Mini 388: DOOMsville II {Game Over!}

[Turbovolver]

/confirm

[Turbovolver]

yeah, and you were a good scum in that too. I've only played with you and Turbo before, but this feels like a Sissyfight reunion.

I recognise 6 of the players in this game!

[Turbovolver]

Vote: ShadowLurker

Definitely.

[Turbovolver]

Just curious, is that a vote?

Nobody is ever "just curious".

Unvote: ShadowLurker
Vote: Ozymandius

[Turbovolver]

I think your all screwed in the head....

vote:friday-14th

reasons why i have that typo lol

this is not helpful

[Turbovolver]

I think your all screwed in the head....

vote:friday-14th

reasons why i have that typo lol

this is not helpful

and throwing random votes are helpful?throwing accusions for utterly no reason is useful?well if that isnt useful either,then wtf do you mean in your mind is useful?

So why were you so offended by this? I mean you

were

joking around, right? Do you think joking around is in fact helpful towards finding scum?

Then again, perhaps you did achieve something.

Unvote: Ozymandius
Vote: Friday-13th

[Turbovolver]

So Turbovolver was the first to change their random vote, and immediately got voted by two others.

Ozymandius was the next one to change his random vote, and got voted for it by ShadowLurker.

Very interesting. I'll keep my SL-vote for the moment.

Why is this interesting?

[Turbovolver]

I think the point of the quote by Falcome there is that Turbovolver changed his random vote, then Ozy did, but Shadowlurker only mentioned Ozy and voted him, seemingly ignoring the fact that Turbovolver did the same thing. I think Turbovolver is always kind of vote hoppy though I've never played with him. I was an avid reader of Leper Mafia 8)

Oh, I see.

You should've let Falcone explain though

[Turbovolver]

sorry guys it has taken so long to post. i couldnt get into the board for about a week. upon reading of course in the first two pages there isnt much so i will withhold my vote for now. i need a chance to sit down and actually read so that i can figure out who is who. i always have a hard time with that in the beginning of games.

Everyone has had problems accessing the board (or at least I hope so )


ShadowLurker, that's OMGUS isn't it. I don't really consider OMGUS a scum tell, but it's hardly helping find scum.

[Turbovolver]

sorry i couldnt post,forum said i couldnt acess and stuff....

be posting shortly

yeah umm...

[Turbovolver]

Not getting why that is a false dilemna.

Because it only presents two possible options (when there are most likely more) and suggests it could only be one of those two options.

That doesn't change the fact that ShadowLurker is avoiding the issue

[Turbovolver]

Yeah I know the definition of false dilemna. I just don't see how that is one. Maybe at worst you could say there are other possibilities that are slightly different, but I don't see any intentional deceit by Falcone, and in fact I think it's most likely to be a mixture of the two he gave. If Shadowlurker did have some other reason, then why not give it to us there and then?

Is it because I used the first thing that was remotely interesting to try and start a discussion, or just because I voted you?

Those are truly the only two possibilities you can see? What about the possibility that ShadowLurker thinks Falcone is scum?

But yes, like I said I think ShadowLurker was mostly OMGUSing and the false dilemma thing does avoid the issue.

[Turbovolver]

ok, without much to go on in the first few pages. The person I find most scummy at this point is Shadow Lurker. She seems much to defensive with just one vote on her. So for right now I will Vote: ShadowLurker. Still watching this game, along with my others.

You "killmenator" people at night, don't you?

FOS: killmenator

[Turbovolver]

This is my first game outside newbie land, so going from 7 to 12 people makes it harder to follow, too many voices.

Found it odd that Turbo and Shadow got such different reads on killmenator's post. One saying it was a good defence, the other using it to point a finger. One has to be wrong, don't they?

I thought ShadowLurker was joking. I mean I don't even see what it was defending against

[Turbovolver]

I'm leaving my vote on Friday until she explains how she thinks her joking was helping find scum.

She came back and addressed everybody BUT me

[Turbovolver]

Umm, ShadowLurker lies as town. In Leper mafia he claimed Kamikaze when he was vanilla.

And why is Turbo so suspicous of Friday? Did Friday not answer you enough in her post on the 4th?

The stuff I want her to answer to was posted on the 6th... so no.

[Turbovolver]

would-ya stop acting like a fag turbo....for god sakes it was A joke!the fact every one was randoming,i thought i would just do it!and are you retarted or some thing?why do you want me to adress you?is that a confession that your scum?FFS grow up yah damn kid...
being so that turbo has just partly pissed me of with his immaturety...i will e posting in a few...

I want you to address me so that I, along with others, can get a grasp of where you are coming from. That's kind of how this game works.

But sure, just keep yelling at me until I drop the accusation

[Turbovolver]

Yeah, the spirit ShadowLurker is putting into his defense makes me think of him as more townie.

[Turbovolver]

To Turbo: Remember Leper mafia... You thought STD's "passion" was a sign of townieness there too...

Well I'm not infallible. And I applied the exact same criteria to find the other two scum that game, so I'm not sure what you're complaining about.


Also Patrick, I doubt ShadowLurker wants attention away from what he has done. What does he gain by drawing attention away from the fact he confirm voted someone he wasn't voting? Or if not that, then what?

[Turbovolver]

It seems like he's changing his defence from 'I'm not doing anything strange' to 'I was deliberately acting strange to start discussion'.

He never said that though. He hasn't said anything about the 'level of weirdness' of his play, and he hasn't really done much defense other than ask snide questions and/or request that people clarify their attacks on him.

You are really misrepresenting the situation here.

FOS: Patrick

[Turbovolver]

Patrick, ShadowLurker is right. This argument is going nowhere.

[Turbovolver]

I dont think it was the generating discussion part that got targetted. I think it was the way in which you generated the discussion. Why not throw out a No Lynch or something like that to generate discussion instead of how you were acting? And honestly I dont like how turbo seems to always be coming to the defense of SL. Maybe it is nothing, but I think that SL should defend herself because she is the one who put herself in this situation.

So, on to new topics. I would like to hear more from other people, and would like to hear their takes on what is going on.

I like the way you arbitrarily suggest no lynch as a better alternative to confirm voting somebody you aren't voting. Both are 'classically scummy' moves that are used early game solely to get things going, so I don't know why one would be better than the other. I get the feeling you don't either, and made that post up as you went.

Unvote: Friday-13th
Vote: killmenator

As for the defending ShadowLurker thing, I like to comment on everything I can.

[Turbovolver]

Patrick, ShadowLurker is right. This argument is going nowhere.

eh since when did that deter you from arguing about something

I never want to argue in an argument that's going nowhere. Unfortunately I often take quite a while to realise that it's going nowhere, and/or get caught up refuting all the defamations being thrown at me.

When it's other people that are arguing it's much easier

[Turbovolver]

ummm... no lynch isnt always a scummy move.

No, in fact it's very rarely a scummy move. But when someone comes along and votes no lynch in the first few pages of the game, it's almost inevitable someone will call that scummy. This is what I mean by 'classically scummy' things.

and i have NEVER before been in a game where someone confirm voted someone they were not even voting.

Well yeah, maybe classically wasn't the right word. Point is they are both stupid things which would get labelled as scummy by knee-jerk players.

and by what you just said, what SL did was a classically scummy move, why then are you voting me and not SL? and why have you been defending SL all game when you yourself just said that it was a scummy move?

I myself don't think what he did was scummy at all.

[Turbovolver]

The issues they are discussing are (to me), minor ones and not going to be enough to convince enough other people to vote for a lynching, unless something comes up that hasn't been mentioned so far.

What do you think about Friday's hyper-defensiveness?

[Turbovolver]

Still here.

[Turbovolver]

Friday 13th's only vote is on Rosso, who she voted because he was trying to "speed lynch". Friday, Rosso appears to have just been generating discussion, and I don't think he's done anything wrong. What do you say to this?

You also told me to "stop acting like a fag" when I put pressure on you. Why are you unwilling to explain yourself properly?
You asked me why I would want you to address me? Maybe so I can find out more about your alignment.

[Turbovolver]

and why must you always mention me turbo...i really havtn said anything scummy yet...hardly at all with all these set backs...

You cant just say "I haven't done anything scummy" and be absolved of scrutiny. Not to mention you indeed

have

said scummy things.

