Consulmaker II: the Pyrrhic War - Game over.

[Feysal]

Very well, you have a point there. I can warn the town not to be lazy, but I would be a poor town player if I did not practice what I preach. Let's see if we can get some more discussion going about Tribunes.

Unvote: The Fonz
Vote: scotmany12

It is not that you would be a bad Tribune choice, but I think scotmany12 is in risk of being lynched, and I trust him to be town as well. Him being unlynchable today would please me, and it would allow for better process of elimination. With the Consuls and Tribune being unlynchable, the Consulmaker above suspicion, and you as a solid town read no one suspects anyway, the possible lynch choices would be reduced to five, myself included.

On the topic of myself, I of course do not wish to die. However if I must go, I refuse to go down quietly. The bad thing about the Lowell lynch is that so few people said anything about it, and so we missed a chance to learn about players from the stances they took. I won't be repeating that mistake. If I must die, I want everyone who agrees with my death to say so and explain why.

For starters, back in post #1193 I responded to Shanba's case on me. I don't think I've seen anyone comment on it, although I have still seen people name me as one of their top suspects. I would like to hear some responses now. Was there some concern I failed to address in my response, or is there something else to the suspicion on me that has not been said? Even if it is just gut or bad vibes, let's hear it. And for the record, I consider gut and bad vibes to be exceptionally poor arguments. I know better than to trust my own gut, and I certainly don't trust anyone else's.

As for my reads, there are some thoughts about Shanba I have not yet said, and for others I should do more ISO reads.

Preview edit: in response to the discussion after The Fonz posted, would it really be bad if we got a scum Tribune? On the first day, SensFan argued in favor of scum Tribunes, how this would force them to take definite stances. If scum were to save fellow scum at this point, it would be an optimal outcome, since there can't be more than two left. Did something change your mind, SensFan? If we're going to take a risk with Tribune votes, should it not be now while we still have a comfortable lead?

[SensFan]

Umm, no, Feysal. ScumTribune saving his scumbuddy today means we have to lynch Town today, and we have far less days to find the connections than if those connections were established on D1.

[Nathanael]

vote scotmany

[The Fonz]

Nate, what is your actual read on Scot?

[ribwich]

I'm with Sens that a scum tribune at this point pretty much guarantees that we're not going to lynch scum. Also, if we get a town tribune, that tribune vetoes a execution, and the day ends in a mislynch, our tribune is suddenly going to look suspicious. Even if they were right in their veto, the fact that the day ended with a mislynch makes it look like scum saving a scumbuddy. Unless they think there's a really high chance that the next next person on the chopping block will be scum, a town tribune has less incentive to actually use their power.

So do we even want a tribune? We're already having to take a chance on my townreads being accurate for consuls, why should we increase the chance of scum getting power when it's unlikely for town to even use that same power? However, if none of us vote for anyone, somebody could make a vote for themselves at the last second. So, I'm going to propose this idea: give me the tribunal power, and I will do nothing with it.

Vote: ribwich

[Feysal]

Tribunes have two powers: they are immune to execution, and they can make someone else immune to execution. If we were to elect ribwich as Tribune, we would essentially be choosing not to have a Tribune at all. No one is going to try to execute ribwich anyway, and if he won't use his power to veto, then the whole potential of the Tribune is wasted, and we get no information from the votes either. I'm not in favor of this. At the very least, we can use Tribune votes as a vote of confidence, to choose someone that the town does not want to be lynched, by granting that player immunity.

As for the scum Tribune, yes, there is a chance that they would save their partner. If this happened, it would cause major suspicion for both the Tribune and the player he saved. I'd welcome it if scum did something this stupid, but I doubt they'd make another mistake this bad in one game. It is far more likely that scum would bus his partner by not vetoing his execution. This would actually be an argument in favor of scum as Tribune... scum could probably not risk vetoing the death of his partner, but town could be fooled into doing so, and become suspect because of it.

Of course there is still the problem that if scum was elected as Tribune, that scum would be immune to execution, and the odds of finding the one other scum and executing him would be much lower than if we had a town Tribune. By this time, this is reason enough not to pick our most suspect players as Tribunes.

