Newbie 982 - Shadows of Death, Game Over!

[AurorusVox]

RE #548:
My apologies, it was my mistake, not yours. I had assumed that you were still responding to Guybrush's #451 and #453, but I can see now that wasn't the case.

I said that I had a theory about your response assuming you're scum, which is potential distancing from MM. It could be a double-bluff; wanting us to

suspect

distancing, and thus suspect MM. Oh, the possibilities. But you and Omnino share this "lacking suspicion" of Bazz, which is also interesting. I find Hindu individually less suspect than MM, so I find it easier to believe that you're distancing (and also it makes more sense at this point in the game). I think it's something to bare in mind.

RE #549:
No, in my opinion the vote isn't opportunistic, because he had said a number of times during D2 that he had suspicions of Omnino (importantly, this came before Guybrush had made a case on him). I find his lack of scumhunting irritating and potentially scummy (if you were to flip town, for example, then it might throw a new light onto his vote). I agree that the "suspect me if you want" comment was strange and a little scummy. But the vote itself I don't find suspicious because Omnino has been suspicious, and theperson had picked up on this (albeit through the conduit of other players on most points). Whilst theperson isn't the most outwardly townie player by a long shot, I still have lingering town leanings on him due to Michel's read and subsequent flip. I'm willing to give him the benefit of the doubt for now at least.

---

I hope that 2k3 turns up to vote. He won't be due a prod until Wednesday 1:30am GMT, which is obviously after the deadline. Also, I hope that Mastermind comes back to vote (he hasn't posted in over a week...) Obviously there's no guarantee that they will vote for Omnino, but I'd like them to at least indicate who they would be comfortable lynching because a no lynch would really hurt town.

[Guybrush]

I'm approaching the end of my Pair analysis. I'm checking the links, grammar, rereading stuff, and making it as organized possible.
I'd say I'll be done in a couple of hours. (2-3)
Again, nothing spectacular, but it will be easier later for references.

[2003041]

I've caught up with the reading. I don'tmind putting the hammer on EI, but I wanna make sure you guys are all done asking questions before a hammer. I'd rather get as much info as possible now than hammer and lose that.

[AurorusVox]

I'm looking forwards to this pair analysis! It's like Christmas - it should be waiting here when I wake up in the morning :p

And 2k3, I'm glad you're not MIA. I wasn't asking you to hammer (or even vote for EI), I was voicing my concerns that we might end up with a no lynch. It's right to use all the time we have left available to us. Do you have anything to ask EI?

[2003041]

I have a question, but I feel if I ask it and he is scum, that he could be lying to confuse us or just telling the truth and we don't truly believe him. If you still want me to ask him, I will, but I don't feel that comfortable asking him straight up.

[AurorusVox]

Hmm. If you're going to hammer him then you won't get another chance to ask the question, so I guess it depends on how important you think the question is. And it's up to you whether or not you think you can see through the lies/confusion, and the inevitable WIFOMing that could result. If you don't feel comfortable then probably don't ask it.

What do you think is the scummiest thing that the LoakaMossi/omnino/EarthIntruder slot has done?

[EarthIntruder]

I find his lack of scumhunting irritating and potentially scummy (if you were to flip town, for example, then it might throw a new light onto his vote). I agree that the "suspect me if you want" comment was strange and a little scummy. But the vote itself I don't find suspicious because Omnino has been suspicious, and theperson had picked up on this (albeit through the conduit of other players on most points). Whilst theperson isn't the most outwardly townie player by a long shot, I still have lingering town leanings on him due to Michel's read and subsequent flip.

Fair enough, I suppose, but I'd argue that basing your read on someone off of a dead player's read is a little shaky.

As for theperson's previous suspicion on me, there was ISO 8, which both I and omnino have responded to (omnino said those things because he didn't understand the setup and his scumteam speculation is based on HIS OWN meta).

There's ISO 16 in which he refers to his previous post.

Uhh...

