Mini 956: The Quayside (Game Over)

[SerialClergyman]

Last time I played with hoopla I got modkilled. Here's to hoping my jockular humor and piecemeal reasoning gets a little farther this time ><

I'd vote goat but I'm a little uncool with the domestic violence schtick that I don't understand. Interestingly, in Australia we had a domestic violence campaign that was widely mocked amongst us neds because it read (violent act) - that's assault. Those chemically minded created arguably the smartest yet stupidest graffiti ever - 'NaCl - that's a salt'.

True story.

vote iamausername

He knows why.

[SerialClergyman]

Irritatingly, my girlfriend has discovered that I regularly have a piece of information that I consider interesting but know it'll be a hard sell, like statistics that run against conventional wisdom or a random scientific fact. Rather than just keep it to myself, I attempt to push on with the conversation, but in a semi-conscious act of desperation, I start the sentence with 'Interestingly, ....'

I relate this story so that you all may benefit from the knowledge she has sacrificed so much time and energy in gaining, and can easily identify these said boring whims and ignore them safely.

[SerialClergyman]

What exactly is this supposed to be, and why was it such an important follow up to your first post? To paraphrase: I talk out of my butt alot. You can safely ignore those instances.

What?

Ecto - you've been brought undone by your own reasoning. If your paraphrase is correct, why aren't you taking my advice?

[SerialClergyman]

You're uncool with my actions, therefore you won't vote me?

Just didn't understand whether it was a joke or GD meme or what. Didn't want to get involved without knowing the backstory.

Incognito has seemed genuine in his hunting.

[SerialClergyman]

Incog, do you think McGriddle's PR comment is scummy, or just bad?

I don't see anything wrong with goat's attacks or choice of words.

I vaugely like that pops didn't answer iamausername's question, I don't know that scum would be ballsy enough to not go with the group on that. Not sure about appealing to confirmation bias in post 56 though, to someone no longer voting him.

Allow me to introduce myself. I am not easily deflected, nor am I likely to take any advice that is not my own.
I have only a narrow band of leniency for a lack of clarity. You'll want to pick yours up. I also have a narrow band of leniency for making excuses for yourself before there is even a cause to have an excuse.

'this is who I am, now YOU change' Zzz.

Oh and, I always play pretty terribly, but when I am scum it tends to be even worse. I don't think you have either. I am putting myself down because I don't know if I am very good.

Don't like this.

Nab has earned my vote via this:

RL D1 of D1 of an invitational (basically) is a tough crowd, and

while I have reasons for looking at pops,

it's not because he's a bad comedian.

People who say 'backup reasons I will not express' ping my scumdar.

[SerialClergyman]

Incog points out that I ignored some major material. Goat quotes and expands on that point. RedCoyote quotes THAT and expands on THAT point. I bet there's scum in those three, and even further I would guess it's Red. The original point was nowhere near strong or unusual enough to get this kind of reaction.

To answer the charge - I read Goat's case on pops and didn't feel the need to comment. While Goat checked the time was 4 minutes after his post, he didn't check that that time in Sydney would have been about 3:30am, and that was my last post before going to bed, which explains it's brevity. But even then, I would have commented if I felt I had something to add, I just didn't.

To comment as much as possible - I'm not swayed by your case, Goat. There's not much evidence there and I don't see anythign inspirational in your gut read. As I mentioned later, I don't find your choice of words scummy, as Incognito did. (that's your explanation requested above, red.)

I did indeed forget to vote, but now I'm musing about sending it Red's way. In fact, lets get that done.

vote RedCoyote

[SerialClergyman]

My attacks and choice of words are saying that you are scum.

Yes they are, but I think Incognito's attack on you was unreasonable. You're wrong about me, unconvincing about pops and your self-assured language isn't a scumtell.

[SerialClergyman]

I don't see anything wrong with goat's attacks or choice of words.

You're wrong about me, unconvincing about pops and your self-assured language isn't a scumtell.

Hmmm...

I'm not sure what point you are trying to make here.

[SerialClergyman]

Ah. seeing nothing wrong with his attacks is different to judging whether he's right or wrong in his conclusions.

In effect -

1) You said you didn't see anything

wrong

scummy with Goat's attacks.
2) Goat says that he is attacking you.
3) You said he's

wrong

incorrect about his attacks against you.

[SerialClergyman]

Patrick, who do you think is looking scummy at the moment?

[SerialClergyman]

I didn't like one part of Nab's post (that I was oging to for other reasons stuff is a minor scumtell) but I'm not sold on him.

I would like Patrick to say something concrete after his last post, hence my question to him about his suspects.

[SerialClergyman]

I think the above is both utterly believable and very unlikely to come from scum.

[SerialClergyman]

I was thinking the same thing could be possible, Elmo.

unvote, vote Nabakov

[SerialClergyman]

Goat pretty genius. Current theory is that I ignored his case on a possible innocent to stick it to my scum mate.

Still, my bad for saying 'he earns my vote' without actually typing the vote bit - apparantly indicative of me secretly protecting him from the non-existant wagon that I started to distance from him.

Anyways - if we're all so keen on Nabscum, lynch time?

[SerialClergyman]

><

[SerialClergyman]

Ecto - it attempts to disarm HALF of 189, completely ignoring the fact that I was apparantly distancing from Nabarov when he was under no pressure, and afraid to vote him when he was under no pressure.

As for his points:

1. This shows your theory of the game is at least partially self-contradictory.
2. Nabarov answered my criticism, Red pushed up his scumminess. When I came back, he and jahudo had attempted to disarm my town read of Ecto is a scummy way.
3. It may not be surprising, but you're using it as evidence against me. You're suggesting that it's likely that Serial(scum) is more likely to completely ignore a giftwrapped case on Pops(???) and instead push (however feebly in your opinion) suspicion on Nabarov(scum mate). I can't see any reason beyond WIFOM to accept that.

Neither of you mentioned McGriddle's bizarre, selfadmitted-ignorant vote. Thoughts?

[SerialClergyman]

I think it's enough to make me doubt my thoughts somewhat. Brazen assumes he knew the impact it would have. But on the other hand, I agree that it's unlikely he thought he could just sort of slip in like that, presumably scum would come up with a reason from the reread.

[SerialClergyman]

People Serial wouldn't lynch today include:

Incognito
Goatrevolt
iamausername
Patrick
Ectomancer

and himself.

[SerialClergyman]

My main reason for dulling my fire on RC was due to him explaining his lack of vote on me or McGriddle. I think scum rarely would say 'I liked the answers they both gave me'.

Aside from that specific instance, I thought he dealt with pressure pretty well.

At the same time, NabNab started egging you to push on me, and then attacked Elmo and McGriddle, the two easiest targets in the game. My cause for concern at McGriddle's recent vote is that if he is scum, Nab is probably innocent, which is less than ideal. However I do think it's more likely that he's a townie who is genuine in his putting himself down and Nab is taking advantage of 'mistakes' like that to push him. Same with Elmo, I think most town just don't see much about Elmo yet.

When Jahudo posts discrediting the town read on Ecto and sounding like a Nab buddy with his disagreeing with the case but zero opinion on Nab, I felt the two really looked like scumbuddies. Elmo got in first, but I agreed absolutely.

My opinion of Patrick changed in post 146, where he answered my demands for something more concrete. He explained why there wasn't something more concrete earlier and I believed him, and I liked what he put forward. I also like his semi-defence of McGriddle to me just then, which pushed him into the no lynch for today category.