In short: it is obvious that The Fonz has the confidence of the town. There is no real need to elect him as Tribune, and even less reason to elect ribwich, since they won't be executed anyway. Can we agree on anyone else who would deserve that confidence, and who would deserve to be unlynchable today? Even if Tribunes are discouraged from using their veto, voting for someone to become immune to execution would still have merit.

[SensFan]

Maybe I'm missing something, Feysal, but why it is in the Town's best interests to decide now on someone that will be immune from being lynched today?

[Feysal]

Maybe I'm missing something, Feysal, but why it is in the Town's best interests to decide now on someone that will be immune from being lynched today?

Why would it not be? In a normal mafia game, players vote for who they want to die. Here, we would be voting for who we want to live. Of course the former is more powerful, but since that is not available to us, we should make use of the latter while we are able. It would be a way of getting definite stances from players, by forcing them to go on record with their townreads. Of course, to make it useful, ribwich and The Fonz should be excluded as candidates, since there is no information to be gained from electing either of them.

[SensFan]

Other than the fact that a lot can change between now and the end of the Day, and I'd rather not lock in anyone other than rib/Fonz as untouchable a full week before the deadline. Also, being made untouchable may lead to someone taking a Day off, since they're in no danger.

[The Fonz]

Maybe I'm missing something, Feysal, but why it is in the Town's best interests to decide now on someone that will be immune from being lynched today?

Maybe I'm missing something, Sens, but someone is going to get the immunity. It's in the town's best interests to have an argument about it, and that means not giving it to someone who's not going to need it anyway. Let's say this Scot wagon gets close to or above mine. Then, if you or Magua wants to retain the option to execute Scot, you've got to argue the case for him being scummy enough to merit serious execution consideration. People who think Scot should be immune will present counterarguments as to why Scot is townish enough to merit being spared. Hey Presto, we've got an actual argument about how likely someone is to be scum with people forced to take positions.

[SensFan]

I think we all agree that you are likely to be Town, and so aren't in any real danger of being executed today.
I think we all agree that ribwhich is obviously Town, and so isn't in any real danger of being executed today.

I'm saying that I think its in our best interests to give one of you the Tribunal power, because you weren't going to be lynched in either case, and in your particular case, I personally trust your judgement. I think it would be foolish for us to give Execution Immunity to anyone other than the two of you, since that would narrow the effective pool of lynches from six to five, and that's before any of the Official Pardons given by the three people capable of doing so.
Here's a quick hypothetical scenario off the top of my head:
Let's say we give scot the spot of Tribunal (for example), now we're down to 5 realistic lynches.
I don't want Shanba to swing, and Magua has a townread on Nat. Now we're down to 3.
We decide to lynch Parama, and scot intervenes and uses his veto.
All of a sudden, we're down to two lynch targets to pick from.

I'm just saying that the pool of potential lynches is small enough as it is, with Me/Magua being Consuls, Rib being Consulmaker, and you being viewed as town by most people. I don't see the need to want to add a fifth person to the list of people who won't be lynched today, as well as give them the power to add a sixth.

[Parama]

okay so the last scums are Feysal and Nath, gg.

[SpyreX]

Good lord its not mission critical.

FORCE a scum hand today and out they go.

I'm more than a little wroth at this and I am taking back my Feysal good feelings entirely.

Parama may be right on the head.

[scotmany12]

Hey parama, could you explain your suspicion of feysal? This goes for others who are suspicious of him too.

I also notice that no one has yet to respond to Shanba's request for those that find nate scummy to explain why.

[SpyreX]

Except i did.

It doesn't take a million words to say survival-focused.

Thanks, try again.

[SensFan]

As did I.

[scotmany12]

I missed your answer. Sorry. I don't think it's very convincing, though. I'd like you to elaborate on your towel-around-head statement.

And i disagree with that sens. All you said was:

Add on 'Does his damnest to undermine the credibility of anyone who isn't mod-confirmed Town' to the list of reasons why Nathanael is probably Scum.

