Open 204: Friend and Enemies Over

[don_johnson]

don_jonnson, what is your view on lurkers?

henceforth and wherefor art thou i hitherto proclaim that etcetera etcetera and a peculiar amount of hemoglobin generally creates an atmosphere of undeniable angst and frustration directed forth at the naysayers and the whatnots. so, yeah.

vote: discoroboto

the cleverness of this fellow is subtly intriguing.

[don_johnson]

awesome. are you planning on making the summer olymnpics? or do they frown upon webbed toes?

this game needs a car battery hooked to its nipples. or maybe that's me.

[don_johnson]

@don_johnson: Does your strategy change at all when comparing open to normal games?

absolutely. you are starting the game with a knowledge set. you can use it to your advantage.

[don_johnson]

I think the questions are great, they spark discussion, the only downside is that they can spark a wrong answer and lead to a mislynch.

as can any other type of discussion or random voting case. am i to understand that your suggestion here is that we simply call a draw?

unvote, vote: mcgirdle

complete waste of a post.

[don_johnson]

yes. please look at mcgriddle's answer to pe's question more closely. this is exactly what he is saying. "the downside" of discussion is that it may lead to a mislynch. its a cop out. what is the alternative to discussion on a text based forum?

[don_johnson]

disagreeing with the attacks on disco. the word "and" is hardly a mechanic of separation.

[don_johnson]

no. a townie lynch is not an auto loss. i.e. if a townie is mislynched it may be because of something he did. so therefore the thing he did came back to bite him in the ass. the next day, his interactions may mislead the town to another mislynch. therefore the thing he did came back to bite town in the ass. hence, something can come back to bite a player AND the town. at least thats how it read to me. i think some people are making a big deal out of something that is not so big.

[don_johnson]

^^ i think i can get with this one. i need to iso a couple players here. try and post more later.

[don_johnson]

hm. i'm with adam.

unvote, vote: excedrin

he's giving me a headache.

[don_johnson]

i don't like the severity of excedrins attacks over what seem like minor issues. and yes, adam is he-man.

These three are currently screaming scum team to me... Does any one else get this read?

the name of the game is "friends and enemies". pointing out connections on day 1 is poor form. i.e. i was asked ealier about my strategy given the open set-up of a game and answered that it alters my strategy. most important thing for town to do is keep the mason's hidden as long as possible. with a three mason team we need to realize that there are two informed minority's and not just one. further, the accusations of "buddying" are not all that applicable in this set-up either. as the masons need to try and hide their identities and the identities of their partners, so to do vanilla's need to "act" like they are masons in order to draw nks away from the real mason team thereby increasing the chances of a town win.

Disco, please stop saying you don't care about this game because that seems very anti-town to me and you have been posting a lot of fluff... The other thing you have been doing a lot of which is making my scum meter go crazy is defense by ridicule. Instead of properly defending yourself you just attack those who are putting you under the magnifying glass which, from my point of view, looks like you are scum without a good alibi...

i believe you are referring to "ad hom", but i don't believe this is what disco is doing. what would a proper defense look like? i only ask because the attacks against disco are so contrived its making my eyes bleed. how does one defend against constant accusations of "fluff" posting? the only place to cast suspicion is on ones attackers or on lurkers, both actions which can then easily be twisted into "scumtells" by lynchthirsty scum. i think disco is handling things just fine.

+ 1 scum point for water_foul for poor posting.

farside, if you have a question then ask away. i am not getting much of a town vibe from excedrin at this point.

183 seems chock full of good observations.

[don_johnson]

mindgamer: please expand. what don't you like about my posting? you seem to agree with some of the things i am bringing up, so i am confused as to what you are thinking is scum motivated.

[don_johnson]

i am voting. i am questioning players. i am pointing out things i don't think are helping town. accusation of "not scumhunting" is piss poor. retract it.

"buddying" is also ridiculous. i have already laid out my stance on the strategy behind this set up. accusing me of buddying after i clearly pointed out that its a viable strategy in this set up tells me that you are not fully reading my posts.

further, the accusations of "buddying" are not all that applicable in this set-up either. as the masons need to try and hide their identities and the identities of their partners, so to do vanilla's need to "act" like they are masons in order to draw nks away from the real mason team thereby increasing the chances of a town win.

rethink your stance and get back to me. post 216 does not contain a single question which i can answer. they are off the mark, ridiculous, blanket statements which achieve nothing. much like my response to farside: if you have a question , please ask.

Buddying much?

^^ only question there. interestingly, this implies that DR is town. why is it odd for me to think he is town when you obviously feel the same way?

[don_johnson]

*facepalm*

[don_johnson]

do you

want

to be lynched?

[don_johnson]

i'm not exactly sure what's going on here. DR is acting like a jack ass. if he wants to be lynched, then i'll vote for him. tbh, i am considering replacing out of this game. i don't know what else to do here. DR seems to have some insight as to my role. he needs to explain himself at this point, but i am not sure if he should as revealing role information unprovoked on day 1 only helps scum. if he's not a mason, i am fine with lynching him. if he is a mason, then 218 is quite possibly the worst post i have ever seen on this site. in fact:

unvote, vote: discoroboto

the only way i can deal with this issue is head on.

[don_johnson]

not entirely, no. i feel like his post has helped put me into a precarious and awkward position. i don't really know how to handle it. his intentions are extremely cloudy. if he is town, all he has done is help scum with his posting. i don't know how to further extrapolate without revealing info that could damage town. i feel as though my most logical resource is to push his lynch but i cannot entirely explain myself without saying what i feel may be too much. as i said, the most important job for town is to keep the masons hidden as long as possible. his play is potentially outing one of the masons(if not more), unprovoked, on day 1. its a horrible play regardless of alignment.

[don_johnson]

^^ your lack of explanation is astounding. didn't you criticize an earlier vote i made in a similar fashion? how is it scummy to say "his actions are only helping scum"? how do you think his actions helped town? he is playing around with town's only advantage. we have no doc, no cop, no jailkeep, no vig. we have masons and masons alone. how does outing one or more masons on day 1 completely unprovoked help town in any way, shape or form?

[don_johnson]

I read what he said and I find it astounding your voting on him. I think what he did was a trap and it caught you. your vote on him where there is no counter claim or comment against it makes me believe you are jumpy scum that just took the bait.

i am not following you. what is this "counterclaim" you speak of? there have been no role claims as far as i can tell. what was the "bait"?

PE: yeah. i'm not really sure what to do at this point. DR's comments have kind of screwed up my mojo. i don't see any bit of town motivation for his actions. i.e. if he is mason then he is incredibly stupid. if he is vanilla town, then he can not reliably make the comment he did, and therefore he is either anti-town or stupid. if he is scum, then he has helped sow the seeds of confusion and attempted to draw out a mason claim. so what do i do? i feel like my hands are tied. short of roleclaiming there is no way i can explain my own actions accordingly. the more roles exposed on day 1, the bigger the advantage for scum. especially if a mason(or two) is revealed. if

you

want suspect number two it has to be:

unvote, vote farside

she's capitalizing on a weakness here.

[don_johnson]

Disco just attempted to breadcrumb being a Mason so that he can go back later and say that he breadcrumbed being Mason and that DJ isn't a Mason and he knows so cause he's a Mason blah blah blah. There are no investigative roles in this game so that MUST be what he's attempting to do. And having seen what he's been saying so far this game I'm 100% positive that he's lying. And any rebuttal from Disco that it wasn't his intent is a huge crop of bullshit and he better come up with a good ass excuse if he's even going to attempt to say that wasn't his intent.