[Guybrush]

	omnino\LM	Hindu\Bazz	mm\Akira	Aurorus	person\zauper	2003
omnino\LM	XXXXXXXXXXXX	* +4 *	* -1 *	-8	-6	* +1 *
Hindu\Bazz	* +4 *	XXXXXXXXXXXX	-1	0	-5	* +3 *
mm\Akira	* -1 *	-1	XXXXXXXXXXXX	-6	-1	* -2 *
Aurorus	-8	0	-6	XXXXXXXXXXXX	-2	-15
person\zauper	-6	-5	-1	-2	XXXXXXXXXXXX	-16
2003	* +1 *	* +3 *	* -2 *	-15	-16	XXXXXXXXXXXX

Spoiler: Conclusions

1. If omnino is scum, his buddy is likely Hindu, 2003 or Akira.
2. If Hindu is scum, his buddy could be anyone. Most likely omnino, least likely zauper.
3. If Akira is scum, his buddy could be anyone. Most likely omnino, least likely Aurorus.
4. If Aurorus is scum, his buddy is likely Hindu or zauper.
5. If zauper is scum, his buddy is likely Akira or Aurorus.
6. If 2003 is scum, his buddy is likely Hindu, omnino or Akira.

Spoiler: Notes

0. This is pair analysis. Individual reads are not taken into consideration here at all.
1. The table is symmetric obviously.
2. Positive values indicate pairs. Negative values lack of them.
3. If the value is accompanied with "* *", it means that the interaction was scarce, which is always troubling.
4. Interaction levels were graded subjectively. I didn't go into details. Correct me if I was wrong about something.
5. Pairs haven't been updated since I made them. Only omnino\Hindu\Akira triangle was cross-referenced with Aurorus' one.
6. This is lots of text, which was made through several days. Some double-standards in views and lack of references should be natural.
7. This is not a complete list of interactions, only the ones I found interesting enough.

Spoiler: Buddies Possibilities - used in analysis

Very likely buddies. (+15 and more)
Probably buddies. (+10 to +14)
Might be buddies. (+4 to +9)
Either way. (-3 to +3)
Might be unrelated. (-4 to -9)
Probably unrelated. (-10 to -14)
Very unlikely buddies. (-15 and less)

Spoiler: Interaction levels - used in analysis

- Few interactions. (*)
- Enough interaction.
- Lots of interaction.

---DETAILED ANALYSIS---

(Sorry, there's no nesting of spoilers)

1 omnino\Loaka + Hindu\Bazz

Spoiler: Interactions

Post #176 Bazz briefly comments Loaka's inactivity.
Post #237 Asks omnino again, to answer his question about his experience and is being careful not to accuse him.
Post #269 Bazz notices Aurorus copying Omnino's actions.
Post #459 Hindu notices omnino's action from past and say they are vote-worthy.
Post #471 Hindu asks "Where's omnino?" as if someone other than him could provide an answer.
Post #525 Omnino is Hindu's second suspect, but isn't clear if he would support his lynch if needed.

Spoiler: My Thoughts

Yes to scum-pair:

[459] Should have either worded it differently or voted for him now. (+1) [525] Should have been more supportive of his lynch, since he's his 2nd suspect. (+3)

No to scum-pair:

None.

Conclusion:

Might be buddies. (+4 points) Few interactions. (*)

*If it's not YES or NO, then it's neutral - could go either way. Conclusion is made by only interactions. (without individual cases)

2 omnino\Loaka + mm\Akira

Spoiler: Interactions

Post #61 Akira pointed out Loaka's lack of activity.
Post #157 Akira FOS'd Loaka but mentioned he might be a cop\doc.
Post #223 Omnino pokes Akira a bit, asks him to vote.
Post #235 Omnino votes Akira as a pressure vote.
Post #263 Omnino retracts his vote pretty quick after his answer.
Post #414 Akira gives omnino 2 town points.

Spoiler: My Thoughts

Yes to scum-pair:

[157] I can see a buddy trying to repulse town from voting. (+1) [414] Town points from vibes and NK speculation from a buddy - possible. (+1)

No to scum-pair:

[61] Buddy wouldn't be the first one to say it. (-2) [263] I can see it go either way, but it makes no sense to vote and then unvote so quickly. (-1)

Conclusion:

Either way. (-1 point) Few interactions. (*)

*If it's not YES or NO, then it's neutral - could go either way. Conclusion is made by only interactions. (without individual cases)

3 omnino\Loaka + Aurorus

Spoiler: Interactions

Post #130 Aurorus repeats if Loaka is lurking.
Post #134 Aurorus votes for inactive Loaka.
Post #143 Loaka accuses AV for using him as a distraction.
Post #159 Aurorus questions Michel about why not doubting Loaka.
Post #201 Aurorus gives his detailed analysis on Loaka's 2 posts.
Post #319 Aurorus suggests omnino should start looking for his 2nd suspect.
Post #319 Aurorus defends omnino's L-1 for zauper, after Michel condones it.
Post #378 Aurorus asks omnino to decide who is scummier.
Post #394 Aurorus points out omnino's possible slip.
Post #408 Omnino somewhat warns AV to back off because he has faith in his logic.

