Open 29 - C9+2 (~GAME OVER~) before 470

[Rishi]

Umm... I hate to put a second vote on someone so early, but this is getting really annoying.

Vote: YogurtBandit

[Rishi]

vote-yogurtbandit

out of randomness

That's an awfully convenient random vote. Putting someone at lynch -2? Hmm.

Anyway, I think that YogurtBandit's behavior is annoying, but not necessarily scummy.

Unvote

[Rishi]

I think we need to slow down a bit. A very fast lynch, without discussion, tends to benefit the Mafia, I think. There's a greater chance of getting it wrong.

Even with the two extra pro-town players in this setup, we can only lynch incorrectly twice. On the third mis-lynch, the town loses.

[Rishi]

Personally, I'd like to hear from Lateralus and Honorary Hitchhiker why they both put the third vote on someone so early. They gave rather flimsy excuses so far.

[Rishi]

Flimsy excuse? its the first round usually the first lynch as a random vote is it not?

Yeah, I agree with DeliciousGoldfish. The first vote is random, a lot of times, but the first lynch isn't. That's not to say that the first lynch is usually correct, but at least there's some justification behind it.

Still, Lateralus did remove his vote eventually. Honorary Hitchhiker still has his vote on somestrangeflea still up.

[Rishi]

Yeah I'm not sure what's going on with Lateralus. I'm guessing he doesn't realize how long these games go.

[Rishi]

well i tried my best on to prove my innocense but nothing is getting through to you guys so i have nothing to say really

unvote: SSF

I suspected SSF because he began a bandwagon on me then he took it off and i kept the vote on him and then you guys started to suspect me cause i had not known he had removed his vote on me and then people thought it was odd that i had the 3rd vote on one person which for some reason gave me the FOS from everyone thought i did say it was random because i did not have anyother reason. and the only thing i can talk about is proving myself innocent which i am.... and the only thing i can speculate was SSF attempt at a bandwagon towards me but soon he removed it. and now just cause of a random vote im automattically scum thats just not right.

Just because your behavior is suspicious does not mean we're going to lynch you or think you're scum. I think you gave a fairly good explanation of your reasoning. As many people have said, in the first few pages, we don't have a whole lot to go on, so any minor behavior will be seen as suspicious.

You can still change people's minds at this point. Getting defensive is not the way to do it. Just calmly explain what you you were thinking and hope people buy it. Pro-town players don't want to lynch a townie.

So just take a deep breath, relax, and slow down. This game could go months. And remember, it is just a game.

[Rishi]

Seriously, you call this a fairly good explanation? To some extent the problem with it may be the lack of punctuation, but to me it reads like incoherent rambling.

I was being polite. It seemed that he was taking the game a little too personally and I didn't want him to quit or become frustrated with the game. He seemed frustrated because he thought we had already decided he was guilty and that we were going to lynch him immediately. I wanted to assure him that not everyone has made up their mind yet. I'm reasonably sure that Lateralus is a newbie. I know this isn't a newbie game (plus, I'm fairly new myself), so I probably should have just kept my mouth shut.

Besides, I honestly think Lateralus' mistakes were just pure stupidity than actual suspicious behavior. I am more disturbed by Honary Hitchhiker, who actually is a coherent writer and isn't even attempting to justify his voting patterns.

[Rishi]

My reason being Mr. Honorary Hitchhiker. He was FOSed, voted, and questioned, yet he flew under the radar while Lateralus fried at the hands of the town... And then he pipes up with his FOS for Lateralus? Not answering questions and then only saying that there's just "something" about the posts of Lateralus? That seems somewhat opportunistic if you ask me.

If HH doesn't give some sort of valid explanation... I say we pressure him with some votes if not lynch him here in this first day.

I also want him to explain how he spelled "Honorary" wrong as "Honary."

[Rishi]

Hmm he was quick to make the first vote if it was by number odds. So im going to have to

Vote:somestrangeflea

Right well I can say for myself that it was a random vote not as much as trying to bandwangon SSF but this might be due to noob experience I have. Thats why in a later post I Unvoted SSF and voted noone since I messed up enough with my votes already. My random actions seemed to have gotten me voted, Fos, and pressured. All im trying to do is get back on the right track so thats why I Fos Lateralus since he had some scummy posts posted for him. I will admit I had no valid reason for my votes and I realize that now so I'm trying to get myself together.

