Mini 1064 - Charlie's Town (Game Over!)

[Casus Belli]

Looks like our account got approved just in time.

/confirm

[Casus Belli]

I can't speak for Reckamonic, but this hydra will have only one poster (Sotty) that will make points only after both heads weigh in on them. There will be no "he said" "she said" conflicting reads here.

[Casus Belli]

Vote: RichardGHP

Random.org bandwagon sounds good.

[Casus Belli]

@Spyre: Protest what exactly? He voted without posting a word of reason which isn't excusable even in the RVS and then turns it into some sort of terrible gambit when he gets called out on it. Oh, and it's drawing votes away from GHP who he throws a weak FOS at to distance with.

We're struggling to believe this reasoning is sincere, simply because you didn't question and pressure FakeGod who essentially did the same thing as Mas in post 42

For example, I am thinking FakeGod is scum based on his response to my vote for Shotty.

Why? FakeGod issued no explanation for his post so how do you know the vote is a reaction or a response to your vote on Shotty? Also, if FakeGod is scum for this move, doesn't that also reflect on you in a scummy manner, since you also made a reasonless vote?

A reasonless vote isn't useless, it's a good scum-tell! At any stage in the game, scum often have trouble scum-hunting and weakness like your reasonless vote and the FoS on GHP are signs of it.

You're reaching here. The game has just started and while it is true that scum have more trouble scum hunting for obvious reasons, at this point, so do the town. We're on page three and you are trying to apply a tell that is significantly stronger and carries much more weight later in the game

I have no comment on the RVS wagon on me, but please do not refer to me as GHP. Instead, call me Richard.

Why no comment?

I've made two RVS votes, and since RVS is now over, it's time to get serious. Nacho's vote in post 68 causes a reaffirmation of my intitial vote on him.

Reaffirms? You realize that you simply random voted Nacho, there is nothing to back up here. This feels like you are trying to make your vote stronger than what it actually is. Also, your vote on Shotty does not scream random to us due to the context of everything else going on in the game. Can you explain how being the forth vote on a bandwagon still qualifies as a random vote?

mas reads as town right off the bat and Nacho has posted 3 times thus far. Meanwhile, none of those posts are even remotely exonerating or content-laden.

Looking at your ISO, you have made 7 posts, with one (the latest) being the only “content” post. Essentially, you were guilty of the same thing until just now. so... Why is it scummy again?

[Casus Belli]

We are feeling that Richard is very likely scum. His only reaction to the wagon on him is to say nothing and push the counter wagon on Shotty. He then avoids all the big talking points by placing a horribly reasoned vote on Nacho, that he quickly abandons with no further comment or push on anyone. He did have it set up to switch his vote over to CES, since he accused him of the same things as Nacho. Yet he didn't switch. Opting instead to unvote which isn't helpful to anyone. Possibly in an attempt to slip under the radar as Mas v Shotty garners more interest.

With how scummy Richard is, Mas and his reasonless Shotty vote looks like an attempt to distract the town away from the growing Richard wagon. Still we find Richard scummier than Mas, so no switch from us.

Is nobody else concerned with FakeGod's failure to contribute anything but usless one liners?

What was useless about FakeGod's post 93?

Shotty, please address our questions in post 76

Here's the thing: Mas's playstyle is very reactionary at this point. If I switch my vote to him, OMG, he reacts in an angry fashion. There'd be no difference in his reaction than what he's done before and probably nothing that we would learn from it. So instead, I left my vote where it is because I think it's much more interesting to note the connection between you and Shotty, and something that I would prefer to explore more before I move my vote elsewhere, especially since my read on mas is a gut-read, and I don't typically hold much with my gut.

Are you scared of getting a reaction from mafs? If your gut case is based on him being reactionary, wouldn't voting for him provide more evidence of him being scum for the reasoning you laid out?

Would really like to hear more from CES and Reckamonic and to get a response from Shotty.

[Casus Belli]

With how scummy Richard is, Mas and his reasonless Shotty vote looks like an attempt to distract the town away from the growing Richard wagon. Still we find Richard scummier than Mas, so no switch from us.

Have you never seen somebody vote for somebody without giving reasons? This is really reaching. Keep in mind this was an RVS bandwagon.

