Mini #1007 (Game Over)

[gonnano]

Hello all

[gonnano]

Definitely an interesting start to the game... I agree with redtail that we shouldn't lynch based on just this claim. Hoopla's play does make sense as a town move.

Here's something else to consider -- AGar and I just got out of a game where he was scum. He and his partner managed to win by convincing a townie that my claim was a gambit. He could be trying to pull the same trick again. Gambits do exist, of course, but the reason that they work is because a straight play is much more likely.

[gonnano]

I'll buy the PGO tactic.

Vote AGar

because of the REALLY strong push against Hoopla, and because when I expressed the viewpoint that Hoopla might not be scum, his response was to call my post a "weak chainsaw defense" (is that possible?) and to accuse me of being Hoopla's scumbuddy.

@ConfidAnon - any particular reason for voting me?

[gonnano]

I disagree with Hoopla about scum stating things in a flexible way, because there is a definite town motivation to keeping an open mind.

[gonnano]

As for Hoopla's gambit... I'm finding it really hard to not suggest Lynch All Liars.

OMG HE DID THIS LAST GAME TOO!!!!!1!1!1!!111ONEONEELEVENTYONE!!!!!

Sorry, couldn't resist

[gonnano]

@gonnano - Your humor never ceases to amuse me.

I'm glad you appreciated it. Shotty's reaction was the best part.

@ gonnano and Shotty; "He (AGar) pushed REALLY hard against someone who he'd seen pull a gambit in the same vein as this before, obviously he's scum."

I have never been on board with the idea that Hoopla's claim was

most likely

a gambit. I was aware of the possibility, but it seemed like PGO wouldn't be the best claim for that situation, simply because it can be disproved by a cop or doctor willing to take a risk. If Hoopla were pulling the same trick, the roleclaim probably would have been something that was more watertight (like the miller claim in that other game). AGar's response seemed excessively enthusiastic based on the information that we had, and that's why I voted for him.

I'm finding it really hard to not suggest Lynch All Liars.

Elleran, trying to push the Lynch-All-Liars PL is scummy right now.

@AGar - why mention Lynch All Liars if you don't want to suggest it? Is it possible that you DO want to suggest it, but without committing yourself to anything? I also noticed that you were very quick to turn on someone who followed the suggestion that you were extremely careful to not make.

[gonnano]

So... I'm thinking VI on Shotty, but not necessarily scum.

I'd like to see a vote from KKN, and it would help me out a lot if G&H would at least say where his/her vote would go if it had to be placed. Votes are really the only concrete thing we have in this game, and that's what I like to use as a starting point for my reads.

[gonnano]

Why, shotty? Why do you have to do this to yourself?

[gonnano]

I'm actually inclined to believe shotty on the doctor claim -- I think it would be a very bad move to vig kill him. If he's town the mafia can't risk keeping him around for too long, and if he's still around in a couple of Days he'll basically be confirmed scum... there's no sense in taking a chance now when waiting will yield much clearer results.

[gonnano]

not really... even though the scum know that we know that they know ... etc., they still couldn't risk keeping a doctor around for more than a Day or two.

[gonnano]

What if a Vig claims? If they have a RB, we definitely have more than a just a doc, and then they would have to pick between him and Shotty. It would still make more sense for mafia just to get rid of Shotty soon so that they could hopefully block our other PR.

[gonnano]

Case on AGar:
- Jumped on the PGO claim like no tomorrow, reasoning was based on a previous play that was not actually all that similar (PGO is disprovable, Miller is not)
- Went after me for saying that it was POSSIBLE that he was scum trying to convince the town that the PGO claim was a gambit, accused me of being a scumbuddy on the basis of me not agreeing with him
- In his ISO post #13, he says that my case against him is unfounded, calls my vote OMGUS, and states more reasons that Hoopla still seems scummy to him. Somewhere in the middle of this he unvotes Hoopla. This seems like scum trying to back away from pressure without admitting that there is a case against him.
- He then pushed a case on AlmasterGM, which he is now slowly backing away from without moving his vote.

[gonnano]

@G&H - You've said that you aren't going to lie, but will you tell half-truths with the intent to deceive people? How do you feel about telling untruths without the intent to deceive (sarcasm)?

this is mostly because I'm curious, but I think it's relevant to the game too.

[gonnano]

Unvote

Vote: Elleran

The AGar wagon doesn't seem to be going anywhere, as AGar and I are the only ones discussing it... one scum is as good as another, though.

[gonnano]

Re: gonnano - His logic on dr's claim is bad. His logic about scum killing him is worse. Scum have what reason to kill him? He's not a strong player, so even if he is the doc, it's not like he's going to get off a successful protect repeatedly. Also, where do I back off of my case on Almaster? I dismiss the vig note, but otherwise, I keep on him. I'll get to the rest of his case and the holes in his logic when I get to my actual computer.

Any doctor is just going off of an informed guess, and that's only a little better than a random guess in my opinion. Shotty is still a risk for the scum.

As Almaster has pointed out, there's not much that you can drop besides the vig note. Basically your argument now is about Almaster latching, and I wouldn't be surprised to see a statement form you in the next few pages where you suddenly realize that agreeing with someone isn't scummy. It will be interesting to see what you do with your vote at that point.

[gonnano]

I would also like to see more content or more posts or really more of anything from G&H, and KKN to a lesser extent.
I'll really be watching out for lurking in the case of G&H, because a scum that can't lie wouldn't have all that many options besides lurking.

[gonnano]

@ConfidAnon - You know that vote you put down on page three? The one with no reason? Just wanted to check to make sure that you still have no reason for it.