These posts seem to contradict each other. You said that your vote for somestrangeflea was random, but, your first random vote was actually for Ripley. You definitely were trying to bandwagon somestrangeflea. Your reason was pretty thin, but you did have a reason.

And now that a lot of people are suspicious of Lateralus, you are being suspicious of him as well. I think you're looking very hard to find a bandwagon.

By the way, looking at Honary Hitchhiker's posts, his last vote said "Vote: Noone." I guess Mert interpreted that as a No Lynch.

[Rishi]

I just said I was suspicious. I want Honary Hitchhiker to have at least one more chance to speak in his own defense before I put him at lynch -1.

[Rishi]

I'm quite noob so... How does a quick lynch help the mafia?

Well, there's more of a chance that we'll be wrong in a quick lynch, since we have very little information. Also, going into Day 2, we'll have little information, which means we'll still be at square one.

[Rishi]

Flying under everybodies radar-

When the bandwagoning discussion came out I took notice. Took correct my actions for mistaking a nonsensable vote on ssf I tried to find out who was acting scummy so I didn't mislynch. I seen lateralus acting scummy with posts so I Fos him. However no sooner did I post a Fos I was accused of slipping by and not answering about the bandwagon vote which accusing of this incident would be a sensable thing to do. I forgot to explain myself before I fos lateralus and that would show I was sneaking by everybody.

I still don't think you explained why you put an FoS on Lateralus. You just said that in his posts he was "acting scummy." What exactly about his behavior seemed scummy to you? Other than the fact that he has been looking for bandwagons, which is the same thing you're doing.

[Rishi]

Like I said before I only wanted to contribute to the thread discussion not looking for a bandwagon. As for what scummy posts have been made by lateralus:
1. He claims townie in a desperate plea which was really a scummy thing to do.
2. I know I had a suspicous bandwagon vote in the past on ssf but lateralus had two votes on two people who had a vote on them. The first was YB after a random vote was placed on YB and secondely ssf however he explained it that ssf placed a vote on him to start a bandwagon but it still strikes me as suspicous.
3. His reasons are very thin. He voted yogurt bandit putting him at a -2 lynch only saying it was random.He stated that YB had put a random vote(it was only a random vote at the begging of the game that was a single vote) on someone trying to confirm his -2 vote as perfectly resonable.

You are criticizing Lateralus for putting the second vote on two different people. That means that you feel that people in this game should pay attention to who they are voting for. And yet, you expect us to believe that you didn't happen to notice that you put a third vote on somestrangeflea?

I don't understand half of what you are saying, but you seemed to have a reason for voting somestrangeflea. It wasn't just a random vote. There seems to be something you're not telling us.

You're not defending yourself very well, but I think you should probably have one more chance to contribute to the discussion. We already know that you feel that Lateralus is scummy. What are your thoughts on the other players?

[Rishi]

Well, Honary Hitchhiker has been logged on since I asked him to give a better defense. He has also posted in some other threads. So, obviously, he has nothing to say.

Vote: Honary Hitchhiker

[Rishi]

I've been thinking about this. There are only three people who didn't vote for Honary Hitchhiker to get lynched. I'm going to assume, for now, that his scum partner did not vote for him. So, let's analyze the three people who didn't vote for him:

Ripley -- Has repeatedly said that Honary Hitchhiker is his prime suspect. Ripley had a vote on Honary Hitchhiker, but retracted it later because he was not ready to get Honary Hitchhiker lynched. Ripley was fairly instrumental in turning the tide against Honary Hitchhiker, so I doubt he is scum.

AmeliaLi -- Has not posted much, so I am not sure what to think. When she has posted, she didn't contribute much. Still, without much to go on, she becomes my secondary suspect.

Lateralus -- My primary suspect. I know I defended him before, but I noticed something very interesting. Lateralus never voted for Honary Hitchhiker, but cast an FoS at him after things started to turn south. Also, Honary Hitchhiker cast an FoS at Lateralus, but never voted for him. Neither of them significantly contributed to the case against the other, but simply went with the flow. This seems to be an attempt for scum partners to distance themselves from each other. Also, we have to consider why DeliciousGoldfish was killed. She was fairly vocal about her suspicions of Lateralus.

I am pretty sure about this. Lateralus has been acting suspicious all game. I think it's enough for him to get one vote.

Vote: Lateralus

[Rishi]

MOD: Mass prods/deadline

I've gotten bored with you people.

Talk to me.

I'm waiting for Lateralus to post. But I don't know if mass prods are necessary. Except for YogurtBandit and Lateralus, everyone alive has posted on Day 2.