^^ this. this is what i was referring to that needed to be dealt with head on. there is no town motivation behind DR's moves unless he is a mason and thinks i am scum. the tough part for me is that he may very well be a mason, so by pushing this issue i may out one of our masons. i was hoping not to release the knowledge that i am vanilla, but at this point it is obvious. so whatever. i'm not panicking, i'm just fucked either way. i can only hope DR is scum.

unvote, vote discoroboto

farside is my second choice atm. they are acting very scummy trying to hitch their apple cart to my situation without concrete reasoning.

[don_johnson]

disco:

1) what is it about my posting that led you to believe that i was not a mason prior to post 218?

2) in your own words, how did you expect post 218 to benefit town?

[don_johnson]

farside: you are making no sense. you quoted posts of mine and said "scummy", but haven't explained why. also, what is this "contradiction" you refer to? please try to keep it to 100 words or less. your quote wall hurt my eyes.

DR:

1) Nothing. The conclusion was from your interaction with others. I wanted to test your reaction to outing it, too.

again. please point out what you are talking about. you said earlier that anyone reading my posts could discern that i was not a mason. well then, what was it about my posts that led you to believe that? oh, wait. its not my posts, its my interactions? okay, my interactions with who? please point out your reasoning. post references, names, etc. you know... evidence to back up your claims.

2) I was hoping Town would realise some more things about the set-up (which is partially obvious by now)

actually, its completely obvious. this is an OPEN set-up. we all know the set-up.

and was hoping to get the vanilla townies to deduce other things from it besides only your role, as they have a better view on who's teaming with who and behavior.

outing me as a vanilla only helps the scum team. outing me for a reaction which then reveals me as vanilla, only helps the scum team. if you think i am scum then you should have voted and built a case. as it stands, you haven't done either of those things.

Don, why did you eventually claim? Why did you feel the need to do that?

i was placed in an awkward position. it was the only way i felt i could explain myself and my indignation to your blunder. i.e. i felt i was doing a wonderful job of appearing as though i was possibly a mason. that entirely coincides with my aforementioned strategy which farside so conveniently quoted.

[don_johnson]

Did you read what DJ stated about buddying up?
Now put in the comment that disco said about DJ and DJ's reaction is to start critisizing Disco (this is after defending the guy) and call him scummy for what exactly? Did he say in his initial post that didn't contradict all his defense from before.

this doesn't make any sense. my initial reaction was one of bewilderment. i didn't attack disco until he started backtracking and spouting bullshit. i have said repeadetly: disco's actions ONLY helped scum. what he did was potentially out a mason. whether that mason is me, him, or someone on the fringe of the conversation, his action could have resulted in a mason claim, or a mason outing themselves inadvertently. his statement only makes sense from the perspective of him being a mason, and if he is a mason, it only makes sense as him being a really dumb mason. so if he's a dumb mason, then i'll move my vote. otherwise i see zero town motivation for his actions.

Frankly to continue a bit. DJ was fine and dandy with the game and is talking about replacing out now. I find DJ is scum that just got served a dose from his own comments about buddying to Disco's comment that I can't believe people are not voting for DJ at this point.

yes. my initial reaction to disco's incredibly idiotic statement was to replace out. i was extremely frustrated. so what? i really have no idea what you are getting at. your posts make no sense to me. neither of these posts you have asked me to respond to contain any questions for me. if you want to understand my reasoning, ask me a question. ask me a few. number them so i can easily respond to them so that others can understand what you are talking about as well. right now, you look like scum throwing a smokescreen.

[don_johnson]

Flipping out and taking about replacing out for someone who you say did something idotic is scummy.

how so? townies don't get frustrated?

Second did you read your own comment about buddying up.

mind saying you were buddying up and disco stating you were not mason after that

?

what are you talking about? what is the question here? this makes no sense to me. i feel like the bolded is gibberish. try and restate it.

Seriously I can't be the only one who caught on to what disco was implying with your buddying to him.

disco seemed to imply that he was a mason, and that i was not. then he backtracked and said he wasn't a mason, but that he knew i wasn't a mason based on my posts. now he has further backtracked and claimed that he knew i was not a mason based on my interactions with others. to wit, he has not provided one shred of evidence to support any of his alleged stances.

[don_johnson]

Did you read your own comment about buddying up?

yes. i made the comment. and i have read it.

mindgamer stated you were buddying up and disco stating you were not mason after that.

okay.

Do you get now what he was implying and doing with that statement?

i answered this:

disco seemed to imply that he was a mason, and that i was not.

i don't understand what he was doing with the statement. it frustrated me. his subsequent inability to explain himself leads me to believe that he is scum. there was no reason whatsoever for him to make his statement as town. at least he hasn't stated any reason yet.

i still don't get what you are trying to say here, and why you think i am scum for being pissed off with Disco.

townies get frustrated but from going to hey all is cool and right to stating you want to replace after Disco's comment.

when he first made the comment it read to me as though he was claiming mason. if he was, then as far as i was concerned he was fucking town in the a$$. that frustrated me. then he backtracked on his softclaim. that made it worse. i was pissed. i didn't want to have to claim, but i didn't see any other way to explain my actions. as he has continued his backwards tumble, he has me convinced(at this point) that he is either a dumb mason, or scum. more likely scum, so he has my vote.

@don: Explain your vote on farside. It makes no sense.

farside latch onto the suspicion DR put on me seemed very scummy. i still find her extremely scummy. like i said: DR is either mason or scum imo. i was waffling on whether to pursue him because i would rather not out a mason on day 1(or more than one). hewitt put together a rather succinct post explaining things in a way i could not, and DR's floundering convinced me that my initial instinct was the better option: push DR.

[don_johnson]

He went from defending to basically freaking out in my view.

read it in iso. my initial reaction is a *facepalm* and nothing more. when he backtracks, i sarcastically ask him if he wants to be lynched. then giving it further thought, i vote him. i switch to you because it felt like you were just latching onto the suspicion and confusion that DR's statements helped create. you still seem to be misrepresenting my actions. i have been actively assessing the situation and answering all questions tossed my way. DR has changed his story several times, and the answers he has given have negated any of the situations in which i believe his post could have been town motivated. therefore he is most likely scum at this point. imo, if he's not a mason, then he should be lynched. if he is a mason, then town's going to be fighting an uphill battle.

[don_johnson]

off to work this morning. i will explain both statements for you when i return home.

in the meantime, would you like to explain:

Your interactions are stated in your posts? I don't want to point it out right now, because it won't add anything. You've outed yourself already, so yeah. I still think you don't play like a mason.

so you want me to point out evidence to back up what i'm saying, but you don't want to produce eveidence to back up what you are saying. please quote exactly what it is in my posts that led you to your conclusion. you may think it might not add anything, but it certainly can't be any more useless than your last post. c u later.

[don_johnson]

DR: if english isn't your main language that may explain some of the issues i have. this afternoon i will put togethr a post explaining what i promised earlier.

farside: what are you talking about? what "edge"? and why are you cherry picking that particular quote?

[don_johnson]

farside: i am pretty much done with our conversation. we disagree on your interpretation of my actions. not sure what "omgus vote" you are referring to. DR never voted me. that's partly why his statement was so frustrating. it read as though he was claiming mason and outing me as a vanilla for no good reason. to wit, my iso of DR...