As for your last post, I admit upon reflection that was probably not really correct. I guess I don't like it when you set things up that may or may not be true, it appears to be having your cake and eating it too. If Pops' alignment matters in how you view me, it seems unreasonable to counter my objection by saying it's up in the air.

But even then, having another look at it, it seems that part was using ME to try to determin POPS' alignment, so I think I just read that wrong on the way through. My bad.

[SerialClergyman]

Zzz

Pops case:

a) Logic out of order - Just not true, as far as I can tell. I saw a minor point quoted and expanded then quoted again and expanded again. That led me to believe it was being taken out of proportion, which suggests the work of scum. That's how I thought about it, that's how I expressed it. It's the correct logical order and it's not circular.

Usually if a point is quoted excessively it's a contradiction or some other big interesting point that the town grabs and runs with. This was not - this was pointing out I'd ignored some material in thread, which would apply to everyone about one thing or another. It's also puzzling as to why the motivation for ignoring it is scummy. So I'm pretty confident in objectively calling that a minor scumtell. From there, the logic saying that one of those three are scum follows.

b) Overly defensive - Well, I didn't defend that issue at the first opportunity, in fact I ignored it completely. It was only when Red pushed it after incog and goat that I even addressed it. Once addressing it, I thought both my non-inclination to comment and the time in Sydney were both factors (and could be factors again) so I listed them both.

c) Sponsor a townie - I'm a massive advocate of town tells, you can look at most of my meta or anyone who's played with me to verify. I even went through a phase where for day 1 I specifically DIDN'T scum hunt as town, instead just looking for people I wouldn't want to lynch and lynching literally anyone else. I just finished a98 page game with iam as mod where a major factor in our winning was a town read elvis and I made on each other on page 2. If I see something town-looking, I'm calling it out. Theory arguments that it's a bad idea for a scum hitlist are stupid. If we could use a cop or something to give us 3 confirmed town right now, we'd do it, yes? You only need 1 more obvtown than scum left in lylo to win.

So, in short, I'm big on town reads, I'm loud about them.

d) Lack of independence - Probably the worst of the lot given in B) and C) he's shown instances where I WAS independent. I think grabbing all of the times where I've agreed with people or asked for thoughts without acknowledging I've made several of my own observations throughout the game (initial suspicion on nab for his 'I have other reasons' comment, declaring patrick town, declaring ecto town, declaring iam town, suspecting Red) - all of which I think I was either first on or had unique reasoning.

Bed time.

[SerialClergyman]

Patrick, where's your scumlist at at the moment?

Ecto, what's with the non-vote?

[SerialClergyman]

Yes, Ecto, it does, especially with your quick reply. What do you think your goals are re: this game right now?

[SerialClergyman]

Yes, I'm bothered.

[SerialClergyman]

Yes, I'm bothered.

You two are beating around bushes. What are you getting at?

I've asked him what's with the non-vote. You may direct your frustration at his stalling to him. His lack of a serious vote while still following the game closely enough to respond to me a couple of times pretty quickly bothers me.

I agree with Goat's views on just about everything except his view of myself.

I disagree with Goat on almost all of his methods, including constantly looking for a buddy of Nab before Nab's flip and the upcoming case, which will be done primarily to look like Goat has some substance rather than do anything convincing regarding Nab. In my experience, D1 is betterp layed on gut than on confirmation-biased paragraphs of language analysis. I'd prefer to see a lynch. Also - I'd lynch any one of Jahudo, Red and Nab, at least.

[SerialClergyman]

Also, CSL is a policy lynch wherever he played. I had the pleasure of replacing his self-voted near-confessed scum recently.

[SerialClergyman]

So my concern with him is, why? It wasn't an item I would expect him to be focused on. It didn't make sense in context to me for that to be his concern. It seemed almost a contradiction.

Rubbish. I read you as town on one post. If you do scummy things, that read will deteriorate. Sitting there doing nothing without a vote on anyone counts as a scummy thing. (Patrick can take note of this too.)

And aside from being a possible scumtell, no matter what your alignment it's DEFINITELY useless.

[SerialClergyman]

I should point out that I still very much read ecto as town though, and I'm a little uncool with a couple of people spurring on our little spat. I think one was Incognito and the other was pops - what about our comments to each other made you guys feel like you wanted us to expand on them?

[SerialClergyman]

Nab's claim doesn't do it for me. I'm happy to lynch.

Goat, I don't have much to say to your reply of my criticisms. I think criticising your methods is relevent to the discussion if I felt it was causing an issue. I'm actually a lot less incensed by linking alignments between players - I do this quite a bit. What I object to is doing it on day 1 (no flips, information extremely limited) and letting it colour your entire view of the town. I felt that you had pretty solid reads on over half the town purely based on Nabscum. I wanted to get you back to the here and now. (and stop reads like the one mentioned above, elmo town because he voted an unflipped nab)

It's also relevent in that I was quite surprised that DESPITE this disagreement with you, our views were actually very similar, which is a good thing.

Why didn't you end up posting that case on Nab Nab?

Elmo makes a good point to connections above, and more generally about Red.

I don't get Red, I'm finding him really confusing. I have the odd gut feeling where I don't like part of his posts, despite liking a lot of what he puts forward. It reminds me of Plum's posts in your last game, iamausername - don't know if you remember. I don't like his attitude towards the game at the moment - wailing on Elmo while having a mukry position on the massive issue at the moment (claim + near-lynch of nab). I don't have him sussed at all.

I've been asked about my town reads, and most of it is pretty subjective. I've played a lot of games with iamausername and I'm just feeling him as town for the moment. He seems to be operating off his gut and speaking his mind without being hassled about essentially anything and I like that. I'm waiting for him to click into gear though, I suspect when he does that his alignment will be obvious to everyone, not just a gut read by me.

I struggle to think of any scumhunting you've done, Patrick. You can argue about the relative merits of having a vote down or not, but i've personally prodded you for content throughout the day and I haven't seen you apply pressure or even ask many incisive questions. Ecto is similar. I understand you guys view this as a playstyle issue, but I'm not picking up what you're putting down. (I also view not joining a wagon you support because it puts them on L-1 to be a pretty weak reason, unless you are REALLY worried about a quicklynch.)

I don't know about Incognito's vote switching. I think I can see town doing it, and I don't see scum motivation for going back if he was partnered with Nab. If Nab is town, there's more motivation for the double manuever but not much. I think it comes off slightly positive.

Jahudo's push about pairing scumreads has been largely dealt with by the town, but I'd echo that there's a pretty obvious difference between highlighting a suspicious relationship between two players and analysing the entire town's busses or defences while assuming an unflipped player is scum.

I found the 'I really like this vote' at the end particularly odd, given he doesn't seem to be hard-pressed that I'm scum, doesn't push the point after deciding how much he likes it nor does the alleged contradiction particularly spell scum. It's not like I as scum would be painted into a corner and forced into a contradiction. I wasn't pressured into either comment. At best it could be regarded as hypocritical and judgemental, not the sort of aha! moment he's representing.

Anyway, role cop is an odd role. I think it's entirely likely he's a mafia role cop who's claiming the role as town. Either way, it's not enough for me to want him in the game.

[SerialClergyman]

iam, I love your cases. Honestly. I don't know if you're right more often than other people but they just.. they make me warm inside.

*basks*

[SerialClergyman]

I don't understand that comment.

[SerialClergyman]

STOP............


Hammertime.

gg for nabnab, let's get a flip.

[SerialClergyman]

Developments.

