Mini 436 - Game over - Mafia wins with no casualties!

[Paradoxombie]

Vote Miztef

for saying "that is all" at the end of his post

[Paradoxombie]

Vote Snichkin

because his english isn't bad at all

Lynch all Liars!!!!!

[Paradoxombie]

Mod, Your count looks wrong, you have Snichkin voting for himself

[Paradoxombie]

It's a quote from Scarface

[Paradoxombie]

Well don't feel bad, I watch alot of movies and I didn't see Scarface until about a week ago. It's not that great but worth seeing if only for the cultural significance(i.e. just now).

[Paradoxombie]

I don't have a post limit

Unvote, Vote: Albert B. Rampage

For an insanely anti-town playstyle.

I don't really have a fix on anyone else.

[Paradoxombie]

wow, what a situation to come back to

To keep it simple, I don't believe ABR, and I'd rather risk the consequences of killing him than risk letting him get away with an insane strategy like this.

[Paradoxombie]

In that situation, I will be dead, lol.

To be frank, I'm not worrying over it either way.

And also, I'd like to say, perhaps(likely even?) he is an anti-town power role
After all he is immediately against the first people to threaten him. Why is he so sure I'm worth killing? Maybe because he knows who are scum and who are town and was just waiting for someone protown to make him an excuse.

In that case some of the people who strongly supported his claim could be mafia(i'd guess 2, with the power role in the place of a 3rd)

but that's even IF he's a power role, I'm just stating it now in case I get killed

[Paradoxombie]

In that case some of the people who strongly supported his claim could be mafia(i'd guess 2, with the power role in the place of a 3rd)

Hahahaha this is so ridiculous, I'm feeling clownish to have to reply to this half-assed argument that's standing on a toothpick.

Your subtly trying to say that Miztef and DeathSauce are my scum buddies, here. Don't run away from it, there's no one else supporting me LOL

Miztef and DeathSauce were BOTH staunch supporters of the anti-ABR campaign. That very fact, and the fact that I was a -1 PROVES that we are not affiliated. I ALMOST FREAKING GOT LYNCHED. MAFIA CANNOT COMMUNICATE. What are you implying ? That they knew I would make a claim and get away from my lynching ?

RIDICULOUS.


Even VanDamien should see the scummishness of this post.

To be honest I haven't even looked at any posts except the last few when I posted that, and I wasn't thinking much at all really, just throwing an idea out. You're the one that's connecting dots, my friend, and I'm not gonna argue about anyone else in the meantime.

And it's not an argument, it's a statement of a subjective opinion/suggestion THAT WOULD ONLY APPLY IF I WAS DEAD!!!!

You shouldn't have to argue if I really am mafia, because I'll be dead and it'll say it right next to my name.

You are either scum or a purposely terrible player, because I can't possibly believe someone could accidentally be as anti-town as you are.

seriously.

And to all: I hope to God ABR doesn't somehow convince you to take any action other than to lynch him. Remember, he's done nothing to prove our trust, not a thing.

I gotta say, for ABR to somehow get out of being lynched now he'd have to be a pretty great player, but I just don't want to underestimate him and put him in control of the game through some magical manipulation.

Hopefully everyone will use their own logical analysis and vote: ABR

[Paradoxombie]

to calrify I posted before I read posts 226-8

it doesn't make much of a difference but Im responding directly and only to ABR

CONTEXT IS IMPORTANT!!! lol

[Paradoxombie]

Just to make this clear, which of the following scenarios do ABR and VD each want;
1) VD to be lynched?
2) VD to lynch ABR, killing VD and another player of ABR's choosing?

Just to make sure I'm following (which it's making more sense after re-reading ABR's and VD's posts) Did this question ever get answered?

as i understand it,

VD and Me want to lynch ABR, asap, and in theory we'll both be killed along with him

ABR on the other hand wants us to let him live until day 2 so he can take out more suspicious people

although I don't understand why he's sure he'd live through the night, I guess because he's pretty certain the mafia won't kill a psychopath.

[Paradoxombie]

Oh sorry, I meant "recently" when i said that, not ever

I can see how that would be confusing

[Paradoxombie]

Please get up to date ASAP.

Good night.

No you don't understand, I meant I wasn't looking back at who I was throwing suspicion at and fabricating a loose FOS around it.

My post stood alone and I don't suspect or plan to throw suspicion at anybody but you right now.



And at Volkan: I disagree.