Just dropping in here to say that Don isn't a mason

, interpret it any way you want, I rather not elaborate on it.

there is no use of the phrase "imo" or "i think". this statement is made with certainty. the only player in this game who could be "certain" that another is not a mason, is in fact, a mason. therefore this post clearly reads as a mason claim/breadcrumb. so let's look at our options:

disco is either a mason, vanilla town, or scum.

as a mason: the only thing his statement does is out a mason. it narrows down the scum nk. if disco thought i was scum, that's fine, but there is no indication that he thinks that. also, if i am hypothetically scum in this exchange, disco has ONLY outed himself as a mason. the only thing he can prove is that dj is either scum or vanilla. again, this only helps the scum team. knowing one mason makes it easier to find the others, so even if hyposcumdj gets lynched, scum easily has the upperhand. problem here is that disco makes nbo attempt to cast dj as scum. he posts no evidence that shows he believes dj to be scum. all he does is claim mason and inform the rest of the players that dj is not part of the mason team. basically narrowing down scum's nk choice and jeapordizing the identities of the entire mason squad.

as a vanilla: disco should not be able to make such a statement as he woiuld not be certain that dj is not a mason. by lighting the path for this conversation, the most likely outcome is to out one or more masons. if dj is a mason, he may respond with "yes, i am", or someone else might come to dj's aid and when dj is nk'd and flips mason, his defenders are easily identified. as a vanilla, he also is basically LIEING with the statement and its certiainty.

as scum: is much the same as the outcome of "if he is vanilla". the only purpose his statement serves is possibly outing a mason or two which is not good for town.

tl;dr: the only potential this statement carries is to expose the mason group. it has zero scumhunting value. the only way the statement makes any sense at all(given its certainty) is if disco is a mason. hence the *facepalm*.

but wait...

Maybe I'm wrong, maybe I'm not. You can theorize(is that a word?) on how I came to the conclusion... maybe I'm distancing, maybe I just saw something. I hope that the brighter minds among us will see what I'm implying with saying it.

maybe he is claiming mason, maybe he's not. this is a backtrack on the "certainty" of his original statement. it is vague. it provides no evidence but implies that disco may just be being disco.

How was I breadcrumbing a Mason?

please refer to your original post and its certainty. you all but claimed mason.

I could've just simply seen things in his posts or 1000 other things that are possible.

another vague statement which fails to explain your original statement.

Trying to out other masons? By accusing someone of not being mason? Eh, okay.

yes. i explained this. your post served only the purpose of narrowing down who may or may not be a mason. regardless of your intentions or alignment or role. if you are a mason, you outed yourself and possibly your partners. if i was a mason and you were scum or vanilla, you ran the risk of me outing myself in defense. if we are both vanilla, all you have done is lie and create suspicion on two vanilla players. etc. etc...

It was (partly) a fish for reactions. If you want to know more about Don's role, look more closely at his posts.

now your statement has become a gambit. you also imply that one can discern information regarding my role if they read my posts. yet you have since failed to point to anything in my posts which led you to your conclusion or which might lead someone else to the same conclusion. further, you have since recanted this implication and have implied that you deduced my role through my interactions with other players. you have still failed to explain which players and exactly where in the thread that these "interactions" occurred.

I unvoted Excedrin to vote Don, just wanted a votecount first. I don't think scum is dumb so I'm not going to vote Hewitt.

here is the first time you imply that i am at all scummy. before this you produced no accusations or evidence to back up your supposed intentions to vote me.

Besides, explaining myself would be bad for Town at this point, I think anyone with half a brain would've realised that by now.

^^ this is an implication that you somehow need to reveal role information in order to explain yourself. you said before this that anyone could deduce my role from reading my posts. this is yet another backtrack.

it would mean i'd have to claim my role. do you guys still want to do through with this?

^^ here you confirm 100% that you need to claim your role in order to explain yourself. this means that you were in fact lieing when you said people could deduce the information by reading my posts. confirmation of your backtracking.

The conclusion was from your interaction with others. I wanted to test your reaction to outing it, too.

if your conclusion is based on my "interaction" with others, then you should not need to roleclaim in any way shape or form to explain yourself. this directly contradicts your earlier statement where you say you have to claim to explain yourself. also, when asked to point out which "interactions" led you to believe i was not a mason, you have still failed to qualify the statement.

As I stated, explanation = claim. So you want me to claim? Nice one there.

It's simple,

I based that statement on my role

.

wtf? now we are back to "its based on my role". where are the "interactions"?

My logic only makes sense when you factor in my role. Too bad that at this point this could mean anything.

THE ONLY WAY YOUR ROLE WOULD FACTOR INTO YOUR STATEMENT WAS IF YOU ARE A MASON. if you made that statement as a mason, then you are not very bright. even if from your point of view hyposcumdj exists, your statement did nothing but out a mason and maybe more. the fact that you can't qualify any of your statements with evidence from this thread makes it seem that you are much more likely scum than mason.

It's hard to explain... It's just that you don't interact like I know a mason interacts with other players. Also, your buddying with me was one that partially sparked it.

no. its not hard to explain. you said "The conclusion was from your interaction with others." all you were asked to do is point out the post and/or posts which led you to believe that. all you were asked to do was point out which interactions led you to make the statement. oh, but that's right, in order for you to explain yoursaelf you need to roleclaim. oh, wait, you don't need to roleclaim, youy based your statement on my interaction with others. which interactions? oh, nevermind, i need to roleclaim. i mean interactions.

roleclaim.

interactions.

read his posts.

roleclaim.

interactions.

read his posts.

roleclaim...

are we clear?

[don_johnson]

As for DiscoRoboto himself... the claim now is that he was fishing for reactions. What have we learned? Summarise that for me please.

Wrong.

I wanted to test your reaction to outing it, too.

It was (partly) a fish for reactions.

seriously. disco, if you are a mason, just fucking claim. this kind of horseshit is wasting our time if you are a mason.

[don_johnson]

All that aside I find it interesting that DJ doesn't see an issue with buddying up and defends someone for buddying (will look up who later) I have been in a few mason games and I never saw mason' buddy to begin with so where this logic about budding to hid mason came from doesn't make sense and I would like to know why he believe this helps the town when no other game I have been in I saw mason's buddy before.

i covered my theory here:

the name of the game is "friends and enemies". pointing out connections on day 1 is poor form. i.e.

i was asked ealier about my strategy given the open set-up of a game and answered that it alters my strategy.

most important thing for town to do is keep the mason's hidden as long as possible. with a three mason team we need to realize that there are two informed minority's and not just one. further,

the accusations of "buddying" are not all that applicable in this set-up

either. as the masons need to try and hide their identities and the identities of their partners, so to do vanilla's need to "act" like they are masons in order to draw nks away from the real mason team thereby increasing the chances of a town win.

^^ this is my personal theory developed from my experience and research regarding this set-up. i didn't just sign up for this game. i chose this set-up because i have been preparing for it. once we have a flip or two, "buddying" can be looked at more closely and players will need to explain themselves, but on day one, town's priority should be to keep the masons hidden. i put alot of time into preparing for this set-up which is why when disco made his statement i gave him the *facepalm* and considered replacing out. at that point in time his post read as though he was claiming mason and calling me out as vanilla which imo would be one the worst plays in this set-up.

[don_johnson]

What have we learned? Summarise that for me please.

[don_johnson]

DJ: Link to games you found were the mason's buddied.

never said i had games where the mason's buddied. my theory is based on how i think the game

should

be played. i don't think mason's would make a concerted effort

to

buddy. the idea is that a vanilla townie defending someone under attack would be mistaken for a mason and then nk'd, thus leaving the mason team untouched. not sure why this is so difficult for you. i didn't like the attacks on disco. i defended him. he claimed to be a mason unnecessarily. now he has backtracked, lied, and has utterly failed to explain any of his actions. do you feel that you are tunneling at this point?

[don_johnson]

If you never saw it happen why state that we should look at the buddying and question players that buddy to others on day 1?

i didn't say that. in fact, i said the exact opposite. i said "buddying" was not something which should be considered scummy on day 1. only until after a couple flips should it even be looked at, and then with a grain of salt.

