE.

You had a choice between trying to lynch the townie, or trying to lynch the scum. You tried to lynch the townie. When someone says they want something to happen, but take the action most likely to prevent it, i conclude they are likely lying. You don't wear a condom if you want to be a father. You don't drink whiskey if you want to stay sober. You don't vote for one Idol finalist if you want the other to win, and you don't counterwagon Igor if you genuinely want Emile to die.

I found both of them scummy. Easy as that. You're acting as if the world ends because I stayed on Igor's.

It's not so much that you *stayed* on Igor's, as it was you and Claude who made there be an Igor wagon in the first place. What changed between you saying 'Emile can die today, the iso doesn't look pretty' and saying Vote Igor?

[Edward Smilie]

But only if my assumption is right. However, if my assumption isn't correct, we have another day to play with, ne? Odd are, one of Jaime or Leon is scum. Jaime is more likely to be last remaining scum. Leon, however, fits as part of a scum group. So, honestly, we should either lynch Leon today or tomorrow, and if by some stretch of the imagination he flips town, lynch Jaime, quite likely for the win.

What are the flaws in this plan?

That I'm currently finding it very hard to see a scumgroup where there's more than one person left which doesn't include Claude.

You keep talking up Jaime's vote switch, but one pro-town thing the entire game does not justify the rest of it. I'm calling it a cleverly timed vote jump.

He is either VI, or the more than likely blatant obvious scum.

The bolded part is funny, because that's exactly my view of you.

And yes, we talk that up. It's the most significant thing he's done. What 'other things?' All I get other than that are kinda what I call 'tone of voice' things. He doesn't sound like a town player who particularly knows what he's doing. But then, neither do you.

Can you explain what other things there are that are more important than placing a vote on scum at a crucial juncture that gives that wagon the momentum?

However, something else I'm seeing. Leon is trying to play with our emotions as he sees that hes the most likely death tomorrow. Stuff like "If you lynch me you'll lose!" will get you nowhere!

Did saying that make Igor scum, Jaime?

Also, I'm not playing with your emotions. It seems like your trying so hard to falsely incriminate me.

And if he's town, he probably has the same feeling about you. You're saying he's 100% scum, after all. Quite apart from the fact that the case for you being scum is better than the one for him.

Vote: No lynch

If I've read something right, the scum have a pretty tough decision tomorrow.

[Edward Smilie]

Your bolded part is funny as well, Edward, as you are essentially just trying to annoy me.

No, really, I'm not. I'm serious. I think any reasonable, impartial observer looking at this game being asked 'Who is the VI?' would be at least as likely to say 'Leon' as 'Jaime.' After all, if you're not deliberately playing dumb, then you appear to be completely unaware of why saying you want to lynch one player whilst pushing the counterwagon makes it look like you don't really want to lynch that player.

And just so we're clear, one town thing in an ENTIRE game of other town actions does not make up for a game of scum. I have NO idea where you are getting this from.

Again. I don't see an 'entire game of scum.' If you think this, i'd like you to explain why.

@ Claude: I'd be interested in seeing you expand on that, but from my perspective:

Andrew looks town
Jaime and Leon sure as hell don't look like buddies
Spencer's behavior today makes him look more likely to be buddied with you than either of Jaime or Leon

[Edward Smilie]

I honestly do not see where I and Spencer buddied.

I didn't accuse you of buddying up, I suggested you were buddied, ie you are mutually aligned. He came in, screaming for Jaime's head, then started considering Leon after I flagged up a few things. He's basically ignored you. That's why i think you're a more likely Spencer buddy than either of the others.

[Edward Smilie]

3) Edward: if Jaime were scum, do you think we would suspect you to be his buddy?

Possibly. But who the hell cares? You can't play town worrying about what it will look like if you're wrong. Make your best guess and let the chips fall where they may.

Spencer: who would be your main suspect if Edward were night-killed?

Scummy, scummy question. Hey guys, why not tell us exactly how you will react to every possible nightkill so scum can best plot the kill that leaves them able to cause a town lynch tomorrow!

[Edward Smilie]

But, Claude, you do this.

You say 'Why would scum kill their own?' and justify it because 'scum might slip up and give their alignment away.' Far more likely, town gives away role info, which helps the scum.

You say 'What if X is NKed?' and justify it by the NL, even though it clearly benefits scum more to know that information.

In short, you ask questions, the likely answers to which are more useful to scum than town, and then try to make them sound townish.

BTW: In case i get NKed, the very first thing that needs doing tomorrow is a massclaim. No-one should comment on anyone else's claim until all claims have been made.

[Edward Smilie]

No. No discussion. Massclaim first, then we see where we are.

Does anyone have a huge problem with Jaime first, then popcorn?

[Edward Smilie]

Uh, sure? (Sorry, I'm a bit confused, since I thought everyone knew why towns should always massclaim at LyLo).