You right that we should be examining risk/reward and likelihood situations

but I think you are too trusting of ABR even to let him live one day

If you concede that there could be a psychopath, you must concede that there could be many other possible terrible, negative abilities.
Anyone could be anything.
Letting him live means possibly letting him use such an ability

I move that it is far worse to let someone with that potential go one more day, than any possible reward from lynching him day 2.

Additionally I think he is more likely lying than telling the truth

with those factored together I have my reasoning

To you volkan it is safer to let him live, to me it is safer to take him out
both reasonable opinions, I think

[Paradoxombie]

If he concedes that there is a pyschopath, the likelyhood of another crazy role

goes down

. This is a normal game, which means abnormal roles should only be placed very sparingly, and therefore, if there is 1 then another one becomes less likely.

I meant he is a risk if he isn't a psychopath and he actually has a powerful anti-town ability/influence.

I don't even understand why you're so quick to believe him at all

But if you want to, you need also accept the possiblity that he is actually is some other role with an equally crazy ability and a reason to lie

And I think such a situation is more suited to ABR's behavior

[Paradoxombie]

Furthermore, as DeathSauce said, ABR's play has been enitrely consistent with him being a Psychopath.

That is ridiculous. If you were the a psychopath, with all the same abilities as ABR described, how the hell would you play?

I know what I'd do. I'd play totally normal, and only claim at -1 or -2, and even then, I may not claim so that I could take out some suspicious people.
Wouldn't any intelligent person play this way?
While ABR did claim after he was about to be lynched, he did not play normaly at all. He made totally incomprehensible posts that just confused everyone.

No way in hell he could've actually expected any of us to figure out what he meant! It should have been obvious to him that acting like that would get him lynched. Imo, he is nowhere near stupid enough to have actually thought his hints would be understandable. I feel 100% sure that ABR could've had no intentions other than to get himself into a situation where he'd have to claim.

With this in mind, there are only a few situations where ABRs play is consistent
-a lying Townie who decides to play in a totally radical way for fun or expirimentation
-a scum who decides to play in a totally radical way for fun or expirimentation
-A real psychopath who decides to play in a totally radical way for fun or expirimentation
-Someone who just want to get to day 2, maybe he has some role that he wants to get to use at least on night 1, and feels that playing like this is safer than pretending to be a townie

In any case I refuse to be used or manipulated by him. Since I feel that he is lying and that he set this entire situation up from the begining(forcing himself to claim)and has long held control of the game, he must have some idea what he is doing. In which case I refuse to do anything he suggests.

At worst he's anti-town and at best he's a liar
If you want to you can throw out every argument of mine except this.

Even if you don't want to consider the possiblity that he is scum or antitown:

His play is NOT consistant with his story

LAL

if you can somehow convince me this is not true, I'll happily drop my case against ABR.

Also, I'm not grasping at straws, these are all valid arguments in my opinion. ABRs own actions led me to think these ways, I did not fabricate them with the intention of convincing anyone. I AM telling you them to convince you, but I did not make them to convince you(you= whoever reads this with the exception of ABR).

[Paradoxombie]

I claimed because I was no longer sure that it was scum that would hammer me. Also, I had no idea who to NK so I wanted more discussion.

So you played to be lynched, a strategy which is not just anti-town, it's anti-entire-****ing-game.

You really thought you'd be more usefull killing a couple of your suspects and yourself than to just play the game normally without even mentioning your role?

And why now have you changed you plan from letting yourself get lynched immediately to making it to day 2? Why didn't you try to get as far as possible in the begining?

Second. I far from have control of the game. If anyone has slight control of the game, it would be Miztef. Miztef has volunteered a plan which you stubbornly refuse for no reason at all.

Well I disagree, I think you are in control. You virtually addmitted you plan was to immediately get yourself lynched which would put you in total control of day 1, and additionally in control of two more kills. Practically everything that has happened this whole game has been directly caused by your actions.

A real townie would come up with a counter-plan, much like Miztef did. All you do is whine and whine and whine. I DONT WANT TO BE MANIPULATED BOOHOO

All a person can do in this game is talk and vote, and I've done both. My plan as of right now is to get you lynched.

Mitzefs plan wouldn't even work for the obvious reason that you can't force someone to hammer you and kill themselves. Why has no one pointed this out?

Additionally these comments are definitely inflammatory, and far from constructive

Talk is cheap, paradox. You have no evidence. You rely on your emotions. You sound like a 8-year-old afraid of being tricked out of his favorite toy.

Talk is the entire you game, my friend.