Spoiler: My Thoughts

Yes to scum-pair:

[130] Extremely weird for Aurorus to repeat things. (+1) [319] Possible daytime tutoring. (+1) [319] Seth hammering was a possibility, which would hurt town. (+2)

No to scum-pair:

[143] Can't see it coming from an inactive buddy. (-2) [159] Why ask him that? (-1) [201] My God, would he have the patience to write that if buddies? (-2) [378] Forcing him to make a choice. (-1) [394] I doubt he would point it out. (-3) [408] Why would buddies use AtE? (-3)

Conclusion:

Might be unrelated. (-8 points) Lots of interaction.

*If it's not YES or NO, then it's neutral - could go either way. Conclusion is made by only interactions. (without individual cases)

4 omnino\Loaka + person\zauper

Spoiler: Interactions

Post #235 Omnino FOS's zauper but votes Akira in the same post.
Post #298 Omnino votes for zauper and puts him to L-1.
Post #329 Omnino unvotes zauper and shifts his attention towards Michel.
Post #398 Omnino steered Aurorus in theperson's direction, instead of 2003's.
Post #408 Omnino FOS's theperson.

Spoiler: My Thoughts

Yes to scum-pair:

None.

No to scum-pair:

[298] No way he would have put his buddy at L-1 with Seth out there. (-4) [398] Could have gone in other direction. (-1) [408] He described it as a massive FOS. (-1)

Conclusion:

Might be unrelated. (-6 points) Enough interaction.

*If it's not YES or NO, then it's neutral - could go either way. Conclusion is made by only interactions. (without individual cases)

5 omnino\Loaka + 2k3

Spoiler: Interactions

Post #103 After being asked about it, 2003 is forced to talk to nonactive Loaka.
Post #223 Omnino didn't like 2003's play.
Post #398 Omnino explains 2003's actions as "uncertain town".

Spoiler: My Thoughts

Yes to scum-pair:

[103] Tries now too hard to make it look like he's angry at him. (+1)

No to scum-pair:

None.

Conclusion:

Either way. (+1 point) Few interactions. (*)

*If it's not YES or NO, then it's neutral - could go either way. Conclusion is made by only interactions. (without individual cases)

6 Hindu\Bazz + mm\Akira

Spoiler: Interactions

Post #268 Bazz acknowledges Akira being a hot topic, but doesn't comment on it.
Post #269 Asking Aurorus about his reasons behind voting for Akira.
Post #304 Bazz blocks Akira's question for Seth and suggests he shouldn't answer.
Post #352 Bazz would consider Akira's lynch, but only after a reread.
Post #459 Hindu rapes then votes Akira, only to discover he's getting replaced.
Post #481 Master accused Hindu being possible scum.

Spoiler: My Thoughts

Yes to scum-pair:

[268] Smells. (+2)

No to scum-pair:

[304] I see no reason to block your buddy. (-1) [481] Master went after me and Hindu. Knowing my alignment, makes me doubt they are buddies. (-2)

Conclusion:

Either way. (-1 point) Enough interaction.

*If it's not YES or NO, then it's neutral - could go either way. Conclusion is made by only interactions. (without individual cases)

7 Hindu\Bazz + Aurorus

Spoiler: Interactions

Post #50 Aurorus condones Bazz for his investigation of 2003.
Post #96 Aurorus votes for Bazz as pressure vote.
Post #116 Bazz and AV talk pleasantly.
Post #118 Aurorus unvotes.
Post #176 Bazz gives his mixed feelings about Aurorus.
Post #269 Bazz accuses Aurorus for copying omnino.
Post #304 Bazz spanked Aurorus a bit for being overly aggressive.
Post #418 Aurorus gives Bazz townpoints for jumping to seth's lynch.

