Mini 911 - Mike's Pizzeria Mafia (Game Over)

[Jack]

I did a skim reread. Read the little posts, skipped the details of the bigger posts. Especially the last two pages and cuetchli.

Scum:
Parama
DRK
DeathSauce/diamond

Vote:Parama

My gut read from viewing the thread as a whole and from the way their posts are written.

I'll ISO and point out the specifics when the time comes.

I will say that parama's post at the start of day 2 (ISO 38) is super scummy. The only purpose is to make him look good, and the surrounding comments sound fakey as you can get.

[Shiverer]

I don't do town analysis of players for public consumption

Oh, really? Why is that?

[Thor665]

Because i consider town analysis to be akin to safe lists. Both of them I feel tend to be more helpful to scum choosing night kills then to town choosing day lynches. Therefore why do it? I discuss who and what I think is scummy, that's the useful angle in my opinion.

[Thor665]

I will say that parama's post at the start of day 2 (ISO 38) is super scummy. The only purpose is to make him look good, and the surrounding comments sound fakey as you can get.

I can't fully fault that since I bristled at it too. Check his ISO 39 for the answer to that one...unless you think that's the fakey surrounding comments.

[Jack]

I will say that parama's post at the start of day 2 (ISO 38) is super scummy. The only purpose is to make him look good, and the surrounding comments sound fakey as you can get.

I can't fully fault that since I bristled at it too. Check his ISO 39 for the answer to that one...unless you think that's the fakey surrounding comments.

You know, I skimmed over that post and didn't remember it. That makes it look so much worse.

cuet says: if I get NK'd, I hope the town makes you post your case on me

Very first post after day begins and parama has the case and posts it? He even says the power was out. Case posted 8 hours after day starts.

It sounds too much like he wrote up the case when they decided to NK cuet.

And then it's:

...>_>
yeah thanks a lot mafia you can go kill yourselves now for making me waste my time on this

[Shiverer]

Jack's 600 is good posting.

Because i consider town analysis to be akin to safe lists. Both of them I feel tend to be more helpful to scum choosing night kills then to town choosing day lynches. Therefore why do it? I discuss who and what I think is scummy, that's the useful angle in my opinion.

To be blunt, I always find this a stupid precaution. You think scum are too blind to tell who you're suspicious of and who you aren't suspicious of? All they have to do is read the thread.

---

• Lastsurvivor

Here's what I have so far. My suspicion of LS is more about his minimal involvement than about anything he's actually said, and frankly he hasn't done anything glaringly scummy, but some things still nag. Don't expect this case to contain super slip-ups, because there aren't any. Holistically, though, this looks very much like ho-hum scum play that lacks in pro-town content.

DRK, Seer, why are you two bickering about something so pointless? Unless you two are playing some elaborate joke, getting so angry about this looks strange.

This was a decent early opportunity for scum hunting, and LS passed it up. Asking why they are "bickering about something so pointless" instead of looking into the matter, and then never looking into the matter later on . . . I might understand if LS were a complete newbie, but where is the scum-hunting townie mentality here?

I personally wouldn't be surprised if the two of you were just trying to bus/distance yourselves. Seer, you're saying that you aren't concerned about his vote, or am I just misinterpreting things?

There it is. He does follow up on the previous post I quoted, but again, this is ridiculously gentle for someone who's supposed to be fishing out scum from the trash heap.

Here is the climax of the little dialogue between LS and SP (the point of which I'm a little fuzzy on):

@Seer: I see what you're saying now. When I was talking about my unsureness, I wasn't being sarcastic, I was actually unsure. The overreaction is still odd though.

"Odd." Okay. Who was LS voting for, by the way? Oh, that's right, he was still random-voting Idiotking. This reeks of lack of investment in scum hunting. Worse is how LS

never

goes back to DRK/SP. Did he just forget? Townies tend not to just drop suspicions like that, even if their questions are answered (and clearly LS's issues weren't fully resolved, as he still had that "odd" feeling).

Fortunately, LS had come up with something a little more substantial about the latest vote magnet (same post):

Dana, how hard can it be for scum to submit a random vote? Not one mafia would be afraid of doing the RVS gig. Also, how is aggressiveness bad?