Friday 13th's only vote is on Rosso, who she voted because he was trying to "speed lynch". Friday, Rosso appears to have just been generating discussion, and I don't think he's done anything wrong. What do you say to this?

well you know,technicly,you kinda answered your own question...

What? No I didn't.

[Turbovolver]

The Friday thing is nothing? Well in her latest post, she tells me I should drop accusations for no good reason, then goes on to say she is unvoting just so she won't look like scum.

O.O

[Turbovolver]

I need to think about this.

[Turbovolver]

Friday-13th, I want to know who you suspect and why. The whole reason I mentioned the Rosso vote is because it's your only serious vote, and it wasn't even for good reasons.

There is clearly some level of disconnect here, which makes me feel a bit better about your crazy reactions to me, but that doesn't change the fact you haven't been posting good content.

[Turbovolver]

sorry, didnt realize the site was back. i can rehash everyhting tommorw.

Well....

[Turbovolver]

SL, why do you always seem to be sticking up for Friday?

Hey Friday, you didn't tell me your thoughts on the game. You don't seem to be interested in talking about anybody but yourself (and Rosso lolz). It doesn't matter how weird you want to post, if you aren't here to hunt scum then you are scum.

Unvote: killmenator
Vote: Friday-13th

[Turbovolver]

@turbo:if you want my suggestion in game,then tel me...i dont rember you asking,then again i havnt scimmed through the game yert.

Wait, so you're admitting you only post thoughts about the game when asked now?

[Turbovolver]

sorry about that SL i meant to say turbo not friday. it has been a long week..already and it is only tuesday! ahh... you always seem to be sticking up for turbo... i need a reread terribly!

Oh, you didn't mean ShadowLurker was sticking up for Friday, you meant

I

was. That makes so much more sense.

FOS: killmenator

. Start making sense.

[Turbovolver]

Oh, I see with that Killmenator thing. My mistake.

[Turbovolver]

And after a quick skim back, I don't see anything suggesting ShadowLurker is sticking up for me.

Unvote: Friday-13th
Vote: killmenator

ShadowLurker has been contributing this game more than a lot of people, that is a terrible reason to vote for him. You say you don't know who to vote out of him, Friday or Patrick.
Why those other two?

[Turbovolver]

and i wasnt ready to put either patrick or chess at 3 votes because i honestly dont want to spark anothe debate about whether 3 votes is scummy or not and so forth. so SL got my vote. obviously SL isnt in any serious trouble since i am the only one voting for him. anyway... my logic...

So first, I'm assuming "chess" is Friday-13th.

You listed Patrick and Friday-13th as the other people you might vote BEACUSE they have two votes? Like, not because they are scummy, but just becuase you like furthering bandwagons on people you don't find scummy?
And the reason you didn't do it is because you didn't want to possibly take heat for putting the third vote on somebody?


It's like you and Friday-13th claim scum in every post.

[Turbovolver]

Hang on, so you don't actually suspect Friday and Patrick, that was from a different game?

I'm confused

[Turbovolver]

Ozy, you filled your post with too much filler. Pointing out that more talk is good is just worthless, everyone knows that. Kil already said they were going to reread and repost and asked for time, but you FOSed within a few hours.

I am going to

vote bird111[\b]
picking up a prod and still not posting is just unforgivable. Especially as he still seems to be oretty active elsewhere on site.

:goodposting:

I will investigate this bird111 thing.

[Turbovolver]

Well, most of bird1111's recent posts were MishMash and the last mafia post was actually the same day the prod was sent out. So I don't think that it's necessarily a scummy avoiding of the game.

It is something to note though.

[Turbovolver]

i didnt put them at three because i find the discussion of a third vote useless

Kilmenator was saying disscusion was useless. I was merely trying to point that out. Because everyone knows that more talk is good, right?

Actually discussion of third votes usually is pretty much useless. If Kilmenator said "I don't want to discuss what I had for breakfast", would you also call that "saying discussion was useless"?

You're actually misrepresenting here.

I didn't know you felt so strongly about an FOS...

Scum tell.

I'm not saying we should lynch her now. My goal was just to let her know that I think she should do a bit more thinking before she posts to avoid confusion. I was and still am quite willing to give her plenty of time to work out anything that has caused confusion.

Well, OK then. Very "don't look hard at me" posting.

Unvote: Killmenator

Vote: Ozymandius

[Turbovolver]

More thoughts - Rosso seems a horribly lazy poster. I have no clue about him, he is refusing to give us anything to work with. If he was town, i would hope he would be writing more. But is this his normal play style?

Last game I played with him, he was willing to vote and take positions, but not really do any analysis work, IIRC.

Then he claimed he was writing a computer program to find the scum, but refused to ever show anyone said program or do anything with it. Then he claimed he never throws his scum partners under the bus despite several games with evidence to the contrary.

And he was surprised when he got lynched

[Turbovolver]

EBWOP: I should mention he was town in that game.

[Turbovolver]

I too was happy with Killmenator's reply, except for one thing: You didn't vote anyone after going back and re-reading all the players. Why didn't you vote anybody after all that work?

I'd think townies who just re-read the game would certainly find somebody scummy enough to vote, and it's not like you've been conservative with votes earlier in the game.

[Turbovolver]

I'm sorry, I'm here, I've just been without power for a few days. I'm happy with Kilmenator's response now. If she's not going to mix anything up anymore, I'm fine. I don't find Kil that scummy anymore. Discusing breakfast is clearly irrelevent, I know. Breakfast is not part of a mafia game. Voting is. I thought that there may have been some direction to it, but I guess I was wrong.

I don't understand what you're talking about in the last half of this.
Also please address my points against you.

[Turbovolver]

turbo- quite honestly, what i did took way to much time and i wanted a little time to digest what i had posted. still need a little time to think it over, but my vote will probably land on either rosso or ozy. but i still need a little time to process. so give me some time to think, but expect a vote in the next day.

Fair enough ^^

[Turbovolver]

I see now that this kind of comment of mine does not help me look good. Noted for future reference.

Go on then, explain how.

[Turbovolver]

My comment was half sarcastic. It was taken as scummy by you. That is not helpful to me, because I am town. That only adds to the fact that you found my Fos to be scummy and poorly founded in the first place.

Well, it was a crappy FOS. You cant just say "discussion is good for town", because a lot of discussion

isn't

. I can give examples if necessary.

Also, stretching "I don't want to discuss X" to "I don't want to discuss" is still misrepresentation.

And I'm not trying to appear townie, I'm trying to prove my inocence. I made a mistake by saying that comment that turbo (and others) find scummy.

I'm supposed to believe you were trying to prove your innocence by sarcastically brushing things aside?

Also to explain this comment:

I'm not saying we should lynch her now. My goal was just to let her know that I think she should do a bit more thinking before she posts to avoid confusion. I was and still am quite willing to give her plenty of time to work out anything that has caused confusion.

Well, OK then. Very "don't look hard at me" posting.

It's just a feeling I get reading through the quoted text of yours. It seems to be "over-explaining".

[Turbovolver]

Oh, hold on, I think I misunderstood...

[Turbovolver]

My comment was half sarcastic. It was taken as scummy by you. That is not helpful to me, because I am town. That only adds to the fact that you found my Fos to be scummy and poorly founded in the first place.

So you're saying the "I see you make a big deal out of FOS..." comment was half-sarcastic.

1) You said you understand why it's scummy. You still haven't explained why.

2) Calling it half-sarcastic could easily be an attempt to absolve yourself of those words, but I guess that just comes down to whether you can be trusted or not.


Also now that I realise my mistake, some of the stuff in the last post doens't make sense any more. Namely,

I'm supposed to believe you were trying to prove your innocence by sarcastically brushing things aside?

This.

The rest still holds.

[Turbovolver]

Turbo: That's a scum tell.
Ozy: Yes, I can see why that is considered scummy.
Turbo: I don't believe that. Why is it scummy?
Ozy: Why don't you tell me?! You're the one who called it scummy with no reasoning?



When you defend against something with "Yeah, I can see why that's bad, sorry," and you cant actually see why it's bad, then you are lying to the town, and you are just saying whatever you think will get people off your back.

[Turbovolver]

Well, I was actually talking about this quote,

I see now that this kind of comment of mine does not help me look good. Noted for future reference.

but it turns out you never said you knew

why

it was scummy there either.

So yes, I was mistakenly putting words in your mouth and I apologise.