Goat and pops have reacted the most virulently to being declared as buddies, more so than either reacted at being called scum individually. I would normally run with that but I have to admit that the evidence linking them is pretty bad, and saying the word 'bus' doesn't make it true. So I'm interpreting it as both of them feeling really firm about the issue. I don't think they are buddies together at all.

Goat's lack of obvious change in his mindset about the game is the best point Red made, I feel. I think it's pretty disengenuous to talk up your 50% record on D1 and things like this:

I have explained, over and over and over again that my read on Elmo is based on my read of Nabakov. What you're doing is INCORRECTLY saying that my read of Nabakov is based on my read of ELMO when I've explicitly said infinite times that IT'S NOT. What the **** do you not get about this? It's not difficult. I find someone who I think is scum, Nabakov, and I base my reads on the rest of the game PARTIALLY on my read of Nabakov. This is not a difficult concept. If you continue to come at me with your wrong and ignorant version of my playstyle then I'm going to seriously consider policy lynching you for being a liability.

and then not have an obvious change of thought afterwards.

However - I don't think that's a scum thing, and I really do believe Goat is town. I think his passion at the end of D1 is real. And I think his assessments are honest. He reminded me of a fight I had in iam's game with someone who thought I was scummy but asked my opinion because he wanted a straight answer. I couldn't believe the contradiction - why would he think I would give him a straight answer if I was scum?

I get the feeling that goat would give me a straight answer, I think he hasn't done anything to shield his words from political turmoil or try to avoid making enemies and I don't see scum doing what he's doing.

Having said all that, what's with the Red hate? Pops' jump onto a Red vote looks scummy to me. I think Red's case isn't horrible, nor is it worthy of being a case only scum would conjure. His painting of Red as someone who is creating fluff battles and then sneaking onto wagons is not the impression I get of him at all. And it doesn't really coalesce, is he trying to get goat lynched, or is he just blustering to cover while the town look for another wagon? I am not picking up what pops is putting down.

This coupled with iam's case and Jahudo's solid point about pop's relative indifference to his position on Nab Nab put my voteo n the pops wagon.

Vote pops

[SerialClergyman]

I did, but I think you're being too kind on yourself. I think your views about who is scummy have barely changed despite Nab's flip.

Having said that, I don't think you're scum so the only reason I brought it up was to defend Red from Pops' pretty unreasonable attack. I thought Red's vote was fine, just misguided. He addressed problems he has with you, some of which I agree with, but didn't go the extra step of working out whether those problems are likely to be of scum's manufacture.

I'm getting the impression you're easily pissed off by people questioning your playstyle, and I appreciate that because it happens to me a bit too, but in the end we're all looking for scum here, and I don't see scum in you and the way you've gone about this game, and I don't see scum in Red's attack of you.

It doesn't seem logical to paint him as shying away from the spotlight and not giving his opinions on the wagons when he just made a bold, ballsy case about someone he knew would backlash against him (and probably draw others as well). As well as not being an easy target, you also aren't an easy lynch, he could hardly have expected getting overwhelming support for his case.

As for my suspects, zzz. I'll do my best to compose my nebulous thoughts.

I wouldn't lynch Red, me, Goat, iam, elmo or ecto. I think all of these are probable town, to differing degrees.

That leaves Incog, Jahudo, pops and McGriddle. So almost by default you have my scum suspects.

I did have Incog as more town, but Patrick's NK, iam's unease and that Jahudo voteswitch thing he did still has me on edge.

Jahudo has been upgraded since Nab flipped town. Patrick was against him though. How serious was his switch to pops at the end of yesterday? It really did start pretty late, well after repeated calls for a hammer. It also came after his maligned case on me, the vote of which he 'really liked' then did nothing to push or propogate.

McGriddle has been downgraded since Nab's flip. I thought Nab might have been picking on the easy target but since we know he wasn't, that changes things around. I haven't seen much reason to think him town. He hasn't posted since yesterday, and that was a fluff vote. He's probably my second most suspicious.

And pops is no. 1 atm.

[SerialClergyman]

To be honest, goat, I think the argument about your views changing has already gone way too far and doesn't have very much to do with your scumminess. I'm not going to get into a wall of words with you about it, the only thing I'm trying to point out is that I can see that someone who thinks it's a problem would view your views on D2 as perpetuating that problem. You were linking pops to nab, then your first vote is nab. You've pointed out liking some of my posts but your main reason to dislike is my 'bussing' vote on nab, but now you're still thinking I'm scummy etc etc.

I'm not pointing this out to argue the merits of it, (I'm sure you're already pointing out in your mind that you had enough other reasons that even without the link to nab these reads are fine) I'm pointing it out to show you that Red has something that he's basing his case on. I agree that he's mixing wrong/scummy (and assuming that it's wrongi n the first place a little too vividly), but that doesn't make him scum. Even in your post you wish he'd drop the conf. bias and be able to assess your play with an unbiased look - that's an appeal to a townie, not a mafiate.

I think the spat between you guys has really led me to believe both of you are town, so it's just a matter of getting you both to accept the other one and we can get on with this puppy.

As for your read of me - I can't really predict what you find scummy and what you don't, so expect more of the same. Just wait till you get to the wild manic theory stage.

You've announced good thoughts about my posts almost always after I've answered direct questions from you. Perhaps this means that my 'to everyone' posts aren't doing it for you - too vague or indirect or whatever and you only start to think town thoughts about me when you really get exposed to the full working of my reads. I don't know.

I thought it was remarkable how similar Ecto's post was to mine, which is possibly why you didn't like it (found it weird.) He both found Goat looking more town and pops looking more scum out of the exchange.

Perhaps because our posts happened after Pops attacked Red in a way that you felt vindicated you, you were beginning to feel better about pops and worse about red, so it struck you as scummy that both ecto and I immediately voted pops?

Where IS McGriddle? When I said 'yesteday', I meant 'D1 on 23 of April'.

[SerialClergyman]

Great, well the walls weren't exactly wasted because now we're thinking town/town on goat/red, which is a good end result.

Now I spend much of my time replying to Incog.

Incog -

Jahudo case - didn't think it was that much of a case, worthy of specific comment. I feel like I've been in this discussion before on D1 with Goat. Iam's pops case was much more convincing. Also, I'm a little cooler on Jahudo since Nab's town flip.

re: vote switching - indeed I did remember it incorrectly, I thought you were voting Nab when you first voted Jahudo. It's interesting that you weren't, although were lending it support. You were also voting pops, followed by Jahudo. Hmm.
Either way, I think the point is still pretty similarish, whether you'd actually voted or just supported his wagon by proxy.

re: iam - I'm pretty sure he's town. I mentioned this a while ago, at the end of D1, but I'm picking up what he's putting down. I've played a lot with him, and while he's definitely a good enough player to fool me, I feel like he's not this game. I think he's been pretty open with his reads despite a low post count and he's put forward ideas that aren't really in keeping with a scum agenda. Plus his case on pops was the best case of the game, imo.

re: Patrick - Patrick had very little in the way of a scum list, but he was uneasy about you. There's precious little other reason for him to die apart from perhaps reputation - he wasn't setting the town on fire with his insight, and was drawing criticism if not suspicion. I have felt the same way, particularly recently, and iam expressed the same feeling. I don't think it's a coincidence that 2 townies and one person I think is townie all felt uneasy about your posts.

re: shying form the spotlight - I disagree completely. I think that many players in this game haven't made the sort of bold, forthright attack on an established player. Red's attack on Goat was completely unnecessary and dangerous if he was scum. There are plenty of wagons around, andp lenty of easier targets he could push with easier reasoning. I think the goat/red saga reeks of town, and I've just been more andm ore convinced as it's gone on.

re: My post being similar to pops' - I already explained why when I made the comment - goat voted pops, red makes case against goat, goat unvotes, pops votes red. From this point there are all sorts of sides to take and people to bully. Then Ecto and I simulpost the exact same thing - goat and red look townie, pops looks scummy. There are parts of our posts that are different, but the fact that our read on the situation was so similar is interesting.