Your bad argument is scummy to me.

Except that doesn't do much to change his airs of non-investment. "Your bad argument is scummy to me"—the wording of this is scummy as hell. No vote, no real pressure, no nothing, just gently (and that's the key word) prodding the popular target. Active-lurking.

And, I'll say this again. I find your weak case scummy, and the fact that you still find it justifiable is even more strange.

And again. What is up with "strange"? It's like LS thinks he's stepping on thin ice with everything he says, which is typical of timid/unseasoned scum lacking in self-confidence.

K, did a reread. Nothing I really picked up on that wasn't said before. I wouldn't really say that Seven is the best lynch right now, since he can actually respond to people and is at least trying to be protown. I kind of get fishy stuff from what Seven says (nothing that hasn't been pointed out before), but at least there's effort.

I get vibes that DC's trying to blend in atm, but he's only been in for like a week. I still stand by my opinion on Dana, also.

First paragraph has LS being too cautious to pursue the "fishy stuff" he supposedly sees in Seven's posts. He also neglects to point out exactly what's so fishy, instead piggybacking on other people's gut reads. Casting a wide net of suspicion, planting a soft suspicion he might need to come back to, etc., all while saying he doesn't want to lynch Seven for what is potentially a bullshit reason. LS/Seven scum team stock goes up.

Second paragraph looks like more ho-hum (faux) scum hunting, but not as big a deal.

Dana's still my top suspicion atm. I definitely think the player by player analysis is weird. Seems like the thought process was "Hmm, Seven did this and they backed off on him. Maybe I can do it, too."

On my slight suspicion list would be Panzer, just because of that contradiction of logic pointed out by someone, and the fact that I'm not too crazy about who he replaced. I generally don't like my read on DRK, since he just seems to reflect some points that are brought up against him under the rug with a joke (along with other things that have been brought up).

So he's clinging to his shallow danakillsu suspicion, which again is easy pickings given the popular sentiment about dana. And his second ("slight"—more cautious, gentle wording) suspect is Panzer . . . which came out of nowhere and just baffles me in general. I don't know what to think about that.

Sooo, two questions for Dana:

1) Why did you want Seven to defend himself when you defended him yourself?

2) Were you doing the player by player analysis to actually scum hunt? If so, why didn't you direct any questions to anyone (to be fair, you asked one question, but it seemed more like a question you were asking yourself)?

Vote: danakillsu

My vote's staying here for now.

I also did an iso on Panzer, and I'm really not liking him either. In ISO Post 3 (where he votes for Dana), the way he words his post kind of seems like he's just posted this big ol' case on Dana, when, in all reality, his case was generally weak. Panzer, are you just keeping some of your facts to yourself, or do you feel that the information you showed us is enough to advocate a lynch on Dana?

This is from a nice substantial post, the first paragraph of which was full of
"WTF?" moments for me when I read it; it rang so fake. See quote tag for that; my post is already fat enough. LS's questions for dana make little sense to me, especially the second: What would LS-town expect to learn from a question that blunt? As for LS's Panzer suspicions . . . does he really think overconfidence (or at least overconfidence as he perceived it) is a scum tell? Smells like more faux scum hunting—shining suspicion on a player for something like a personality flaw, which is very obviously not alignment-indicative.

Iso. 27 is more opposition to suspicions of Seven. Iso. 28 is largely IIOA. Iso. 29 is lame. Iso. 30 is absurdly unfair to DRK—he damn well may attempt people to look at his top suspect. Persuasion is half the point of scum hunting, regardless of how heavy fire your taking. Iso. 32 is full of the usual gentle, cautious wording: "I dunno if this is just me," "a bit of," "kind of reminds me of," "just a bit" . . .

As I said at the top, there's nothing concrete that's absolutely incriminating about LS's play, and that's partly my point. He's done a very good job of softly generating suspicions and staying out of the line of fire—producing minimal useful content for the town. Many of his posts give me horrible nervous scum vibes, and he has some curious interactions and connections with other players.

More later, burned out.

[DeathSauce]

...
More later, burned out.

Me too, from trying to read that.

PBPA is scummy.