You know what he didn't claim mason. He said you were not mason.

yes. he said that with certainty. it initially read as a claim/huge breadcrumb. he has since backtracked. he has also failed to explain why he said it with certainty and the reasoning behind his certainty seems to shift between three different answers. none of which have been explained.

I saw it as a reaction to your comments about talking about buddying up.

and? no matter what it was, i have already explained why his statement did nothing to help town regardless of his role, alignment, or intentions.

And by the way when I same your vote was OMGUS (the first vote on disco and then your vote on me) The first vote granted he didn't vote your you but your reaction was OMGUS. IE: How dare you try and out me.

no. not omgus. i thought it through. it made no sense for him to make his statement and then backtrack. it made no sense for a townie to identify another players role. especially not in this set-up. i have already explained all of this.

DO YOU FEEL THAT YOU ARE TUNNELING? DO YOU HAVE ANY CONCERN FOR THE FACT THAT DISCO HAS NOT EXPLAINED HIMSELF AND THAT HE IS SHIFTING BETWEEN THREE SEPARATE AND COMPLETELY UNSUBSTANTIATED EXPLANATIONS AS TO WHY HE MADE HIS STATEMENT?

[don_johnson]

Why should we not consider buddying on day 1? Your theory is only in your head (if it actually exsist)

it exists. i posted it earlier. onemore time: on day 1, town's most important job is to keep the mason team hidden, therefore vanilla townies are just as likely to engage in the activity of defense and buddying as scum and/or masons. this renders "buddying" a virtual null tell. until we have a couple flips, examining the nature of buddying can help scum uncover the identity of the masons. i.e. if player a buddies player b and player a is nk'd and flips mason. then scum will most likely target player b next. hence, vanilla's need to engage in interactions that could read as mason interactions(i.e. "buddying", whatever you want to call it) in order to help protect the masons. i have been consistent in this view from the beginning of this game. i still think it is poor form to draw connections before there is a flip and a night phase as it can greatly benefit the scum team.

I already and you agreed that mason don't normally buddy up anyways.

no. we don't agree there.

No I'm asking you questions and I'm not satisfied with your answers.
Do you feel threatened with me asking questions to you?

no. annoyed is a better term. i feel like i am saying the same thing over and over and you just don't seem to get it.

Do you think your tunneling on Disco?

100% yes. absolutely. i am convinced beyond a shadow of a doubt that disco should be placed at L-1 and forced to claim. his inconsistencies in his explanations warrant that scrutiny.

What is your opinion of McG, Light, Excendrin and Mindgamer?

i'll have to get back to you on that as i have been fully engaged with both you and disco. atm, i am not wholly concerned with any of them. i want solid explanations from disco. his play is atrocious and i am stunned that he is not under more scrutiny at this point in time.(although wf has agreed to place him at L-1)

water_foul: will you place disco to L-1 and request a claim? you seem to be waiting to do that in hopes that we have a longer day, but i don't see much coming from you in the way of participation.

for me, this is simple. disco is mason or scum. i think he is way more likely scum, so yeah.

[don_johnson]

no. we don't agree there.

farside22 wrote:
DJ: Link to games you found were the mason's buddied.

don_johnson wrote:

never said i had games where the mason's buddied. my theory is based on how i think the game should be played. i don't think mason's would make a concerted effort to buddy. the idea is that a vanilla townie defending someone under attack would be mistaken for a mason and then nk'd, thus leaving the mason team untouched. not sure why this is so difficult for you. i didn't like the attacks on disco. i defended him. he claimed to be a mason unnecessarily. now he has backtracked, lied, and has utterly failed to explain any of his actions. do you feel that you are tunneling at this point?

If you never saw it then how do you know it exsist?

how do i know what exists? noone said masons "buddied".

Waterfowl had stated he saw three player screaming scum team when you brought on this:

further, the accusations of "buddying" are not all that applicable in this set-up either. as the masons need to try and hide their identities and the identities of their partners, so to do vanilla's need to "act" like they are masons in order to draw nks away from the real mason team thereby increasing the chances of a town win.

Why should we not look at players that are buddying up if I have never seen in a game mason's buddy before?
Please stop dodging this question.

stop dodgin what question? this:

Why should we not look at players that are buddying up if I have never seen in a game mason's buddy before?

i have answered this already. if we call out "buddying" and point to scum "teams" as opposed to single suspicion, it makes the scum teams job of finding the masons that much easier. i.e. if i were to say "farside and disco look connected at the hip" and disco later claimed mason, where do you think scum will look to find disco's mason partner? they would most likely think that you were disco's mason partner.

hence, pointing out connections and partnerships on day one is POOR FUCKING FORM.

look at players who are buddying all you want, but pursuing a player solely because they are buddying is shit for brains scum hunting. look at players who are acting scummy.

i was defending disco from poor attacks. his actions in response to that are scummy. he has STILL FAILED TO EXPLAIN HIMSELF.

i haven't avoided a single question posted my way.

[don_johnson]

DJ: There has never been as far as any game I have ever been in seen mason's buddy up. Your theory is all based on mason's buddying. Now either link a game you saw mason's buddy or you comment about ignoring buddying looks that much more scummy.

*FACEFUCKINGPALM*

no.

my theory is based on the fact that this set-up contains two informed minority's.

scum and masons. by exposing links between players without a confirmed scum flip, you then run the risk of exposing the

wrong

informed minority. the only power town has in this set-up is the ability of the masons to confirm each other. exposing them early is suicide for town as it allows scum to pick them off unprotected at night while spinning lynches on the vanillas.

hypothetically: player A and player B are masons. if player A gets into a tight spot, most likely player B will defend him. player B will try to not go to the extent of revealing a link between the players, but the "buddying" will be there.

you are basically arguing the semantics of the term "buddying". players who know each others alignments will subconsciously engage in behavior that resembles buddying. therefore, as a vanilla townie, it makes the most sense to model ones behavior after the type of behavior one might think to see from a mason. if i was disco's mason partner i would have done what i could to defend him to protect him from having to claim.

why is it scummy for me to have defended disco from poor attacks? your initial issue with me was not because of my behavior

before

disco's post, but for my behavior

after

his post. you seem to have shifted the focus of your case. why?

[don_johnson]

PE: can you summarize the case on Light? maybe some post references and what not? imo it feels like more of a policy lynch, but that could be because my attention is elsewhere.

disco is at L-1. nobody hammer. i support the request for claim.

[don_johnson]

hm. my bad. lets wait for an official vote count before someone piles on. i wonder why water_foul was so hesitant to vote him then? it seems as though the debate with farside has tapered off. i'm going to go back and do some iso reads and whatnot.

[don_johnson]

disco: if you are a mason, getting nk'd is better than getting lynched.

if you are a mason and don't claim and we proceed to lynch you, then one of your partners will most likely end up stepping forward and claiming for you whcihc would be absolutely horrendous. you have been lieing and acting scummy. you are evading questions and are now employing a strategy that will only benefit scum(again). just claim. if you are a mason then you are taking a bullet tonight. if not, then you are being lynched. simple as that.

[don_johnson]

you have been lieing and acting scummy

Point out both, lol.

already have. ;aid out the case against you two pages back.

and are now employing a strategy that will only benefit scum(again).

I don't think I ever outed my strategy, stop pretending to know what's going on when you can't even figure my original statement out.

not claiming only benefits scum. your strategy is to not claim. thats what you stated in post 356. that's the strategy i am referring to.

if not, then you are being lynched.

If I'm lynched I want DJ to be quicklynched tomorrow. Don't want his scumpartners to help him out.

a) quicklynching is always a bad idea.
b) you have presented no case as to why i am scum.

Because you said you were not going to talk about it.

not going to talk about what? another nonsenssical post from fardside.