I think I would be up for an Incog wagon as well now, actually. I think of the people I'm interested in lynching, he and pops are the two I'm focused on. Anyone prefer that to pops?

[SerialClergyman]

If you're going to meta anyone Elmo, that's a good one to meta.

[SerialClergyman]

Zzz

Pick a game.

My latest game (iam was mod) I spent a massive amount of time trying to get farside and elvis to stop attacking each other. Once they did, and agreed each other was town, we had a massive base to them go win the game, and we essentially won via process of elimination. Before that, elvis and I tried to essentially clear each other on D1. quotes like

I'm glad that you and farside agree on something, however. Convince each other you're town and we can get this party started.

are ridden throughout it.

Aside from that game, there's stacks where I've made town reads unapologetically. I spent a good portion of my earlier games specifically not scum hunting early, and instead only looking for town players and being prepared to lynch anyone else.

Essentially - I'm the town reads dude. And this game really seems like a good occasion to use it. I'm pretty comfortable with literally all but 4 people in the game, and the sooner we can start getting a good bunch of prob-towns up, the sooner we're going to hit scum.

And goat and red are looking obv town after their little spat, so that's a good thing.

[SerialClergyman]

This is iam's dollhouse mafia with the quote above

A townread game
Another one
Another one

etc

[SerialClergyman]

'Scum can make cases too'

Seriously? What kind of comment is that? Clearly scum can do pro-town things and town can do pro-scum things, that's the point of the game. But people who quickhammer are morel ikely to be scum, and people who make good, solid cases are more likely to be town.

Throughout his posts he's done a few things that scum had no reason to do. Agreeing with my read on Ecto-town and defending McGriddle from his playing of the newbie card by questioning the question are two that stand out in memory.

In what manner, by the way, do you expect him to follow up his vote, after you agree he's already put forward a solid case?

It's not that his suspicion was particularly telling or omniscient, it's that it's a town-read that I respect and that he died. So it's both worth reflecting on and wondering whether that's why he was killed. There seemed to be little other reason (apart from perhaps reputation - he certainly wasn't looking obvtown)

You'll note that I do mention Patrick's death as a point against Jahudo in an earlier post.

Jahudo has been upgraded since Nab flipped town. Patrick was against him though.

I'm saying here that I think I'm less keen about looking at Jahudo because without a link to Nab there are better targets. He is one of two people that can easily explain Patrick's NK though, yes.

[SerialClergyman]

Which finger is the major finger?

At what point did you decide iam was more scummy than jahudo?

Did you not realise that iam's comment about a case on you was by it's nature a reference to the fact that he hasn't made a case on you yet? What's with the flight comment?

I'm not liking any of the above.

[SerialClergyman]

1) I don't see enough in that post to inspire you to switch votes.
2) You're attacking iam for not providing a case on you, despite the fact he freely admitted it and hasn't voted you.
3) While complaining about iam's lack of case, you yourself switch off the player you made a case about (and specifically asked pops and myself to comment on) and moved onto a player who you haven't made a case on.
4) I tend to have the opposite reads to the ones you're expressing.

The comment about which finger being major was just me being facetious, I'm not a FoS kind of person.

[SerialClergyman]

Pesponding to prod, will post content within 24 hours.

[SerialClergyman]

Ugh, so many words over red herrings. I think the theory that someone may be town because noone is voting them is pure rubbish, but for my scum game I hope it proliferates. And then there was an argument about that assertion that lasted a page, holy hell. This thing with Elmo is no different, a) I don't really care who's behind the face and b) I sincerely doubt that the quoted passage means it's not really elmo.

So the game has opened up to have two pretty distinct sides, I think. Irritatingly for me, two of my suspects are on each side (Jahudo and McGriddle are anti-pops, Pops and Incog are pro-pops). Thankfully for me, the wagons are both on my suspects. Goat and Red both not planting down a vote is making this drag a little, I'm not quite sure what they're trying to achieve at the moment. It doesn't look like they are in the throes of a tough decision.

Goat - I know you called me out for content, but I don't know why. What do you need to place a vote (PS, it's a few posts up in obvtown iam's case)

Incog, mafia opens as one of the tabs when I open my home internet browser, so I often appear to be online when I'm not actually around and posting. I'm sure you won't find any posts in the last few days on site, i haven't mafia'd since the weekend (excluding last night promising this post.)

Actually, why are we still having this talk? Looking at the vote count and looking at Red's 539. Where's the hammer, son?

[SerialClergyman]

It's also worth pointing out that this:

If I were to focus on stuff that I haven't liked from Today though, I'd say that I have trouble with your "solid town" read on iamausername - I seriously can't see how anyone can be reading him in that way at this point in the game. SerialClergyman cited meta for his reasoning which baffles me - I too have played games with IAUN and have read others of his, and I haven't in any way been able to say that this definitely feels like iamausername-town. So really, the town read of IAUN coming from the both of you makes me feel like it could be contrived.

is a pretty cheap shot, given I've specifically had this conversation with you and gave examples of the non-meta reasons for my read. Remember this conversation?

re: iam - I'm pretty sure he's town. I mentioned this a while ago, at the end of D1, but I'm picking up what he's putting down. I've played a lot with him, and while he's definitely a good enough player to fool me, I feel like he's not this game. I think he's been pretty open with his reads despite a low post count and he's put forward ideas that aren't really in keeping with a scum agenda. Plus his case on pops was the best case of the game, imo.

I agree that the pops-case he put forth was pretty solid, but that doesn't explain why that would make him town. Good scum can easily put together a solid case against anyone, so, imo, a solid case isn't a real reason to feel like someone's town. I agree that having experience playing with another player is different, yes, and that might lend you the ability to read a given player better than players who are unfamiliar with said player, but my meta with iamausername suggests that his play here doesn't completely fall in line with the type of play I've seen come from him as town. So I'm curious as to why you feel differently about that. Also, I don't understand the "putting forth ideas that don't fit a scum agenda" thing; he planted his vote on NabNab Day 1 and has so far placed his vote on popsofctown but hasn't followed up yet. NabNab ended up being a mislynch, and pops hasn't flipped yet, so I don't see how you've been able to determine that iamausername's agenda is a town-driven one given that there's simply not much there from him as of yet.

'Scum can make cases too'

Seriously? What kind of comment is that? Clearly scum can do pro-town things and town can do pro-scum things, that's the point of the game. But people who quickhammer are morel ikely to be scum, and people who make good, solid cases are more likely to be town.

Throughout his posts he's done a few things that scum had no reason to do. Agreeing with my read on Ecto-town and defending McGriddle from his playing of the newbie card by questioning the question are two that stand out in memory.

So you know, him providing a solid case (in your words) and two specific examples of townie behaviour later, and you're still saying my support of him is some contrived meta read. Poor form imo.

[SerialClergyman]

Incog is the most pro-town player? You must have your head screwed on backwards. ><

Pops is my lynch of choice. I have 4 people where the scum can reside, but that doesn't make them equal.