I can also now explain why

I didn't know you felt so strongly about an FOS...

is scummy.

* You are suggesting because it's only an FOS it shouldn't be looked at too hard. It was still based on logic, so there's no reason not to analyse that logic. It could even be seen as an attempt to suppress discussion.

* You are calling into doubt the behaviour of those who analyse your FOS in any great detail. Basically without any solid accusation or commitment to a position, you are providing the opportunity to make players look worse.

It's not really a major tell, because I can reasonably see townies doing it (though not as much as scum), but it was still scummy to me. And when I thought you were saying you knew why it was scummy when it was quite likely you did not, I thought I had found something more solid.

[Turbovolver]

Part or me says Turbo is making a mountain out of a molehill, but the other part says we really don't have too much to look at right now anyway with so few ppl saying anything. I think we might as well hear Ozy's suspect list.

I'm making a mountain out of a molehill? All I've done is bring up things I found scummy and ask for explanations. I haven't been calling him assuredly scum because I am not myself 100% convinced of his scumminess, though he is the player I'm most wary of at the moment.

I also think a suspicion list from Ozymandius is a good idea.

[Turbovolver]

Sorry to double post, but I couldn't sleep, and I had an itch that needed scratching:

unvote Vote Shadowlurker

Ahh that sounds right...

If you defeat me, you STILL won't beat me! Beware the flood! -Belome

Wushhhhhhhhhhhhhhhhhhhhhhhhh...

umm...

[Turbovolver]

Unvote Vote Ozymandius

Your wide net of suspicions seem contrived at best and I find this too similar to that scumchat game if lyncher when you leapt on everybody else's cases and tried to pursue them no matter how weak they were.

I've never been in a scumchat game, but it does seem like Ozy's objections to your comparison between this game and a scumchat game are valid.

However, I agree with your actual point about the suspicions, and it's scummy regardless of what happened in some scumchat game. They look like the suspicions of someone who re-read the thread looking for things that jumped out as "safely" scummy.


Also Patrick's last post gives me the feeling of someone "floating" about the thread commenting when they can to avoid attention. I'll have a look at his other posts.

[Turbovolver]

Well, there are quite a few Patrick posts where he just comments on something off-hand in one line, but he also has some with a good deal of content. Something to watch but not really a strike against at the moment.

[Turbovolver]

if ozy does end up getting lynched, it will be one of the worst lynches i have seen. just a truly poor game to try and get a 'fair' lynch from, if that makes sense. i'll be very disappointed if ozy goes (unless he turns up scum of course)
and if we get two new players, they'll have like 5 days to actualyl post, almost worthless this game makes me sad.

I don't know what you mean about a 'fair' lynch, but what is wrong with an Ozy lynch. Are you saying you think he is town? What is wrong with the arguments that have been raised, then?

[Turbovolver]

I feel that is a misrepresentation, Patrick. geraintm doesn't seem to be defending Ozymandius much at all (though he did conveniently fail to take much of a position on his scumminess, at least in the recent posts that I saw).

His point about a 'fair' lynch would apply to anyone, he doesn't want to lynch whilst players are inactive. It's not Ozymandius-specific.

[Turbovolver]

His point about a 'fair' lynch would apply to anyone, he doesn't want to lynch whilst players are inactive. It's not Ozymandius-specific.

How do you know that? Yes, if he's a genuinely concerned townie it would apply to anyone. If he's scum with Ozy, I imagine it only applies to Ozy.

It seemed a genuine enough statement to me. I don't know that geraintm's intentions were good with that post, but I see no reason to assume otherwise at this time.

[Turbovolver]

turbo - i know i didn't make much of a claim on my thoughts of ozy's scumminess. i didn't think my thoughts on the matter were especially important compared to the question on what i thought a fair lynch was.

OK, now this I don't like. You don't want to lynch people until everyone can weigh in, but you don't think weighing in on the possible lynchee is particularly important. Doesn't make much sense to me.

[Turbovolver]

What do you think Adele single focus has been and why do you think she has had that focus.

Pretty sure you're not reading the game carefully. Scum is much more likely to read carelessly.

I really don't buy the "not reading properly = scum" routine. There is nothing to suggest that townies wouldn't be lazy, nothing to suggest townies have better reading comprehension than scum, etc etc. The argument about scum only reading what concerns them isn't particularly true either, because there are definitely 'naturally defensive' townies.

Scum is also not likely to write that sentence you wrote to attract attention to a relationship between them and their partner. So I'm going to operate for now on the belief that Ozy and kil are scum and Adele is not.

I don't get it.

And you're "operating on the belief"? This sounds ridiculously sure of alignments, it doesn't have the 'townie doubt'. And unlike when people say stuff like "pretty sure X is scum", you don't seem to be saying it to provoke a reaction or be dramatic.
Townies don't "operate on beliefs", they keep their mind open and remain eternally curious until the scum are dead.


Still waiting for Ozymandius but I would also support votes for MBL at this point.

[Turbovolver]

So Ozymandius, you didn't want to explain that weird post you made before you came back?

[Turbovolver]

Arg... I'm so stupid. I just almost tried to translate Patrick's avatar from Greek... *smacks head* Sorry, that's unrelated.

This seems really fake, like it was included just to inspire sympathy.

[Turbovolver]

This is horsecrap. Scum know who scum are and have to fake the effort to make it look like they're curious. It's not easy to do and I think most lazy scum simply skip it. Town is curious but may be lazy about it. There's a difference, and it's sometimes REALLY easy to spot.

And I'll stick with my scumhunting techniques that work for me, tyvm. I'll treat scum like scum and town like town until and unless my hunches change.

Of course the key to townieness is curiousity, but in my experience you cant simply work out who is curious by who is up to date with the thread.

And sure, I wouldn't expect everybody to conform to the same principles of scumhunting. But when someone comes to the opposite conclusions you do, it looks suspicious.

And Turbo, why the kilmenator protection? You truly saw no merit in my observations and decided a counterattack was appropriate? Your post history regarding kilmenator looks like a vicious attempt to flog him with kid gloves.

I saw no merit in your observations, so I attacked them. It's got nothing to do with protecting kilmenator.
kilmenator was initially quite scummy in my eyes, but then it turned out she was confusing games and a lot of my suspicion of her died then and there. I haven't really agreed with a lot of her logic but I don't think she is very scummy at the moment.

[Turbovolver]

I will lay off from MBL with the role stuff, but I do believe him to be scum and wanted to know what he would claim, maybe that was stupid, I dont know, but I wanted to know how he would react.

You could have good or bad reasons for wanting him to claim, so I don't support it at this time.

I would also like to know why you think MBL is scummy.



I am a bit wary of Shadowlurker. I didn't really care about the "WTF" posts, but he has been almost completely a nonentity in terms of analysis this game. Also want to know why he finds MBL scummy, he was contributing more in my last game with him and I don't think she should be allowed to get away with this.

Adele's thinking post-Ozy claim is kinda dodgy. The thing with an unlynchable role is if they are scum, lynching them is good. If they are town, lynching them confirms them (and if the scum want to nightkill them, they are hitting someone who is essentially now vanilla). But when Adele considered his claim, she said she wouldn't unvote because it was a good role for scum to claim, seeming to ignore the fact that there wasn't really a risk in lynching him. It didn't seem genuine.

[Turbovolver]

I support a mass claim today. I'll go first.

w.t.f. x4

[Turbovolver]

I don't know about this mass claim stuff. I can see the

potential

to break the game open but that's only if things fall the right way, and it has the downisde of exposing the doc with a claimed cop already out there. Is it really worth leaving things to luck?
Also ShadowLurker I didn't understand your ordering post at all, it looked like there were three sepearate lists

[Turbovolver]

Vote: klebian

He's scum.

[Turbovolver]

I did have reasons for voting Klebian, I just wanted to keep them quiet to see how he would respond.

Klebian replaced into this game, saying he had a few suspicions but couldn't remember of who, and that he would re-read to remind himself. He also found the post where Ozy claimed.

Then next time he came back, there was no re-read, or a mention of it, and all he provided was a mincy little question and a comment about mass-claims.

This was where I voted him, he was showing no interest at all in catching scum. Klebian responded with a very awkward OMGUS FOS, but more telling was the fact that he

didn't

give any thoughts about anybody. He's always here to go find posts for us and talk about 'safe' topic like mass-claims, but that's all we're getting from Klebian, and I wonder why. Wait, no I don't.