Yes we have seen people voting without reason before. You.

Wasn't it you just arguing that FakeGod's reasonless vote was a reaction to your vote on Shotty? Why can't we propose the likelihood of your hop on Shotty as a reaction to Richards growing wagon considering the timing and how you gently pushed it on with subsequent posts.

Casus Belli, why didn't you give any reads in your previous post?

Read it again. We said Richard and yourself are likely scum, in our book, those are reads.

We are feeling that Richard is very likely scum.

How serious is this statement?

Serious, otherwise we wouldn't have said it. Now how about some actual input from you.

@Casus: What questions in 76? You direct two comments at me neither of which contain questions.

Fair enough, to be more clear:

Why didn't you question FakeGod's vote?
And why are you pushing a tell that is stronger in the late game so early when it's effectiveness is questionable at best?

[Casus Belli]

@CES - don't buy what? You haven't made a single relevant observation all game; on the plus side, you are now on our probable scum list, and here is why. You voted richard in 34, a seemingly innocent RVS bandwagon vote. At the time of your vote change in post 72 the three leading wagons were:
Richard - 5
Shotty - 4
masf - 3

You then switched votes to masf (for no documented reasoning), putting all the wagons at 4 votes; but at the time it seems like while the masf wagon is picking up some steam the Shotty wagon looks like it has the most momentum and at the time the Richard wagon was still mostly RVS bandwagoning. Why did you switch votes?

You then chainsaw defend Richard by, out of the blue, questioning our read on Richard, and then voting for us. Was there a reason you thought we might not be serious when you quoted us in 109? If we didn't know any better we would think you are preparing to jump ship on the masf wagon; oh wait, you did jump ship on that wagon because you didn't "buy" that we were serious about our Richard read.

Could it be that easy? Richard, masf, and CES?

[Casus Belli]

No it couldn't, and you damn well know it. No-one has ever legitimately caught all three scum within the first day.

Okay, so who which one of your buddies are we missing?

@CES - don't buy what?

I don't buy that you ascribe such a high likelihood to Richard being scum so early and based on so little.

Richard is our top suspect, do we think he is 100% scum? No, but that wasn't what you asked us, you wanted to know if our statement about him being scum was serious. What about the other players who have also called various players scum or scummy?

With how scummy Richard is, Mas and his reasonless Shotty vote looks like an attempt to distract the town away from the growing Richard wagon. Still we find Richard scummier than Mas, so no switch from us.

Have you never seen somebody vote for somebody without giving reasons? This is really reaching. Keep in mind this was an RVS bandwagon.

Yes we have seen people voting without reason before. You.

This doesn't answer my question, and I think you know it.

It does answer your question. If this isn't the answer you want you are going to have to be clear with what you were driving at here. Both players of this hydra have seen plenty of situations where a reasonless vote has been placed. Why does it matter?

Casus Belli, why didn't you give any reads in your previous post?

Read it again. We said Richard and yourself are likely scum, in our book, those are reads.

No, you didn't. I'm talking about this post.

When you said “previous post” it sounded like you were talking about our last post. As for the one you quoted we had a couple of ideas, but wanted to question a few people before coming out with our reads at the time. As you can also see we didn't move our vote from Richard because we were feeling scum there, but there was a lot going on and wanted to see what the explanations were for all that (which Shotty still hasn't answered).

We don't think there is anything wrong with asking questions before forming a more solid judgment. This is what we did.

Wasn't it you just arguing that FakeGod's reasonless vote was a reaction to your vote on Shotty? Why can't we propose the likelihood of your hop on Shotty as a reaction to Richards growing wagon considering the timing and how you gently pushed it on with subsequent posts.

...because the theory that I'm protecting RichardGHP is reaching whereas the idea that FakeGod could've been scum trying to avoid commenting on the game was logical.

Why is our suggestion a reach and your similar assumption logical? From what we can see it is working of the same basic logic that scum look to cause a distraction. Your vote came at a time that Richard's wagon was really picking up speed. If you are his buddy then wanting to distract from his wagon would be a natural reaction; hence your poking and vote on Shotty.

[Casus Belli]

Sorry for the late post, the hydra heads missed each other over the weekend. So consider us to be

V/LA over the weekends.