Spoiler: My Thoughts

Yes to scum-pair:

[176] "Possible, sound, difficult to read". Not getting the right vibe from this. (+1) [418] I wouldn't give him townpoints, since he started the zauper case. (+2)

No to scum-pair:

[269] Can't see it coming from a buddy. (-1) [304] Valid point that no one else mentioned. (-2)

Conclusion:

Either way. (0 points) Enough interaction.

*If it's not YES or NO, then it's neutral - could go either way. Conclusion is made by only interactions. (without individual cases)

8 Hindu\Bazz + person\zauper

Spoiler: Interactions

Post #120 Bazz introduces "zauper agrees" argument.
Post #152 Bazz is not satisfied with zauper's defense, and votes for him.
Post #205 Bazz accuses zauper of shifting attention.
Post #351 Bazz comments theperson dealing well with the situation, but still not being visible enough.
Post #352 Bazz switches from his prime suspect (zauper) to Seth.

Spoiler: My Thoughts

Yes to scum-pair:

[351] Dealing well while not dealing is not valid. (+1) [352] I'd expect the initiator of zauper's case to be a bit more stubborn. (+2)

No to scum-pair:

[120] I don't see it coming from a buddy, especially so early. (-4) [152] Not buddies. (-2) [205] He really wants him dead. (-2)

Conclusion:

Might be unrelated. (-5 points). Enough interaction.

*If it's not YES or NO, then it's neutral - could go either way. Conclusion is made by only interactions. (without individual cases)

9 Hindu\Bazz + 2k3

Spoiler: Interactions

Post #39 Bazz didn't like 2003's excessive clarification, but lets it go later.
Post #120 Bazz starts his zauper case when town was focusing on 2003.
Post #245 Bazz gets frustrated with 2003.

Spoiler: My Thoughts

Yes to scum-pair:

[120] Help coming from a buddy. (+4)

No to scum-pair:

[245] Too harsh for buddies. (-1)

Conclusion:

Either way. (+3 points) Few interactions. (*)

*If it's not YES or NO, then it's neutral - could go either way. Conclusion is made by only interactions. (without individual cases)

10 mm\Akira + Aurorus

Spoiler: Interactions

Post #91 Akira accuses AV for being similar to 2003.
Post #174 Aurorus gives Akira a town vibe card.
Post #254 Aurorus joins in examining Akira.
Post #258 Aurorus votes Akira (unvotes real quick).
Post #270 Aurorus states that his vote on Akira was a pressure one.
Post #369 Aurorus doesn't let Akira be vague about his suspicions.
Post #385 Aurorus accuses Akira again.
Post #414 Akira gives Aurorus a neutral read.
Post #418 Aurorus points out that there was nothing suspicious about Akira's hammer.

Spoiler: My Thoughts

Yes to scum-pair:

[174] You never know, since it's easy to hand out vibe cards. (+1) [270] I don't see a reason to pressure the guy who always responded on time. (+2) [418] I disagree. It was a bit rushed, since questioning was in progress. (+1)

No to scum-pair:

[91] Absolutely no reason to do this. (-4) [254] Could have ignored it and let me do the talking. (-2) [369] Would have let him be vague. (-1) [385] All in place. (-1) [414] He could have easily given him a town card and get away with it. (-2)

Conclusion:

Might be unrelated. (-6 points) Lots of interaction.

*If it's not YES or NO, then it's neutral - could go either way. Conclusion is made by only interactions. (without individual cases)

11 mm\Akira + person\zauper

Spoiler: Interactions

Post #5 Akira condoned zauper for his random remark.
Post #93 Zauper agrees with Akira, but ignores it.
Post #183 Akira states that zauper has agreed with him twice, but could be scum.
Post #188 Akira votes for zauper.
Post #197 Zauper suspects Akira right back at him.
Post #302 Akira asks others is zauper's inactivity under pressure a scum-tell.
Post #412 Akira repeats Aurorus thoughts of NK, and how it makes theperson less suspicious.
Post #424 Theperson agrees that Akira's NK talk is unusual, but doesn't give him scum points.