You ignored the question about why 1 line threw you over the edge to talk about asking to be replaced.

i did not ignore the question.

a) the question was presented poorly.
b) i never implied or said that "one line" "threw me over the edge". that was your interpretation. for instance, how would you answer this question:

farside, why are you overreacting about my strategy?

its not a fair question because it implies that you are overreacting. it creates a false dilemma because if you chooe to answer to answer it, you are, by default, admitting that you are overreacting. if you are town, you need to take another look at the situation. there is no reason whatsoever for anyone to be defending disco at this point in time. he has dug his own hole with his inability to explain his post. he has backtracked several times and seems to think that ambiguity is his best strategy. sorry, but happy fun time is over. he needs to claim and clear up exactly why he is acting the way he is.

From someone saying you are not mason, to you saying facepalm, to him saying I'm not saying Im mason, blah, blah, blah. To you asking him if he want's to be lynched to throwing a tantram that fits a 2 year old that goes off on Disco and calling him names and saying I thought about replacing is assign. I don't for a second read it as frustrated town. I read it as caught scum.

read it how you want to read it. you have been saying this over and over. saying it over and over doesn't make it true. i can agree to disagree.

Last time. Mason's don't buddy and checking the last game they are more careful about defending.

nobody said they "buddy". the idea is that one informed minority is hunting another. scum is obviously going to be looking for connections between townies in order to uncover the masons, therefore the vanillas need to do a good job of "muddying the waters" so scum cannot see so clearly. hence, it is a good idea for vanillas to engage in "buddying" players they believe are town.

The mason's if smart are good enough to keep their own views and use their own wit to mislead the scum.

When 3 players buddy up too much day 1 I'm not saying oh they could be mason we should buddy to others.

I'm looking at is one of those players buddying up scum to a town player trying to hope one is mason and fake claim later if said player flips mason.
And don't tell me that doesn't happen.

never said it didn't happen. i have never seen it, but i see how one might think that. either way you slice it, disco's post was anti-town at best. he weakened towns position. i have explained this over and over. please stop talking to me. the bolded represents a poor strategy on your part. you are basically banking on the idea that our masons are good players. there is no guarantee that three smart players pulled the mason roles. i disagree with you here. townies had better do their best to cover up "buddying" on day 1. i never said or implied that it couldn't be looked at after a flip or two, in fact, i think it should, but on day 1 exposing "groups" of players makes scums job easier.

[don_johnson]

How the fuck am I overreaction to your stradegy.

i never said you were overreacting. i used that question as hypothetical to show you some of the finer points of how to communicate with other human beings. go sign up at your local community college for a basic course in communication and you will learn all about it.

I asked you questions and so far you haven't given one good reason that YOUR THEORY not anyone else in this game means that mason's buddy and that town should not try to point out the buddying in the game of others on day 1.

i've given you several reasons. you just don't agree.

This is something only you believe and as I stated I never see mason's that are trying to hid buddy up or defend one another.

yes. this is MY THEORY. i never implied otherwise.

They stay apart as long as they can unless a mason is about to be lynched.

^^ this is

your

opinion and it follows along with my theory. a mason gets into trouble and his partners try and save him. that's a form of "buddying" regardless of when the trouble occurs.

There is no reason that anyone should ignore buddying based on a theory that is not fact in past game here at MS.

noone said to IGNORE buddying. all i said is that the accusation is poorly fettered on day 1.

i don't actually believe that you are this dense.

dr: your post is shit. you are a backtracking liar and you need to be lynched. certainty wasn't "claimed", it was "implied" by your use of words. you said english isn't your first language. well it is mine and i know what you said implied certainty by the way you worded it. again, you seem to say your explanation is role based information and interactions. you can't seem to point out these interactions even still.

someone put this guy at L-1. i'm getting sick of this conversation. its entirely circular.

[don_johnson]

for instance, how would you answer this question:

farside, why are you overreacting about my strategy?

FOR INSTANCE. < implies that it is a hypothetical question. it means i am using it as an example.

Seriously? Fine you called it poor form. Why you are wrong right here is the follow:
First off this happened early in the day so their is no reason for a mason to "buddy" So pointing out a connection this early in the day is valid
Again unless a mason is under scrinty they will not "buddy" up to their mason partner or defend them.

disco was under pretty heavy scrutiny at the time. the attacks on him were poor. he was doing nothing to alleviate the pressure. if he were my mason partner, i would most likely have either tried to alleviate the pressure or hung back to avoid being tied to him. either or. two options. as a vanilla, by defending him, if he later flips mason, i could then be targeted by scum as a possible partner thus forcing scum to waste a nk oppurtunity.

It's not my opinion it's what i have seen in other games of Friends and Enemies.

good for you.

Your theory unless agreed with by others before waterfawl mentioned the buddying is pretty useless after the fact. You don't know if those accused of buddying are scum, town or mason. You just want to shut it down right then and there.

not sure what you are talking about here. i don't think lynching a player for "buddying" on day 1 is a good idea because you have no idea who they are buddying to. therefore, those observations are best made discreetly and looked at later. by exposing them on day 1 before we have any flips, we run the risk of helping scum figure out who the masons are.

You know what I did last game when I thought someone was mason. I didn't buddy up. I looked for scum. I didn't protect them with fake buddying. I looked at those players I thought were town and those who I thought were scum and I made cases. The one mason was NK. The other mason was outted because of scum making weak cases. Not on "buddying".

good for you. you play how you play, i'll play how i play. as far as scumhunting goes, it might be in your best interest to reread disco's ubercontradictory posting instead of continually arguing with me about a theory of mine that you disagree with.

does anyone else here feel like this day is turning into a broken record?

[don_johnson]

List mod note: If the mod does not post today I will be replacing him.

DJ:
So this post http://www.mafiascum.net/forum/viewtopi ... 29#2133729
Where Water calls out McG (noticable quiet scum) You and Disco as buddying is not something that should be noticed because you think town should be doing this.

town should be doing what? i don't think town should be calling out "groups" on day 1. hypothetically, at that point in the game it was still possible from a vanilla townies pov that the mason team was "mcg, disco, dj." by water_foul pointing out the connection he can (if vanilla) be helping scum narrow down who the masons are. pointing out "connections" regardless of how you want to define those connections, is poor form on day 1.

Now mind you I will say it's valid since you think this is a theory to go by but what about disco and McG. They don't have this theory. Their buddying (I don't think disco was buddying but to carry on for a bit) isn't something that normally happen unless it's scum buddying up to town.

again. this is your opinion. masons know 100% that their partners are aligned town. i am not implying that the "buddying" would be intentional. i think this is the main source of our argument is that i am using "buddying" in a much broader sense than i think you are accustomed to. masons will employ distancing tactics as much as scum, but once you have a scum flip, you often look to that players interactions with others to find his partners. often you can look at "wealer" attacks they made, or unexplained or chainsaw defenses. scum can employ the same tactics in order to hunt masons. scum is the more informed minority in this game. i.e. they know more players alignments than masons, so by pointing out day 1 connections without a flip to refer to, vanillas may inadvertently out the mason team and make scums job easier. i found water_fouls post to be poor form and i responded.

Based on meta I know I'm changing my vote. Game is ongoing.

unvote:
vote: McG

mkay. what is your opinion of Light?

pure scum here.

[don_johnson]

ebwop:

sorry: "wealer" should be "weaker".

and a question for farside got cut off:

farside, what is your opinion of Light?

[don_johnson]

Your not explain why town should not be doing this. Unless you are mason which I seriously doubt you are, I have already pointed out that there is no reason that early in the day for mason's to buddy and typically do not buddy.