As far as we're concerned, Spy's hammer for giggles or whatever is a null tell. It isn't anything out of character for Spy. We are not particularly pleased at post 190 we agree that this one instance should be settled now and not brought up later as a scum tactic to undermine Spy; but this isn't the definitive moment that determines Spy to be scum or not for the rest of the game. Right now we aren't finding Spyrex scummy.

Substrike's cop error looks like an honest mistake to start with, however posts 175 and 177 look a little like back tracking to make himself look better. Overall opinion is that scum would have to be crazy to pull a fast one like that in an attempt to get Spy lynched, so it was likely a mistake, therefore null. He needs to pick it up with some scum hunting though.

With Richard's flip we have to reevaluate some of our suspicions. Mas was our number two suspect yesterday, but a lot of what we found scummy was linked in with how he reacted to Richard. With Richard flipping town we need to look else where.

His role PM is in the lynch scene, substrike, so we know Richard didn't have an investigation on SpyreX. That breadcrumb comment is very confusing - I certainly don't see any.

FoS: Nachomamma and SpyreX

Vote: Casus Belli

who just looks worse now that Richard has flipped town.

How exactly do we look worse now Richard has flipped? Townies get it wrong all the time, that's nothing new. And do you think we were the mastermind behind his lynch wagon, and if so, can you provide examples of why we are the scum on his wagon compared to the others? You seemed intent on focusing in on us yesterday for our push on Richard and looking back now it looks like you knew he was going to flip town. You hop right back on us today, holding us to a perfection standard when yesterday you never bothered to say why the case on Richard was bad in the first place.

We noted your chainsaw like defense yesterday, combine that with the weak FOS's for the hammer gang you are looking very much like self righteous scum.

Vote: CES

We could also swing for a shotty wagon as he seems to be strategically lurking, commenting on very little almost waiting to see if the attention on him will blow over.

[Casus Belli]

jmurph3

, why did you wait until asked to give your reasoning for the shotty vote? What other reads do you have right now? Opinions on Spy's hammer?

---

Well, you obviously thought more highly of your suspicion. Don't downplay it now.

We aren't downplaying anything. You said we were scummier based on Richard's flip, which isn't a definitive scumtell since, as we said, it happens. If you supported that with other evidence (or any evidence at all) that we were actually scum we might give you a little more credit for your efforts. Instead, the only real case you made on us yesterday only became true after Richard flipped, which is fairly prophetic. It was a decent setup, but the execution was a little lacking (as obvious by it backfiring).

No, I do not.

So was Richard's wagon a town failure or was it orchestrated by scum?

Isn't the idea of a chainsaw defense to defend your partner while keeping your distance?

Chainsaw defense is when you defend someone by attacking his/her attacker. Like you did here and here. You provided no actual comments on the Richard case at all. Why not?

P.S. Is "Casus Belli" singular or plural?

Singular works.

Reckamonic seemed to show an even stronger belief that RichardGHP, don't you think?

No, I don't. Furthermore, I see them as more likely to make the type of mistake that would see this type of behaviour coming from a townie.

Really? Please explain the difference between these two quotes and why one is town behavior and the other isn't.

Richard is scum, though, for this post.

We are feeling that Richard is very likely scum.

[Casus Belli]

You totally are downplaying things. Don't pretend your suspicion was run-of-the-mill.

What are you talking about here? Show us how we are down playing this.

I know what Chainsaw defense is, but my understanding was that the purpose of it was to indirectly defend your partner (in the wiki article Tar says it's only valid if the chainsaw defendee has flipped scum). I'm not sure how I would benefit from chainsaw defending Richard.

Looks like you are befitting quite well right now. It has enabled you to place a weak vote on us in an attempt to pass it off as legitimate suspicion. The fact is you didn't and still haven't said why the case on Richard was bad. You explanation around why our post was different from Recks is weak and we don't fully understand how you could possibly hold the belief they are different seriously.

As for Spy's hammer, I go back and forth. Mainly it's an argument full of WIFOM in my head - scum wouldn't be that stupid; but he would know that we would think that, so he's safe to do it; but scum really wouldn't be that stupid, etc. Circular argument, getting me nowhere.

This is called a null tell. Why dance around it?