Spoiler: My Thoughts

Yes to scum-pair:

[93] Possible buddy affirming his partners opinion to give more credit. (+2) [183] Why even mention the agreement. (+1) [412] Possible buddies. (+1)

No to scum-pair:

[188] Nah, it was getting too dangerous for zauper. (-3) [197] I doubt he would play along. (-1) [302] Buddy would ignore it or provide his answer. (-1)

Conclusion:

Either way. (-1 point) Enough interaction.

*If it's not YES or NO, then it's neutral - could go either way. Conclusion is made by only interactions. (without individual cases)

12 mm\Akira + 2k3

Spoiler: Interactions

Post #91 Akira defends 2003 and attacks Aurorus, his attacker.
Post #412 While commenting on NK, Akira mentions it makes 2003 more suspicious.
Post #414 Akira gives 2003 2 scum points.

Spoiler: My Thoughts

Yes to scum-pair:

[91] Possible help, since things got a bit out of hand. (+3)

No to scum-pair:

[412] If they both made a night choice, this wouldn't make any sense. (-4) [414] Don't see them as buddies. (-1)

Conclusion:

Either way. (-2 points) Few interactions. (*)

*If it's not YES or NO, then it's neutral - could go either way. Conclusion is made by only interactions. (without individual cases)

13 Aurorus + person\zauper

Spoiler: Interactions

Post #57 Zauper responds to AV that he didn't answer well before.
Post #90 Zauper is persuaded by AV and joins the wagon on 2003.
Post #93 Zauper agrees that AV looks scummy, but doesn't know how to address it.
Post #153 Aurorus contributes to "zauper is scum" case.
Post #191 Aurorus explains his trap for zauper.
Post #394 Aurorus says theperson is less suspicious because of NK.

Spoiler: My Thoughts

Yes to scum-pair:

[90] Possible wagon. (+2) [394] They made their choice and now he looks less suspicious. Possible. (+3)

No to scum-pair:

[57] Buddy would be more pleasant. (-1) [153] Buddy wouldn't add more when there was enough already. (-2) [191] Buddy wouldn't be so sneaky to his buddy. (-4)

Conclusion:

Either way. (-2 points) Enough interaction.

*If it's not YES or NO, then it's neutral - could go either way. Conclusion is made by only interactions. (without individual cases)

14 Aurorus + 2k3

Spoiler: Interactions

Post #50 Aurorus votes for 2003 and introduces the case on 2003.
Post #78 2003 FOS's back at AV (soon votes).
Post #96 Aurorus unvotes after 2003's scumhunting.
Post #97 2003 unvotes out of honor.
Post #418 Aurorus says that NK makes 2003 more suspicious.
Post #418 2003 is Aurorus' top suspect.
Post #435 Aurorus gets bloodthirsty on 2003.
Post #465 Aurorus lets us know that scum could have talked pregame, no matter the rules.

Spoiler: My Thoughts

Yes to scum-pair:

[96\97] Unvoting was unusual. Possible pregame tactics. (+1)

No to scum-pair:

[50\78] Can't see them voting both ways and being buddies. (-5) [418] Why would they make a decision together and use it against them? (-2) [418] He would be only sacrificing him if Aurorus was in danger, and he was not. (-3) [435,465] No way he would be that aggressive, and then even disprove my defense of 2003. (-6)

Conclusion:

Very unlikely buddies. (-15) Lots of interaction.

*If it's not YES or NO, then it's neutral - could go either way. Conclusion is made by only interactions. (without individual cases)

15 person\zauper + 2k3

Spoiler: Interactions

Post #90 Zauper is persuaded by AV and joins the wagon on 2003.
Post #94 2003 OMGUS FOS's back at zauper.
Post #100 zauper doesn't let 2003 go.
Post #103 2003 gets somewhat rough with zauper.
Post #115 2003 votes for zauper.
Post #142 zauper still disapproves 2003's scumhunting abilities.
Post #151 2003 copies other's reasons for suspecting zauper.
Post #162 zauper condones 2003 for switching his reasons to doubt him.

Spoiler: My Thoughts

Yes to scum-pair:

None.

No to scum-pair:

[90] Buddy wouldn't join that soon. (-5) [94] Can't see it as buddy action. (-2) [100,103,115] They continue to be rough, without letting go. (-3) [142] Zauper could have joined "He scumhunted. Hooray." wagon. (-3) [151,162] Still doing their thing. I cannot see this as faked, not from those two. (-3)

Conclusion:

Very unlikely buddies. (-16 points) Lots of interaction.