I think your trying to make it sound like buddying is always typically with mason's which has no fact in it

.

you are missing the point entirely. bolded is not even close to what i have been saying. i am done here. i will get to my iso's asap. i haven't had anytime as you keep responding with the same fucking thing over and over no matter how many different ways i try to explain it to you. we have differing theory's on how vanilla townies should play in this set-up. case closed.

vote: deadline extension not having the mod around has hurt our ability to organize. i had no idea the deadline was so close.

[don_johnson]

I also have issue with DJ saying I'm tunneling on him when that is all he's been doing with Disco most of the day. That comment smacks of hypocrisy.

i admitted that i was tunneling on you. thats not hypocrisy. hypocrisy would be if i was using it as an attack on you and denying that i was exhibiting the same behavior.

Your missing my point to DJ. Unless Disco or McG had the same theory as you about buddying your comment about not pointing it out early day 1 is invalid.

not at all. i have no idea how you can reach that conclusion, but whatever, this conversation is pointless. i came into this game with a theory. disco was under scrutiny, the attacks on him were poor, and he was doing nothing to diffuse the situation. i defended him. in response, he revealed(though he now denies it) role information and has so far failed to explain himself in any way shape or form.

McG's vote is stupid so close to dealine.

mindgamer is just being silly. i have repeatedly stated that i have been absorbed in my conversation with farside and disco, so of course i have not been paying as much attention to other posts, sorry i didn't realize deadline was so close.

I say DJ, McG and either Excedrin/Light

its funny, but you seem to have a "group" here. would i be correct in assuming that you came up with this group by looking at the interactions of the above mentioned players? if so, does it not occur to you that the scum team would hunt the masons in a similar manner? the scum are looking for connections just as much as you(if you are town). your entire disagreement with me seems to be based on the fact that you think the masons are smarter than the scum team. its kind of a bad assumption to make. it is not an assumption that i made at the start of this game. it occurred to me that the scum team would hunt for the mason team in a much similar manner as town hunts scum. therefore i used my theory to defenbd a player i thought was town and who was being pushed around by players with weak attacks. but whatever. for some reason you don't want to believe me, even though you are allegedly hunting scum in the same manner i proposed that scum might hunt the masons. oh well.

With mason's in this game the only list I plan on making is a list of those I think may be scum.

^^ you posted this on page 5. my point is that by a player making "scum" lists, or pointing out connections between players, one has the potential to out the masons. i.e. the masons make up an informed minority, much like the scum team, so they can(in effect) be hunted the same way. i think "scumlists" and "connections" are best left til after day 1 in friends and enemies due to the specific nature of the set up. the only players who can effectively look for a scum "group" are the masons themselves because they know who the mason "group" is. the vanillas should avoid such scumhunting tactics and if the masons want to stay hidden then they should also avoid making those "lists" public as it then alerts scum that they might be masons. get it?

POSTING SCUM LISTS ON DAY 1 HELPS THE SCUM TEAM NARROW DOWN GROUPINGS OF PLAYERS. THIS HELPS THEM DETERMINE WHO THE MASONS ARE. PLEASE STOP DOING IT.

MINDGAMER: DO YOU JUST REALIZE THAT YOU MOVED YOUR VOTE FROM DISCOROBOTO TO ME? WHAT HAS CHANGED YOUR MIND ABOUT HIM? BECAUSE I DIDN"T RECOGNIZE THE DEADLINE WAS SO CLOSE THAT MAKES ME SCUM? WHY WERE YOU VOTING DISCO IN THE FIRST PLACE?

[don_johnson]

ebwop: "tunneling on disco", not farside.

[don_johnson]

we really shouldn't be coasting into deadline like this.

farside: you voted McG instead of me which tells me that you are more sure that he is scum than i. in that regard, i ask you to look at this situation with me as vanilla town and reevaluate for the sake of getting this right. your stubborness reads more town than scum to me. i would be willing to join the McG wagon, the last vote of his is a bit out there, but i would like your opinion of mingamer's recent switch.

your alluding to pages 4-6 and his recent attack had me doing a bit of a reread of those pages and an iso of mindgamer. to me, it looks as though mindgamer was riding the disco wagon with very little reasoning. i.e. it looks as though he was just trying to get a claim with no intention of lynching, whereas myself and i think some of the others on the wagon were prepared to lynch with a vanilla claim. this seems like a scum motivated action to me.

he even stated i was his preferred lynch target while hopping the disco wagon. not sure what to make of it, but i would like your take on it.

unfortunately, with so little time left for deadline i am most likely not going to get to much more rereading and iso. i work both tonight and tomorrow night and have other obligations pending on this site. if you are town, you know as well as i that we need to organize something.

my lynch pool: disco, mindgamer, McG, Light

please realize this is not a "scum" grouping as i currently don't see connections between these players, they are simply the four most independently scummy individuals imo. Light still reads like a policy lynch and so is last on my list.

[don_johnson]

i realize this. please read 399, it seems we had a giant simulpost.

[don_johnson]

farside: sorry i haven't gotten to other reads, i have just been banging my head against the wall trying to explain myself. i think i have explained my stance on disco. i just don't see him as vanilla playing the way he is. i don't want to lynch him because of his initial statement. its the backtracking and inability to explain himself that has me convinced he is scum. however, the possibility exists that he is mason, and it also exists that he is vanilla being ridiculous. i'm not going to push the wagon with so little support this close to deadline.

I'm going to say reading Disco I don't think he's scum. I can't explain gut calls, but again I never think scum is dumb. They get tripped up on small things not something like trying to out a mason.

ok. its not how i read him, but i can accept the possibilities here and his refusal to claim is probably the best decision he could have made as town. granted he could make it as scum as well, but with too little backing i will move.

unvote, vote: McGriddle

i can go with this. please reconsider mindgamer, his vote on disco is certainly the scummiest and would fit both a scum on town scenario or scum on scum scenario. it seems as though he was only interested in getting the claim and not intent on lynching at all.

[don_johnson]

disco: please tell me that you realize the fact that 4/5 of your "list" is omgus. seriously, you are not playing pro town. the "lightning rod" theory should not apply.

[don_johnson]

disco: please tell me that you realize the fact that 4/5 of your "list" is omgus. seriously, you are not playing pro town. the "lightning rod" theory should not apply.

It's a fact that scum goes for a mislynch, especially when the target is (was) already under attack.[/dice]

i can see that point and i do notice you said "1-3 scum". honestly, if scum

is

on the wagon, my bet would be mindgamer. i find it interesting that you seem to ignore his play, and he seems to have backed off of your wagon. but whatever. the rest of your wagon is on with good reasoning, i know you don't agree, but you have lied and backtracked about your reasoning for your statemtn and have produced no in thread evidence which you claim exists even though you have been asked rather politely and repeatedly by everyone on your wagon. moving on.

McG. i love the fact that you haven't posted a coherent case or any reasoning for your vote. especially considering you showed absolutely ZERO suspicion of me until your last two posts after i called your Light vote useless and farside moved to you.

[don_johnson]

according to my calendar, deadline is today. farside, would you consider moving to disco?

excedrin, hewitt, kunk: would you consider moving to McG?

[don_johnson]

mod: deadline extension, please.

i can agree here, though we have already been extended once, so we should be prepared to act if need be. unless we need replacements we may not get what we ask for. i'm not sure if we even have enough active players here to lynch. that said, what do you think is our best option?

[don_johnson]

according to my calendar, deadline is today. farside, would you consider moving to disco?

excedrin, hewitt, kunk: would you consider moving to McG?

OMGUS much?

feel free to make a case. i already explained how my vote is not omgus.