[Casus Belli]

A.) Today he subtly pushes the suggestion of lynching somebody that wasn't on Richard's bandwagon by saying that there is a 1/3 chance of hitting scum as opposed to 2/7. This seems to be self serving, because he was on the Richard lynch bandwagon.

We actually sort of agree with FG's logic here, other than the fact that we can't really call it a "cop wagon" since there was no claim. We think that the logic is valid, if not a little misguided. From a scum POV (if the scum ratio is accurate) in the context of a purely numbers based scenario, wouldn't he want to lynch from inside the wagon to increase chances of not hitting any member of the scum team? This is the most troubling aspect of this point, unless there is reason to think that FakeGod would be more self serving scum than team oriented survival.

@ FakeGod -

We would be interested in hearing more about why you suspect that the scum breakdown on and off the wagon is 2:1.

he problem with this is that he says there is a 2/7 chance of lynching scum if they go for somebody on the bandwagon. However, from his PoV it should be a 2/6 chance if he is town. Could be an indicator that he is scum.

This is null as a lot (most?) players speak from an uninformed viewpoint since they are arguing to convince other people who do not share their inside knowledge.

I don't even understand what the first point means and the second point is inaccurate (you can't chainsaw defense isn't a scumtell if it is on a townie). I would like you to explain this attack. The posting style seemed strange to me because it consisted of many questions but not a lot of thoughts. However, looking at xvart in other games, it seems like this is just his normal playstyle as town.

When we speak about a chainsaw we are referring more to how CES attacked us personally for wording, rather than the Richard case itself. In fact CES never directly commented on the Richard case opting instead to attack us.

At the time it felt like a chainsaw and we called it as so. But Richard flipped town so he wasn't attacking us to defend his buddy. But he could have easily been scum who knew Richard would flip town. This stood out by the fact he avoided the case and attacked us for a townie lynch when he had no basis to suspect us over say Reckamonic.

There is a disconnect here somewhere, and we don't seem to be getting anywhere.

CES, do you ever plan to hunt for our alleged scumbuddies; or is your incorrect and unsubstantiated read enough for you to sit on our wagon all day?

---

@Shotty

- We are still waiting on a response to these questions:

Why didn't you question FakeGod's vote?
And why are you pushing a tell that is stronger in the late game so early when it's effectiveness is questionable at best?

Furthermore, you said that a reasonless vote is a scumtell. If it is a legitimate scumtell, why did you not vote on the basis of that scumtell when you originally questioned masf's vote? It appears to me that you probably asked a seemingly innocent question and then masf put a lot of attention on you you tried to justify your response after the fact. Add to that your reluctance (or negligence) to answer our questions after we have repeatedly asked makes it look like you got caught in a scum storm that you didn't know how to get out of.

---

@SpyreX

- what do you think of CES's play?

We are hesitant to move on from CES but we are getting nowhere without some backup or support.

UNVOTE:
VOTE: Shotty to the Body

[Casus Belli]

VOTE: FakeGod

I'll go ahead and follow up my eariler post and cast the vote at this point.

Reck, do you think FakeGod is a better lynch than Mas right now? You have an entire post dedicated to scummy things that Mas has done, and yet your vote is on FakeGod; I read over your post outlining everything scummy about him, and it reaffirmed the suspicions I expressed on day 1.

I also agree with your sentiments about the wall of text. I think his case on FakeGod is particularly suspect, because it pulls out a fact that would've been made into a WIFOM argument either way and attempts to make it seem like a scum slip.

Actually.

UNVOTE: FakeGod
VOTE: Masfloohinev

Thoughts?

We always find it suspect when someone votes, unvotes, and votes for someone else in the same post. The motivation is strange, especially in this case where Substrike essentially says he wants it on record that he was voting FakeGod (by following up his previous post). While we are on the subject, why didn't you vote for FakeGod in your post 236? You said, "

FakeGod is my most comfortably scum right now

" and "

flipping FakeGod will help give us reads on other people. A lot of people started talking about potential busing of FakeGod and such.

" While the second justification is pretty terrible, we don't understand why you didn't slap a vote down at this juncture; especially since you had been withholding your vote for over a RL week.

So you admit it's not a chainsaw? You only started calling it that today.