*If it's not YES or NO, then it's neutral - could go either way. Conclusion is made by only interactions. (without individual cases)

[EarthIntruder]

o______o;;

[Guybrush]

I apologize to everyone.
I think I just broke some sort of record.
This reread made me realize how my posting style is not beneficial for town.
I'll do my best to keep it to a minimum in the future. (this game and every one after that)

@Earth

It would be really nice if you'd try to defend omnino. (not the pair thing, but individual cases)

[EarthIntruder]

It looks like my lynch is pretty much inevitable at this point with so little time left, but I'll do what I can to respond before I'm hammered.

Regarding AVox's case in post 526, it seems to mostly be based on omnino's interaction with other people. Again, I don't think that speculating this much about scum pairs is very helpful when we haven't caught a single scum yet. Speculating about one player's identity is tough enough when you aren't speculating about both of them at the same time and basing your reads based on other reads that you're already not sure about. As for the interaction itself, I don't really see what's suspicious about it. He put pressure on someone to properly question him, Akira responded, he was satisfied with the response and unvoted, presumably because he had a more town read on Akira. Since he did have a town read on Akira, he criticized Michel's case on him, a case that happened over something Akira did in RVS. It was very close to the deadline when omnino said he'd be willing to hammer the top suspect - isn't that normal to want to prevent no-lynch close to deadline? No one's calling out 2k3 for being willing to hammer me right now (I'm not saying that I think 2k3 is scummy for it, I don't think he is - I'm just using it to illustrate my point).

Again, Hindu's willingness to vote omnino seems to be most based around the fact that he said

I don't want a lynchless day. It's an missed opportunity to catch scum and only scum [IMO] would support a lynchless day. Therefore I would theoretically support any lynch towards the deadline if it meant we got a lynch.

...Wait, am I at L-1 or L-2 right now? It's really late here so I might just be delirious, but I've only seen AVox, theperson and Guybrush voting on me so far.

All omnino said is that it's better to mislynch than no-lynch, and he'd be willing to switch his vote, even to someone he's got a town read on, in order to prevent that. That's not scummy.

Guybrush, the biggest points in your case in 516 seem to be
-omnino's frustration and putting zauper at L-1, citing "pressure" as the reason despite zauper being pretty much MIA at that point.
-Not using his vote during the wagoning of seth despite saying his preferred lynch was zauper.

Honestly, I think this was dumb as hell on his part, but here's my interpretation: omnino came under fire for putting a lurker at L-1, began to suspect Michel as a lynch/deadline was drawing near, realized that the case wasn't gaining any steam and was unable to make up his mind between voting someone he'd gotten heat for or voting someone that he'd have no support with before the lynch on seth happened. And yeah, I know he said he'd vote for anyone to prevent a no-lynch, but well, it's pretty obvious that he didn't have to vote seth to do that, did he?

[EarthIntruder]

EBWOP: Ugh, that "Wait am I at L-1 or L-2" thing is supposed to be at the end of my post.

LIKE I SAID IT'S REALLY LATE.

[AurorusVox]

@GB - Merry Christmas!! (You just levelled up in Life)

Regarding AVox's case in post 526, it seems to mostly be based on omnino's interaction with other people.

I've previously mentioned a number of scummy things that Omnino has done individually, and putting that into my "interaction" case helped me settle on your lynch. It isn't a case that solely relies on the mild-pair analysis that I did (mild in comparison to GB), but one that became more attractive because of it.

No one's calling out 2k3 for being willing to hammer me right now (I'm not saying that I think 2k3 is scummy for it, I don't think he is - I'm just using it to illustrate my point).

That's because 2k3 has said that you're his second suspect. In fact, I was trying to figure out whether he was just trying to avoid a no lynch with my previous question for him.

[quote="EarthIntruder]"Again, Hindu's willingness to vote omnino seems to be most based around the fact that he said

I don't want a lynchless day. It's an missed opportunity to catch scum and only scum [IMO] would support a lynchless day. Therefore I would theoretically support any lynch towards the deadline if it meant we got a lynch.