[gonnano]

I didn't even know it was possible for one person to be that scummy... are you doing it on purpose or does it just happen?

[gonnano]

Hoopla's wagon took 19 posts to get up to 4 votes.
Almaster's wagon took 5 posts to get up to three votes.
Other attempts to start wagons have stayed at or below two votes.

AGar and Vel have been on both of the bigger, faster wagons, and now Shotty has completed his collection of fast,scummy wagons.

So... I like the Elleran wagon, because it seems so hard to get going. AGar and Vel are my next two suspects, and I'm standing by my statement that if Shotty is still around after a Night or two we should lynch him.

[gonnano]

In response to AGar:

If a cop or doctor targets a claimed PGO and lives, the claim is disproved -- confirmed to them. All they have to do is convince the town to lynch the claimed PGO, which shouldn't be too hard considering the circumstances. The idea here would be that the cop/doc would target the claimed PGO without letting the mafia know (possibly breadcrumbing the day before), then if they are still alive they can go from there.
A miller claim could only be tested at all by a cop, and the cop still basically has no idea what to believe even after the investigation. See how much more elegant that is than a PGO claim?

The point that I was trying to make about your ISO 13 is that you don't retract any of your reasons for voting Hoopla in the first place, but you still unvote. To me this seemed like responding to pressure by unvoting while still leaving an opening for you to jump back on the Hoopla wagon if you saw a chance.

My intention is not to freak out about ConfidAnon's vote -- I'm not concerned about his vote being on me, I'm concerned about his vote not being on someone that he actually finds scummy. We've had enough content in this game for him to put down a meaningful vote.

[gonnano]

will do, buddy

[gonnano]

Here's the meat of your case against Hoopla, as I see it:

I also find this slightly scummy, because I've seen you pull this stunt before, back in 909, where you claimed miller off the bat, and then turned out to be a goon.

Every point you have made is something that we can't confirm, because it's all you saying one thing that is supposedly in your head. There is no proof that you remembered, you could easily be bluffing every post you make to fit in with "I remember you being in that game." The only point you bring up that's confirmable is, yes, I did talk to Amished about that game. But, again, nothing in that post shows that I read more than the OP, so how are you to know from that post alone that I know that you claimed miller falsely.

Here's the post where you unvote Hoopla, but don't retract the above arguments -- implying that you still consider them valid.

As for Hoopla's gambit... I'm finding it really hard to not suggest Lynch All Liars. And before gonnano gets all excited thinking "OMG HE DID THIS LAST GAME TOO!!!!!1!1!1!!111ONEONEELEVENTYONE!!!!!", it's in my meta to push policy lynches when the opportunity arises regardless of alignment. Look at Mini 909, Newbie 863 and Newbie 965. Off of the top of my head, I pushed a policy lynch on Quagmire D1 for not reading his role PM in 909, I pushed a LALiars against Panacea in 863, and again, LALiars against DavidParker in 965. I do believe I was town in all three of those games.

The thing I don't like about Hoopla's gambit is that I don't feel Hoopla got as much reaction as she could have because of my attack on the meta. The breadcrumb makes sense, mainly because of the K sentence. Hoopla's smart enough to know that you won't attract a cop and a doctor with the same playstyle in most cases. But I feel like it was a misguided attempt, especially if she knew I was going to meet the claim head-on, as basically all discussion that followed revolved around whether this was a gambit as has been executed in the past or not.

This is what your new summary of why you unvoted says:

Apparently an unclaim with a breadcrumb and logistical explanation (whether I like it or not) is no reason to unvote someone.

... but you've already said that you think lying is a scumtell, it's already been pointed out that the breadcrumb could have been planted regardless of alignment, and logical explanations of Hoopla's claim have been around since the beginning of the game.

[gonnano]

RE: Post #96 -- As town, I'm looking out for scum. That means being aware of the possibility that I am completely and utterly wrong about any given case. If I have a gut feeling or a vague theory, I might post it just to get feedback and further the discussion. However, I won't state it as if it is a certainty and I won't try to pretend that it is based on pure logic. If it sounds like I am leaving myself room to change my position, it's because that's exactly what I'm doing. Projecting a false sense of confidence will only make me look foolish in the long run.

KKN -- my "soft defenses" of Hoopla came from an unwillingness to buy into her wagon wholesale. As a result of playing and reading other games, I get suspicious when a Day 1 wagon seems to be moving too fast.

[gonnano]

hey Shotty... care to explain the voting/unvoting?
Also, a confirmation that you are not a townie pretending to be a doc would be nice.

[gonnano]

in response to AGar:

The great thing about logic is that no matter who it comes from, it's still logic.

I was mistaken about the scumtell thing, I should have said "you've already said that you think liars should be lynched"

I'm not trying to tunnel -- I can't help it if you do lots of scummy things.

And scummy character defamation aside, I hope that you don't actually think I'm holding a grudge. That was a great play by you and your partner that pulled you out of a tough situation, and I respect the fact that it was all part of the game.

in response to KKN:
any D1 quick wagon is enough to earn my suspicion now, regardless of the why, because there's never enough information to just go ahead and lynch someone a few pages into the game.

[gonnano]

G&H has been on the site today... I wonder why he/she didn't chime in?

[gonnano]

I'm on board for the protection role massclaim, but I'm not sure if I would be willing to lynch shotty straight away in the event of a counter... I'll have to think about that some more. For example, why wouldn't the counter claim have already happened? If Shotty is scum, I'm sure the real protection role would have had no problem convincing everyone to vote for shotty a few pages back.