[DeathSauce]

Allow me to rephrase. PBPA is meaningless, not necessarily scummy

[Thor665]

Because i consider town analysis to be akin to safe lists. Both of them I feel tend to be more helpful to scum choosing night kills then to town choosing day lynches. Therefore why do it? I discuss who and what I think is scummy, that's the useful angle in my opinion.

To be blunt, I always find this a stupid precaution. You think scum are too blind to tell who you're suspicious of and who you aren't suspicious of? All they have to do is read the thread.

And I think your concept is stupidly McStupid

Seriously though - was there a point to this? As far as I'm aware the debate between pro/con on discussing town tells is an ongoing meta debate and you had to be aware when you asked me why I didn't discuss town tells publicly that I was going to respond with the belief of the 'don't discuss town tells' concept. There's no problem with you disagreeing with it I just wonder why you felt the need to have me state my belief so you could call it stupid - what angle are you working here?

Allow me to rephrase. PBPA is meaningless, not necessarily scummy

Thank gawd it's not scummy. But why do you consider it meaningless? Scummy actions, by definition, happen within posts and analyzing posts is a way to spot scummy actions so...? I don't follow the logic.

[Shiverer]

Seriously though - was there a point to this? As far as I'm aware the debate between pro/con on discussing town tells is an ongoing meta debate and you had to be aware when you asked me why I didn't discuss town tells publicly that I was going to respond with the belief of the 'don't discuss town tells' concept. There's no problem with you disagreeing with it I just wonder why you felt the need to have me state my belief so you could call it stupid - what angle are you working here?

With regard to game theory, no angle (except maybe that you might see the light); with regard to LS, I wanted to know why everyone found him town before I explained why I found him scummy. It would've been interesting to see people's reactions because the sort of case I have is never terribly convincing, but it also doesn't hinge on aspects that are easily to flat-out disprove.

But yeah, obviously that was too soul-crushing a demand for all of you, so whatever. I feel so distrusted.

Allow me to rephrase. PBPA is meaningless, not necessarily scummy

Interesting that you'd mix up the two terms. Also, Sherlock Holmes disagrees with you:

You know my method. It is founded upon the observation of trifles.

It is, of course, a trifle, but there is nothing so important as trifles.

There is nothing so unnatural as the commonplace.

The little things are infinitely the most important.

[Jack]

Parama mentioned that he smoked trichonoply cigars back on page 5, and I spotted some of it's distinctly colored ash in the murder write up.

[Thor665]

I wanted to know why everyone found him town before I explained why I found him scummy.

I still don't see the reason to have to ask others to outline their analysis on someone prior to putting out your own analysis. Generally the entire concept of the game tends to hinge on people saying "hey, this is my analysis - react to it you lackwits!" Yet you really seemed set on doing it the other way around and acting like we're the odd ones for it. I don't grok.

Plus something about your whole process crushes my soul.

[Seven]

So here are my thoughts on SP/Rad/Shiv. I'm doing this with ISO now that I've caught up, I'll try and keep track of who is saying what between all the replacements. Some of what I'm saying up to SPs post 26 is just repetition of my earlier ISO of him so I might go into less detail, but if clarification is required just ask.

Starts off overreacting on DRKs vote. They argue... could be seen as distancing[?right word?]. Only valid if one of them flips scum. Especially after this:

If I were concerned about his vote, why would I continue to put myself out there over this after he changed votes?

I pointed out in my other ISO his post 12. I still think it's suspicious.

I also said in previous ISO he may have been protecting me because I was mindlessly protecting him at the time (before I had ISOed him, mind).

I had only ISOed him up to 26, so everything that follows is new.

In ISO 28:

Seven's personal analysis doesn't impress me into thinking he is town for sure, but I'm not saying we should lynch him yet.

This brings me to a theory question: Is anyone else severely annoyed that on this site it seems we HAVE to go to deadline in order to lynch someone? I mean, I know in a hypothetical situation, a group of townies would want to wait until the last moment, but I feel like dragging days on usually ends in a lull of activity in forum mafia, and don't necessarily see the point in wasting time waiting for people to flake. (However, if we need all the time up to deadline, I completely advocate using all of it.)

He spends the whole game defending me to the teeth, and all of a sudden (and I believe this is after I ISOed him, to boot) he is prepared to lynch me. "Not yet", he says, but his following question tells me he was fine with lynching right away, he just needed to put that to get everyone's approval first and not seem suspicious for it. This screams scum to me.