The point is I don't know what you want me to comment ON. I've told you very openly my reads and why, I've voted my top suspect and I want him lynched. I don't even care about his claim, I doubt it'd make me radically change my mind. If he was a cop or similar he'd have claimed by now.

What I think you should do is stop getting yourself messed up in diagrams about who is with who on what condition and find someone you think is scummy and vote them.

[SerialClergyman]

I haven't been avoiding the thread at all, I just haven't been here. What I was talking about was that I don't get you. You spent a post calling me out (and possibly iam as well from memory) for not posting when I have been open with my reads and my vote on my top suspect. This is a good place to be as scum. At the moment, I have about a million conditionals, no vote and no strong suspects from you, and I think rather than concerning yourself with my posting frequency you should go get that done.

And your hypotheticals aren't going to be useful to anyone because you don't take a decent stand. For example - Jahudo is a possible pops buddy, their fight strikes me as scum distancing as a townie goes down. If pops is town though, Jahudo is more likely to be scum based on the strong push to get Pops lynched today.
Clergyman makes sense as a pops buddy. (??)
If pops is town, Clergyman is probably scum as well.

In fact, if pops is town, your ONLY reads are two people who you think would be scum if he's scum! That is genius on a stick right there.

As for your list of things to comment on, I think I've either commented on it or find it irrelevent. If my read on Elmo went from town to scum, you'd know about it. It hasn't.

And while we're on the subject, how could you possibly view incog as more town than iam? Iam has been consistent, direct, willing to look at town reads and gut reads etc. He's made two of the best cases the game has seen. He doesn't seem concerned about himself or any scumbuddies facing suspicion.

Incog has made one 'case' located here which was hardly much of anything - it starts by saying the first two points are speculative then doesn't continue with any more!

He slunk onto the Nab wagon late after it was looking like stalling, while supporting it without voting on it previously. Since his Jahudo 'case' he's done very little, but has had several cheap shots (the one on me saying my iam read was meta alone, the one on iam about iam's non-existant case on incog, switching off jahudo to vote iam without a case WHILE complaining about iam not having a case on him etc etc)

Now I'm not sure if I can see Incog/pops, and I don't know if Incog is scum, but to me there's no way to view incog as the most pro-town player in the game.

[SerialClergyman]

Also, I remember checking to see if the wagons were ismilar to D1 (because I agree there is a similar feel to this lull period) and they aren't, really.

D1: Elmo, Goatrevolt, SerialClergyman, iamausername, McGriddle, Incognito, Patrick

D2: Jahudo, iamausername, SerialClergyman, Ectomancer, McGriddle

So Serial, Iam and McGriddle are all on the second wagon. Patrick is dead. Elmo and Incog were on the first wagon but have switched for the second, Ecto was not on the first but IS on the second and Goat was on the first wagon and is undecided on the second. Also, Red has signalled his intention to hammer, so that would make him not on the first but yes on the second.

Pops is the only player on neither.

So all in all there's a lot of mixup of players between D1 and D2.

[SerialClergyman]

You can try and meta me if you like, but I'm not sure you'll have too much luck. I'm certainly on the record as town as saying I don't like making cases, but in other games i've been more involved than this one (this is my only game at the moment, and that's mostly because Hoopla is modding <3)

I'm also irritated a bit by the request because last time I did this was to Elmo, I posted 4 games immediately with links and it had no visible reaction whatsoever, so you know, zz.

But here goes:

F&E game me town
PYP3 me town
F&E game me mafia

If you need more, there's a fair amount of games in my wiki.

To be honest though, I think meta isn't the right way to look at me, because I'm conscious of my own meta. The best thing you could do is work out if my play is coming from someone who believes what they are saying, believes the points they make and if the motivations behind them aren't tainted, and I'm sure my alignment will become pretty obvious.

I'd totally flip your last sentence around on you, which is possibly why we keep coming to loggerheads. I feel like I've done my part, I'm voting a wagon and begging for ah ammer, I've given a clear and honest history of my reads, when I made them, what thigns have occured to me during the game etc etc. I feel like I've probed as deeply as anyone, and I'm putting more pressure than most.

In fact - you're saying that I don't really put pressure on when you're unvoted half way through the game! ugh.

I think your first sentence is a fair point though, I suppose if you're desperate to judge me you might want me to post more, but then we just get back to what you want me to talk about. As far as I'm concerned, I think I'm an open book, I don't know what I'd say that'd help you judge me one way or the other.

I agree that McGriddle likely town on pops scum is a fair point, but rteally the only one that is taking a stand at all. This 'scum either way' thing is, in my opinion, one of the most massive fallacies in this game. You have to make the decision BEFORE he flips, otherwise you're just hedging bets, imo. I'm sure you can find meta examples of me complaining about this before as well.

OK, I amend my statement about Iam to say I haven't seen anything from him that suggests he's manipulating the game one way or another, I think his views and encouragements have been open and honest. I don't sense a hidden agenda from him.

I note you didn't say anythign in defence of incog though, was that a conscious choice?

(By the way, these posts have just made me more sure you're town, I just wish we'd gel more on how to proceed.)

[SerialClergyman]

Even I don't know for a fact I'm not a bad player.

- My position is that making a good case against someone is not a town-tell. You claim to believe otherwise. Are you really suggesting that in all the games of Mafia that you've played, you've never seen scum make a solid case against another player?

These two statements are incongruous. While it's possible that scum can make a good case on someone, I think it's MORE LIKELY to come from town - hence town TELL. I have seen scum make good cases on town, but that's not the point, it's an INDICATOR.

What if pops was to flip scum? It's not impossible that Iam is a buddy who is strongly bussing pops. I've seen scum strongly bus before. But it would be MORE LIKELY that he was town who caught scum.

You can take ANY town tell and find scum that make it, and any scum tell and find town that make it. The point is that some things are good behaviour that town are more likely to engage in, and somethings are bad behaviour that scum are more likely to engage in. Making a solid case (solid is important) is a pro-town action that while POSSIBLE to do as scum, is MORE LIKELY to be done as town.

I don't know how I can be clearer than this.

No, my IAUN read has been solid since D1, nothing magical or contrived about i, I've given stacks of reasons for it and whether you agree with it or not is of little concern to me - unless you're characterising it as meta only when I specifically explained how it wasn't.

Huge Red X.
10 bucks says you didn't even attempt to look into what I said after that.

Quotes please. As far as I can tell, you made those two points in part one in post 418, then in part 2 in 420 you don't mention Jahudo at all then in your next post at 446 you complain about ecto and I not commenting on your case.

To go from "not figuring out why" to "his posts are bad" is a huge jump if you ask me. That by itself is completely vote-worthy

I think this is rubbish. He made an offhand comment about his 'case' on you being your bad posts. He was referring specifically to a comment pops made about the case on him:

your attack was basically "I read your posts, they're bad".

No, that's my case on Incog.

[/quote]

So now it's my turn to play this card - I know for a fact YOU aren't stupid, and I know that you understand a facetious comment because I made one earlier, so I can't understand why you'd read this as anything other than facetious.

[SerialClergyman]

Ugh, fail tags.

Goat - I believe everthing you said in those two posts. I'm butting heads with Incog more than the others because i'm still trying to work him out, he is not the highest in my list. I just can't see him as the most pro-town in the game at ALL.