[/quote]

I believe he also said that he was convinced by GB's case. I found it a little odd that he suspects you of being MM's partner, and yet wouldn't vote for you despite it looking like Mastermind wasn't getting lynched. I wondered if he was either (a) hoping that there wouldn't be enough votes on you to cause a no lynch and save you; (b) hoping to not get on a townie mislynch; (c) play the hero and vote for you on deadline day and then either get town points for hammering his buddy or at least not really get any scum points if you flipped town ("Town asked me to change to avoid a no lynch").

...Wait, am I at L-1 or L-2 right now? It's really late here so I might just be delirious, but I've only seen AVox, theperson and Guybrush voting on me so far.

It's only four to lynch to day because there are only seven players alive

All omnino said is that it's better to mislynch than no-lynch, and he'd be willing to switch his vote, even to someone he's got a town read on, in order to prevent that. That's not scummy.

See my above concern of Hindu. Saying you'd be willing to policy lynch to avoid a no-lynch is a risk free move. It might not be scummy per se, but its intentionally neutral; because town "needed" the extra vote to get someone lynched, it doesn't put the pressure on the hammer-er, or at least not as much pressure.

And yeah, I know he said he'd vote for anyone to prevent a no-lynch, but well,

it's pretty obvious that he didn't have to vote seth to do that, did he?

Can you explain this?

If he had other options, are you suggesting that Omnino's declaration of hammer-intent of seth was bred out of a suspicion of seth rather than to avoid a no-lynch? In which case, why did he try to guise it as no-lynch avoidance?

[AurorusVox]

Q_Q

The first time I've quote-failed in quite some time. There's a chunk of Vox in that big bold quote thing.

[AurorusVox]

I'd forgotten to respond to this because I'd been reading the pair-analysis.

I find his lack of scumhunting irritating and potentially scummy (if you were to flip town, for example, then it might throw a new light onto his vote). I agree that the "suspect me if you want" comment was strange and a little scummy. But the vote itself I don't find suspicious because Omnino has been suspicious, and theperson had picked up on this (albeit through the conduit of other players on most points). Whilst theperson isn't the most outwardly townie player by a long shot, I still have lingering town leanings on him due to Michel's read and subsequent flip.

Fair enough, I suppose, but I'd argue that basing your read on someone off of a dead player's read is a little shaky.

It's more based on the NK and the fact that Michel is confirmed-town. Why would theperson kill off someone who argued for his township? Yes, it could be WIFOM, and it's something to look into should you flip town (see later in the post for a little more on this). But Michel's argument - of the opportunistic bandwagon - was a strong one, and it seems to have more legitimacy now that I know that there were no ulterior motives behind it.

As for theperson's previous suspicion on me, there was ISO 8, which both I and omnino have responded to (omnino said those things because he didn't understand the setup and his scumteam speculation is based on HIS OWN meta).

There's ISO 16 in which he refers to his previous post.

Uhh...

Well, the one-PR slip I feel is a legitimate one; using his experience when he was mafia to look for a scumtell is still looking for a scumtell. He expands on these reasons in his #18, which I'll go into below. As I said before, I think you're right to be wary of theperson in as far as some elements of his case seem to rely on the scumhunting done by others. Would you make the same accusation of 2k3?

---

The reasoning in theperson's #18:

I asked him where he saw that 2k3 was confused. He quoted the post that I had written that in but didn't answer the question at all. This gives me reason to suspect an omnino-2k3 scumteam. Seems to me like omnino was trying to protect 2k3 so he gave a reason, but he couldn't back it up.

I believe avoiding answering questions is a legitimate scumtell. Omnino tried to discredit the "defending" read, but it's a pretty standard thing to look for. At the same time, Omnino didn't quote 2k3 and point to where he seemed confused over inconsistent.

Then of course there's the whole power role thing. [SNIP] It could be an honest mistake, or it could be that he's a member of a two goon scumpair and has it set in his mind that there's one power role then tries to make up for it, but doesn't think it through. Or both.

Again, I think this is a legitimate scumtell. He does analyse it as well, offering different takes on it. Not original, but it is one of the most legitimate slips I think there's been in the game so far.

---

On the other hand, there are a few things that were off about theperson's #18. I'm pretty confident that we've got scum in the Omnino/EI slot, but if EI were to flip town, I would look carefully at these more negative aspects. I want to get some answers before Night, so that theperson's answers are ready going into D3.