I may use emotion to convince people, but my arguments are based in fact or reasonable speculation

and again this seems awfully inflammatory

Please post a REAL theory that is grounded in fact. I will not put my vote on you until you have the time to analyze everything OBJECTIVELY, and think out a REAL solution.

maybe you should be less general. All I've done is try to convince others using your own posts, or suggest you may be lying and offer alternate possiblities to your "truth".

Your accusation is fantasy. The votes on you is reality. Now come up with something good, I want to see something SO GOOD that I will feel the urge, the NEED, to congratulate you for.

there is much suspicion for both of us, sir
and if you count VD's an equal # of votes

And I'm not looking for your approval.

Until then, your "I WILL NOT BE MANIPULATED!" stance will suffer severe criticism, so you better hurry up mate.

using the power of suggestion? People can make up their own minds
The only people you may predict would be your scumbuddies if there are any.
IGBMEOY


After that whole post you haven't done anything but make hollow attacks on me, several of which are fundammentally flawed.

If you make another post this empty and meaningless, I will not bother responding to it

[Paradoxombie]

Let me ask you a question. If I am not mafia, and you are not mafia, then who is mafia ?

No idea, since most of the game so far is about you or me + there's still alot of lurkers. I have suspicions, but nothing really valid at all

[Paradoxombie]

The hammering flaw is easily resolvable imo: Force them, or lynch them. at L-1 a power role will claim anyway, so I see no difference in this situation. If the person is scum, There is no huge advantage to being lynched over being the hammerer.

If the scum hammer, they kill 1 Pro-town role, kill themself, and give the town a chance for another kill.

If the scum instead choose to be lynched, only they get killed.

I don't see them at an advantage by lynching themselves over hammering.

Id think a scum would choose to be lynched so we have to waste another day lynching ABR, right? Therefore, in order for someone to hammer ABR they'd actually have to be pro-town and we'd be sacraficing them unintentionally.

As long as we actually suspect scum, ABR will live, it will be when we make a mistake that he is taken out.

there's the obvious risk of letting ABR go free indefinitely but also,

Even though a mislynch is a likely eventuality in every game,
it seems unethical to me use a plan that requires a Vanilla to die in order for ABR to ever get taken out.

therefore, I cannot support that plan

[Paradoxombie]

yeah he took his vote off because he was gonna be the one to hammer ABR

Much like myself, I guess, he expected people to be more willing to lynch ABR

[Paradoxombie]

Wow, I gotta say, I didn't think any possible occurance could ever convince me to vote anyone but ABR, short of a believable cop claim

It looks like I was very wrong

Vote: HurriKaty

just wow

it is unfortunate, though, that we'll get essentially no clues from her death if she is scum

[Paradoxombie]

hey you forgot to unvote me

Heh, I've done that alot.

Guess it doesn't make any real difference, now.

[Paradoxombie]

It's LYLO, people(just in case anyone isn't observant enough to notice)

I guess it's time for everybody to read over the topic again from the start

[Paradoxombie]

Shit! I was going to ask for a doc protect but the hammer fell while I was at work!

Good luck, town!!

What? According to the Lawrencelot you ARE the doctor!

[Paradoxombie]

ah, that makes sense

Fortunately(or unfortunately), even if ABR had lived we'd have probably wasted alot of effort discussing him. Not that it has any bearing on the game at this point.

[Paradoxombie]

Hmm, well if there is an SK, what is his motivation to kill ABR? I thought that there was some agreement that Scum wouldn't go after ABR since he was muddying the waters(though at the time there was also the possibility he was scum)

But I didn't really think of this:
If whoever took out ABR was indeed scum or SK, that must mean he was a threat to them, right? I don't see what other reason an anti-town would kill him except if they believed his claim and he was planning to go after them.

doesn't prove anything by itself, of course.

[Paradoxombie]

I'm fairly suspicious of Paradoxombie today. Yesterday it seemed he was adamant on killing ABR and many of his posts became irrational and emotional. He then switched to hurrikaty in the end, stateing that:

Wow, I gotta say, I didn't think any possible occurance could ever convince me to vote anyone but ABR, short of a believable cop claim

It looks like I was very wrong

Vote: HurriKaty

just wow

it is unfortunate, though, that we'll get essentially no clues from her death if she is scum

Since both these players have been found as town, it leads me to believe it is possible he is scum attacking the most viable bandwagon.

ABR was clearly lying, I still don't understand why you guys couldn't see that.

So first I bandwagon a liar and then someone you admit was extremely anti-town and just because they both turned out to be actually town that makes me suspicious?

doesn't seem justified to me.