[SerialClergyman]

I started after Patrick's death and Nab's townflip. The main reason was I didn't understand why Patrick was killed, and him being suspicious of Jahudo and Patrick were two possible reasons (I didn't think he looked pro-town enough to be killed, and he was quiet and in the background most of the day)

I think in the context of Nab being town I was uneasy about his voting pattern (I had thought he was voting Nab then unvoted and went to Jahudo and back, I later learnt that he never voted Nab until that last vote).

From there it's developed a bit, but that was what turned me from town -> not sure.

[SerialClergyman]

Well, that game I was scum, and Kise was my partner.

But aside from that, it's still not quite the same thing.

Fine:

Player A is scum whether player B is or not.

Not fine:

Player A's interactions with Player B make me think he's scum, no matter player B's alignment.

Do you get the distinction? The problem is that if his interactions could be read as EITHER bussing a mate or picking on a townie, then it should be neutral - you haven't actually done any analysis to help determine his alignment.

So it's fine to think someone is scum regardless of another's alignment, but not BECAUSE of their interactions with that person, regardless of alignment.

[SerialClergyman]

Well, I remember saying 'let's lynch Reck without telling him why' in a recent game, and in general I don't mind pushing for hammers.

Meh - I could find tonnes of things in my meta that back my play, and probably tonnes that don't. As I said, I don't think meta is really a strong way to read me (I was recently lynched in two games simultaneously as town, one for not obeying my town meta by tunnelling and one by not obeying my town meta by NOT tunnelling. I may be still a little bitter).

I re-read your last post and your meaning wasn't fully apparant to me at the time (I didn't realise you knew I was scum that game) but I think I answered it fully anyway.

[SerialClergyman]

I don't think that's valid. 'In a scummy manner' implies that you understand the motives behind his attack, but if you can't tell if the person he's attacking is scum or not then how can you understand the motives behind his attack?

From memory, around the time he started voting you. I'd considered doing the same thing but then dismissed it as me being frustrated at parts of your play I disagreed with, not that you were doing anything scummy. When he voted you, I recognised a lot of the same thought process I went through, and thought it entirely likely that he went through the same process but stopped just before the 'is this play that I disagree with actually scummy' stage.

Aside from the case itself, there was the timing and the target of the attack. it didn't make sense as scum to go after someone that was going to put up that kind of fight without a shred of support. It looked like an earnest case, one he was pushing because he belived it, not because he thought it would help strategically.

[SerialClergyman]

That's a good point. But even then, I think you need to focus on the fact that it's a bad attack, NOT that they are linked to this player.

A busses B here *quote* is not reaonsbale without knowing B is scum. I don't believe this attack by A on B is genuine *quote* is much more reasonable.

*shrug* I am always re-evaluating my reads. You can't afford to be complacent. I think the time I specifically remember thinking about whether I thought you were specifically scummy or not is around D1 during our back and forth about your playstyle. It came to me briefly after Nab's flip too (was Goat using his SC is bussing Nab thing to pretend he was tunnelled about Nab being scum?) but that's it. It wasn't suspicion as much as a rethink. I decided against it and i'm glad I did, but when I saw Red's post I sympathised.

[SerialClergyman]

I think I've just been served. Maybe I didn't follow that argument properly, but your last point makes sense. Hmm.

Ah well, if I get aggreived later I'll return to it.

I think the problem for my comprehension was you saying if pops is blah then blah - that sort of insinuates that pops' alignment is driving the read. If you'd just said SC and Jahudo look scummy I'd be fine with it, but you said if pops is town then blah blah and then did the opposite.

Right, so, moving on. Ecto, I agree.

[SerialClergyman]

Ugh all around.

Not worth lynching Pops. Normally a claim with an innocent on the guy we just spent days working out was almost certainly town would have me jumping at the leash, but a weak doc should take care of itself tonight, either by bullet or by finding scum.

Where to now? Zzz.

unvote

Probably Jahudo or McGriddle, I guess.

[SerialClergyman]

Incog - yes, I didn't realise you were referring to his points, not your own, communication error.

[SerialClergyman]

Well, if pops reveals his target and then dies it's not ideal. If he dies AND someone else dies that's fine, but you know zz.

The other thing worth noting is scum probably have roles, given the town role cop, and a blocker might lead to some seriously unfortunate innocent assumptions. Pops aims at scum, scum roleblock him, pops says scum is confirmed innocent becauseh e didn't die.

On the whole, I'm thinking pops should target any non-mason pair.

I believe the masons, by the by. I was wondering where your town reason on Jahudo was coming from iam lol...

McGriddle seems to me to be the best lynch. If there are 3 scum then I'm wrong on at least 1 town read or pops is scum. Will have to rethink a bit.

What's your suspect list, Jahudo?

[SerialClergyman]

This is actually fantastic info, and it massively backs up pops' claim. I don't know why Ecto isn't more willing to believe that a protect on Goat is legit given he knew that the scum missed a kill.

Ok - so lets run with this.

Ecto is 1-shot vig (Don't know why he'd claim this otherwise, no real reason to believe it other than it being a weird scum gambit, I guess.)
Pops is weak doc (hard not to believe if Ecto is telling the truth.)
Goat is town (was aimed at by mafia probably)
Jahudo is mason
Iam is mason.

Provided there are no fake claims there, and it seems to fit in OK, that's a lot of town right there. The non-confirmeds are therefore:

SC, McGriddle, Elmo, Incog and Red.

If the claims are correct we can almost PoE this baby down.

Oh, unless Ecto is a SK. THat'd be lame.

vote McGriddle

[SerialClergyman]

Before I forget - this explains Patrick's death, which I'd always thought was a weird scum choice. That improves incog's position a bit.

Also, it makes Red's attack on Goat look a little more scum-possible. From a scum perspective, they tried to kill Goat, it didn't work and there was another kill. That could well look like a NK-immune SK or NK-immune 2nd mafia. So it makes more sense for Red to come into d2 swinging at goat.

[SerialClergyman]

Hey guys - I'm thinking massclaim.

We already have a lot of power outed, scum are hitting guaranteed power from here on out whether we've claimed or not. I also want to know if these claims are too good to be true, and a massclaim is the way to do it. Plus we lock scum into the fake claim early, that's always important.

I'll go first and popcorn, unless someone has a better idea (goat could pick? A mason could pick?)

iam - think /inv 4. This is the way to play, I'm pretty sure.

[SerialClergyman]

Goat - good reasons to suspect me include my position on the wagon and percieved lack of scumhunting.

A terrible reason to suspect me is my town reads. It's really a huge part of my game. I haven't just had a strong town read on iam, I've also had one on you, and the fact that i pushed so hard for both of you is vindicated in that I'm right, and it was useful for me to do that. So all I can do is say look at my meta and look at my arguments and thought processes behind that. I don't back myself into a corner as scum and I've had so many town reads that's exactly what I'd be doing.

As for defending the good reasons to suspect me - I don't have much of a defence about being on the wagons other than I thoguth they were good wagons *shrug*.

As for not scumhunting - despite my votes not changing very much i feel I've done a hell of a lot of questioning that other people weren't prepared to do - look at my work on Patrick D1 and Incog D2 for example. I haven't voted these peopel or put them at the top of my list, but I think it's obvious I've been probing and doing more work than you're giving me credit for. Also, the town reads are essentially scumhunting that found town rather than scum, and I've been very vocal both in where I stand on everyone and where I think people should be looking.

Having said all that, it's not the end of the world to have some suspicion now I'm not in the role-confirmed group, so can't complain. I'm glad I'm not number 1.

Also - Nab's town flip did change my views, just not on pops. He pushed pops ahead of Jahudo.