PE: please iso McGriddle. its not hard. i think he's a safe bet. biggest problem with the disco wagon is that he has breadcrumbed mason. if we are forced to lynch without a claim due to deadline, this could be bad. McG has done nothing and is now being a giant hypocrite. i.e. refer to the farside/dj discussion of hypocrisy. this one fits the bill.

also: please bold requests made to the mod. i think its sop.

[don_johnson]

It is noted how Don_johnson suggested the policy lynch on Light but not on McGriddle, who plays in pretty much the same way.

dj never suggested a policy lynch. dj said the light lynch

seems

like a policy lynch. light was placed dead last on dj's "lynch list" would should be an obvious indicator that is his least preferable lynch of the day. next time you come to the playground, please bring your big boy pants. the light lynch is being pushed by others, not by dj.

unvote, vote: disco

with the extension i believe this is the better wagon. i love the fact that mindgamer is still calling out "groupings". i think hewitt is a beacon of wisdom.

[don_johnson]

433 is a bit wierd. its almost a vanilla claim in and of itself now. which really contradicts(once again) everything disco has been alluding to. if we push McGriddle to claim, then we need to follow through with the lynch, i.e. its not a good idea to get more than two claims out on day 1, and since i am already out, going back to disco would be a bad idea. scum knows who is town and who is not, and if we are all three town, it is better to let them sift through the wifom that disco has created tonight than give them a clear picture. sorry for the flip flopping, but we need to get somewhere.

unvote, vote McG

[don_johnson]

I dont know how you got that out of it but the statement is wrong like always.

you speculate on yourself being lynched. that's a near impossibility if you are a mason. for someone who posted this:

As you've probably noticed by now, english is not my 'main' language.

you seem to get awfully defensive about how people interpret what you say. maybe the issue is you not posting coherently, not everyone else interpreting your posts incorrectly.

hammer away, McG's just being stupid.

[don_johnson]

waiting for the flip...

[don_johnson]

so you say you are town, you have zero input, and you just spun your own lynch because you're too busy to pay attention. i get it when people don't want to invest the time it takes to read the thread. i do that myself sometimes, but just acting like a jack ass helps noone. i sincerely hope you are scum.

[don_johnson]

really? what a scummy mason...

mod: i can replace in somewhere for you if it means getting someone in here.

anyhow:

vote: disco

this one should have never been let go.

[don_johnson]

poor form farside. if you iso mindgamer, you may find something which states otherwise. i.e. mg may have been distancing.

here's my issue: one of the main reasons i left the disco wagon yesterday was the vehement defense which disco was recieving. farside, herself, was one of disco's main supporters. during her entire defense(which remained unexplained) she attempted to argue against my theory that vanillas should buddy to/defend others on day 1 to avoid revealing mason partnerships. so, if farside is vanilla, why was she defending Disco so much yesterday? the attacks on disco were well warranted given the easily provable backtracking and misdirection, and yet farside seemed to completely ignore the idea of disco scum yesterday. my thought was that disco/farside were masons. if thats not the case i would like farside to explain why they defended disco so hard yesterday(apparently thinking they were a mason), while debunking the theory that vanillas should engage in buddying/defense of others in order to protect the masons.

what's with the 180?

unvote

[don_johnson]

farside: just to be clear, i would like our conversation to remain civil. there is no need for this to turn into an anti-town pissing match. if my tone seems offensive, just let me know. my confusion revolves around your vote today. it seems as though you are voting him simply based on the fact that he is not mason. you entirely discount the idea he is vanilla. the whole case on him yesterday seemed to revolve around the idea of him being either scum or mason. in other words, you were defending him solely based on the fact that you thought he was a mason while chastising me for exhibiting the same behavior earlier in the day. the only difference was that i acknowledged the added benefit such defense has when exhibited by a vanilla townie. in any case. i am puzzled, so i would like you to expand on why you think disco is scum.

the "poor form" was in reference to the fact that you just outed yourself as "not mason". but we need more input. off to work...

[don_johnson]

*facepalm*

i guess you'd rather it be a pissing match.

Mindgamer did vote for him so this definately leads to disco not being mason

^^ this implies that you were

not

voting him yesterday because you thought he

might

be a mason.

I thought maybe disco could be a VI.

^^ yet here you say you thought maybe he could be a VI(do you mean vanilla?). so what exactly has changed about disco's status which now makes him voteworthy? why can't he still be a VI? your logic is confusing me. why exactly do you think disco is scum?

[don_johnson]

sorry farside, but you clearly outed yourself as "not mason". don't try to project suspicion onto me for a move that you made.

mindgamer thought he was scummy. Did you miss that part?

i need to iso and find out just how much, but either way, this insinuation flies directly in the face of the theory you were pushing yesterday. if you recall you fought me tooth and nail on how masons would act in this set-up. you claimed yesterday that they wouldn't defend each other. now you are claiming that they wouldn't vote each other. so tell me, if the masons aren't going to defend each other, and aren't going to attack each other for distancing purposes, how exactly are the masons supposed to act? (rhetorical, don't answer). your logic is fuzzy and your attitude is extremely confrontational.

hewitt: my statement wasn't "necessary". i was highly surprised by the flip as mg was one of my main suspects.

farside: in case you missed these

so what exactly has changed about disco's status which now makes him voteworthy? why can't he still be a VI? your logic is confusing me. why exactly do you think disco is scum?

^^ please answer all three.

[don_johnson]

ok. just iso'd mg. stand by my original statement. his posts showed little consistency and his final call on the scum team was at least 2/3 wrong. that said, we need more participation here.

farside: truce. i think you are most likely town in this situation. i do not want to clog this thread with useless back and forth. i would like you to answer my questions, and if you have some for me, please lay them out in an orderly fashion.

hewitt: disco's refusal to claim yesterday was a smart decision. the fact that he wasn't nk'd is the biggest indicator(imo) that he is scum. he has already claimed. running up his wagon isn't going to yield many more results from him. i am thinking we need an alternate strategy for today. perhaps keep him as a deadline lynch and all of us go back and reread a bit for new suspects. PE and water_foul need to be looked at and we need replacements. kind of frustrating.

[don_johnson]

are you referring to my random vote? i didn't think you and disco were masons until he softclaimed and you launched an unexplained defense of his actions while ignoring his scumminess.

mindgamer thought he was scummy.

how is this relevant? you said you thought disco was a VI.

He could still be a VI and there are 2 votes on him I still question and if disco flips town I would look more into excedrin and waterfowl if he does flip town.

what two votes are you questioning? why excedrin and water_foul if he flips town?

The really thought disco did what he did for reaction. Looking back and reveluating there could be him trying to out the mason's in the game.
Now he's hinting more about trying to out them which screams scum.

how could he out the masons if he is scum? if he is VI, do you think he is smarter than the scum team and that he does actually know who the masons are?

[don_johnson]

If you thought disco and myself were mason why did you vote disco the start of the day?

are you referring to today? if so, then let me explain:

disco softclaimed mason. you launched an unexplained defense. scum should have targeted one of you two. the mindgamer hit makes no sense.

disco's refusal to claim yesterday was a smart decision. the fact that he wasn't nk'd is the biggest indicator(imo) that he is scum.

at this point in time, the "biggest" indicator that disco is scum is that he wasn't nk'd even after he softclaimed and recieved defense(not from just you) from others. the only reason scum would hunt elsewhere is to either find one of his partners and push a mislynch or claim today or if they knew he wasn't mason. the only way they could "know" he's not a mason is if he's part of the scum team. however, if they were looking for his partners, mindgamer (as you pointed out) would be a poor choice. hence, disco is most likely scum. hence my vote. the only reason for my retraction is because i see you as a very possible partner for him. this, however, conflicts with my read on you to this point and so you do not have my vote(which will most likely land on disco). the other factor here is the amount of lurkage going on. i don't see any reason to lynch disco if we can't get full participation from the rest of the players as scum could easily be sitting back and watching as we lynch vanilla disco.