[Paradoxombie]

If I had a suggestion I would have posted it

[Paradoxombie]

Paradoxombie: [..........] Seems to be ABR’s #1 target, did ABR see something that we are missing? [...........]Post 506 is not helpful to the town and not even enough to consider lurking

I'm sure if ABR noticed anything scummy about me he would have just said it. If I really was scum having a reasonable suspicion of me might have saved him, but I guess that's getting WIFOM and assumes he was the mafia target(which I am lead to believe he was not)

I don't understand that second part, do you mean I'm lurking so much that scum would actually post more?

Other than that I don't have much more to say. I find the suspicion on me unreasonable, but I guess with so little to go on it's understandable.

Well even if I only post about myself, hopefully you'll be satisfied that my reasoning is sound. Just because I can't reach any other post-worthy conclusions doesn't prove anything.

[Paradoxombie]

Well to be honest, I still haven't re-read day 1, yet.

I'm in 4 games so I usually just come on and post about in one, but don't have quite enough time to go all the way back over this one.

When I have the chance to re-read I'll see what I can do about having more suspicions/conclusions

[Paradoxombie]

EBWOP I meant I come on and post in each one

[Paradoxombie]

well I have exams all week, but I rarely study(god bless High School)

Since they're over earlier I guess I'll re-read in the next few day. I'm not gonna promise any conclusions though, I did that in another game, and when I couldn't find any good ones that screwed me.

I pretty much guarantee some suspicions though, but I can't vouch for their validity, yet

[Paradoxombie]

I'd be surprised that it isn't a common thought, that scum had to be helping push that. Especially if they thought they could not only get one townie lynched, but another taken out in the process.

See, I disagree. ABR was helpful to scum if anything. And it seems like both you and me thought that lynching ABR was gonna be a more popular choice. If either of us were scum, and we thought there was gonna be a stronger bandwagon on ABR then we would have just jumped on the bandwagon as it built up. Instead we both pushed strongly oursleves and in the end no one wanted to go after him.

Basically, going after ABR agressively was imo the least scummy choice of all. We put ourselves in the open when we didn't need to(or so we thought) to get a ABR lynch. Because of that I'm inclined to believe that you aren't scum VD.

[Paradoxombie]

If I remeber correctly, I was going to be his nightkill the next night, so I would have had somthing to lose If he was telling the truth.

[Paradoxombie]

EBWOP:

remember

[Paradoxombie]

I agree with Trust about Para. Filtering the ABR situation through a polarizing lens, I see myself and Para pushing it primarily. I know I'm VT, and I feel it likely, and I'd be surprised that it isn't a common thought, that scum had to be helping push that. Especially if they thought they could not only get one townie lynched, but another taken out in the process.

You think we shouldn't have gone after ABR?

[Paradoxombie]

Here's my thing: an initial reread of day one got me thinking vollkan was scum, and as I pondered on that, and who his buddies could be if he is, I had an inkling that DeathSauce and Para were most likely. So, somewhat early in day 2, I vote vollkan. Almost immediately the other two jump either jump to his defense, or attack me.

confusing me with Miztef?

[Paradoxombie]

So you do think we should have gona after ABR? Just clarifying

[Paradoxombie]

I'd like VD to answer the questions I posed in 563 and 565.

[Paradoxombie]

Paradoxombie, you asked a few questions of VD, happy with the answers you received?

I am pleased with the answers.

I believe DS is at lynch -1 now. I'm going to read through all of day 2 so far again and see if:
1. The suspicion/lynch is justified
and
2. If anyone on the wagon looks off to me

then I'll post my opinion of the entire situation. Before anyone hammers, they better post their reasoning in full and give some time for second thoughts.

[Paradoxombie]

I still haven't had a chance to re-read, but on recent events, 2 points:

1. Also Volkan since you noticed that Mitzef used this tactic which you consider unethical, why not point it out? It seems just as bad to wait and see what happens as to use it in the first place. I think his intentions were fairly obvious. It's almost hypocritical that you'd allow it and yet criticize him for it now as risky.

2. I don't think what Miztef did proves he is scummy. At best it shows that he set himself up to look good no matter what the outcome of a lynch, which is only FOS worthy, in my opinion. I just don't feel that what miztef did and said about what he did is much more likely to come from scum than a townie. It certainly demands investigation, but I think I'll need more evidence for a lynch on Miz.

[Paradoxombie]

So all we've really proved is that IF neither me nor Trust noticed the unvote, then we are either not scum, or not in LYLO, but not both.