I'm glad you're behind the massclaim, I'll wait till we get a few more people confirming before we start.

[SerialClergyman]

Why'd you claim, Ecto?

[SerialClergyman]

Ugh, that's a terrible idea. FWIW I'd much rather you used it as an investigation than a protect (barring some interesting combination from the MC).

[SerialClergyman]

Claim vanilla townie. Red, you are up.

[SerialClergyman]

Yep, note it and then at the end of the game add this case to the pile that says that's a terrible scumtell.

And while I'm being snide, if we'd listened to elmo we'd have lynched a mason. If you're town, time to suck up the fact you've had to claim and look forward.

[SerialClergyman]

No the point is that you guys were pushing a case on a claimed mason, and we were pushing a case on a claimed weak doc. I personally think the masons are extremely likely to be telling the truth, I'm not sure but willing to go with the weak doc.

So enough with the hypocritical bitch fest. You can look at the wagons, look at who you think belived it or not, but sitting there complaining to the world at large because you've had to claim is not productive, and stupid in that your proposed alternative was just as bad.

And that's not to mention that our (my) suspicion doesn't exist in a vacuum and that pops' play and defense were lacking.

[SerialClergyman]

I chose Red because I wanted to get this thing under way and I thought McGriddle would take some time. As long as you're last, Goat, I don't particularly mind.

I have a sneaking suspicion that McGriddle isn't going to post properly before deadline.

[SerialClergyman]

How about everyone just claims when they next post. I'll claim last.

!support

[SerialClergyman]

As I mentioned earlier, Patrick's death being a vig shot both made Incog look less suspicious (Patrick's suspicions were irrelevent if the mafia didn't kill him) and Red look more suspicious (he had a greater reason to go after you if he's scum, the NK on you didn't work and there was a secondary kill).

[SerialClergyman]

Position on wagons, primarily. McGriddle has taken a similarly late entry onto both wagons. Red has been more involved with the game, and although they're both suspicious after the claims I think McGriddle is less of a loss.

I'm at work atm so can't write pages.

[SerialClergyman]

Sometimes I despair, Goat. How is my read on Red not clear? Out of all the people here, why is it me who you feel is riding out the day when I've been ever-present in the latter stages, both in posting and updating my views? What about me constantly answering your questions on my motivations for every action gives you the impression I'm hiding something?

[SerialClergyman]

You seem very content to place your vote on a wagon and sit on it without much regard for other players.

This is what's so frustrating. I don't know anyone who's been as vocal with their reads on the whole game as I have. I've fought hard for people I didn't want lynched.

Meh, I'll get over it, I'm just frustrated. I agree that waiting for 3 days to claim was irritating, hence I was happy to drop the hammer. I disagree that McGriddle makes a bad target.

Out of the people left, I can think of 5 people that would make a good lynch. Myself, Red, Elmo, McGriddle and Incog. I've given my reasons for cooling on Incog, I obviously don't think that I'm the best lynch (and I think there are unbiased reasons for making this the case), I still have a gut town read on Elmo (and his defense of pops does count for something), so we're left with Red and McGriddle. Either are OK lynches, but I definitely prefer McGrid thanks to wagon position and activity.

That's not some random lurker lynch, that's the result of a pretty obvious thought pattern.

[SerialClergyman]

Seriously? A vig that conflicts with a current claim (unless you think a 1-shot and an even night is likely) who hasn't been able to shoot but will be able to if he lives today.

><

[SerialClergyman]

Just about the only way that makes sense is if Ecto is an SK, which is possible.

[SerialClergyman]

I'm fine with being McGriddle's target and lynching Red, I don't think he's telling the truth.

I get what you're saying about scum choosing their claims and everything, but it's not like McGriddle's been in touch with the game. I think it's not impossible he hadn't properly reaslised Ecto's claim.

And Ecto - what did you mean by your comment? I get that you're implying I'm worried about saving my own skin, but what does that even have to do with it? Why do you think it makes sense?

[SerialClergyman]

I'll vote Red after incog then goat claims, most likely.

[SerialClergyman]

I don't believe that we have two vig roles, and even then an even night vig is a weird role to pick. It's also totally set up to allow him to live through the night. And we have too much power, so someone is lying. In my mind, the only two legitimate possibilities are Ecto 1-shot and Griddle mafia, or Ecto SK and Griddle town.

Red - Incognito is spared some wrath because it seems Patrick wasn't a mafia kill - this eliminates a fair bit of the NK-analysis stuff against him.

[SerialClergyman]

Red - what do you think about McGriddle's claim?

[SerialClergyman]

It's also difficult to confirm McGriddle. Say we wake up tomorrow and just I am dead. Is McGriddle a vig? Is pops a doc? Was his doc successful? Who knows?

[SerialClergyman]

You want me to be shot, I put my money where my mouth is on the McGriddle claim and ASK him to shoot me, and I'm accused of knowing there's a roleblocker. Not that it even matters if I consent to getting shot, given he's going to choose his target no matter what. But no, the reason I'm happy to be the shooting target is because I don't believe him, not because I'm scum, know it to be true and have a roleblocker amongst my mates.

I spend ages defending goat and iam, both of which now look town, and apparantly I KNEW they were town because I was defending them too much, despite this being a massive part of my game easily verified by meta.

I also don't care who the lynch is on, despite the point above where I pushed it away from people I thought were town too much and despite me constantly talking about who I suspected, why those suspicions changed throughout the game etc etc.

Look - I understand gaming the mod is an issue, but I don't mind undertaking it, and the roles don't fit. If it was Even night and Odd night vig, maybe we'd be sitting pretty. But I'm pretty sure one of those two are lying, and given Ecto didn't have to claim when he did, I'm more inclined to believe him. McGriddle's claim seems designed to get him through the day.

I agree with pops (!!) that there's too much power. I also agree that McGriddle is the piece that doesn't fit. pops blocked the kill, Ecto committed the kill, masons are a very rare fakeclaim plus I'm 100% behind iam - it just leaves out Griddle. I'm most sure about him.

Red is a decent alternative. I turned around on him as soon as I knew that Patrick wasn't the night kill, and therefore there was likely a failed mafia kill on Goat. That game him plenty of reason to attack Goat on D2 like he did that wouldn't have been there otherwise.

[SerialClergyman]

In fact, rather than appeal to meta, lets do the work for you.

In iam's modded dollhouse mafia, I had declared elvis town at about page 4, this continued through to page 98 and was a big factor in us winning the game. You can see exactly the same kinds of hating on heavy town reads there too. Example
[quote="SC from that game"]
For anyone thinking I'm scummy for defending elvis, defending my town reads is a BIG part of my game. That's easily evidenced by most if not all of the games you can check out in my wiki. I don't know what the point of having a town read is if you aren't prepared to back it. /quote]

Another example

I've been through this beeefooooreeee

[SerialClergyman]

In fact, rather than appeal to meta, lets do the work for you.

In iam's modded dollhouse mafia, I had declared elvis town at about page 4, this continued through to page 98 and was a big factor in us winning the game. You can see exactly the same kinds of hating on heavy town reads there too. Example

For anyone thinking I'm scummy for defending elvis, defending my town reads is a BIG part of my game. That's easily evidenced by most if not all of the games you can check out in my wiki. I don't know what the point of having a town read is if you aren't prepared to back it.