Confirm Vote: Klebian

[Turbovolver]

I think we're getting a little OT here. People are speculating about the setup, arguing about claiming, massclaiming, no-lynching, second-test-lynching, discussing mod-metagaming... it's seriously distracting us from our core business: catching scum. Nor do I want people to state their allegiances in the hopes that someone's going to wrap it up tomorrow.

Forget

tomorrow for now, please, and let's focus on playing today as solidly as possible.

I would have thought people stating "their allegiances" would be a good way to progress with this scum-hunting business. Isn't this paragraph contradictory?

[Turbovolver]

Yeah, all that is true about klebian, though I can't say it surprises me. However, we do need klebian give us some substancial suspicions now.

What do you mean it doesn't surprise you? Does he have a habit of not contributing as town or something?

[Turbovolver]

yo. I don't have the time (or if I do, then I don't have the willpower) to do a reread just yet. Meanwhile, I think it's better if I at least make posts in this game, and read and talk about what I can, and I'll do a reread on the weekend most likely.

Well, if we are still just waiting on a re-read then we will see what happens then.

Turbo, you say that post 425 was "a comment about mass-claims", but that post was more telling shadowlurker that he was trying to take control of the game. I know that he's already claimed, but scum could just have well spelled out 'i am a daycop' in a post to refer to later on if necessary.

Well, maybe I misremembered exactly what was in the post. That's not the point, the point was you weren't really taking any hard stances in it.

I still haven't had my 'mincy little question' answered, for that matter. I don't like it when someone unvotes a vote that they apparently made with at least some solid reasoning, and then unvote, but don't explain why. I'd like to know what mbl did that made kilm not suspicious of him anymore from where she was before he responded to her.

I'm not saying the question shouldn't be answered, I'm just saying that hanging back asking questions is very 'safe' posting.

In essence, what I've done since I made my first post is minimal, but I think you are trying to twist it a bit too much into my doing nothing, and not doing the reread I promised.

I'm not twisting anything. You said it yourself, what you've done is minimal. And that's suspicious, because it's more in scum's interest to do little.

[Turbovolver]

What do you mean it doesn't surprise you? Does he have a habit of not contributing as town or something?

Pretty much regardless of alignment from what I've seen. I think he's more likely scum than alot of ppl, but I'll reserve judgement until he gives some suspicions.

Well that changes things a bit. I agree waiting for the reread is best.

[Turbovolver]

I might be misunderstanding this, but Pat seems to be saying that there's a case on klebian, so klebian needs to say who he finds suspicious. I'd've thought Klebian should be defending himself, not looking for people to accuse.

Umm, not really. Klebian is suspicious

because

he hasn't been posting anything about his suspicions. So by telling us what he thinks of the game, that is a type of defense, really. When a player has to make up suspicions on the spot, it's sometimes easy to notice... we'll see.

Requests for people to post lists of who they do and don't trust, ostensibly for later examination, smack (very vaguely) of a distraction technique, maybe to gloss over a scum who's throwing out tells. That's what we should be looking at, and for.

The lists basically just force some discussion, discussion not about mass claims and the like. I don't think making such lists is the best way to actually find scum, but again it sometimes catches people out who have to scramble to come up with who to suspect.
I don't see how such lists could distract people from a scum who is throwing out tells - such tells would be brought up in the lists, would they not?

[Turbovolver]

I'm a little surprised nobody's going after me for not posting thoughts on specific people, since klebian and I replaced in to the exact same situation. I'm working on a read right now, will have stuff to say about Day 1 over the weekend, if not sooner.

You didn't have any posts that got my hackles up. When a lurky player is happy to come in to dredge up posts for other people, or is always present to defend themself but does little else,

that

is scummy.

[Turbovolver]

Friday's question seemed more like a newbie who apparently was under the impression that random votes are just how people begin, not for any use, and decided to do a 'similar' thing, by voting a nonexistant person. I think turbo was making too big of a deal out of a minor thing done by someone who just wasn't acquainted to the game.

When Friday responded like that, I was definitely suspicious. Unless you think joking around is in fact helpful towards catching scum, you cant really have much of a problem with the "this is not helpul" statement.

Defensiveness isn't in itself scummy, but unexplained defensiveness is. I thought this was definitely something worth pursuing, because while it was possible Friday was just a naturally defensive and hostile player, it was more likely she reacted that way as scum.

Now, I understand this was the first post after a crash. No one had posted for 6 days. Falcone was asked to explain what he found interesting, and when he responded to the question, shadowlurker called him out for this. I don't think sl's statement had basis; falcone thought it worth notable that many people were being voted for vote changes, and had even been asked to clarify.

This is actually sort of misrepresentitive. ShadowLurker didn't appear to be chastising him for providing his reasoning, he was chastisting him for providing

bad

reasoning, i.e. "making masterpieces out of shit".

These posts were made 6 hours apart. While I know he said 'shortly', 1) That can be interpreted different ways, and 2) Other players were just making "I'm here" posts, so I don't think it's correct to call someone out for not 'posting shortly' when others weren't as well.

Wow, you're really biased against me huh? Yeah, I interpreted shortly as "sorry, I'm here again, I'll post". You are correct that it might have meant "in a few days" but that's not a big deal.

And your second point is just laughable. There's a difference between an "I'm here" post and a "I'm here, posting soon" post. Not only that, but of course I'll be waiting more for Friday to post, as I felt she was scummy and I believe I was waiting on her response at the time!

Seemed like a stupid and random post... Can't really explain why else this post was made.

Because I was suspicious of kilmenator and decided to throw a bad pun in there as well. Kilmenator said "I don't know who to suspect, not really sure about this, but I'll vote ShadowLurker for being too defensive." I mean, Shadowlurker hadn't even been defensive!

and people started discussing whether he forgot, or whether this was a deliberate lie. This question was stated by Patrick, and it's interesting to note that SL didn't say anything about this being a false dilemma.

How is it a false dilemma? Either Shadowlurker deliberately confirm voted someone he wasn't voting, or he forgot and it was an accident. What other possibilities are there?

Kilmenator made what I'd consider a sort of newbish response, and this made Patrick vote for her because he said she was just looking for reasons to vote SL, despite the fact that she was voting him for being too defensive, which was fairly unrelated to the topic which was then being discussed.

The defensive reason was baloney, like I said above, so that would in fact be "just looking for reasons to ote SL".

Patrick then said this: "If you vote Shadowlurker, you're saying that you think scum are more likely to lie about where they had a vote than a pro town player, which I don't think is true." This statement really seems like he's trying to make people not vote SL. He then says "All I can say is I don't find it scummy, and that behaviour like that can often make you the target for superficially thought out or oppotunistic votes." :Badposting:

What? Patrick is right. I don't see any reason that scum would be more likely to confirm vote someone they weren't voting than town.

Then for many posts, people argue against shadowlurker, and he eventually says that his inital arguement was to generate discussion. I've found that SL makes the excuse of 'generating discussion'. Kilmenator makes a comment about it was more suspicious HOW he generated discussion, and offered no lynch as a hypothetical better alternative.

I like the way you arbitrarily suggest no lynch as a better alternative to confirm voting somebody you aren't voting. Both are 'classically scummy' moves that are used early game solely to get things going, so I don't know why one would be better than the other. I get the feeling you don't either, and made that post up as you went.

Unvote: Friday-13th
Vote: killmenator

As for the defending ShadowLurker thing, I like to comment on everything I can.

that reasoning is just horrid. And that last sentence doesn't really seem right, since I haven't felt like he's been doing that; it seems more like he's been attacking newbie posts and defending experienced souding posts.

That reasoning is not horrid. Shadowlurker did something 'stupid', that people might consider scummy just because it was 'bad play' - evidenced in this thread, and even by you. Kilmenator said: "Why would you do that, when you could vote no lynch?" When no lynch is also a "bad play" move which some people deliberately do to generate discussion. That is, NO DIFFERENT.

More to come.

[Turbovolver]

After the crash, turbo randomly brings up the fact that friday had voted only once the entire game, on rosso, and defends rosso. The vote had been made pages earlier, and this makes me think that turbo is just attempting to attack Friday on whatever basis he can.

When a player has made only one vote and that vote is for a dodgy reason, that is a pretty solid basis for attacking someone. "Whatever basis he can," yeah right.