I don't understand Vel's point about PR fishing -- basically Hoopla's massclaim idea amounts to saying, "If there's a real doc out there, they should counter claim now" I don't see much harm in it, and here's why:

There are two cases -- counter claim and no counter claim. Both end with a dead doctor, but if we get a counter claim, we also have a confirmed scum. It's at least worth trying to get a counter claim, although I personally don't think we're going to get one. I'll go ahead and say that I don't have a protection role.

[gonnano]

Methinks Vel just picked up a couple of scumpoints.

[gonnano]

Hi Good and Honest! I see you

[gonnano]

oh, and Shotty would have picked up a couple of scumpoints just now if he had any room left.

[gonnano]

I'm posting just to say that I'm emotionally drained by the other game I'm playing with drmyshottyizsik (no, it has nothing to do with drmyshottyizsik's behaviour). I don't know when I'll post here again...

I notice that it doesn't exactly say that the emotional drain is the

reason

for limited posting... This could be interpreted as

Unrelated Statement. I'll be lurking for a while... kthx.

Whenever G&H gets back I would be very interested to see a response to my post #149

[gonnano]

apparently my facetious and/or dry and/or not funny sense of humor doesn't go over very well... I'll have to start using joke tags like a good humor-handicapped person should </joke>

[gonnano]

gonnano, if drmyshottyizsik is not a "Doctor", would your position change?

Yes, because then he would be scum. If he is town and not a Doctor, he would unclaim.

Good and Honest: to clarify the half-truths with the intent to deceive thing -- would you be willing to say something like "I like ice cream. Vote Hoopla." with the intent of having us believe that you are voting Hoopla because you like ice cream? This is a nonsensical example but I think you can see what I'm getting at.

An untruth without the intent to deceive would be something like saying "Everyone knows that there are 24 days in a week -- where do you think the expression 24/7 comes from?" with the understanding that your statement is obviously false and is intended as a joke (a really bad one, in this case). I don't see you ever using this one, but I was curious about what you thought about it.

Also, would you be willing to participate in a role-specific claim like doc/not doc? I'm speaking generally here, not necessarily about this particular game. I don't think it would break your playstyle, because even if you claimed not doc it doesn't guarantee that you are scum.

I'd really like to know who you would vote for if you had to right now. Really, we're only taking it on faith that the mod didn't decide to load us up with a bunch of mafia, so you're going to have to anticipate the possibility that you will have to vote.

Hoopla: reading those statistics makes me feel like ((christmas morning + birthday)^Summer vacation). Not joking. Please insert them any time that they occur to you whether they are relevant or not.

[gonnano]

I've even said that a lying townie is a worthy mislynch if a player isn't acting scummier. But I've never said that lying is a scumtell, at least not that I recall in this game.

I was looking at this again and I'd like some further explanation. Are you saying that you would lynch a player that you think is probably town but has told a lie? Even randomly voting someone out of the pool of people that you don't have town reads on would be better than that.

Assuming that you're trying to lynch scum (admittedly a bit of a stretch in this game), the fact that you are willing to vote for a liar in the absence of game-specific scum reads would logically mean that you consider lying a scumtell, at least to some degree.

[gonnano]

Three days later, he's still alive. WHAT DO?

Discuss strategy for a Day, then lynch Shotty the Scum

I don't agree with AGar that having a liar around in LYLO is worse than lynching a very pro-town player, but this is turning into a theory debate, so I won't push it any further.

Also, sorry I'm refusing to just tunnel on one player and thus am apparently not scumhunting.

What is this in response to?

There are a thousand and one ways this can go wrong, and very few where it goes right, in my eyes.

There are a thousand and one ways for people to be killed by office supplies, but that doesn't make it likely.

[gonnano]

Almaster - If you believe the scenario that you described is true, why not look for the counterclaim, then lynch shotty if there is one, then lynch Hoopla if he flips scum? Losing a doc is definitely worth two scum lynches.

[gonnano]

Zach, what is your position on the massclaim? Claiming protection role/not protection role would be considered an acceptable answer to this question.

[gonnano]

EBWOP: Or whatever else you want to say. Not trying to force anything.

[gonnano]

Unfortunately I will be V/LA August 1-9, with the possibility of getting back the 8th or maybe even the 7th. Luckily, the way this works out with my timezone I should be able to post right up until the deadline of Day 1, be absent for the Night, and get right back in Day 2 soon after it starts.

[gonnano]

My V/LA is no access

[gonnano]

Just would like to interject here that I feel very good about an Elleran lynch if we don't get a doc counter.

[gonnano]

Come on, man, read the thread. Specifically AGar's post 262 and after. It seems like you're scum just trying to drag this out so we don't get to discuss what happens afterward, but it won't work.

[gonnano]

G&H, my posts #200 and #214 were to basically let the record show that you had been active on the site that day, in anticipation of the possibility that you weren't going to post that day. (At the time that I posted 200 I had seen you on the site, I posted 214 when I saw you browsing this forum.) I mentioned you later (#218), but that was mostly to point you to the questions that I thought were relevant, but were a long way back and might have been overlooked.

[gonnano]

I think he was talking about something bigger than mafia games... just my impression, though

[gonnano]

gonnano, you noted the quick succession of votes for Hoopla and AlmasterGM. Why didn't you note it when the same thing happened with Elleran on page 10?

Hoopla had been trying to get that wagon going for a long time already. After I joined in started to take off. My thoughts are that the scum were trying to see if they could get by with ignoring Elleran's scummy behavior, then when it looked like they might not get away with it they started showing more support for his bandwagon.