What's your hurry, anyway?

[Rishi]

Sorry boys and girls Football Has started so i was busy with that.... to post 126.... so was that just a pick between me and HH? My top suspect is still HH he was quite Shady in the last thread. i didnt vote for HH because i was busy pleading my innocence with the "magical Third vote".

Your top suspect can't be Honary Hitchhiker any more because he is dead. Who is your new primary suspect?

Or are you too busy not adding anything of substance to answer this question?

[Rishi]

I think, simply based on the voting patterns, that we have to look at AmeliaLi/Guardian as possible scum. She didn't jump on the Honary Hitchhiker bandwagon, but did jump on the Lateralus bandwagon. This is why it's a shame that AmeliaLi had to drop out of the game. Guardian obviously can't get inside her head and reveal her thought patterns.

Crub is looking super-town at this moment, just based on his votes. He voted for Honary Hitchhiker and did not vote for Lateralus.

In any case, I think the Day 2 lynch went WAY too fast. Let's slow it down a bit and talk this over. But, the good news is we are NOT in a lynch-or-lose situation.

After Guardian, my chief suspect would be YogurtBandit, mostly because of the reasons that Guardian pointed out. I get the feeling that somestrangeflea is pro-town in this game.

Anyway, as I said, let's talk this over and try to make an informed lynch. This could be a very tricky endgame if we don't get the scum now.

[Rishi]

Uh... what happened to slowing down? Let's at least wait for Guardian to get his role PM. I just want to be fair to him. For all we know, he could be a doctor or cop.

[Rishi]

Well

don't vote then...

I won't vote. But I was trying to convince people to unvote until Guardian got his role. Your habit of automatically putting a vote on someone worries me. Even if you are town, what happens if you go into an endgame with three people left alive? If you quickly put a vote on the wrong person, the Mafia can easily hammer and win. With fewer people, I think you should be more careful about voting.

For example, what if AmeliaLi was a cop? I would want Guardian to have all his investigation results before he plays.

Anyway, Crub and YogurtBandit, what do you guys think?

[Rishi]

Good points, but we're not in the endgame now...

I can be more... ruthless...

Well, you're the only one voting for now. Crub isn't quick to vote and I'm not going to put a quick vote on anyone at this point either. So, I don't think anyone is in danger of being lynched too quickly.

Besides, I am giving you a little more leeway in this game, since I get the feeling you are pro-Town (just a hunch).

[Rishi]

Seriously guys what the hell happened yesterday? I really can't see how we can get away from lynching YB today. YB care to fill us in?

I was convinced that Lateralus was scum. It just really seemed obvious to me, by the way he played. I know that I was thinking, "Would scum be that obvious?" I rationalized it by saying, "Well, Lateralus is a terrible player."

I didn't expect the lynch to go that fast though. I think I put the first vote on Lateralus, just to put a little pressure on him. His non-explanation didn't help matters.

I dunno. Crub is the only one that I am sure is pro-town. Guardian is playing pro-town as was AmeliaLi, but the voting history can't be denied. I mean, AmeliaLi/Guardian is the only player left in the game who didn't vote for Honary Hitchhiker.

[Rishi]

I've been reading the thread again. The lynch of Honary Hitchhiker was mostly organized by Crub first, then Ripley and DeliciousGoldfish joined in. I came in next and then somestrangeflea and YogurtBandit jumped on that lynch fairly late. So, I think, if either of them is scum, they saw a sinking ship and needed to distance themselves from it.

The lynch of Lateralus was lightning-quick. somestrangeflea bounced around a lot, but then put the third vote on Lateralus and YogurtBandit hammered.

The case against YogurtBandit: He never wants to discuss anything. He keeps saying there is nothing to talk about and he frequently votes without any content. Most of his posts are one sentence. However, he did come out against Honary Hitchhiker earlier than somestrangeflea.

When YogurtBandit put the fourth vote on Honary Hitchhiker, somestrangeflea asked us to slow down and that he didn't want a lynch before Page 7. He radically altered his tune later. Then he was really vehement about wanting to hammer Honary Hitchhiker and how much he wanted Honary Hitchhiker dead. He also said that he had a feeling that we would like the results of the lynch. Then, on Day 2, somestrangeflea scrambled to find a lynch as quick as possible. He voted Ripley, who looked very innocent to me at that point. Then, he put the third vote on Lateralus, when YogurtBandit quickly hammered.