Actually we did refer to your defense of Richard as a Chainsaw Defense yesterday, here. Actually, it is a chainsaw defense, but the reliability apparently requires a scum flip. However, the xvart head never knew that the tell relied on a flipped scum and the Sotty head thought it applied either way.

It totally is substantiated - I even did sample calculations. But if you must know, I am of course looking for other scum. There may not be many outward signs of that, but that's just my mostly-gut-based playstyle.

Great. We are waiting with baited breath for your game breaking reads that you are keeping to yourself for now for some unknown reason. It was always our impression that providing more information was town behavior and withholding information was scum behavior. You certainly aren't doing much to advance your reads; surely you agree with someone else in this game with some of your hidden reads? Surely you could be helping the town lynch our alleged scum buddies with your hidden reads?

Things are boring without Shotty around, I gotta admit.

Vote: FakeGod

Yeah, scummy. Why?

We are fairly disappointed in this lackluster vote switch. For the sake of argument, did you just come to the conclusion that "things are boring" without Shotty around? Or why was that not a factor when you voted him a week ago. If this wasn't really a reason for you jumping off his wagon, what is the actual reason and why did you not give it the first time?

[Casus Belli]

I share the only important thing in that regard here. While I'm linking the post anyway, why don't you answer the question I pose to you at the end.

I find the case against Shotty very "meh".

The only thing relevant that we see in your linked post is when you say "P.S. FakeGod is looking good as a #2 suspect." So like we said, if that is the teaser for your other hidden scum reads, we are waiting with baited breath; which begs the question why don't you switch your vote to FakeGod? Your one vote wonder wagon on us isn't going anywhere and you are not actively trying to get others to join our wagon, so why don't you switch over to your "good #2 suspect" and advance your alleged town aligned win condition?

As for your questions, the disparity is that you said you "didn't buy that we ascribed such a high likelihood to Richard being scum so early and based on so little." and Reckamonic came in 11 posts later and said "Richard is scum because of this one post."

We posted our suspicion in post 104 at 1:32pm. Reckamonic posted their response in post 115 at 8:10pm (both on the same day, so less than seven hours apart). Richard did not post at all during this time period. Now you don't believe our explained justification for Richard being likely scum but you believe Reckamonic's definitive claim of Richard being scum is solid because of their feelings on claiming the end of RVS? Somehow in the course of seven hours it became acceptable to claim definitively that Richard was scum with a less thought out and less justified reason?

[Casus Belli]

We find the entire scum for town trade ratio discussion entirely uninteresting.

---

We always find it suspect when someone votes, unvotes, and votes for someone else in the same post. The motivation is strange, especially in this case where Substrike essentially says he wants it on record that he was voting FakeGod (by following up his previous post). While we are on the subject, why didn't you vote for FakeGod in your post 236? You said, "

FakeGod is my most comfortably scum right now

" and "

flipping FakeGod will help give us reads on other people. A lot of people started talking about potential busing of FakeGod and such.

" While the second justification is pretty terrible, we don't understand why you didn't slap a vote down at this juncture; especially since you had been withholding your vote for over a RL week.

@Substrike

- Why didn't you vote FakeGod here, when you called him "comfortably scum"?

---

My other scum reads? I only have 2 at this time. As to changing my vote, I've considered it and although I agree that a vote on FakeGod is more likely to contribute to a lynch, I feel keeping my vote on you sends a message to you and the town which I feel is more important at this time.

You keeping your vote on us is not delivering the message you seem intent on conveying, so regardless on how important you feel it is to narrowly focus on us instead of hunting actual scumbags or contributing to your one other suspect, nobody is listening.

Why are you ignoring my earlier explanation? Your entire argument is based on a naive, literal reading of Reckamonic's post which I consider to be wholly unjustified. Not to mention that I hold Reckamonic to lower standards in this regard anyway.

Your earlier explanation basically says you did not take Reckamonic's post as serious and you justified it as not worthy of a literal reading (yet you never asked them if they were serious) and they voted in the same post with no other commentary. Why didn't you ask if their justification was serious? You did not think it was and decided to not question their subsequent vote? We didn't vote in our post and you didn't believe we were serious about how likely Richard we thought Richard was scum at the time. Doesn't a vote imply some degree of seriousness at that stage in the game? And do you think votes should be justified?