[Paradoxombie]

Sorry, but this just baffles me. A player uses a highly questionable tactic in the game and then comes right out and says that they saw it used in a game where it gave the scum the win, and you think it it's only FOS-worthy? Do you need Miztef to actually announce that he is scum? Because what he's done is just one step short of that.

What do you mean? I don't see any logic you've used to prove that he is scummy except

what he did

could

help scum.

I say that's not enough. Note that he didn't say it was a scum tactic in the other game, or used by scum at all. What he said was that it failed and scum won. Not necessarily cause and effect. But that doesn't make much of a difference; let's just look out our situation.

It's a tactic that

could

help scum. It's also a tactic that

could

help the town. The fact that he used it doesn't prove anything except he put himself in a position to act like he was on either side, like I said. Additionally I'm slightly inclined to believe Miz telling the truth based on this situation alone, because:
I've seen Miztef play with willingness to lynch someone fairly suspicious rather than remain reserved and let all discussion for the game decay(I can relate too). His play fits that philosophy because it would force new discussion or allow a lynch of his #1 suspect. In other words it fits a profile of him I have formed. Comparatively I think it's not as likely that if he is scum, he would use such a tactic, when there's no pressure to do so at all. He hasn't gained anything from revealing it, so if he was scum using it it would seem more like a slip that he regrets now, and I wouldn't expect someone to make a play like that without putting alot of thought into it.

One other alternative is that he is actually Mafia with Deathsauce, and didn't intend to follow the bandwagon this far, but it became to risky to just jump off altogether. I have no idea what the likliehood of that is, but the quote of you I'm responding to seems actually to point to that DS. You haven't put any effort into convincing me, and criticizing people's play like you have in the quote seems actually more likely to make a person stick with their beliefs, because people seem unwilling to flip flop in these games after they make a strong argument. It would all be an extremely subtle and well played act of distancing.

In the end I don't fully believe any of these points yet, I just think they are all valid possibilities.

[Paradoxombie]

Even if it isn't cause and effect, why would any pro-town player use a tactic that they saw in a game that even

indirectly

led to a scum win?

See below.

I've seen Miztef play with willingness to lynch someone fairly suspicious rather than remain reserved and let all discussion for the game decay(I can relate too). His play fits that philosophy because it would force new discussion or allow a lynch of his #1 suspect.

Regardless, the riskiness of the play is the same no matter what kind of success rate it has, and that game wasn't even the same situation. I'm sure you'd complain if it had worked in that game and I kept pointing to that as evidence that Miztef is definitely town. It's fallacy.

[Paradoxombie]

hmm, I forgot that I haven't posted for a while. I have been reading though.

Anyway I guess I'm am the only one besides Miztef to think his actions are justifiable, but it looks like that doesn't really make any difference in this particular situation. It seems that all of miztef's actions are equally either scummy or protown, imo, so I can't really vote him on them alone.

I've been noticing very minor scum tells from both Miz and DS for this entire conversation, but nothing major enough to bring up. But I think I'll attribute it to the fact that both of you are somewhat in peril, and might be just slightly twisting truths and exaggerating to survive. It's not unlike what I said above; it's scummy, but a protown player isn't any less likely to act the same way.

I might be wrong, but it seems like people are fairly certain that either Miztef or Deathsauce are scum, but I'm not entirely convinced of that yet. I'd like to hear more from people. More differing opinions would be useful, because when everyone just agrees on everything it gives scum an easier comfort zone than when they have to make fabricated opinions.

[Paradoxombie]

It's ironic that this post exemplifies my point so well.

Anyway I guess I'm am the only one besides Miztef to think his actions are justifiable

Please post in detail why you feel the trap and the multiple contradictions Miztef has posted are justifiable.

Your first response is odd, because we've been over this before. And by "we" I mean you and me, and by "before" I mean about 1 page ago. See my post 626, your's 631, and mine 632. I already explained how Miztef's actions are justified, then you asked me anyway why they were in reponse, and I replied with a quote from the post you were responding to. If that wasn't an comprehendable, then you could have easily asked me to clarify or somthing. But now I repeat my opinion, and you ask me to explain again!

I've been noticing very minor scum tells from both Miz and DS for this entire conversation, but nothing major enough to bring up. But I think I'll attribute it to the fact that both of you are somewhat in peril, and might be just slightly twisting truths and exaggerating to survive.