Good one CA, I wonder why no one else has thought of that already... maybe because G&H has already said that if (s)he answered questions like that it would break his/her playstyle. However, I do NOT think that a doc/not doc claim would break his/her playstyle and I would like to see one pronto. I would strongly advise against lynching G&H today, though. I would much rather proceed with the Elleran lynch and discuss G&H more during Day 2.

[gonnano]

It's just that it's so late in the Day that I don't feel we've had a chance to discuss G&H's actions very much.

[gonnano]

Wait, what? Can someone point me to my false attack? I voted Elleran after he did that "It was a typo, it was supposed to read like this... no wait I mean like this" thing.

I want to say again that a protection role claim doesn't break G&H's playstyle, so the massclaim should be completed in the normal way. I'll explain that here for G&H to read:
Someone who will not lie can't respond to questions like "are you scum?" because then the games where they are scum would be broken. Basically, if the question has no way for scum-G&H to answer honestly and without ruining the game, then the question won't be answered, regardless of what alignment G&H actually has. The doc/not doc question DOES have an acceptable way for scum-G&H to answer honestly, because claiming "not doc" doesn't confirm alignment. Therefore G&H should answer the question.

If he/she doesn't do so in his/her next post, I want to discuss this a little more. If the question gets answered, the point is moot and we should green-light the Elleran lynch.

[gonnano]

AGar's argument against G&H is just a little bit too farfetched. I find it hard to believe that an experienced player like him would fail to see the obvious scum exit that redtail just described, which is even consistent with G&H's "bullsnot" playstyle. I will most likely be pushing for an AGar lynch on Day 2.

[gonnano]

I'm back. And wrong about AGar, apparently. Anyway, here comes the spastic catch-up post.

-------------------------------------------

gonnano, what would you say about ConfidAnon's behaviour towards you on Day 1?

I don't have much to say about that because he didn't do much Day 1. If you have something specific in mind that I haven't already addressed, I'll be happy to do so.
-------------------------------------------
I like Hoopla's assessment in post 391, and I think that her scumteam reads are probably pretty close. On a related note, I'm going to VOTE: VRK because he's been avoiding taking definitive positions like the plague. Most notable were the vote/unvote of Elleran in quick succession and this:

I need to have a think about what the night kill means, although it may be too early in the game to get anything useful out of it.

Why make this statement? If you don't have an opinion about it, why bring it up? To me this reads like a quick shot at getting some town points.
-------------------------------------------

I have already explained why a doc/not-doc massclaim does not in any way break G&H's playstyle. I am expecting (in the very near future) either a completed massclaim or a very thorough explanation of why G&H has not completed the massclaim.

-------------------------------------------

I don't buy the viewpoint that G&H is just building up trust for a big lie somewhere down the road. Think about it. What would be the point? Why would someone play game after game without lying just to win one game and then never be trusted again? What game of Mafia would be important enough to ruin an account for? It would be too much effort for such a tiny payoff.

[gonnano]

gonnano, in my post #393 I did explain why I refused to participate. I summarized ConfidAnon's behaviour towards you earlier - first, ConfidAnon voted you to "add another name to the conversation"; then in post #144 ConfidAnon made a short remark on a post of yours and I perceived that again as trying to bring attention to you; but, finally, ConfidAnon stated that your reaction to ConfidAnon's vote wasn't strong at all. I wondered whether you'd have any comments on these actions of ConfidAnon.

I consider CA's actions to be a null tell. He's a little on the lurky side IMO, but that's about all I've got on him.

Regarding your refusal to participate in the massclaim:

As I have said, I intend to always be honest when playing a game of Mafia. So, in general, I won't reveal what my role in a particular game is. In our current game, I was only supposed to say whether I'm a "Doctor" (or something similar) or not - but that still has something to do with my role.

This statement from you says that you intend to be honest and that you don't want to finish the protection role massclaim. What I'm looking for is a connection between these two things. I've already explained that roleclaims only break your playstyle when there is no acceptable scum answer to them (acceptable meaning both honest and non-gamebreaking). The protection role massclaim does have an acceptable scum answer, and I would like an actual reason that an honest player could not participate in such a massclaim.

Mod - I believe that I should be voting for Vel-Rahn Koon, unless there was something wrong with the way I formatted my vote. (It's in post 414)

[gonnano]

I think the best way to approach the G&H playstyle is to ask the right questions. For example, instead of asking "Who do you think is scum?", the question should be "Who would you choose to vote for if you had to right now?". Information can still be gained this way without compromising the honest playstyle.

I don't like policy lynches and would not participate in one. However, I don't see any reason that G&H shouldn't answer correctly worded questions and would most likely regard a continued refusal to do so as extremely scummy.

[gonnano]

gonnano, a question you haven't addressed yet:

What if I refuse to answer your question on the grounds that my stimulus for answering isn't coming from the inside?

[gonnano]

Gonnaro, if you find the fact that G&H is scum because he wouldn't claim for that reason, why would you use it, even jokingly?

If you have nothing to hide, you could answer the question safely. There is a difference between telling someone their play style is detrimental and mocking them because of it. There should be no harm in you answering that question.

Why would anyone say anything jokingly? I thought that it was obvious that I wasn't legitimately citing that reason, and the fact that there is no harm in answering the question is sort of the point. My intent was not to mock G&H, but to show what would happen if everyone just ignored questions that they didn't feel inspired to answer. I am willing to accept an honest playstyle, and I can even accept someone who won't vote until absolutely necessary. However, ignoring questions is not something that I would consider an acceptable playstyle. If you really, really need to know the answer to G&H's question, I will gladly answer it for you.