Oh, so that's all that was left.

[Turbovolver]

Also there was a mistake in my first big post: there was some text of Klebian's that got in there and wasn't quoted.

Also I didn't yet respond to this:

As for the defending ShadowLurker thing, I like to comment on everything I can.

And that last sentence doesn't really seem right, since I haven't felt like he's been doing that; it seems more like he's been attacking newbie posts and defending experienced souding posts.

Well, obviously the statemtent should be "I like to comment on everything I can and consider worthy".

I certainly don't agree with "attacking newb posts and defending experienced posts" though. Even if that's the way things have panned out, and I don't think that they have, my motivation certainly hasn't been some sort of crusade against new players.

[Turbovolver]

The summary is useful, and the analysis makes sense to me. The points he's made against SL, Turbo and (to a lesser extent) you, Patrick, all seem sensible, whereas your rebuttals do not.

There is NO way that stuff is 'sensible'.

"Look here as Turbo prods the person he was most suspicious of when they say they would post and didn't. He completely ignored the other people who posted to say they were around!"

"Look here as Turbo attacks someone he was already suspicious of for only having one vote and that vote being for a crappy reason. He must just be just trying to attack her on whatever basis he can!"

[Turbovolver]

Well, I don't think it was a modkill.

[Turbovolver]

So, we have an anonymous daykiller...

Well, I don't think it was a modkill.

Don't think? Are you taking responsibility or speculating? If the latter, I agree; I can't imagine a mod not taking responsibility for a modkill.

Speculating. I checked over the latest Patrick posts quickly and didn't see anything modkill worthy.

I do agree that speculation about who is the daykiller isn't really worthwhile at this time.

[Turbovolver]

Oh, not again.

Just because Friday is possibly a really sensitive person and Kilmenator confused a bunch of games together doesn't mean they cant be scum. Yes, it would be scummy to attack them *because* of these things, but I didn't do that. I raised legitimate points, and to have people to just reduce them to "whatever basis he can" is frustrating and just not true.

I wanna see these statements backed up.

[Turbovolver]

I find it interesting that everyone else feels that it is a pro-town player who day killed him.

Umm, what?

I certainly don't.

[Turbovolver]

Seriously, what is with your rude responses? She found it interesting because apparently she thought patrick seemed to be pro-town, and thus she thinks that a protown dayvig wouldn't kill patrick. When you're going to respond, respond to the whole thing she says. All you're doing is picking on the newbie-ish players who apparently don't word things the way you would.

And here we see the scum who's been called out start trying to discredit the person, not his arguments.

All I did was correct her when she said "everyone else seems to think the daykiller is protown". Because that was not correct. I don't see my actions as particularly rude, and they are definitely a long shot from "picking on the newbie-ish players who apparently don't word things they way you would". What you mean because I wouldn't just assume everyone's opinions and say it for them?

But of course you would say that, wouldn't you? You're still desperate for anything to back up your baseless claims about me picking on newbie players from before.

[Turbovolver]

Well, anyone can be scum. My question is, is pressuring people who've shown a history of reacting badly to pressure in past games a pro-town action on day 1? I mean, the "easy target" accusation makes some kind of sense to me. I'm not making that accusation, Turbo, I'll need to look back at Day 1, but I'm saying that a pattern of focusing unduly on players known to act scummy when not scum early on

might

be a scumtell.

Well, that's just the way things fell together.

I'm wondering, has anybody actually looked up other games from Friday and kilmenator? There was a mention of Friday winning a game as scum but that's all I heard - here you are talking about people "who've shown a history of reacting badly to pressure in past games", but do we even know if that's true? I certainly knew nothing of these players before coming into this game.

[Turbovolver]

Klebian, the fact you didn't finish your analysis is not scummy, but the fact that you only brings it up when pressed

is

troubling.

More though, I don't like your response to kilmenator. The post she didn't like

was

scummy (and I see you completely ignored my response to it), and the way you only FOS her and then when she keeps pressing quote the same text and vote her is just weird. If you really had such a problem with her being vague about her not liking your post, you would've voted her off the bat. Your attacks on other people seem remarkably tied to your own situation, scum.

[Turbovolver]

Did you not see a strange (dis)relation between her post 539 and the post i quoted?

What?

[Turbovolver]

Read kilmenator's post 539. Then read the post of hers that I quoted in post 540. Then report back. I'm beginning to feel like I missed something, but I sure think that we're both referring to the same 'last post'.

OK so I did this and I'm none the wiser.

You FOS'd kilmenator for #529, then when she argued more with you, you went back and requoted #529 but voted her for it this time.

[Turbovolver]

or... your vote is totally WIFOM.

OMGUS.


And I hope that this post is not too rude for Klebian

[Turbovolver]

I believe klebian is referring to the discrepancy of her saying she found it scummy earlier and now saying she did not consider it because he has not finished it.

Ohhh, I see it now.

You want to explain this, killmenator? You did in fact vote klebian for not liking a post, and then later say "Why would I not like that post?"

[Turbovolver]

as i said in post 548, it wasnt his post that bothered me as much as it was the fact that he was supposed to be too busy to finish his reread/analysis, and yet has time to come in and post something to make someone else look bad. his post was essentially sticking up for me so it wasnt what his post was saying, it was the fact of when and why he posted and yet didnt finish the analysis and him trying to buddy up with me, i did not like it at all. i also did not like how he tried to point out who did agree with his post and such. sorry for the confusion in the posting next time i will have to be more clear.

Oh yeah, I do remember you explaining that now, it was just before I understood what was going on with this stuff. Your explanation does make sense.

Sorry for any inconvenience.

[Turbovolver]

how am I gonna figure out what to do?

Read post #514
Then read post #522
Then notice Klebian completely ignored the accusations. Didn't even want to deny them, let alone rebut them. That's not townie behaviour.

[Turbovolver]

OH! Reading 512, 513, 514, 522 again, I see I misinterpreted you there. I'm deeply sorry for that. She said "I find it interesting that everyone else feels that it is a pro-town player who day killed him." and you responded with "I certainly don't." which I interpreted as 'I certainly don't find this interesting', which I consider a rude response.
Crap. I'm sorry about this incident.

That does make more sense. Hmm...

[Turbovolver]

I was originally happy with Norinel's contribution, even if it was sparse, but that patience is quickly wearing thin.

Making the "people with votes on them" distinction seems a lot like an excuse. And not only that, the post before was simple gameplay stuff, plus using Adele's justification as his own.

He was another one who said I picked the two easiest targets by playstyle. Have you encountered them before, Norinel? Or are you just assuming they play this way as town?

I'm still waiting for klebian's analysis, but I am just as keen for something more substantial from Norinel now.

He was one of the ones ShadowLurker was clearing, yeah?

[Turbovolver]

He was another one who said I picked the two easiest targets by playstyle. Have you encountered them before, Norinel? Or are you just assuming they play this way as town?

kilmenator I've played with before in Newbies. I replaced friday-13th in (the now-finished) Jungle Republic, where she was town.

People's grammar, writing style, and strategic approach don't get significantly worse when they're scum. If they did, it'd be way too easy.

So there was some basis there. Anyways,

Grammar and writing style aren't likely to change. But I never found anyone scummy for bad grammar or writing style in itself. Some of the things coming out of Friday's mouth were very scummy, and when I read such things my first thought was not "Well she probably didn't mean to say it and it's just a symptom of poor writing".

As for "strategic approach", if someone's strategic approach didn't change then they wouldn't have scum tells! Everything is motivation.

[Turbovolver]

I liked Klebian's analysis more this time, and not just because he's happier with me
I do get the feeling though that it's rather forced. Not necessarily that the opinions are forced, but that it's being posted primarily to appease, rather than to share.
Of course, people were pressuing him to give some good analysis so it's not necessarily a scummy forced, but something to note.
Considering there is a deadline, even if you cant finish your in-depth analysis Klebian, some up-to-date suspicions would be preferred.

I was inspired a bit by your review though, I'll take a better look when I get more time.

[Turbovolver]

Well, I've attempted to have a 'reaction' at the end of both analyses.. But I guess it's not really current.

Yeah, they were basically summaries/conclusions of your analysis. The problem is yes, you've proven you're willing to analyse and make reasonable conclusions, but scum or town can make reasonable conclusions. That's why at this point I'm feeling like I wouldn't care if you didn't want to go so in-depth with the rest of the thread, just to give current thoughts.