This is nonsense.
If you think I am doing something scummy, please post it. The last 9 pages of this thread has been you and a few others saying "DeathSauce seems scummy" and only vollkan has had the courtesy to actually explain his suspicion.

As for me being "in peril", there is exactly one vote on me. Why do you feel the need to miscategorize my situation? If I switch my vote to you, are you "in peril"?

You're obviously overreacting. I haven't said you are scummy at all. I am in fact probably the least suspicious of you at the time of posting. I said that most people thought either you or Miz were scum. You haven't bothered to disagree with that, and if that's not "in peril" I don't know what is. It only solidifies my point that you've lashed out at me for even mentioning you, even though I actually said I didn't think those scum tells were valid. It also doesn't help that I'm the only one who hasn't condemned Miz, so I guess I'm just an obvious target for you, trying to attack anyone you can to escape the suspicion that still rests on you.

Saying my post is nonsense is ironic as well, because one of the scumtells I see in you is exaggerating the truth, perhaps the most common scum tactic of all. You seem to think this one action of Miztef's is not only scummy, but totally complete and 100% evidence that he is scum. Yet you've never explained your vote. You never pointed out exactly how it proves the scumminess. Then, as soon as anyone suggest otherwise you go after them, as if their opinion is totally unacceptable. And your explanation for why everyone should immediately vote Miztef?

Sorry, but this just baffles me. A player uses a highly questionable tactic in the game and then comes right out and says that they saw it used in a game where it gave the scum the win, and you think it it's only FOS-worthy? Do you need Miztef to actually announce that he is scum? Because what he's done is just one step short of that.

This is the only explanation you give. The tactic was "highly questionable". We've already explained that it's totally fallacy to suggest it makes a difference how it played out in another game, in a totally different scenario too, and since you've neither retracted or affirmed this point, it makes me think you realize it's wrong but are afraid to admit it. So we come down to your only explanation why Miztef should be condemned, is that his tactic was "highly questionable". Additionally, while you haven't come out and said it, it's obvious that your post suggests it is more reasonable for me to be scum than to disagree with your opinion. And as soon as I reaffirm my opinion in the post you just quoted, you're ready to attack me as I feel you would do in the next post or two.

I think your entire attack on Miztef is exaggerated. I thought this could be simply because you were afraid of being lynched, but now that you are so eager to exaggerate my opinions as well, I'm willing to say you are scummy. You say my opinion that you have been giving off minor scum tells is nonsense, even before I say what the tells are. I could have a different opinion than a normal player and easily consider things scum tells which others wouldn't, and that wouldn't make them nonsense, even if you felt you hadn't given any. Still in this situation the scum tells are obvious, making it an even bigger exaggeration.

Here are the tells, for clarity:
#1. Going after obvious targets to escape suspicion
(While the "to escape suspicion" is speculation, I think it's obvious that's what DS is doing)
#2. exaggerating points extensively and intensely for use in #1

You seem to feel it is totally ridiculous and unnacceptable to say you notice scumtells and not post them, but that is far from the truth. Especially with minor scum tells, it is important you keep them to yourself and watch for repeating the same behavior. If you straight out tell them, the scum will obviously modify their behavor, and since the tells were minor in the first place, you gain essentially nothing in your case to point them out as soon as you see them. In this case, I didn't even plan on using the tells in an argument and felt they were meaningless, but you still attack me over suggesting there are any at all in the first place.

I am glad that I didn't post them, because in the way you've responded, you show the tells very clearly. I thought they were minor before, but in the way you've repeated them, and used them so blatantly for your own gain, I change my mind. I will admit I've been hesitant to have a strong opinion since I've been attacked for going after ABR a while ago, but this last post seriously took DS from a 0 to 100 in scumminess, imo.

While I realize that exaggerating and playing aggresively simply to escape your own lynch could easily be used by a townie just as easily as scum, I think it's important in the tradition of LAL to assume that they won't, because they shouldn't need to. Townies should be able to argue effectively and fairly to avoid a lynch and make a case. In my opinion DS purposely hasn't done that.

Vote: Deathsauce

I won't lie that I am still wondering how you could appear pro town and than all of a sudden pull an anti town move, but eh, it's a game and a slipup by you which is the reason I'm sticking to you as a vote

I don't like this, because it exemplifies my biggest problem with the Miztef bandwagon, and no one has bothered to explain. You assume he is scum pretending to be town and made a slip and appeared scummy for a second, but the obvious alternative that he IS town and made the same slip. There's no reason he's anymore likely to make such a slip if he's scum than if he's town, I don't see why you are so willing to pick one over the other. Maybe it's just an easier alternative for me to see since I think the slip in the first place wasn't really necessarily a slip.