I disagree with people who say that mafia members have to lie. It's true that the point of being mafia is to make people believe you are town, but it is entirely possible for this to be accomplished while only making true statements.

[gonnano]

And Zach have you claimed yet? Just wondering, cause you are so interested in everyone else doing it.

Not a protective role.

Read the thread, please.

---------------------------------------------------

gonnano, I'm surprised by your reaction. You yourself had previously stated that I have to be asked the "right questions" - when I said I can't promise I'll answer all questions, I was thinking mainly about questions like ConfidAnon's (which Zachrulez has brought up now and I'll talk more about this below). As I said, I'm always open to questions. And since it looks like you didn't understand my point about the stimulus coming from the inside, I'll explain in greater detail:

Since I want to always be honest, each time I reveal my role (or something about it) in a game of Mafia is going to be a remarkable event. I have been imagining some special situations where I'll do it and that will make that particular game very memorable... So, obviously, I want the stimulus for revealing (a part of) my role to be coming from the inside - if I answer questions about my role or participate in mass claims (i.e., when the stimulus comes from the outside), everything special about my revealing my role will be lost. And that will make the game less interesting for everyone, I think.

By "the right questions" I meant any question that does not break your playstyle, and I would expect you to answer the vast majority of those questions. The question "Do you have a protection role?" does not break your playstyle, so I would expect you to answer it. The question "Who would you vote for right now if you absolutely had to vote?" does not break your playstyle, so I would expect you to answer it.

I will answer questions from G&H if:
1. G&H answers the questions that don't break the honest playstyle, or
2. Someone else asks me the same question.

[gonnano]

What kind of followup would you like me to make, redtail? Unless I'm missing something, VRK's posting since my vote for him has been limited to the playstyle and theory type of discussion that you criticized me for. The points that I made in my vote post still stand, and I think the fact that no one has refuted them says a lot.

[gonnano]

what claim did you think Zach was referring to? All he's expecting G&H to do is say doc or not doc.

[gonnano]

Our positions don't seem to be equal to me.

About "Do you have a protection role?" [...] I don't want to

About "Who would you vote for right now if you absolutely had to vote?" [...] I really don't want to

You're not answering my (two) questions because you don't feel like it, I'm not answering your (two? three?) questions because I don't feel like it. Seems fair to me. To help things get moving, though, I will answer one of your questions even though I don't feel like it.

"When I asked you about the quick succession of votes for Elleran on page 10, you said: "Hoopla had been trying to get that wagon going for a long time already. After I joined in started to take off. My thoughts are that the scum were trying to see if they could get by with ignoring Elleran's scummy behavior, then when it looked like they might not get away with it they started showing more support for his bandwagon". Did you write that from the standpoint that Elleran was a mafioso?"

I wrote that to say that the voting behavior that I had observed was compatible with a scum-Elleran, and therefore made him seem scummy to me. Now it's your turn to answer a question that you don't feel like answering.

@ConfidAnon:

Do you think that your limited involvement in the game is hurting the town?
Does Zach seem scummy to you for any reasons other than ones that could also be applied to you?
What do you think about G&H's posts?
What do you think about Hoopla's scumteam picks?
Are you still not sure why Hoopla thought Almaster was probably town?

[gonnano]

A couple of people have said that they would be willing to lynch Zach, and he's my second choice behind VRK, so here we go...

Unvote
Vote Zach

That should put him at L-1. Time for a claim, then most likely a hammer.

[gonnano]

Zach said something about a week-long trip. He probably won't be back before deadline, so we need to decide whether to lynch him or not. If we decide not to because we can't get a claim from him today, we need to move to another bandwagon ASAP. Personally, I'm not sure if another lynch would be feasible at this point.

If you honestly "don't feel like" answering my questions, please give me an explanation why.

I don't like answering your questions because that makes it seem like I am fine with you ignoring my questions, which I am not. I completely understand why you can't tell us whether you are town or not, and why you can't tell us who you think is scum. I have absolutely no clue why you refuse to answer the massclaim, and the only explanation I have seen for that is that you don't want to.

The "right questions" that I asked ConfidAnon were some crap that I came up with off the top of my head, and I was more interested in the way that he answered them than the actual answers. I was also hoping that they would be enough to get him started posting some real content.

By the way, I'm confused by your question to ConfidAnon: "Are you still not sure why Hoopla thought Almaster was probably town?". What made you think ConfidAnon wasn't sure about that?

I've already answered one of your questions, so I'll wait for an answer to one of mine before I answer any more from you. As a courtesy, though, I will tell you that the answer to this one is already out there if you want to find it yourself.

[gonnano]

12 hours to deadline... we aren't getting a claim, so redtail needs to hammer if he's still around.

[gonnano]

none here, it's an easy claim to make as scum.

[gonnano]

First, I want to say that I think it is unlikely that Zach did any bussing. To bus effectively, you have to make a lot of accusations (mostly non-bussing) and I don't feel like Zach did enough of that for him to accuse a scumbuddy. Therefore I think that G&H is probably town, seeing as Zach was pushing for a G&H lynch pretty heavily. I think Almaster is probably town for reasons that have already been discussed.

Now, to check the post-flip information against my suspicion of VRK...

I'm getting a town vibe from Vel.

As far as why I'm voting you over shotty and VRK. I can see where VRK is coming from. (Even though I don't feel the same way.) Also as I said before, he's giving me a town vibe.

These are the only statements that I can find from Zach that mention Vel. And Zach's "town vibes" aren't seeming so townie to me these days.