Seriously though; we are getting tired of this ridiculous round robin of having to parse out why you think particular players are serious or not with their observations and why there is a disparity between who is vote worthy or not based on your assessment of player's level of seriousness; we're actually not surprised that nobody is taking you seriously (or at least listening to your arguments) and really could care less if others do or do not. You are scum; you are not advancing whatever your scum agenda is by parking your vote on us; so we'll just let you sit in your corner with your vote on us until we can garner some more support to lynch you. You've got some whacked out measurement tool for suspicion levels that seems to be based on nothing in game and we don't feel like trying to decode it anymore.

[Casus Belli]

Welcome to Llama.

Well, you're not the audience, so I don't know why you think you can judge that.

Because we can judge your audience by what your audience is writing in thread. We have been declared town on a couple different occasions by different people, we haven't had a bandwagon on us, and you don't seem to be trying to change that. Our point was, if you were so confident in your read you would be shouting to the heavens to get people voting us if nobody was; but no, you sat back and kept you vote on us and did not even try to lobby some votes or even some suspicions. You kept your vote on us and let the game go right on by.

Re: votes, I think we can agree that a page 5 vote does not indicate an above average level of suspicion.

We might agree with this if Day 1 wasn't a sum total of just over six pages and Reckamonic's vote was not the fifth on the wagon.

When someone is being replaced, it means that we're going to get a fresh new set of eyes on the game that might see something we've missed. I don't trust people's play when they end up flaking because it means they really don't care about the game they're playing so despite what alignment they are, they're not playing to their wincon like everyone else is. It also means that you AREN'T going to get a claim, and honestly, I have not seen a case out of you on Shotty that warrants enough confidence to lynch without a claim.

The problem is we are getting a fresh pair of scummy eyes. The argument is age old, should a fresh replacement be vindicated of their predecessors crimes? We've seen both sides of the argument countless times and I think that distinction is more personal to playstyle. Regarding masf: we think he probably falls on the side of allowing a replacement a chance but did an exceptionally poor job explaining it. We don't see scum submitting a post like that with the implication that a vote might be highly opportunistic and scummy.

Right now we think Spyrex and Reckanmonic are town. Possibly Substrike as well, we won't be joining the rush to Mas however. We still think shotty aka Llama is the mostly likely scum. CES and then probably jmurph too.

[Casus Belli]

The problem is we are getting a fresh pair of scummy eyes. The argument is age old, should a fresh replacement be vindicated of their predecessors crimes? We've seen both sides of the argument countless times and I think that distinction is more personal to playstyle.

So you are going to just brush aside what I am going to put up here?

No; that's not what we said (or at least what we intended). We both agreed that we would not remove our vote on you just because you replaced in which contrasts other opinions. That has no bearing on future content, though; just like votes are fluid even without replacements. Your case on jmurph is pretty good as he has been flying under our radar for the entire game. Your posting and content has been very town, so we are now comfortable removing our vote on you now. We wish you would have been here the entire game.

UNVOTE:

Do you disagree with what I put up on Nacho?

We don't overly disagree with what you posted about Nacho. At the time of his vote on Richard the game had ground to a halt. I don't think a replacement would be able to judge that very well. If nacho is scummy for that what is your opinion on Spyrex?

Reading the thread, your 180 on nacho does strike us as a townie move. Townies are more likely to be flexible with their reads. We have a little voice saying that you are dropping the case because there was no support, but town or scum would probably want to do that.

The case you build against jmurph3 is pretty compelling, we hadn't noticed any deep connections between her and CES but we will take a look at that.

We are not particularly understanding the FakeGod shift at this point, though.

Im borderline pulling a skitzo move right now wondering if Nacho was just making a very stupid move with the putting RGHP at L-1 right after the Spy move.

We don't really think it was that bold of a move. The intent to hammer was there, and Richard just brushed it off.

I think Fake was going to be the casualty of opportunity. If you look at Mas' wall of textpwn where he outlines his arguments on everyone, most of his arguments against Fake are WIFOM; he was taking advantage of an opportunity, based on town-lead suspicion on FakeGod. Scum was trying to push a lynch anywhere but on himself.

What do you mean by a "town-lead" suspicion?