He even continues to say in the same post:

I said that I didn't believe that Seven was very scummy, and based on his content, I did (And still do) not believe that he is scum. I am still keeping an eye open on him (And advocating for him to be lynched today, because I don't see him to have reacted in a very townie way up until recently, and heck, he's pretty disposable as a vanilla.).

If I wasn't acting townie, WHY didn't he think I was scum?

I have no read on RadHi. Too little to go on.

Now we get to Shiv... Christ. I don't even care so much about his initial vote on me, it was stupid but it doesn't really matter. In answer to this question:

2. Seven, please direct me to any recent/semi-recent post of yours that's involved a strong scum read, a strong argument for why you find someone scummy, or even a strong town read. Anything substantial laid out with a good degree of conviction. Frankly, I'm seeing way too much curiosity and indecisive (I understand I may have missed something; see my first point.)

My ISOs of players D1 contain most of my suspicions. I haven't explicitly said I thought anyone was scum because if I thought someone were definitely scum I would vote for them. D1 my vote would have been on Cuet or dana, but I wasn't around. Making a case against them now is pointless as they both flipped town. Today, I was suspicious of PJ and DS. I was hoping to get more out of PJ in response to my post 528, but he replaced out. DS has yet to respond to that post and remains on my list until then. Yes, I'm curious why people say what they say and indecisive until I'm decisive. Once I've decided, though, you can be sure as hell that I'll be sure as hell.

A bunch of things have already been pointed, so I won't repeat them.

I believe Seven was already called out for this exact same thing regarding building a case on DRK.

Not that it matters, but it was on Thor.

And further, my question was directed at DRK because he seemed to have a case on Thor. I even tried to give a general sense of direction to my thoughts by giving the whole "too town" thing... I know it wasn't any good but at least I put something more than "build a case on Thor, everyone". Anyway... I just think it's weird for Shiv to vote for DS, not say why, and ask everyone to build a case on LS in the meantime [ie I may be a hypocrite but he's far worse!].

Good, I was hoping for this response.

1. If I just want to wagon and lurk, why do I choose a difficult, out-of-the-way, completely unsuspected target?
2. If I'm scum, do you really think I expect people to just build cases on their own without questioning my interest? You and Thor already did. Your attack hinges on the assumption that I'm idiotic enough to think I can coast to the deadline on another person's case, and get away with it. That's silly and impractical, and for someone who's apparently to duck out of the spotlight I'm drawing a lot of attention to myself by doing it.
3. Even then, in order for you to be confident that my goal is to "get other players lynched without [my own] reasons," then you must either know there's some preexisting "Lynch Lastsurvivor" sentiment. In order for me to coast on other people's cases, they must be willing to build those cases, and if they're willing to build those cases then they're either (a) already suspicious of LS or (b) suddenly seeing him as an easy target. In other words, my apparent wagon-and-lurk strategy only works if someone provides an LS-scum case that I can wagon on in the first place. And it doesn't look to me like anyone's suspicious of LS, so it would be ludicrous for me to assume that.

TLDR: The scum motivation you've outlined here involves a ludicrous scheme. I like to think that if I were scum, I'd have a better plan than that.

Sorry for quoting that whole thing, I could have quoted just the last line but it has less impact... Do I even need to say why this is hilarious?

@Shiv:

"I wouldn't do this as scum because it's SO obviously scummy" doesn't make you town. It makes you scum who knows what they're doing is scummy.

I fully expect his reaction to this post to be, "Look, now scum is appealing to my emotions to get me off his back!".

Again, "if I was scum it would be scummy for me to do this but I'm not scum so it's not!" Why the need for the disclaimer if that's not what you're doing? You're defending yourself for an attack that we haven't even had the chance to make, yet.

Please explain how analysis and scum case are synonymous—oh, wait, there goes the basis for your entire theory. Oopsy!

Semantics... if you wanted to get rid of the ambiguity, you would have been more specific. For a lot of people the word "analysis" involves more depth than just yay or nay. You left it just open enough to leave yourself this little loophole if it backfired.