[gonnano]

I was

paranoid

this town would eventually succumb to temptation and want to lynch him.

Found a breadcrumb for a PGO reclaim! Just joking (unless I'm right, in which case I knew it all along).

[gonnano]

On a less stupid note, are there any statistics floating around for investigative roles in mini normals?

[gonnano]

Just thinking that mafia and vanilla plus one doctor isn't quite enough. It might help me with my reads, but mostly I'm just curious. Nothing worth gathering new data for, but if you've already got the information I would be interested in it.

[gonnano]

AGM and VRK have little real contact

I don't want to interfere with this interview, but I did want to point out that this is more a VRK point than anything, because VRK hasn't had much real contact with a lot of people.

[gonnano]

Would a mod put a gunsmith in a game with no false positives?
Why did you choose to target redtail?
Also, what night did you target redtail, and who was your other target?

[gonnano]

I don't know about this. I don't see scum-Hoopla making such a risky play, especially against redtail, but she might just be crazy enough to try it. I think it's likely that she has some information, considering that she (correctly, of course) cleared me, but this could be scum information for all I know. I also don't see scum-redtail bussing VRK so hard (I still think VRK is scum), but then again he could be pretty confident that after being on two scum bandwagons that he wouldn't be high on the list for a lynch.

I'm leaning towards lynching VRK today, hopefully getting a scumflip, then doing some massclaiming when it won't benefit the scum as much. If you see any flaws in this plan point them out, but otherwise it's the one that I am in favor of.

[gonnano]

After everyone comments on the new developments, I have something to say. Nothing special, but just to be safe it should wait.

Preview edit: Whoa... I don't have a gun either. Nice flailing tho.

It also means that redtail is town, because surely scum in that situation would claim cop/vig/something else, knowing that they have a gun, and this was their only chance at survival.

But you shouldn't need that, because you supposedly had a negative result from him.

[gonnano]

Gonnano, you've just fallen squarely for the old bait and switch. I switched the results.

This says that you switched the results, referring to the only two investigations that had been mentioned, me and redtail.

[gonnano]

If there's another investigative role, counterclaiming Hoopla should happen soon.

If the rest of the town buys Hoopla's bogus investigation, I still think that the plan I outlined for redtail would be the most pro-town path, even with me substituted for redtail. If not, I would suggest a Hoopla lynch.

I'll go ahead and say now what I was planning to say later, which is that I thought Hoopla might be a tracker who saw me target nobody and saw redtail target shotty, then was trying to get more info from redtail by claiming gunsmith. Now I think she's scum pulling one of the most impressive gambits that I've ever seen.

[gonnano]

now I know why AGar got nightkilled. A gambit this big can't have a LAL-friendly town.

[gonnano]

No thanks, I still think I can convince the town that I'm innocent.

[gonnano]

There's no way we're not lynching a claimed guilty.

Who claimed guilty?

[gonnano]

EBWOP: the first sentence should be a quote from Hoopla

[gonnano]

You've claimed many things. Is this one for real or just another information-gathering tactic?

I admit that I am curious as to why you would decide to claim this now, knowing that you'll be lynched the next Day. (or nightkilled tonight, if you want to keep your pretense)

Preview Edit: Very good, give yourself the last spot so that you can decide on the best fake investigation. The only problem is that I have no intention of claiming until L-1, or if someone can somehow convince me that giving the scum a list of who's who is a good idea right now, I will not claim unless Hoopla claims before or immediately after me.

And yes, I can see how a massclaim would break the game wide open for scum.

[gonnano]

If you have a guilty on me, why are you worried about lynching with accuracy today?

[gonnano]

Hah! As soon as you claimed gunsmith I went back, found that post, and saw Gun-S-M-I-H. Which confused the heck out of me.

I still am not in favor of a massclaim.

[gonnano]

If we're assuming that Hoopla, myself, redtail, G&H, and AGM are all town, on some pretty good reasoning... how much more narrow does it have to get? We've got a 2/3 chance of lynching scum even if we choose randomly, and a VRK lynch would have a higher chance than that IMO.

[gonnano]

Ok, I agree

[gonnano]

If you're worried about information roles, I might concede to an information-role massclaim, although I'm not even sure about that. I don't think that the possibility of scum hitting a PR is such a big risk that we can't leave it for one more night, and the extra investigation could be extremely valuable.

My favorite idea that I've had so far is to wagon VRK, get a claim, then ask for any counterclaims or any investigative roles with an innocent result to speak up before the hammer.

VOTE: VRK

[gonnano]

Vel, who would you choose to lynch besides yourself?

Also, I'm slowly starting to agree with the massclaim, but I still need to think about it some more.

As for my town reads, I think most of them have been explained at one point or another, but maybe not Hoopla.

The reason that I think Hoopla is town is because I feel that she could have gotten away with a lot less scumhunting if she were mafia. I also read a few of her completed games near the beginning of this game, (I think I got all of her scum games and a couple of town games) looking to see if she gave out information like the protection role stats when she was scum. What I found was a tendency as scum to stay away from specific information, and even though she did occasionally include statistics in her scum arguments, they were the kind of general information that leaves plenty of room for manipulation. I didn't find any scum games from her that came close to the amount and quality of information she has provided in this one.

If there's another of those reads that I have neglected to explain, let me know.

I agree that CA has been extremely lurky, but I think I would rather stay with my VRK vote for now.

[gonnano]

I am now of the opinion that we should move someone to L-1, then ask for any information roles to claim IF we are about to mislynch, then ask for an information role counterclaim if there is one, and finally get a claim from the prospective lynchee (if he hasn't claimed an IR).