Still not too happy with the wagons right now. M is probably town, FG is one of my wildcards at this point. I am getting somewhat sure that the scum in this game are in a combo of jmurph/CES/reck/sub (note jmurph-CES are far and away best partner pick in the game, I hope that doesnt need explaining). I will be floored if more then one scum is out of that group with Spy, nacho and M being town.

If you wouldn't mind giving us a quick rundown since neither of us recall the connection it would be beneficial to us. Do you think lynching one will give more information on the other? SpyreX has also commented about CES being scummy, plus our suspicion, and yours. That's three votes on CES which finally makes it a viable wagon.

VOTE: CES

[Casus Belli]

We are town tracker.

N1 we tracked CES due to our suspicions of him. He did not go anywhere. It is our experience that scum teams will keep sending the same person to to the night kills unless there was some reason or town suspicion to send someone else on the team to do the kill. So his lack of action N1 means he is either VT or scum goon who did not send the kill N1. We had been planning on tracking Shotty after our N1 results came in until Llama came around and changed our view. That left masf as a good track target for N2 as between the two us he seemed a good target and we had been going bakc and forth in our hydra QT about some stuff. Normally we wouldn't think much of a player visiting someone unless the target was dead the next morning and we would just try and poke and prod at both the target to see if they might have not gotten some flavor that night (as a target who might have been role blocked) or the targeter; but, masf seems to think he is a VT, which our track results say otherwise... so...

Vote: masfafaluso

CES next.

[Casus Belli]

We tracked Mas to Llama last night.

This is just a quick post to correct that oversight. More detail coming later when I get a chance to catch up with my other head.

[Casus Belli]

wait wait wait!We understand how this looks but please do not quick hammer us. I'm at the dog park and will be back on acomputer in two or three hours. All will be answered, although truthfully nobody is going to like it.

[Casus Belli]

I haven't had a chance to talk to my other head about how this turn of events changes our reads so I'll only offer our thought processes going into the mass claim yesterday. But I'm sure I speak for my other head when I say we really blew it big time and that we don't really expect to survive through today and wouldn't blame the town for lynching us. I know I wouldn't have even given the courtesy of unvoting to hear us out.

So we are not a full tracker; but a one-shot tracker. And when we said yesterday we had been knocking it back and forth about masf all game in our hydra QT it was a little more than that. We thought 99% that masf was scum and so we decided to claim a result we didn't have as a gambit for a couple of reasons. First, we would get a lynch on scum. Second, we thought that if we claimed full tracker and lead the lynch on masf with our result that we would most likely be the NK and would save the other PRs since we were essentially a VT and had nothing left to offer when our other PR counterparts might still be able to get information last night. We went back and forth about it when the mass claim came up and definitely figured we would be the NK or at least survive if Reck protected us and we would be in even better position tomorrow with two nights of no kills. It was a high risk high reward play (although we honestly thought it wasn't that high of a risk at the time) that was an epic failure.

Masf wouldn't have been too hard of a lynch to push through anyways which is why we decided to full out claim to help draw a NK and save the other PRs.

As for our one actual result; we did claim it yesterday. CES did not go anywhere N1.

[Casus Belli]

^^This is why I am not the dominant poster.

Again, I'm speaking out of turn here without conferring with my other head, but since we've sort of reached critical speed I figure it is pertinent to answer tonight.

So why did a "went nowhere" result make you think CES was scum? I have been a tracker before and "no result" I always took as a slight town tell since there are statistically far more VT then scum who would not act. In most normals that would be at MOST one scum who fits that niche.

You are speaking out of context here, as our claim post yesterday and our D1 views will show. Our result did not make us think CES was scum as you suggested. His behavior and views did. We tracked him N1 because of our suspicion of him from D1. Our lack of result weighed against his behavior did not give us a slight "town tell" or make us less suspicious of him, simply because he could be a mafia goon.

I remember someone mentioned yesterday why scum would do a one for one trade with a town member. This is a pretty relevant question, especially considering our credibility in the game yesterday versus our targets credibility. I know our credibility is now shot, but what possible scum motivation would we have had, when none of our alleged team had died, to sacrifice ourselves at the expense of one claimed VT?

CB, entertaining your notion for a second, who do you think is scum?

We'll let you know once we've had a chance to knock heads together tomorrow.