Another example

I've been through this beeefooooreeee

[SerialClergyman]

My suspicions:

1. McGriddle
2. Red
3. Incog

[SerialClergyman]

It just doesn't make sense for Ecto to claim vig there if he's scum. If he's SK, it's a useful little claim - he avoids mafia kills because he's essentially claimed vanilla from now on, it helps with the scumhunting because we have more info about the NKs and all that. It plays for an SK pretty nicely.

But for mafia, I don't see any point. If he was mafia, why would he feel the need to raise his hand and say that he killed Patrick? He's opening himself to getting grilled for his choice, to SK suspicion, to being counter-claimed etc.

Plus his breadcrumb-esque post (the one criticising Patrick's hammer after patrick had already flipped at the start of D2) makes no sense - he couldn't have known we'd have a protection role claim, and if he didn't know that then he couldn't have claimed vig (because then where's the scum kill?)

I said just about the only way this makes sense is if Ecto is an SK or town becuase it's true - if he's mafia, his claim makes no sense.

[SerialClergyman]

Redcoyote's refusal to be practical at all and do anything but wall post pillowfight with Goatrevolt is not consistent with a townie trying to make sure the best lynch happens today, it's scum trying to paint a picture.

is interesting. SC & Incog, what do you think?

Sorry, didn't answer this.

While I agree with a Red lynch, this is not the sort of thing I find convincing. It is absolutely consistent with a townie who is deeply irritated at suspicion of them, and defending yourself strongly is arguably a way to help the town achieve a better lynch. I agree it's not the best play, but is it a scumtell? Not in my book. There are better reasons for thinking Red's scum.

[SerialClergyman]

Where is everyone? We have a deadline in about 24 hours from now.

[SerialClergyman]

Ok. well this is one.

unvote, vote Red

Remember that if there's no majority there's no lynch.

[SerialClergyman]

*roll*

Goat implodes entire team from position of authority.

gg

[SerialClergyman]

I am all for the SC wagon. He was going to be my nightkill because I was pretty suspicious of him. I didn't have a lot of time to post my case against Red, but I still think SC is more likely scum. So my top 2 in order are SC and Red. If we lynch SC I will not kill red tonight though, that would not help me at all as if he knows I will kill him then that defeats the purpose of even trying beause I will be RB'd. Unvote, Vote: SerialClergyman Let's see what happens. I am fine with either of the 2, I just don't want to be the majority as I fear being mislynched on an accident

Just for those of you who are counting, Red and Griddle are my top suspects. If this doesn't greatly justify their deaths, I don't know what will.

Griddle - you know that it doesn't matteri f they know your target or not to roleblock you. Promise me that if I get lynched, you'll kill Red.

[SerialClergyman]

BY the way, I'm still rolling my eyes at those posts, Goat. I mean we all get things wrong and for all I know you're spot on about the masons, but I'm 98% sure you've just shat on the town from a great height. There's a 1-shot vig and a even night vig, and you think the MASONS are the ones that don't fit.

...

Lost for words.

[SerialClergyman]

In my opinion - you should stick to being surefooted

[SerialClergyman]

Yeah, I missed the Ecto stuff, my bad. Was brain exploded at you declaring the masons scum, should have paid more attention. Sorry.

I agree with iam (howls of anger), pops is scum. If we have an odd-night and an even-night vig, then we definitely have too much power, so it's either the masons or the weak doc. No way it's the masons, it must be pops.

unvote, vote pops

[SerialClergyman]

No feigning, challenging the masons is a stupid idea.

You are suggesting that Iam's town read on Jahudo for the whole game was just him defending a scumbuddy, even when he was really open about it with little reason. You're suggesting that iam would risk his own neck if Jahudo ever got lynched or killed or investigated. I just don't believe it.

Not to mention Iam has been obviously town all game. We've been over this, but it's just there. He's been making waves. I think he made two excellent cases against scum in pops. He had no reason to ever start the wagon on pops, by the way - he could have just sat there and said nothing, but instead he stuck his neck out and made the case late in D1. He's made the logical switches in vote.

And I don't think Iam is the sort of scum to take a massive gamble by claiming mason. Jahudo didn't claim it, so that means iam would have had to panic (or massive gambit) and make that claim, and that's just something I totally don't see him doing.

Plus, on top of all that, mason claims are almost NEVER false. If any of you can link me to a game with a mason fakeclaim by scum I'd be genuinely shocked.

[SerialClergyman]

Goat - if iam wanted to fake night talk, and went back to D1 in order to find out the suspicions of Jahudo, did he just not see that posts that you're talking about? Did he go to the effort of finding the reads but somehow missed that jahudo re-addressed them?

[SerialClergyman]

Was town. Masons are still town. I still think goat is town, if he's not, I can only applaud.

Pops is a good candidate for scum, maybe look at Elmo and Incog. I think this turned into crazy theory night too quickly, and if we'd just settled and knocked out pops without this whole fiasco we'd have done better out of it.

Anyways, I'm at least relieved I don't have to try to argue any more.

Best of luck, kids.

[SerialClergyman]

Ecto's play > me this game. The others I had varying suspicion on, and I'm pretty proud of my town reads (take note, haters) but he just got me - I liked his claim, he switched to protect McGriddle, he looked town - just 10 points all around.

Aside from that I had fun. Elmo, I don't think you sheeped onto goat much at all, as far as I'm aware you just had your reads and away you went.

[SerialClergyman]

Mmm... Maybe it's just me but I'm really not liking this goat narrative... The guy tried hard and actively encouraged other people to agree with his reads - this is a good thing. There's no power trip or having to lead or whatever there - if you didn't think Red was town, don't vote him. ><

Probably the biggest mistake town made (I think) is after the claims we lynched two vanilla when it was clear we had way too much power. Worse than that, two groups of two of the power were CONNECTED, so if we'd hit one scum, we'd get the other one.

The vigs were interesting. After the McGriddle claim, the scum had a powerful bus one and the other is likely town scenario. After the Ecto switch they had a powerful double-confirming position as vigs but were vulnerable in that if one fell they both would.

I thought it was interesting that with a double scum roleblocker the scum have a lot of blocks, but if one gets lynched (like incog) then the town would assume no more blockiung, which put the fake claims in severe jeopardy.

[SerialClergyman]

Well, duh. Does it read at all like I'm blaming Goat?

Yes, basically.

[SerialClergyman]

Yeah, I agree, Goat. Part of my problem as I identified in the dead QT was that pre-claim I had my suspect pool as McG, Incog, pops and Jahudo. Given Jahudo was a mson, that looks really, really strong, but given I was pushing the pro-town power role out of those three, even if I had my way and pops got lynched, no way am I convincing anyone to stick with my plan on D3.

There was a lot of gut-agree with McG's claim at the time of the claim. I think that was a big mistake, and I remember being seriously surprised. I fell into line without questioning it when Ecto switched claims, but before that I seriously didn't believe him. Unfortuantely I had such little cred that when I happily agred to be his vig target people took that as a scum tell ><

Incog's point about counter-claiming is good, but assumes a level of play and activity that McG wasn't showing at that time, I think. I know that I considered Ecto's claiming of 1-shot to possibly-town lie covering for a full vig or an odd night vig (or an SK). It's possible that McG-town doesn't coutnerclaim because he's worried about exposing ecto as odd-vig, not 1-shot vig.

I thanksed Hoopla via pm earlier, but publicly - thanks! Very nice modding.

Was town's fault about the deadlinse - didn't finish off nabnab arlier and pops wasted 3 days not claiming for no reason.

[SerialClergyman]

Wasn't this the zero-prod zero-replacement game?

Weird thing to say.. I think everyone cared to a reasonable extent.