[Paradoxombie]

answers in bold

Actually, I would like you to clarify post 632. It reads as a complete mishmash, and I glossed over because I was sure you would eventually come to your senses.

You asked why a protown player would use the same tactic as scum did to win in another game. An analogy would be to call a gun owner a criminal because criminals occasionally have guns. An even more accurate analogy would be to call a gun owner a criminal because they saw criminals use guns for crime.

I said that most people thought either you or Miz were scum. You haven't bothered to disagree with that, and if that's not "in peril" I don't know what is. It only solidifies my point that you've lashed out at me for even mentioning you, even though I actually said I didn't think those scum tells were valid.

We have different definitions of "peril" I guess. This is not the first time you have accused me of "lashing out" against you. I have done no such thing. I realize that it is hard to judge someones intent just reading words on a screen, but I am not lashing out at you, or upset, or angry, or any such thing. Maybe my typing style is terse or something, I will try to present a friendlier face.

Emotions are irrelevant because I wouldn't expect a townie to be any less emotional. It's not tone, but message that I've tried to respond to. If we are miscommunicating then that's too bad, because now that I've revealed my thinking there's no way to prove your true intents.

You seem to think this one action of Miztef's is not only scummy, but totally complete and 100% evidence that he is scum. Yet you've never explained your vote. You never pointed out exactly how it proves the scumminess.

There have been at least three major inconsistencies in Miztef's posts since the "trap" fiasco. Read my response to vollkan in post 654, that should help to explain my suspicion of Miztef. Read all my posts since the "trap". You are completely misrepresenting the breadth of my suspicion.

I don't consider them major inconsistencies. Even so you immediately voted Miz for the original act soon after he admitted to it. You waited a little bit, but probably so it wouldn't look like you were just making a distraction from your own wagon. I don't think that's particularly scummy, but now you are saying that the reasons your voting him are inconsistencies? I for one don't think there were any inconsistencies in his two posts between.

Then, as soon as anyone suggest otherwise you go after them, as if their opinion is totally unacceptable.

Again with the "going after". I am

arguing my point of view

. That is what players do in this game.

This is the only explanation you give.

No it isn't. I have given three reasons in the last 2 pages.

Well, you didn't give ANY explanation for your original vote. You only said "This should come as no surprise."

We've already explained that it's totally fallacy to suggest it makes a difference how it (the trap) played out in another game, in a totally different scenario too, and since you've neither retracted or affirmed this point, it makes me think you realize it's wrong but are afraid to admit it.

A "totally different scenario"? How do you know that? Because Miztef said so? I saw no link to the game. I have repeatedly said that I found that sentence "explaining" the trap to be incredibly scummy. To suggest I have neither "retracted or affimed this point" is utter hogwash.

No, you said you could not even begin to comprehend how a protown player could use the same tactic as scum did once. It's the only thing you had going against miz before the inconsistencies came up and you said yourself you were arguing your point at the time you metioned it. So I take this as your primary argument for why Miz is scum, and it's flawed. I said it was flawed; you never said it was flawed. That's all there is to it.

So we come down to your only explanation why Miztef should be condemned, is that his tactic was "highly questionable". Additionally, while you haven't come out and said it, it's obvious that your post suggests it is more reasonable for me to be scum than to disagree with your opinion.

Have you read my posts? How many times should I explain that it is NOT the trap that is my main source of suspicion?

And please, please do not put words in my mouth. I have not even

hinted

that you are scum. But let me tell you, if you continue to misrepresent my arguments and put words in my mouth, my opinion can change. And please do not bore me with an "A-HA! I knew it!"

NO, you voted Miz after he gave two posts. I disagreed that those two posts proved his scumminess. YOU were so sure I was wrong that you couldn't even comprehend my beliefs and tried to convince me on the basis that Miz used the same tactic as he saw once used by a protown player who lost them the game. YOU SAID THAT HE MIGHT AS WELL HAVE ADMITTED HE WAS SCUM from that alone. The inconsistencies you point out, which are minor miscommunications at best, only came up later

Here are the tells, for clarity:
#1. Going after obvious targets to escape suspicion
(While the "to escape suspicion" is speculation, I think it's obvious that's what DS is doing)
#2. exaggerating points extensively and intensely for use in #1

Re-read the thread. I was suspicious of Miztef long before there was any sort of threat to me. You admit Miztef is an "obvious target", therefore suspicion of an "obvious target" is suspicious?