Basically, there's nothing to lose, and any information town can get at lylo that has the possbility of making its chances of lynching higher needs to be provided. Scum will have the issue of whether to fakeclaim power or go with VT claims. If they fakeclaim, there's the possibility they fuck it up, or get counterclaimed, which tells you that one of two is def. scum. The amount of power claimed can give you an insight into the balance of the game. You can also occasionally semiconfirm players if their claim is solid, and they're the only power claimant. Also, the order people choose is itself instructive. How people react to other's claims, also.

Downside: Pretty much none. This isn't the time to be worrying about tonight, because if we don't lynch right here, there isn't one.

[Edward Smilie]

Well, we have this:

Jaime wants to claim after Claude
Claude wants to claim after Jaime
Spencer wants Claude before Jaime
Leon will presumably want Jaime first.

I say Claude first. That makes it 3-2 for Claude. Jaime is a consensus no2, then Spencer, then moi.

Claude, hop to it.

[Edward Smilie]

No one else claim for the moment, we have enough to work with right here.

Uh, it's a MASSclaim. Not everyone but one player claims.

Able seaman, VT.

Right.

Same here. Vanilla Townie aka Able Seaman.

I call bullshit. When Leon claimed, you said that 'perfectly average aquanaut' did not sound like it came from a real role pm. If you really were a VT, that would be in your role PM as well. Care to explain?

[Edward Smilie]

EBWOP: MERELY average aquanaut.

[Edward Smilie]

Okay, sorry for the delay, here come my comments.

First, I don't see it as very unrealistic that all of us except scum -who are obviously lying- are actually nilla's. In fact, we lost enough PR's to make this possible.

The thing that intrigues me here is the balance. Of course, we don't know what Otto's role was exactly. 9-2-1 with cop seems overpowered for town. 8-3-1 with cop seems insanely swingy, since an early cop death makes the town WP drop like a stone.

Moreover, I do not like the fact that he proposed to interrupt the massclaim. "Oh my, we all claimed nilla! If the last player claims uncounterclaimed PR he will be almost clear " thinks Scummy Scummson "let's try and stop the massclaim". This argument I can use against Leon, but also against Jaime, who, to my surprise, agreed in interrupting the massclaim.

Makes zero sense as a scum thought process. 1) Knock on wood, but i'm hardly in the firing line today. 2) If I hypothetically were this mystery power role, and got run up, well pretty sure I could claim it then.

Also, as Jaime notes, you are misrepresenting him by saying he supported stopping massclaim.

First part: "I forgot the content of my own PM" --> I think any townie who tries building a case on a misquoted PM would go check his own.

A question: In what scenario do you see a scum trying to build a case on a townie on the grounds that said townie's flavor doesn't fit? The more I think about it, the more that sounds like it would require a greater degree of stupidity than the protown explanation.

Second part: "I though he meant it was his name instead of able seaman" --> this sounds like a not very convincing excuse to me.

Though if you go back and reread the actual comment, as I just did, it does give the impression that Jaime thinks that is the actual rolename Leon claimed. (Yes, Leon, THIS is backtracking. Like I said, on deeper reflection, Jaime's actions make even less sense for scum than they do for town).

I bet we all are leaning towards believing you are town, because "come on, who would invent such an incredible and pointless story?"... .

Well, quite. Why would a scum who is almost certainly not going to be lynched today bother coming up with something like that? I mean, it's wifom, but in my experience scum tend not to try to pull wifom when they're not in any danger.

Fixed the triple-post for you.

[Edward Smilie]

Since I do not understand the case on me - even if I can see a couple of dumb moves I did back in game, and namely my "trap" and the questions I asked yesterday - I would like to have a summary of it. Would it be okay if I called an order for you guys to post it? It could be useful tomorrow if I do end up dying.

There's absolutely no reason to think you town.

You were on the first two townwagons, and jumped both right in the middle of the pack.

When the chance to wagon a scum (Emile) came along, you were instrumental in instead pushing the counterwagon on a town player. That you turned around and hammered at the last moment doesn't mitigate that at all- in fact, hammering a scum without giving him chance to claim is often an associative tell, since the buddy is desperate to be seen on the wagon.

Basically, you've done very little to stand out, which is scummy, and the few things you've done which have, have been... well, scummy.

You've done nothing inexplicable from a town POV, but your overall play fits better the mold of a reasonably competent scum trying to avoid attracting attention than a town player trying to find scum.

Mod: should this triple post again, could you fix? MY computer is a nightmare.

[Edward Smilie]

Even though Spencer is highly likely not scum you can't rule him out comepletely just yet.

You can never clear anyone 100%. However, given that we actually have to lynch someone, lynching someone we don't

think

is scum is a bad idea.

Yet another slip by Jaime and we get nothing? /facepalm

Nice of you to drop in from lurking to say that. Any reason in hell we should see that as a 'slip?'

And lurking=/=scummy, there's nothing really to reply to except tunneling and speculation. No one has even as much as mentioned you really, besides Edward.