That's not a full case.

[SpyreX]

And mine is?

WOOSH keep on keepin on.

It doesn't need a bullet point case to call a scum a scum sometimes good lord.

[Nathanael]

Nate, what is your actual read on Scot?

I have him as townish.
and I want parama to be today's lynch.
and I'd wish you stopped saying "Parama is scummy, but I had a townread on chesskid, so he is town" you hadn't even a whole game-day to read chesskid, and parama is getting worse and worse. you are basically giving parama a free pass for the hole game, just because of your early D1 read.
and I want parama dead.

[Parama]

^this is how scum push lynches

[ribwich]

Is there something specific about his post you don't like, or is that just a general "Nate is scum, and he's pushing a lynch. So that's how scum push lynches"?

[SensFan]

Pretty much all of Nathanael's posts today have been spent trying to defame people who are either in a position of power today, or else who other people have town reads on. Scum have much better motivation to defame people who are looking good than to try to find people who look scummy among the rest.

[SpyreX]

Or you can look at the structured difference in posting between throwing everything at Jack being town and the subsequent next day and on.

However you want to cut it.

[Magua]

Would Veto
----
6. The Fonz (replacing Mert) - Rereading D1-D2, I don't have the best opinion of Mert. However, I have a very large townread on Fonz, especially in regards to pushing the Jack lynch D3, when there were plenty (myself, Nathanael, Primate) who would've been more than happy with someone else.
7. ribwich - Obv.
10. SensFan - I had a big scumread on SensFan being scum D3. Jack flip changed that. Rereading D1-D2, I *really*, *really* don't agree with anything SensFan says or did. At all. But it's just so over the top, I can't believe it's scum influenced. "Consulmakers should make eachother consul", "Jack should be D1 tribune" seems like it's designed to provoke. Sens-scum would have to be thinking that Jack would be dying D2, and would avoid the blatant buddying up. It's just so scummy it has to be town.
17. scotmany12 - Pretty heavy on "Jack should be lynched" D1, big on attacking ribwich for saving Jack D2, "It wouldn't really surprise me if both reck and dram are scum." D2.

Unsure
----
15. Parama (replacing chesskid3) - "Rudeness is town" reflected heavily in Chesskid's D1 play. Parama's play I have a harder time getting a read on. Constant on "Nathanael is scum", but waffles between "Jack is town"/"Jack is scum" disconcertingly.
2. Feysal (replacing Rabies) - I don't have a good opinion on Rabies D1, but I really don't like what I read of Feysal. It's all very measured. It's all very rational. But the ratio of "stuff" to "stances" is way off. Irritatingly, this applies both in cases that are good and bad for the scum. Difficult to get a read on. Definite anti-Jack bias, also pre-emptively throws out the "dramonic + reckoner are scum together" (#768) keeps him off of my scum list for now.
14. Shanba (replacing Leon Belmont (replacing horrordude0215)) - There's just not that much there for me to read. Total agreement on his "would veto" list, but that's about it.

Would Execute
----
3. SpyreX - Doesn't mention Jack lynch at all D2 until after ribwich vetoes the execution, then goes "If there are better choices than jack WHO ARE THEY?" (#736), calls Nath scum for "Nathaniel gets to go real soon too saying Jack is town AND Sens is scum. Woooooosh" (#806), then starts reversing "HE hasn't done anything that makes me feel better. But, with dram AND reck being scum I don't see the connection there. I could be missing something that would make me nuke him with supreme prejudice BUT I'm hesistant due to that." (#859). A lot of "I'm not against Jack being lynched" followed by a whole lot of waffling about lynching Jack.
18. Nathanael - I don't begrudge Nathanael for defending Jack-town, as I did the same thing. I do begrudge him for not changing any of his reads, as near as I can tell, in response to the Jack-scum flip, especially in regards to SensFan.

[Magua]

@Nathanael:

Who is scum with Parama?

@Parama:

Who is scum with Nathanael?

@SpyreX:

Who is scum?