[Turbovolver]

the reason i ask is because if you look at the set up of the other game, once people were lynched they became on the opposite side instead of dying. so for example, if XXX were a protownie and we lynched him, XXX would not die he would come back as a player for scum and likewise with YYY if YYY were a scum buddie and was lynched, YYY would come back as a townie. it was in the setup of the other game. i am not saying we need to try it, i just want to make sure that it is out there if i get NK'ed. i thought that klebians summary was good, but again, i would like him to outline who he thinks is scum and why, not summarize the game. he has proven he is willing to work and the summary has been good to refresh my memory, but again, i dont like that he is not willing to put forth who he thinks is scum.

That last sentence is just a

little

misrepresentitive. He's been putting forward who he thinks is scummy based on his current analysis, it just hasn't been up to date considering the analysis is not finished. That's not the same as "not willing to put forth who he thinks is scum".

Also how would that other game work? Someone who was scum becomes town - oops now they sell out all their buddies and win?

[Turbovolver]

Then geraint posts (kinda near a deadline)

if ozy does end up getting lynched, it will be one of the worst lynches i have seen. just a truly poor game to try and get a 'fair' lynch from, if that makes sense. i'll be very disappointed if ozy goes (unless he turns up scum of course)
and if we get two new players, they'll have like 5 days to actualyl post, almost worthless this game makes me sad.

I'll be disappointed if he goes unless he's scum seems like trying to cover up that he already knows ozy will be scum. I don't like this post, the points against ozy were fairly solid, and he doesn't really say why he doesn't like an ozy lynch.

Your post here is very lazy for someone who is doing a review of the game. I clearly say why i thought lynching Ozy was a bad idea in a later post where i explained what i thought an "unfair lynch" was. As that post i am quoting of myself was 4 hours after the one you quoted, i find it hard to beleive you missed it. How did you, or was your quoting just quiet selective?

You did fail to answer his first question here. However, considering that question says "sounds like he knows ozy will be scum", it isn't particularly valid. I was surprised you didn't mention this though.

[Turbovolver]

Turbo: There's the easy target thing, which has been discussed a lot today already. He's very explicitly shifted the burden of metagame research to the people who want to use the argument against him, which I could either see as reasonable or saying that the argument has no bearing unless you're willing to spend a lot of time poring through other games. Other than that, I didn't see too much that caught my eye.

I was trying to make the point that I wasn't going after them because they were easy targets - because I didn't even know. I thought it might've been a slip, the attacks on me - who said they post that way as town? If that couldn't be verified, then the attack was likely craplogic.

[Turbovolver]

Also, didn't Colonel Kurtz replace Ozymandius?

Norinel I think in your list:

Ozy -> Colonel's Replacement
Colonel Kurtz -> klebian

[Turbovolver]

Uhh geraintm, there's a reason I specified the

first

question. The post you linked too answered the next question.

[Turbovolver]

I'll be disappointed if he goes unless he's scum seems like trying to cover up that he already knows ozy will be scum.

OK, so it's an accusation, not a question.

[Turbovolver]

You mean you understood it?

I still don't.

Like I said, how can he be knowing Ozy was already scum if Ozy

wasn't

?

You did fail to answer his first question here. However, considering that question says "sounds like he knows ozy will be scum", it isn't particularly valid. I was surprised you didn't mention this though.

I mean I still don't get it, you took three tries. I don't think the most likely explanation here is geraintm understood it and thought "nope, not worth responding to."

[Turbovolver]

You mean you understood it?

I still don't.

Like I said, how can he be knowing Ozy was already scum if Ozy

wasn't

?

But Ozy hasn't died yet. Maybe he

was

... er,

is

.

He certainly wasn't revealed as scum though, which was my point. If they really were scum partners together, that means geraintm doesn't have any motivation for hedging his bests when it turns out "Ozy will be scum", because in fact Ozy will survive the lynch and not get revealed as scum.

In fact the more I think about this, it's klebian that comes out looking bad. His attack on geraintm doesn't hold up to scrutiny and I still cant see any way saying "Ozy will be scum" makes sense without some sort of inside knowledge.

I mean, I think what klebian was getting at is that gerain's "I'll be disappointed if he goes unless he's scum" looks like someone trying to oppose a lynch but hedge their bets for the eventual discovery that ozy's scum and therefore gerain was opposing a lynch on scum.

Like, gerain's trying to push the "this is a stupid wagon" card but at the same time the "if he comes up scum, it's on record I never said he definately wouldn't" card.

I don't really see how you get this from klebian's words, but it is a reasonable point. However if Ozy is scum with geraintm, it doesn't make much sense to say it. If not, then it's either a throw-away comment (geraintm townie) or feigning incomplete knowledge (geraintm scum). I don't really see a way to discern from the two, so yeah, I guess I agree geraintm doesn't have anything to explain.

[Turbovolver]

I'd kind of like to think scum go out of their way to make those kinds of throwaway comments. If it becomes a pattern, we can get somewhere.

It's a hard one, really. It shows caution, and caution is generally the domain of scum. But it's not like townies aren't ever cautious.

if ozy does end up getting lynched, it will be one of the worst lynches i have seen. just a truly poor game to try and get a 'fair' lynch from, if that makes sense. i'll be very disappointed if ozy goes (unless he turns up scum of course)

I don't even think the paranthesized bit goes far enough to make up for the sentence before it.

I don't think there's much of a disconnect. A townie who doesn't like the lynch won't be disappointed if it hits scum. Or at least, I know I certainly wouldn't be.

I don't think it matters how "strong" he said his disappointment would be.

[Turbovolver]

Vote: Autoload

[Turbovolver]

So I actually forgot that Autoload was replacing Ozy. Obviously I too would like an explanation here, but I don't like that vote nearly as much.

Unvote: autoload

[Turbovolver]

Autoload made the same play as town in a newbie game he replaced into. I'm thinking that as a newbie he has yet to understand the value of patience in these games.

Which game was that?

the reason I dont think he will respond anytime soon is because he posted twice yet did not outline any reasoning at all, obviously did not check the vote count to see that klebian was -1, or just dropped the hammer anyway without waiting for a role claim. To me that seems like someone who just comes in and is pretty reckless about playing, again, that is just my opinion, but that is why I dont think he will respond anytime soon.

You think someone who is hasty and reckless is

less

likely to respond soon? This makes no sense, and sounds a lot like you're trying to justify someone else lurking.

[Turbovolver]

Turbo - What? I am not trying to justify him at all, I am saying it is crap what he is doing. I am not at all against lynching him, being that all game I have been pointing out he could very well not be an unlynchable townie he could be a townie who was lynched and comes back as a scum. I was saying his playstyle seems like he doesnt care, therefore would be less likely to respond even if pressure was put on him.

Well I see better what you are saying now, but that doesn't change the fact that it's weird.

Basically you are saying, "Sure he ended the day all of a sudden and lurked when questioned about it, but that would make sense with his playstyle!" Y'know, as opposed to making sense because he's scum. And now you're trying to say that no, that's not a defense of him.

MBL did a similar thing, but he was at least quoting another game as evidence (I still want to know what game that was).

[Turbovolver]

vote turbo

too many of his posts just seemed to be him asking others their opinion (when i just went back over his posts) and his going after Klebian now justs seems poor.

anyways, i'll vote turbo and see where things go.

Yes, I do ask a lot of questions. I'm a firm believer in giving people a chance to explain the things I find suspicious, because what I'm searching for is what motivates their replies. You need to probe to find scum.
You say I'm asking others their opinion too much, though?! Please, give me some examples.

And my going after Klebian was poor? Well you had plenty of chance to say that yesterday, y'know, instead of saying you agreed with the arguments against him and voting him.

[Turbovolver]

and you never let up on him from then on, even when you say you are backing off of him, you later find cause on about the 9th to keep on at him. In hindsight, it didn't look good to me when i reread your posts. and when looking at only certain people's behaviour, you vs klebian yesterday made me kinda go hmm...

Yeah, I was wrong. He acted scummy though >.<

And examples of you asking people's opinions...

1.

What do you think about Friday's hyper-defensiveness?

2.

Friday-13th, I want to know who you suspect and why.

3.

You say you don't know who to vote out of him, Friday or Patrick.
Why those other two?