To be blunt, I always find this a stupid precaution. You think scum are too blind to tell who you're suspicious of and who you aren't suspicious of? All they have to do is read the thread.

This is scummy ONLY because you have already stated you're skimming over posts. Now you're saying Thor should make it easier for scum by giving them a succinct little resume. Really now...


All this being put together, I'm very comfortable with this:

Vote: Shiv

Par has also made it into my suspicious list. Only stating this for future reference if more comes up later.

[Jack]

Why is par on your suspicions list?

[Shiverer]

I wish I hadn't replaced into a game with players who repeatedly fail to tell the difference between scum tells and . . . everything else.

"I wouldn't do this as scum because it's SO obviously scummy" doesn't make you town. It makes you scum who knows what they're doing is scummy.

It makes me neither.

Again, "if I was scum it would be scummy for me to do this but I'm not scum so it's not!" Why the need for the disclaimer if that's not what you're doing? You're defending yourself for an attack that we haven't even had the chance to make, yet.

I wouldn't call that defending myself.

Sorry for quoting that whole thing, I could have quoted just the last line but it has less impact... Do I even need to say why this is hilarious? @Shiv: "I wouldn't do this as scum because it's SO obviously scummy" doesn't make you town. It makes you scum who knows what they're doing is scummy.

Yes, I just shouldn't have defended myself with an explanation for why his ridiculous accusation required a hysterically impractical maneuver and illogical thought process by Shiverer-scum. Then I would have been slammed for not defending myself. I can't win, can I?

Semantics... if you wanted to get rid of the ambiguity, you would have been more specific. For a lot of people the word "analysis" involves more depth than just yay or nay. You left it just open enough to leave yourself this little loophole if it backfired.

Bullshit. Utter bullshit. "Analysis" entails neither town slant nor scum slant. I didn't WANT to be specific. YOU are the ones who are narrowing down what I said.

This is scummy ONLY because you have already stated you're skimming over posts. Now you're saying Thor should make it easier for scum by giving them a succinct little resume. Really now...

I have not skimmed over every post. Sweet fuck. I have skimmed some. I KNOW what has gone on this game. I said that to let people know in case I make a mistake with my facts.

As for you, learn not to be so horridly inconsistent. Why the fuck aren't you slamming Jack for skimming? Start paying attention.

@All

I still want my damn Lastsurvivor analyses. I caved and gave you mine. And now I regret it because you are continuing to ignore my one request.

[Seven]

I'm not "slamming" you solely for skimming. I'm voting you for the cumulative actions of you and your predecessor. And Jack is on my list of suspicious people because of PJ, I already said that.

I don't think LS is suspicious. I'm not going to post a case on why I think he's not suspicious. Your request is idiotic and distracting.

@Jack: It took me a while to go over everything on Shiv. I don't want to build a case on Par when I don't think it's necessary atm. I'm set on my current vote. I stated D1 I don't like setting up chain-lynches, so I'd rather concentrate on this lynch. If someone changes my mind on Shiv (including Shiv) I'll probably look into Par or DS next. If it helps it's mostly stuff from the last day or so. Anyway... I think the focus should be on Shiv, he is the scummiest player.

[Seven]

EBWOP:

@Jack: OK I'm sorry, I just remembered you voted Parama. I'd still prefer not to get into his case today, my reasons are different than yours anyway (the ones you stated at the top of this page). If everyone insists I'll do it, but I really don't think he's the best lynch.... I would vote DS before I voted Par, probably.

[Shiverer]

I don't think LS is suspicious. I'm not going to post a case on why I think he's not suspicious. Your request is idiotic and distracting.

You have got to be kidding me. Asking why you think someone is a townie? Welcome to the game of Mafia, bud.

Oh, and refusing to explain why you find another player scummy just because you aren't trying to lynch him is usually poor form.

[Jack]

Ok. You don't have to build a case on par. I already think he's scum so you don't have to convince me. But presumably there was a post that put him on your suspicions list?

Haven't gotten a scum feel from seerpenguin or shiv. What do you think is the single scummiest mark against them?

[Thor665]

@All

I still want my damn Lastsurvivor analyses. I caved and gave you mine. And now I regret it because you are continuing to ignore my one request.