I'm almost tempted to policy-lynch anyone who ever says this. It's the single scummiest thing a player can do.

God, Claude's last post is a huuuuuuuuuuuge stretch.

[Edward Smilie]

A stretch- you are taking a small bit of information, and attributing to it more value than is merited. IE, that someone thinks their top two suspects are you and Jaime doesn't mean that they trust Leon (ie, think he is definitely town)- they just have to have Leon as even marginally less likely to be scum than Leon.

@ Leon: Meh, you're probably right that we're not going to convince each other right now, though it still amazes me that anyone thinks that way when the evidence is so overwhelming. Towns that are unwilling to lynch lurkers lose.

But still-

Our role PMs were sent to our mains, not these accounts. If he wasn't aware of the role pm on the first page, in the same way you claimed not to be, I can see how he could have had an idea in his mind of what his pm said (your role is able seaman) thought you were claiming something different to that (your role is average aquanaut) and posted without thinking 'maybe i should check this out with my own pm first.' We've established that Jaime doesn't necessarily seem to always think thinks through with brilliant logic before he says them.

The alternative is that Jaime is scum. If he were scum, he'd only know the contents of the town pm from the first page. However, if that were the case, and he were referring to the first page as he looked at your claim, he'd see the merely average aquanaut bit, wouldn't he? At the worst, a scum who has seen the townie PM is

no more

likely to forget its contents than a townie who has.

Or, without knowing what your role pm is, and knowing you're town, he's taken a wild guess that you might have misquoted something. That's even less plausible- I have never, ever seen a situation where that has happened- a scum who doesn't know what the townie role pm is accuses someone of misquoting it. It just wouldn't make any sense for a scum to do that.

For shits and giggles, if jaime isn't scum, who is?

[Edward Smilie]

Hmmm. It makes sense. It also kinda worries me, since I think Leon's more likely scum in either situation than Jaime- I don't see how a few 'slips' can possibly make up for the difference between being the pivotal vote that gives the Emile wagon momentum, and being the person who pushed the counterwagon to the scum in the first place.

My one concern with Jaime, really, is that the Igor vote by Emile was an attempt to quicklynch to win, and then Andrew unvoting made it impossible, so Jaime decided to bus. However, EVEN IN that scenario, it would mean there was another partner.

Basically, in terms of today, I put scumgroups involving Claude > Scumgroups involving Spencer or Leon (still not sure what to make of the whole Leon thing- townies shouldn't need flavor updates) > scumgroups involving Jaime.

Tbh, although i still want an answer from Leon on the 'if Jaime's not scum' example, I feel we've debated long enough to make me happy with a

vote: Claude Lefevre

. Like i said, nothing he's done all game stands out as being protown, he was one of the leaders of the counterwagon, and he's a plausible partner for all other players.

[Edward Smilie]

Man, I see what they mean about you saying pointless things to 'sound town' though.

Ewwww, we shouldn't lynch right now! Let's leave it to later! Long days benefit the town! Weeeeeeeeeeee!

Do you have any pressing issues you feel need to be resolved before you vote? Are you pursuing an angle that you think requires more discussion? If so, why not aggressively push these things?

Or are you waiting around, in the hope of the mythical scum 'slip up?'

Because there sure as hell isn't any reason to hang around just for the sake of hanging around.

[Edward Smilie]

The whole 'Yeah, it's ridiculous how i'm being voted, so i'll vote the player most similar to myself' thing doesn't really cut any ice with me.

(besides 2: if I were scum, I would have killed Edward, not Andrew: me and Edward never got along very well during the game, and he was bothered by my allegedly scummy questions as much as Andrew)

Massive pile of WIFOM and you know it.

Unless you have any further questions, I have said all I had to say and I suggest to consider this situation as a crossed vote. Leon votes me, and Spencer and Jaime will be free to decide how and whom they will hammer.

Why would you assume that Leon, who says Jaime is PE No1, would countervote you instead of voting Jaime? Why would he be happy leaving it down to Jaime and Spencer to decide?

To be honest, I'm getting some townie frustration off Claude, but I ain't shifting, because:

I can't see how Jaime can be scum unless he's legitimately the stupidest player ever.

I pretty much can't believe that both of those who created the counterwagon to the dead scum are town. And Leon comes off more sincere, and willing to put himself in a position to be criticized, than Claude does.

Also, the day we lynched Emile, Claude said this:

If Emile flips scum, Jaime is my vote tomorrow If Emile flips scum, Jaime is my vote tomorrow .

I'd kinda like to know why the idea of voting Jaime fell off Claude's radar so quickly, if I'm honest.

Spencer i guess is the wildcard. Could you clarify at all why you needed an updated flavor pm? You are still vanilla, right?

[Edward Smilie]

I'd sure love to see the whole setup, with role pms and everything. Kinda curious about whom I replaced.

I'm guessing at least half the game knows EXACTLY who i am... the messed up posts didn't help- at least i sorted that out when i changed the screen settings.