[don_johnson]

Seriously DJ how long have you been playing at this site that you saw scum defend scum as hard as I defending disco?

look at my join date. this is what continues to confuse me: why was it so hard for you to accept my theory yesterday regarding

my

defense of disco? you don't think scum defends scum, and you don't think mason defends mason. yet here:

If your right and disco is scum. Then killing me for example and my flip would put disco in the hot seat today. So if disco is scum killing me is bad. They do a shot at mindgamer (for some reason I don't know why) and unfortunetly for scum mindgamer flipped mason who was voting for disco, which now disco can't say anything but that he is VT because god knows scum can't claim scum and if he claimed mason no one would believe him.

your theory rests on scum buying into the relationships you say it would be stupid for anyone to believe exist. why would your flip put disco in the hotseat? my problem with you is that you are stating theory with no evidence. you haven't explained where you "reevaluated" and decided that disco was scum trying to out masons as opposed to the VI you thought he was yesterday. also, if you thought he was VI yesterday, then how does your theory work at all? the basis of your entire theory of "why disco is scum" revolves around one element:

because mindgamer voted disco. therefore disco is not a mason.

so why, if you thought he could possibly be VI yesterday, what has changed your mind to think that he is scum today? its a huge gap in your case. mg flipping mason is rather irrelevant, yet it is the cornerstone of why you say you believe disco is scum.

and no. you might not be his partner. you might just be scum pushing another mislynch. or you might be misguided town. however, i have never seen gaps like this is townfarside's logic, so meta tells me you are scum.

also, scum killed a mason. there was nothing "unfortunate" about it so i don't really understand that comment other than it relates to your case. somehow, mg's flip forced disco to claim VI which leads you to believe he is scum, even though you thought he was VI yesterday when you were defending him. its not adding up.

[don_johnson]

great. way to claim mason with one vote on you.

unvote

other mason is painfully obvious now. so basically, you've been arguing out of your ass this whole time because of what was said in last night's mason quicktopic? don't get mad at me for figuring out you were spouting shit not based on your own beliefs. as i said earlier, both masons and scum are informed minorities. same tactics can often out both. voting me isn't going to help. if you guys thought disco was scum then i'll follow. but don't blame me for you not being able to conceal the fact that you blatantly did a 180 with little to no reasoning. you should have played better.

also, with the amount of lurkers here, disco may be a suboptimal play. i guarantee that 2/3 of mg's last in thread scum list was wrong, so whatever.

[don_johnson]

Killing a player that is confirmed town isn't unforatunate how exactly?

you said that it was "unfortunate" for scum that he flipped mason. reading

is

tech. try it sometime.

[don_johnson]

also, i am not "lieing" about your meta. i haven't played with you a huge amount of times, but the times i have played with you you seemed smart. my apologies for thinking you were smart. now i have a concrete link to a game where you played like a complete dumbass(hint: its this one.) and no, i am not going to link to a game where scum defend each other. sometimes scum defend each other and sometimes they distance, and sometimes they downright bus. you were obviously "defending" disco and then made a complete 180 with no in thread evidence. i called you on it, you panicked and claimed mason. brilliant.

[don_johnson]

and no. you might not be his partner.

you might just be scum pushing another mislynch. or you might be misguided town.

i have seen plenty of times where scum defended town hard on day 1. i am not linking to a game where this happened and i refuse to argue about it.

[don_johnson]

vote: disco

[don_johnson]

i don't have links to my "theories". they are "theories". they are my idea of how situations might play out. i hold the belief that vanilla townies should act like masons in the friends and enemies set-up. i have no proof or evidence that states this is a "good" theory, it is just something i think works. not sure what the other "theory" is that you are referring to, but the idea that players don't defend other players and that some of those players might be scum is RETARDED. the only "teory" i put forth was that your "unexplained" defense of disco was suspicious when coupled with your complete 180 as to his alignment based on no visible in thread evidence. read up on don_johnson. he doesn't link. never has, and never will. linking is stupid and pointless and it proves nothing. my theories are based on what i believe, not on concrete evidence i have seen somewhere else.

disco: outing the third mason is not a good idea. it only helps scum. though its easy enough to figure out, just drop the subject and move on. if you are town. who do you think is scum and why?

[don_johnson]

speaking of links, seeing as how your case on disco is "mingamer was a mason and said disco was scum", could you link to a game where mindgamer was town, got nk'd on night one, and correctly identified a member of the scum team? kind of a stupid question, right? kind of like "he don, seeing as how you think disco is scum due to a prolific amount of in thread evidence you have provided, can you link to game where that behavior has been shown to indicate scum"?

I am putting you on my list of players I never want to play with.

sign me up, too.

honestly, disco, do you believe farside is mason? if so, what do you think the odds are that all the active players at this point are town and scum is just watching us self destruct.

[don_johnson]

i thought the outed one and the dead one were morons.

unvote, vote: light

active lurking lurker needs to go.

[don_johnson]

Nice personal attack. Just because you can't bother to prove your "theory" as fact here at ms makes me a moron.

i never said my "theory" was "fact". if i thought that, then i would have called it a "fact" and not a "theory". you are also grossly misunderstanding my "theory" to begin with, so whatever.

Lets add lurker hunting. What disco is all the sudden town to you?

add lurker hunting to what? the fact that i presented a good case yesterday which you refused to acknowledge? i was pushing the disco wagon all the way to the bank yesterday. you defneded him for reasons you still can't even explain, now your case on him is "because mg said he was scum". PE has made some good points about Light and was also pushing the case yesterday. disco may very well be VI trying to run misdirection to confuse the scum team. competing bandwagons are good for town. i worked my ass off yesterday trying to get disco lynched. if you want it so bad, you do the legwork today.

[don_johnson]

disco is not a mason. if he wants to be lame and name who he thinks is the third mason then that's fine. it wouldn't be hard for scum to iso him and see who it is he "breadcrumbed" if in fact he did breadcrumb them. its really a moot point. arguing with disco about this is wasting time and space. let's get some input from our other players and get some replacements. let disco be disco at this point. if he is town and can help us win, then i hope he chooses to do that. if we can't organize a better lynch for today, then he will probably be lynched. moving on...

[don_johnson]

light is scum. a giant post with nothing but "it's not me" is indicative of maladapted behavior.

[don_johnson]

I have posted about the disco-farside-don incident. I have taken note on the situation. I have stated there that i think there is no real case on disco other than the fact that mindgamer wanted him out and he was a mason. I have also taken note that disco was apparently trying to out the remaining mason.

there is a case on disco. its rather solid. you also state that you think he tried to out the other mason. why not lynch him?

[don_johnson]

^^ this is true(i think). Light should be lynched.

[don_johnson]

go go gadget bandwagon!

[don_johnson]

abandon

[don_johnson]

scum had this one in the bag. poor town play. too much bickering. another game where lynching lurkers would have been a great way to start.

[don_johnson]

PE: i thought you were town 100% well done.

[don_johnson]

A mason has no reason to buddy up to a vanilla town, so you weren't a mason. And I didn't want to have people think you were my buddy.

@DJ

i was defending you from what seemed like rather poor attacks. in turn, you made a statement that could have outed a mason, and ultimately narrowed down the field of possible masons for scum to choose from. not very epic imo. hugely anti-town. had you at any point recovered and actually tried to scumhunt, then your play could have been okay, but you just continued to act like scum.

[don_johnson]

yes, but seeing as how it basically handed the game to scum, mayhaps you should rethink the "epic" part of it. i wasn't buddying you. i was defending you from poor attacks. townies have every reason to "defend" other players.