OK, I'm not even gonna make excuses. Suspect me from this if you want. I'll just get to it.

This sounded off to me. I'm still waiting to hear what we were meant to be suspicious of - is it the timing of the vote, the context of the rest of his post? The vote itself?

Looking through the ISOs, regrettably I didn't have a sudden breakthrough that no one else has discovered. I have decided that I would prefer an EarthIntruder lynch because [SNIP] it seems like everyone or almost everyone is OK with his lynch.

This is the important question that I want answered

This part of his argument isn't good reasoning at all. If everyone agrees to a lynch, you should try to assess if you think that means scum has engineered a mislynch or whether you think one scum is bussing another. If "almost everyone" agrees, then who disagrees and why?
Theperson; what is your take on this situation?

His argument on Michel (ISO #11 and 12) was largely a misunderstanding. I'm not sure if he meant it that way or not, but he said that Michel was handing me a town card, when he was actually handing me a town card IF I got quicklynched.

Actually, Michel was saying zauper was probably town due to the bandwagon on him looking too opportunistic. Potentially misrepping here?

I think here he could have been trying to find inconsistencies in Michel's play so purposely misinterpreted it to try and add to his argument. Just because of the fact that it happened (I think) in ISO #11 and 12 makes me think it might not be a coincidence.

^ makes me wonder if there was a WIFOM NK after all. Defending Michel's arguments indirectly defends Michel's town-read on Zauper and thus theperson.

---

EarthIntruder, what did you make of theperson's #18? You said in #545 that you felt it was empty of real scumhunting. Was there a reason you neglected to go into detail about what specific elements of the post in you found suspicious? Or why you haven't asked him any questions about it directly?

[Guybrush]

I'm GMT +1 and it's 18:30 here.
Which means there is 2:30 hours left til the deadline.
If someone doesn't hammer, I'm going to rape (mentally) people not voting the next day.
There's 0 chance that a person other than omnino\Earth can be voted out today.

[AurorusVox]

Yeah, I'm getting nervous now.

2k3, assuming that EI posts again today, any remaining questions can be answered during twilight, and if they don't get answered, that's still better than getting a no lynch.

I'm a little disappointed that EarthIntruder hasn't posted much (anything?) today. I had hoped that when he asked to hold off the hammer and promised that he could get online, that the few remaining questions that I asked him would get answered.

[Haylen]

Mastermind got prodded.

[Guybrush]

Only 1 hour left.
And I see no one online.

@Haylen
I'd like a deadline extension, at least til someone hammers. I think that should happen soon.
Reason why I think we are entitled to a deadline extension:
1. You were V\LA for 4 days (V/LA from Monday 9th - Friday 13th)
2. Omnino was prodded after 11 days, instead of 3 (replaced after 16 days - over 2 weeks)
3. Mastermind last posted on Aug 16 (8 days ago), and he hasn't even been prodded. He should have been replaced by now.

EDIT: I see the prod now. I hope you will consider an extension.

[Haylen]

Deadline extention granted. New deadline is Thursday 26th August at 9pm GMT+1. That's 2 days, usually it's one. Sorry for my unexpected V/LA recently.

[Guybrush]

@Haylen

Thank you very much.

@Everyone who hasn't voted

I don't want to repeat what we had today.
Don't wait til the new deadline.
Either hammer or explain why we should switch.
But whatever you do, a vote from you is expected.

[AurorusVox]

<3 thanks Haylen, and well played GB for thinking to ask for one.

[Guybrush]

Scum points for not having the same idea, though. (a pretty obvious one in this situation, IMO)
We seem to think alike. What made you block this time?

[Haylen]

Vote Count

Really having trouble keeping up with replacements. I've only had to replace 2 or 3 people at most in one of my games

EarthIntruder (rep. omnino): AVox, theperson Guybrush
mastermind (rep. Akira): Hinduragi
theperson: EarthIntruder


Not Voting: 2k3, mastermind

[AurorusVox]

Sorry, Deadline extension denied. In newbie games they are only giving when there is extreme circumstances. Inactivity of the town, indecisiveness and bribes are not something that will get the game an extension.

This made me think that one wouldn't be granted, so I didn't think it would be worth asking for one.

Mod Inactivity is entirely different ~ Hayl