I've already figured out my response but quite frankly was waiting for Lastsurvivor to respond first. If you really want my response to your case prior to the response of the person you are making the case on let me know - I'l be on early(ish) tomorrow (EST) and can post it then.

[Seven]

It's like asking me why oranges aren't blue. They just aren't. LS hasn't done anything I think is scummy, that's why I think he's town. I don't see why you want us to focus on him so much. There are other players who have somewhat slipped under the radar, why not focus on them? Evilsnail/HomerSimpson is a good example. Even IK most of D1. I just don't see what your kick is. And despite everything you said in response to me, your method of doing it was scummy as hell.

I said if everyone insists I will explain. He's pretty far down my list atm. I'm not going to build his case for you to jump onto. Who are you voting for again? Oh yeah, DS... why was that, anyway... hmm no real reason, huh? Oh wait, sorry... no reason you want to tell us about. *sigh* see the difference between you and I is that I'm not voting for the person who's case I'm not building.

[Seven]

@Jack: It's the sum total of his and SPs posts put together. SP was already on my list, and even though he's a different person he is the same role. If both people are acting scummy it stands to reason both people are likely scum. If SP hadn't already been suspicious my vote might be different.

[Parama]

I fully expect his reaction to this post to be, "Look, now scum is appealing to my emotions to get me off his back!" But I'm not going to clog the thread slap-fighting with him when he just blithely stretches his argument to generate ridiculous, outlandish hypotheses to back up his reasoning.

I do not care for AtE. I do not feel you are doing such. I just think you don't understand my argument.

He's not using logic; instead, he's telling a 100% speculative fairy tale about what went on in my mind as I made my first few posts, modifying it along the way whenever I show how absurd it is.

This is not true at all. The plain and simple facts - you asked for other people's opinions on Lastsurvivor without giving your own first, without giving a reason for people to look into him. Basically, you want others to find the evidence for you. Or at least this is what your actions suggest. I do not know for sure that this is what you were thinking, but it's what your posting implied to me.

He's deliberately applying a Shiv-scum slant (confirmation bias, *cry*) as opposed to a Shiv-town slant, or—and this is totally a foreign concept in Mafia games—a Shiv-neutral-and-being-the-inquisitive-player-I-am-I'm-going-to-actually-try-to-get-a-legitimate-town-or-scum-read-on-him-based-on-what-he-says slant. I can't win.

Yes, I will admit to being biased. You are not SeerPenguin or Radical Hijinx, but your slot has nonetheless been scummy regardless of your actions. You replaced someone I felt could potentially be scum - your slot already had bias on it before you even replaced it. Even if you aren't the previous two players you have the same role and thus the same bias should apply.
Random question that just came to mind:
Is there anything in your predecessors' posts that you do not agree with at all? I want to look at your own slot to see why people have found it scummy previously and why they apply bias to you based on SP's and RH's play.

No, you wanted to build a case on him. You asked others to provide reasons why Lastsurvivor could be scum. Do not try to cover up your actions with excuses like this.

I didn't ask others for a case. A pair of eyes and the reading comprehension of a nine-year-old will make this much obvious. And I quote:

5. I want to see a Lastsurvivor analysis from everyone, and pardon the rudeness but I want it yesterday.

Please explain how analysis and scum case are synonymous—oh, wait, there goes the basis for your entire theory. Oopsy!

Analysis implies looking for both towntells and scumtells in players' posting, and rarely if ever do people ask others to give as many towntells as possible. So it wasn't directly asking to build a case but more to find the scumtells and suspicious actions that could be used in a case against Lastsurvivor.

But wait, your answer will be, "You obviously expected a great number of us to give scum reads on him, Shiv!" I will then point out that there has been virtually

zero

suspicion cast on LS all game. Hell, virtually zero analysis of any sort, scum read or town read. To which Parama replies, "Gasp! Really, Shiv? I hadn't noticed. I wonder if that's why you wanted people's reads. No, no, that wouldn't make any sense. I much prefer the theory that you used your magic powers to detect that a great number of us were secretly suspicious of him, but were too terrified of his ungodly powers to speak up in the thread." Ad nauseam.

Please do not put words in my mouth, especially if I have never thought anything along those lines.