4.

I too was happy with Killmenator's reply, except for one thing: You didn't vote anyone after going back and re-reading all the players. Why didn't you vote anybody after all that work?

5.

Go on then, explain how.

6.

So Ozymandius, you didn't want to explain that weird post you made before you came back?

7.

I would also like to know why you think MBL is scummy.

8.

I'm still waiting for klebian's analysis, but I am just as keen for something more substantial from Norinel now.

1.

OK

2.

Pushing for more from a scummy player.

3.

Asking someone to justify a statement.

4.

Re-reading and not voting is a scum tell. That's an attack phrased as a question, to give kilmenator a chance to respond.

5.

Prodding Ozy for explanation after a possibly scummy slip.

6.

A request for explanation of a post.

7.

Another request for justification.

8.

Asking lurkers to post more.

So not only were hardly any of those "just asking players for opinions," you then go on to say

I don't know where i am going with this though anymore. As i said, Auto's death has confused me.

So you are trying to use the death of another unrelated player as a reason to back down on your poorly formulated attack on me? Greeeat.

[Turbovolver]

The problem I'm having here is, it's doubtful there is an SK considering how the night's have gone. And it's doubtful there would be four scum in the game, which makes it so that

geraintm
Adele
Norinel

are basically confirmed. Of those Adele was the only one I considered townish, in terms of behaviour.

I don't think it would be likely ShadowLurker ran around confirming everyone with a fake daycop ability just to look good, so I'm happy to call him town for the moment too.

That leaves kilmenator and MBL. I want to take a closer look there, but for the moment

Vote: kilmenator

Now that autoload is scum, your defense of him only looks worse. The fact that you kept insisting there could be town who got lynched and turned up scum only looks worse now that it's actually happened. Especially the way you were so keen to mention town getting converted to scum, and not just scum with a one-shot lynch protection which was also a possibility.

[Turbovolver]

I'm just checking in here because posting is hell on my girlfriend's computer.

I didn't daykill nobody. And I thought autoload was a modkill because he wasn't posting. I'll have to go reread that.

[Turbovolver]

Mod says no prods needed as posting has been good, but autoload certainly hadn't posted in a while. Then again, that probably means no prods are needed because someone just killed autoload.

I checked the frontpage, the modkills are specified whereas this kill is not listed as a modkill.

So that means there are multiple daykills, and now I'm thinking there is an SK - most likely a daykilling SK who can only shoot once every second day.

Now I can see no reason not to take out ShadowLurker unless one of the following is true

* ShadowLurker is actually the SK and has been lying about getting innocent results - those people aren't actually cleared.

* ShadowLurker can only find mafia, not the SK, and so SK is happy to keep ShadowLurker around. How would the SK know this though, unless they'd already been investigated?

* SK avoided killing ShadowLurker just to cast suspicion on the people implicated above.


So yeah, it's actually quite WIFOM, but I think the last possibility is less likely because it carries with it the inherent risk of getting investigated by SL and busted as SK.

[Turbovolver]

Kilmenator, yes I did forget that the mod had confirmed that Ozy was once protown.

geraintm, I highly doubt a mafia recruiter would be allowed multiple recruits. Even if the game started with just a mafia recruiter, that's still a cult with nightkills!

I don't see any evidence for or against a mafia recruiter here. Particularly notable is geraintm voting MrBuddyLee because "the mod's words don't rule out a recruiter". Which is a true statement, but says nothing of MBL's alignment!

This is more craplogic from geraintm, and now I am home I'll get to the earlier stuff.

[Turbovolver]

Nope, i was still voting for you, hadn't backed down when i wrote that post.

Yes, you were still voting for me, but you backed down on some of your reasoning (and failed to provide any more detail on the other part of it).


Here is geraintm's justification for his vote on me:

too many of his posts just seemed to be him asking others their opinion (when i just went back over his posts) and his going after Klebian now justs seems poor.

When I ask for him to justify, he gives

and you never let up on him from then on, even when you say you are backing off of him, you later find cause on about the 9th to keep on at him. In hindsight, it didn't look good to me when i reread your posts. and when looking at only certain people's behaviour, you vs klebian yesterday made me kinda go hmm...

as his explanation for the "going after klebian" part. So, nothing solid yet.
He also posts

I don't know where i am going with this though anymore. As i said, Auto's death has confused me.

as his explanation of the "asking people questions" part, after providing evidence of said questions. How this is not backing down is beyond me. He clearly says he doesn't even know how it's scummy anymore, because autoload died. But what does autoload have to do with me asking questions? NOTHING!

Geraintm launched a vague attack on me, and when I asked him to clarify he said "yeah I don't know what I was going for there, I'm confused because <COMPLETELY UNRELATED EVENT HAPPENED>". This is really scummy, it smacks of scum using vague justifications and getting caught out on it and explaining badly.
If it wasn't for the cop investigation I'd be voting geraintm right now, and even still he is causing me to seriously doubt ShadowLurker.

[Turbovolver]

Turbo, you asked me to provide examples to back up when i said i got the impression from rereading your posts that you liked asking questions. i did this even though i knew at the time i was confused by how the day was going. You had asked me to respong and i felt obliged to.

Yeah, that's great. But...

Auto/Ozy died after my vote for you and before i responded to your post. there had been a significant change in the state of play. I voted for you because at the time i thought you were the best person to vote for. i hope you allow me to change my mind on where to vote when something as serious as another player dieing occurs. And to say Auto/ozy's death is unreleated is strange, everything in a game of mafia is related...

THIS COMPLETELY CONTRADICTS YOUR EARLIER STORY!!

Just before you were saying "no, I'm not backing down. You'll see my vote is still on you!"
Now you are saying "After my vote the gamestate changed and I grew confused. Why won't you let me decide how I want to change my vote after major events in the thread?"

Well maybe I won't allow you to change your vote because you specifically said you were sticking to your vote? That you weren't backing down in the slightest?!

The thing you backed down from was your

logic

, not your

vote

anyway. And me questioning a bunch of people has NOTHING to do with these "gamestate-changing events". Something I've already said but you conveniently glossed over in your compelling-sounding but without-substance defense presented above.

You are

clearly

tailoring your defense to the accusation here, saying whatever you can to get people off your back. And it doesn't add up.

I don't know how it fits into this confusing-as-hell game, but I see no way you are not scum at this point.

Unvote: kilmenator
Vote: geraintm

[Turbovolver]

Turbo- The problem I see with going after geraintm, is that fact that he is cleared by SL. And we have no reason to believe that SL isnt telling the truth, therefore, I dont think we should go after a cleared person. I dont like the fact that you are going after him even though he is cleared, that really sets off my scumdar. I would feel much better if you were going after those not cleared, even if it was me. We need to focus on catching scum tonight, not a cleared townie.

A cleared townie?

How are you so sure that ShadowLurker can be trusted?
How are you so sure that geraintm is not an investigation-immune SK, for example?

We need to focus on catching scum tonight, not a cleared townie.

FOS: kilmenator

. This makes no sense in the townie mindset - town always want to catch scum. What else are townies going to focus on rather than catching scum?

And what, you think I'm deliberately focusing on catching cleared townies? That implies you think I am scum, which leaves me with the question of why you think it will help to tell me we need to focus on catching townies.

It makes no sense for a townie to say this.

And we have no reason to believe that SL isnt telling the truth

We have no particular reason to believe SL is telling the truth, either, apart from perhaps the lack of counterclaim. You cant just rule out possibilities, especially when they impact the alignments of so many players.

[Turbovolver]

I didn't daykill nobody. And I thought autoload was a modkill because he wasn't posting. I'll have to go reread that.

Is that double negative deliberate?

I am not responsible for any daykills. Better?

[Turbovolver]

Please tell me why ShadowLurker being mafia or SK is so impossible that it shouldn't even be considered.

Also thanks for reminding me hunting scum is good. I almost forgot >.>

[Turbovolver]

Given the apparent lack of kills, daykilling mafia actually makes sense as a possibility. I hadn't thought of that...

Turbo, all i am getting from you is someone going around creaating sandstorms to blind people. you are not joining in with your throughts on the main topic of conversation, instead chatting with me or Kilm.

I'm hardly avoiding the main topics of conversation, though it is true I am more interested in behaviour than in what seems to be the rest of you milling around playing outguess the mod (or mislead the town, in the case of the scum).