You accuse me of "exaggerating your opinions". I see no evidence I have done so. If you want to keep your scumtells to yourself, just say so. The fact is I am only looking to defend myself, something every player wants to do. If a group of players continually posted "Paradox is scummy and is showing scumtells" and never exanded on that, might you not also get frustrated and ask for some actual evidence? Actualy, Van Damien did just that when he said this:

Paradoxombie and DeathSauce are scum

, yet you never even asked him about that!

And my accusation was infinitely weaker, too.

I think it's important in the tradition of LAL to assume that they won't, because they shouldn't need to. Townies should be able to argue effectively and fairly to avoid a lynch and make a case. In my opinion DS purposely hasn't done that.

So you insinuate that I am a liar with your "LAL" comment, nice. As to your second point, about my ability to argue effectively to avoid a lynch, perhaps you didn't notice that two players that I previously argued were scum now agree with me that Miztef is worthy of lynching? Did you notice that I was at lynch -1, and then had no votes on me other than the person whose lynch I was advocating? I think I have argued as effectively and fairly as a player can in this game.

No, I suggested that just like a liar there is no justification for trying to warp the truth, even if you were a townie.

[Paradoxombie]

I don't know, I usually only worry about partners when that's part of the evidence/proof/case. For now I think there's enough of an argument from DS alone.

[Paradoxombie]

I honsestly don't think ahead much in mafia. I could review the thread and come up with some stuff now, but that would be alot of effort that I could just as easily do when I find out. If you just wanted it as help in figuring out if I'm scummy, I wouldn't normally object, but I've already posted alot throughout this game.

[Paradoxombie]

Okay for the n-th time, any other game doesn't matter. If you really consider the move too risky, another game shouldn't make any difference.

[Paradoxombie]

Well I think everything said is analytically accurate, but it doesn't do much for me. I honestly have been trying to concentrate primarily on the events of day 2. I find day 1 pretty confusing with all the deaths and replacements since. I think I was justified in my actions, but I'm pretty willing to give everyone else the benefit of the doubt because it seems that people got muddled up with ABR's randomness and absurdity. I've only carried over a handful of thoughts from back then, none of them very significant really.

[Paradoxombie]

I'd like to hear what the three non-voting think of recent events.

[Paradoxombie]

I am not saying that Ryan cannot be scum. What I am saying is, that we can't consider the Night Kill as the evidence to find scum

Well I am willing to vote ryan based on VDs case, anyway. If anything, his proven innocence shows that his arguments were genuine.

Vote: Ryan

[Paradoxombie]

That's an interesting conclusion, Miztef.

[Paradoxombie]

I think Prods are in order

[Paradoxombie]

Thank you, D3sisted, for replacing so competently and quickly.

You bring up several points that I had not considered about Miztef. You make a good case. I realize now that I have essentially dismissed him all game. I'll have to consider all of this.

[Paradoxombie]

I know I've already considered the possibility that d3sisted is scum with Ryan and Miztef, and hopes to save himself and ryan by throwing miztef under a bus along with that whole "either ryan and miz could be scum but not both" thing. But, in a LyLo situation, the whole thing is pretty much null.

[Paradoxombie]

So who's the scummiest in your opinion Para?

The one who I am voting for.

[Paradoxombie]

Vollkan, I am very VERY confident that ryan is scum and in the unlikely case that Miztef isn't I'd feel bad if we lost, hence I tell you now.

[Paradoxombie]

Something unrelated to mod stuff, we (the scum) were able to work out today that Para was the vig and had attempted to NK Ryan (but failed since he was GF) based on the fact that Para voted with little reasoning and that he had said he was "VERY sure" Ryan was scum. I'm saying this because I think it is interesting as a learning point just how little information it can take to amount to (effectively) a role claim.

Yeah, I really meant it as essentially a claim though. I meant to point out the obvious fact that ryan hadn't been quicklynched from my vote even with all active players. Along with the claim, I thought i really had it in the bag, but I got a little sidetracked. I feel really stupid though that I tried to vig ryan again on the last night, because even though I had assumed there was a mafia doctor, I should've realized they would've protected ryan again after my semiclaim. Even though was wrong, if I had taken like 10 more seconds thinking about it I might've gone for someone else and we might've had a chance to keep going even if I got NKd. Oh, well.

Sidenote on vollkan, his lack of scum tells made me suspect him quite a bit near the end. After 34 pages someone so protown seems likely to be playing extremely self-conciously(and therefore very likely scum).