I will say that parama's post at the start of day 2 (ISO 38) is super scummy. The only purpose is to make him look good, and the surrounding comments sound fakey as you can get.

The case was requested the previous day - I know I shouldn't have put it off until night and it was a bad move to wait. The comment Cuet left made me think the town would request my case anyways at the start of Day 2, so I posted it to save them the trouble.

I don't do town analysis of players for public consumption

Oh, really? Why is that?

Thor already answered this but I feel the need to answer this as well:
Players who are generally seen as pro-town by other members of the town are prime targets for scum NKs - if the scum know who the town doesn't suspect, they kill them off so as to leave the more suspicious townies alive later in the game. Giving town reads on players is giving ideas to the scum - it's not a scummy move considering that it implies that the scum only gain information if the player giving the town reads is a townie themselves - but it's anti-town in that having players considered to be pro-town by everyone results in getting those players killed.

Very first post after day begins and parama has the case and posts it? He even says the power was out. Case posted 8 hours after day starts.

I was rereading the thread overnight and I used that time to build my case. I already had the case ready by the time the day started - I just wasn't around to post it.

Here's what I have so far. My suspicion of LS is more about his minimal involvement than about anything he's actually said, and frankly he hasn't done anything glaringly scummy, but some things still nag. Don't expect this case to contain super slip-ups, because there aren't any. Holistically, though, this looks very much like ho-hum scum play that lacks in pro-town content.

I will agree that he is one of the members in this game not posting as often as they should be (evilsnail also needs to post more, and I'm going to accuse myself of not posting enough as well). But I don't agree with the Lynch all Lurkers mentality some players have, plus calling it "lurking" would be a stretch (not to imply that you called it lurking).

DRK, Seer, why are you two bickering about something so pointless? Unless you two are playing some elaborate joke, getting so angry about this looks strange.

This was a decent early opportunity for scum hunting, and LS passed it up. Asking why they are "bickering about something so pointless" instead of looking into the matter, and then never looking into the matter later on . . . I might understand if LS were a complete newbie, but where is the scum-hunting townie mentality here?

It was an argument based on RVS logic and reactions - the reaction part wasn't bad but the RVS logic made for a bad argument. I also was against the argument and remember posting something similar to this. If that makes me scummy to you then fine.

I personally wouldn't be surprised if the two of you were just trying to bus/distance yourselves. Seer, you're saying that you aren't concerned about his vote, or am I just misinterpreting things?

There it is. He does follow up on the previous post I quoted, but again, this is ridiculously gentle for someone who's supposed to be fishing out scum from the trash heap.

I'm more concerned about the comment about bussing myself... something's off about it. Calling it a bus implies that Lastsurvivor felt both were scum, but if he's basing his suspicions only off this argument then that's a baseless accusation.
Lastsurvivor - do you still think a DRK/Shiverer scumteam is possible? If so, what do you see in their interactions that makes you feel the team is possible? If not, what has changed your read since the start of the game? (this is a rather broad question if I would say so myself but it's comparing an early post to a recent discussion so a lot has indeed happened.)

@Seer: I see what you're saying now. When I was talking about my unsureness, I wasn't being sarcastic, I was actually unsure. The overreaction is still odd though.

"Odd." Okay. Who was LS voting for, by the way? Oh, that's right, he was still random-voting Idiotking. This reeks of lack of investment in scum hunting. Worse is how LS

never

goes back to DRK/SP. Did he just forget? Townies tend not to just drop suspicions like that, even if their questions are answered (and clearly LS's issues weren't fully resolved, as he still had that "odd" feeling).

First point here... I have played with several people who hold their vote until they feel someone is

definitely

scum. Also note that Lastsurvivor may have though Idiotking was scum due to his posts and his reason for holding his vote was not RVS logic. I'll have to look back at his posts around then to see if this could be the case.
I will admit that dropping suspicion completely is scummy in a way... it makes him appear like his only suspicion is the popular target and he doesn't want to look at people who have dropped out of the publ-

Dana, how hard can it be for scum to submit a random vote? Not one mafia would be afraid of doing the RVS gig. Also, how is aggressiveness bad?

Your bad argument is scummy to me.