[gonnano]

oh, and the L-1 part needs to happen soon to leave time for the other part.

[gonnano]

I'm more in favor of lynching VRK today, considering that we would get more information from his flip. If I don't think I can get the support I need to make that happen, I will consider switching to the CA wagon.

[gonnano]

I don't think VRK's post means that he's giving up, exactly. It's just as likely IMO that he's found himself incriminated by Zach so he's trying one last tactic to convince people that he's town. I notice that he hasn't actually voted for himself yet... maybe saving it so he can self-hammer if he has to?

Speaking of self-hammering, because a lot of my plan relies on information being revealed after someone has been targeted for a lynch, I think that instead of going to L-1 we should go to L-2, then find two more people who are willing to finish the lynch. This would prevent scum from self-hammering and keeping us from getting any information that might turn up. Of course, this is all assuming that we go with my plan, which hasn't been decided yet.

Does anyone disagree with the plan that I presented in post 633?

[gonnano]

VRK, I was just trying to say that we'd get more from your flip than from CA the super-lurker.

Anyway, now that VRK has claimed we can either go with the massclaim, wagon VRK and follow the plan that I proposed which everyone seems to be ignoring (possibly because it's stupid, but if it is I would like to know at least), or wagon someone else (probably CA) and follow my plan with an extra claim floating around. I think it's obvious what VRK votes for, but I'd like to hear everyone else's take on the subject.

[gonnano]

Can I get a reason why we're apparently going with the massclaim over my plan? I'm perfectly willing to accept a reasonable explanation of why it won't work and/or isn't the best idea, but I don't want us to massclaim just because Hoopla says we should. Why is the order the way it is? I know that this needs to happen soon, but I need some answers first.

[gonnano]

I know that this needs to happen soon, but I need some answers first.

[gonnano]

Here's a choice. VRK is the only one who has claimed so far, so we could wagon him and see if any investigative roles show up to clear him. If not, we lynch him.

[gonnano]

why is VRK probably town? I'm fine with saying that people Zach voted for/pressured are probably town, but why the person that he had a "town vibe" on?

where does KKN fit in all this?

why is cashing in the PR now and definitely losing that player tonight better than letting the PR decide if they have relevant information to offer or not? Scum only have a 1/6 chance of killing the power role tonight.

[gonnano]

AGM, have you ever actually gotten results by saying stuff like that? You didn't say who you were talking about, so no one knows what you even mean, and even if you had I very much doubt that you would have inspired them to change anything with that post.

You just wasted post number 666.

[gonnano]

Why do you think there will just be one? Are you deliberately fishing for that information?

I was looking at the worst-case scenario. I forgot to include the possibility that there is more than one PR, in which case there is no way that scum can eliminate all of our sources of inside information by tomorrow.

Besides, I shouldn't even have to tell people to play the game.

That's right, because it's obvious. So obvious that you pointing it out will never make a difference because everyone already knows it.

[gonnano]

because they choose to ignore it

[gonnano]

why is VRK probably town? I'm fine with saying that people Zach voted for/pressured are probably town, but why the person that he had a "town vibe" on?

where does KKN fit in all this?

[gonnano]

am I to assume that VRK is town based on his willingness to lynch himself?

[gonnano]

It looks as though no one is considering anything but the massclaim, so I'll go ahead and claim now.

I am a Lover, paired up with G&H. This is why I didn't want to lynch him back in D1. Not that I was against lynching him, but you can understand why I would want to be reasonably sure that he was scum before we both got taken out of the game. It's also why I was against the massclaim.

I considered claiming Vanilla Townie, because first of all I know how it must look to claim to be partnered with a player that won't claim, and secondly because I believed G&H to be town and didn't want to get both of us nightkilled. I decided against that because
A. a town lover pair will alter the balance pretty significantly, and isn't the kind of information that I would want to leave out when considering the likelihood of having certain power roles
B. the claim might help explain some of my actions
C. If I claimed VT and then later needed to claim Lover I would pretty much be up the creek

I hope that G&H will confirm this, because it doesn't reveal his alignment and I assume that if I were lying about what his role is he wouldn't be prevented by his playstyle from telling everyone that I'm lying. Also, this stood out to me and I hope it means what I think it means:

I have to say it - I don't plan to NEVER reveal my role. In fact, I can think of special situations when I'll do it.

Then again, maybe I've said all this just to find out that this is another one of those things that G&H doesn't feel like answering.

[gonnano]

I'd like to see Hoopla's claim next, if that's alright with everyone.

[gonnano]

I've told you everything I know already. No alignment hints, no separate chat, just a liability.

However, upon receiving my role I looked up a few games that contained lover pairs, and I gained the impression that scum-town pairs are actually relatively uncommon compared to same side pairs (in spite of what the wiki says about the "classic Lover pair"). This further strengthens my belief that G&H is town.

[gonnano]

I don't remember the games, just the conclusion that I made... sorry, it wasn't an in-depth study by any means, and I was doing it for my own benefit so I didn't bother to record information so that other people could check after me.

[gonnano]

You may be right... I'll look again

[gonnano]

I remember that it was a pain in the butt to find a game with lovers in it before, and I don't see any now. I probably got tired before and went to any game that I could find regardless of whether it was a mini or a normal, just looking for lover pairs. What I can tell you is that I found maybe one lover pair after a night of searching that was town-scum.

I realize that it's a detrimental setup for town if G&H and I are both town, but I was figuring that it could be balanced out somehow. Game balance isn't exactly my strong suit, so I was just going by what I saw that night and if it turns out that G&H is likely to be scum I will vote for him (or myself, makes no difference).