Is this your way of avoiding my accusations? Trying to discredit the person behind the arguments, and not the arguments themselves?

[Turbovolver]

Basically, Kilm, having had a read of what went on overnight, you seem odd. to me it seems MBL is being more honest than you, you seem to be lying to try and trap him and failing, and you come out of it at the end of the day looking like you are pushing very hard to get MBL lynched.

I got this impression from kilmenator's posting too. The problem I'm having is - what, does that make her a mafia tracker? Unless those two are scum together (unlikely), or something weird like an SK and mafia both lying about what happened night 1, then she knew MBL targeted Ozy night 1.

Given how rare mafia trackers are, this makes me lean towards kilmenator as town - at least from a game mechanics standpoint. I don't feel her behaviour has been very townie but in the face of rather hard evidence like this behavioural stuff just melts away.

[Turbovolver]

If we get rid of MBL tonight and he is not scum, then kill me

If he isnt scum, kill me. Honestly, I dont mind, and if you want MBL to vig me today, to prove my innocence, make sure you lynch him today. That might be the best play... what does everyone else think?

No player wants to get lynched, even the townies. Explain.

Also didn't MBL use his kill on Ozy/autoload today already?

Come on now, I could have just lied and you would have been lynched, No Questions Asked.

Terrible logic for the reason MrBuddyLee pointed out.

If I were scum, which I am not, I would have just said, yeah I did track him and come up with some sort of excuse tomorrow.

WIFOM.

[Turbovolver]

Far more damning though is the work kilmenator has done here. I found particularly convincing the stuff about MBL saying he looks for town approval (and then not), and also that he killed Ozy after proclaiming him likely protown. His explanation there seemed too clever, like it was a complicated story he came up with just to fit the pieces.

I also noticed MBL convinced there was a doctor, because he targeted someone for a kill and they didn't die. He ignored the possibility of roleblocking because "he had acted townish at the time", which is awfully subjective and completely ignores the possibility of mafia roleblockers. He does say there that he's only 95% sure there's a doc, but then proceeds everywhere else to act like a doc is a sure thing, and even say stuff like "it's clear the doc has blocked 2 mafia kills now" - umm, it is?

Even more weird was he claimed scum also tried to kill Ozy and got blocked, which doesn't even work because most docs can only stop one kill.

There are a lot of pieces and I'm still a bit confused, but barring some very good explaining MBL will be getting my vote - too many things don't add up with that claim.

[Turbovolver]

You clearly haven't read the thread very carefully... here are two of my posts from the same page as the daykill of Ozy:

Actually, I misunderstood kilmenator's words - I thought she was saying you didn't support the first Ozy lynch and then tried to off him that night, which would be very suspicious and contradictory. But looking back I found out that wasn't even true, and finding the post where kilmenator said that I actually saw that it could also be talking about the people that wanted to lynch Ozy again.

With that cleared up I don't really have issue with target choice.



And as I was thinking about it, I realised kilmenator really threw me for a loop there with the "deliberation with town" stuff. How does an

unclaimed

vig seek approval from town?! Quotes like:

Also, you say if you were a vig you would take the town's opinion, where have you done that?!!!

are purely misrepresentitive.

Unvote: geraintm
Vote: kilmenator

You almost had me convinced there.

[Turbovolver]

Turbo, I saw this in the preview window. I was about to post the... opposite. Something MBL said earlier really stood out for me, and it's this that kil's referring to,

That's what I get for relying on memory. There is certainly a big difference between "I am a vig who would co-operate with town" and "I am a vig who would only kill those thought of as scummy".
I feel Patrick wasn't as well-thought-of as kilmenator is making out here, though. I certainly never trusted him.

This really stood out for me. Where's the line between justifiable disinformation and scummy dishonesty? I mean, you in particular sought to discuss the daykills and the implications of them; you in particular said they were scummy.

If this is addressed to me I have no idea what you're talking bout.


Adele's point about the kill options is solid though, and MBL's explanation so-so at best

Unvote: kilmenator

[Turbovolver]

I've been getting kicked around by thesis work recently, and I'm still busy with that for about another two days, so please forgive my absence.

[Turbovolver]

I liked MBL's actual responses to the questions. They make sense.

But more than one of you is doing so and some have to be town, so it's frustrating waiting for town to stand out via more protown play. The only good news is, and remember this in case I die and become confirmed: you'll be able to figure out who scum is based on the proportionality of how they're questioning me, most likely.

This seems a weird thing to say. By this stage of the game and with all this crazy night-info running around, I think we can do better than just look at who pressed on you the hardest if you come up town.

This is something I missed earlier. It shows pretty crappy town awareness on D3 after Patrick was long dead. You'd think a cop who had just chosen investigative targets would have gone over the living players to decide who's scummiest and needs to be investigated. And therefore would remember clearly who's alive and who's not and not make the mistake of listing a dead confirmed innocent guy as possible scum.

I would call this a minor tell at best, though I recall we did disagree about this issue before so I don't really have a problem with this.


I do agree ShadowLurker probably needs to die at some point. Some people here seem far too willing to trust him and his results, with no good reason to do so.

[Turbovolver]

In fact,

The only good news is, and remember this in case I die and become confirmed:

you'll be able to figure out who scum is based on the proportionality of how they're questioning me, most likely.

Well I'd say it's pretty clear kilmenator is pushing at you the hardest. So why aren't you voting her?

[Turbovolver]

turbo, i don't like. His post on the 23rd Feb where he voted me as confirmed townie has never sat right with me.

You have a problem with me voting you as a "confirmed townie" but then you come out with rubbish like the following. Well.

seemed to switch back and forth between people easily today to me.

I've been suspicious of you and kilmenator, and voted both of you at different points during the day. That's all the "switching" I've done. And it's not like I've just been voting out of the blue, I've tried to express where my suspicions have come from - strangely enough you don't have anything to say about that.

and his post on 5th where he said he liked MBLs response, but still kept his vote on.

I wasn't and am not voting for anybody

I don't like that he has gone quiet since MBL brought up the whole "follow the people who are pressuring me" thing

What?! I actually thought that was iffy sentiment and pointed it out!
I explained I was posting less because of thesis work.

[Turbovolver]

The talk centred around MBL's claim seems to be going nowhere.

[Turbovolver]

If turbo is cleared I will be the next lynch

If you truly knew yourself as innocent, then there's no way you'd propose lynching yourself when we'd be quickly running out of time to determine if ShadowLurker was lying scum, or naive.

But you're not innocent, are you?

Vote: kilmenator

Vote: kilmenator

That's lynch.

[Turbovolver]

Though Mert as godfather didn't say when they killed...

Don't think that means anything.

I wanna see MBL daykill ShadowLurker.
We wait for a result in case ShadowLurker is telling the truth, though I think it's likely he's not.

If it turns out that ShadowLurker is telling the truth, then MBL = daykilling scum is the best explanation IMO.

[Turbovolver]

OK, so...

MBL is the daykiller:

He's lying so he doesn't have to kill SL and get confirmed as guilty, most likely losing him the game.

MBL is not the daykiller:

His earlier claim was a complete lie (and very risky, making this option seem unlikely). I think his reasoning is pretty good against Norinel, but only after you assume that MBL is not the daykiller himself. Given the series of convoluted stories MBL has been spinning, he's still probably some flavour of scum.


Given this about face from MBL, I see no reason not to believe he is scum.

Vote: MBL

[Turbovolver]

Turbo, can you explain what your double vote thing was?

My role.

Can you explain what your horrible attack on me yesterday was?

[Turbovolver]

AARRRRRRGGGHHHHHH!

[Turbovolver]

Oh man, that sucks. Yeah, town won.

Adele was the daykiller.

Again, props to MBL for spinning so many lies and sticking around as long as he did. Slops to geraintm for blocking our kill on Norinel - if we hit him and were quick enough we could've won, I think.

[Turbovolver]

Why, when the scum win was resting so greatly on your shoulders, did you behave so ridiculously?

MBL played it perfectly.

We had to knock out the Day SK on the last night, and we won because of my double vote. Unfortunately we picked Norinel, not you, and double unfortunately Norinel got protected, so we couldn't even try to race-lynch the SK before they got a kill PM in.

I didn't use my double vote like that with the hope of avoiding suspicion

We were reeeeaaallly close