Except that doesn't do much to change his airs of non-investment. "Your bad argument is scummy to me"—the wording of this is scummy as hell. No vote, no real pressure, no nothing, just gently (and that's the key word) prodding the popular target. Active-lurking.

So at this point I'm going to assume your argument is LS is taking a position of neutrality on everything and not trying to scumhunt...
Combine that with your argument that he's following the popular target... I can sorta see where you're coming from here, though I'm not sure if that makes him lazy or scummy. Though I don't think Lastsurvivor is that lazy...

And, I'll say this again. I find your weak case scummy, and the fact that you still find it justifiable is even more strange.

And again. What is up with "strange"? It's like LS thinks he's stepping on thin ice with everything he says, which is typical of timid/unseasoned scum lacking in self-confidence.

I'd be more willing to point out how his passiveness contradicts his defense of Idiotking - dana was calling IK out for being aggressive (which was a crappy reason) so LS attempted to appease both sides by defending the accused in a passive manner whilst posting with a passiveness that the accuser would not call out. It's trying to appeal to everyone, which is something a townie has no motivation to do - they have to take sides by deciding which side is more likely scum. They cannot appeal to everyone if the town wants to lynch scum, because that would involve appealing to the scum.

Dana's still my top suspicion atm. I definitely think the player by player analysis is weird. Seems like the thought process was "Hmm, Seven did this and they backed off on him. Maybe I can do it, too."

On my slight suspicion list would be Panzer, just because of that contradiction of logic pointed out by someone, and the fact that I'm not too crazy about who he replaced. I generally don't like my read on DRK, since he just seems to reflect some points that are brought up against him under the rug with a joke (along with other things that have been brought up).

So he's clinging to his shallow danakillsu suspicion, which again is easy pickings given the popular sentiment about dana. And his second ("slight"—more cautious, gentle wording) suspect is Panzer . . . which came out of nowhere and just baffles me in general. I don't know what to think about that.

This is what I said about taking sides - the two he's FoSing here are the ones going against each other - it was unlikely that the two were scum together, but FoSing both means he sees them both as potential scum - this is appealing to both sides without taking one again.

As I said at the top, there's nothing concrete that's absolutely incriminating about LS's play, and that's partly my point. He's done a very good job of softly generating suspicions and staying out of the line of fire—producing minimal useful content for the town. Many of his posts give me horrible nervous scum vibes, and he has some curious interactions and connections with other players.

I don't agree with this conclusion based on your analysis - the point I brought up about passiveness and not taking sides is one major scumtell more than little scumtells, though your argument is not necessarily invalid. Thanks for taking the time to present your suspicions, though.
Little problem that I have - this was a case, not analysis. Though it lacked the usual FoS/vote that ends most cases, you only looked at the scummy things here and not mentioned anything you find townie about his play. Though this could be the result of being called out for asking for who others think are town.

Parama mentioned that he smoked trichonoply cigars back on page 5, and I spotted some of it's distinctly colored ash in the murder write up.

I don't get it. Care to explain what cryptic message you're trying to convey? I'd love to know.
@ Seven's last comment in 612 - Why do you find me suspicious after not mentioning me once in your post? Please tell me why you are randomly throwing FoSes around without giving reasons.

@All

I still want my damn Lastsurvivor analyses. I caved and gave you mine. And now I regret it because you are continuing to ignore my one request.

I have now responded to your case, and will read him further tomorrow. Right now though it's past midnight and I really need sleep.

[Parama]

EBWOP: HOLY LOTS OF POSTS THAT HAPPENED WHILE I WAS TYPING THIS LAST POST UP. I will read them tomorrow morning. Like I said, I need sleep.

[DeathRowKitty]

Okay, I lied about responding to the wallposts tomorrow (which is now yesterday). These walls of text are really intimidating. If someone has something important that I should respond to from one of those, just repeat it or something. I don't remember there being anything so important it couldn't be ignored though.

As for Shiv's request for opinions on LS, he has a point. LS was my first serious vote in this game (and I made a comment not long after I unvoted that I might have been right about him), but he's pretty much flown off the radar since and I can barely remember what he's done since early day 1. The only posts of his I remember since then are the ones where he questioned me about my vote on Parama. I'll take a look at him later. I'd prefer not to do any heavy analysis at 1am.