[gonnano]

I searched for lover pairs about

a month and a half ago

, and went through tons of games skimming the first post to look for lover pairs. Most of the games that I found didn't even have a lover pair in them, just the word "lover" or "lovers" somewhere. So no, I don't remember the names of any of those games and apparently there were no mini normals among them. It took me forever to find one game with a lover pair in it before, and I'm not interested in doing it again just to prove that G&H might be town.

[gonnano]

I didn't check the archive. I searched for lover* and checked each individual game that I found for a lover pair by looking at the first post. I don't remember where I searched specifically, but I doubt that I would have looked at any open setups.

I don't see what you people are so excited about. It seems like "OMG he can't remember the game he read the first post of a month ago, he must be scum!!!"

[gonnano]

Lucky me. I thought that the role of a Lover was essentially a Sibling with no benefits, so I wasn't surprised at not being able to nighttalk. I'm still not sure if it isn't just some way to make up for an overpowered town or underpowered scum.

Out of curiosity, what would the balance effect be of a town-scum lover pair? Off the top of my head it still seems slightly pro-scum.

[gonnano]

The playstyle isn't broken... G&H hasn't confirmed his alignment, which as I've been saying is the only thing that breaks his playstyle.

[gonnano]

Just to clarify, tracking a mafia only gives a positive result if that person submits the nightkill, right?

[gonnano]

Do you mind saying why you chose to track me and KKN?

[gonnano]

Also, what has happened to VRK?

[gonnano]

This game needs more massclaim

[gonnano]

I'm inclined to believe Hoopla. G&H is so hard to read because he only participates halfway, and I didn't think he was scum at first but now I'm not sure that I can tell the difference with someone who rarely posts and doesn't vote, and doesn't claim even when it doesn't break the no-lying playstyle.

Since I've got the votes already, we should probably just go ahead and lynch me instead of moving the wagon.
VOTE: Gonnano

Just in case the lynch goes through before I get a chance to post again, note that I still find VRK extremely scummy, and I'm not sure why Hoopla shifted away from him so suddenly. I can tell you one thing, the "humble acceptance" approach would be the first thing I would try as scum if I were in the situation that VRK was in.

[gonnano]

I'm with redtail. Either G&H and I are both town and there is one scum left, or G&H is scum and there is one other scum. Either way it ends up in a matchup of one scum against four townies.

[gonnano]

Going into tomorrow...
-Hoopla is essentially confirmed town unless another PR comes up, and even if one does show up that person will need a real humdinger of an excuse for not claiming during the massclaim.
-redtail is almost confirmed town because of his response to Hoopla's gunsmith claim. The chance that he saw the breadcrumb and played off of Hoopla's gambit is small enough to disregard -- I was looking for the breadcrumb and still wasn't sure that I had found it.
- KKN is basically confirmed by Hoopla's investigation. If G&H is town, KKN is basically confirmed town because the likelihood of there being someone else to submit the kill on N2 is almost nothing. If G&H is scum, it's possible that KKN is scum, though given G&H's refusal to vote, I find it highly unlikely that he would submit a nightkill unless he was the last scum left.

This leaves you with CA and VRK as suspects. However, a town player will get killed tonight, which means that if G&H and I are both gone the game goes into MYLO. So you'll have only one chance to pick the scum.

If you are willing to assume that I'm town (I'm pseudo-cleared by a N1 investigation), I think the best play might be to postpone my lynch. If we lynch CA or VRK today, we confirm the alignment of one of the two viable suspects. If we're wrong, there will still be enough townies around to lynch the other one tomorrow (again, I'm including myself as town). After we find the scum, we rewagon me and kill G&H for the win.

In hopeful anticipation I will
UNVOTE: Gonnano

[gonnano]

Why did you have to ninja me? I was just getting back on to say that I completely forgot about AGM, so my plan sucks.
VOTE: Gonnano

[gonnano]

I don't see why I shouldn't explore Hoopla's potentially being a mafioso.

Have you explored the possibility that if she wasn't the tracker someone else would have claimed a power role?

gonnano, what about AlmasterGM made you reconsider your plan?

Nothing about him specifically, just the fact that I missed someone. I thought we would be going into MYLO tomorrow, but we aren't.

[gonnano]

also, I think that the relative weakness of the town could allow for a mafia with no roleblocks or immunities, especially if G&H is town.

[gonnano]

Well, if no one has anything else to say then someone should go ahead and hammer.

[gonnano]

KKN is fully cleared by the investigation except for the possibility that he is investigation immune or there is another scum that isn't G&H (unlikely).

I still don't exactly buy VRK's towniness, but I don't think it will make much difference if he is lynched first or CA.

[gonnano]

So I was pretty much wrong on every single one of my reads. Well, at least there's plenty of room for improvement. I agree that we made Hoopla carry the town way too much, as evidenced by the massive collapse in activity after she died.

I was very surprised at the lynch of KKN, considering that he was essentially cleared by the tracker investigation (in combination with G&H's playstyle). IMO, that was one of the biggest mistakes that the town made.

[gonnano]

The AGar kill makes more sense now -- I agree that he wasn't in much danger of being lynched soon.

With regard to the setup, I didn't especially enjoy being a lover. Purely from an enjoyment standpoint, I think it would be good to counter the extra personal liability with some sort of inside information, although I can see that in this game the lover chat was scrapped for balance reasons. Honestly, I'm skeptical about the practicality of using lover pairs in mini games, because I don't think a 12 person game gives quite enough room to accommodate them.