My feeling is that somestrangeflea tried to slow the game down so that his scum partner, Honary Hitchhiker, would not be lynched. When he realized that Honary Hitchhiker was doomed, he turned against him dramatically, even though he hadn't really said anything negative earlier. On Day 2, he saw the opportunity to get Lateralus out quickly and took it. On Day 3, he is hoping he could lynch YogurtBandit quickly, but did not succeed. Notice his vote came after Guardian's.

I'm not sure how Guardian got off the hook here, but AmeliaLi has no case against her, except for the voting pattern. She only checked in occasionally, it seems. She probably wasn't around for Honary Hitchhiker's lynch and the vote on Lateralus seemed preliminary.

I'm not saying that YogurtBandit isn't suspicious, but I really think that the last Mafia has to be somestrangeflea or YogurtBandit and we have two chances to lynch.

[Rishi]

Yeah, I don't see any post where Crub defended Honary Hitchhiker.

I'm not trying to align myself with Crub. I just think that he seems to be the most pro-town at this point. Actually, the one thing I find suspicious about Crub is a lot more subtle. Crub seemed so pro-town that it makes me wonder why he wasn't killed. Why would someone choose to eliminate Ripley instead of Crub, unless Crub was the Mafia? I will admit that's not enough to build a case on.

I really want to hear a little more from YogurtBandit. Just saying that Honary Hitchhiker's actions were scummy doesn't seem to add anything to the conversation. And, by YogurtBandit's logic, if someone isn't adding anything to the conversation, then they are a liability that should be eliminated. I want to hear a claim from YogurtBandit as well.

[Rishi]

Unvote

, bringing the votecount down to a nice round 0 for everyone!

Actually, Guardian still has a vote on YogurtBandit. So the votecount is 1.

[Rishi]

I do want to hear more from YB. YB if you are town, please do try and defend yourself --

you are going to need to write a bit more about why HH was obviously scummy, and why you felt good about hammering Lateralus yesterday.

If you are town, trying hard not to get mislynched here would be great.

Also, if town, I want to know who you are currently suspicious of and why.

Come on mate, I know you can do better than that.

QFT

[Rishi]

Also, YogurtBandit, you didn't fully answer Guardian's question. Who do you think is currently scum and why? I'm starting to suspect that you're not answering the question because you're the one who is scum and so you have no suspicions.

[Rishi]

I know, Im not on MS 24/7 though. Its coming.

You're not on this site 24/7? You average 13 posts a day and I count 21 posts just today from you. Obviously, you have some free time.

I realize that you're in other games that you have to pay attention to, but I would think you could put a little more time into this game, since this is the game where you are very, very close to a lynch.

[Rishi]

I propose a Rishi-Crub-SSF-Me order, but that is obviously biased as I know I am not scum (and you don't).

I think Guardian should claim first, since it is his idea. I just find it a little fishy that he proposed the order and went last, giving the excuse, "I know I am not scum." Still, Guardian has the most suspicious voting history. I'll offer to go second since I realize it's somewhat suspicious that I am the only person who doesn't like the vote order. I propose Guardian-Me-SSF-Crub.

Mainly, I don't want Guardian to go last. I'll still go first if everyone else wants me to.

[Rishi]

I would be okay with a Rishi-Crub-Guardian-somestrangeflea order. I don't mind going first. Why is Guardian so reluctant to go early?

Thanks for the birthday wishes, by the way.

[Rishi]

I also had another thought... maybe YogurtBandit should pick the order. Since he's not involved?

[Rishi]

Are we agreed to the Rishi-Crub-Guardian-somestrangeflea order then?

[Rishi]

Wait. Hmm. I just now noticed Guardian about the Ill claim last thing.

Make that,

Guardian-Rishi-Crub-Ssf.

I think of the 1st two are scum. so we'll see.

You suspected Guardian and Crub before. What's changed?

[Rishi]

SSF, et. al -- I am fine with going third, as at least two of you prefer it. The point is the ordering is supposed to be reflective of who the town finds suspicious. I find myself least suspicious, so I wanted to go last. However, you disagree, so I will go third.

Wow. that's horrible logic. EVERYONE finds themselves the least suspicious. Like we're going to take your word for it...

Rishi, you are up, claim cop with result on someone alive, or not cop with result on someone alive. Then Crub, then me, then SSF.

Are we fully claiming, or just Cop and Not Cop?

Doesn't matter. I'm just a vanilla townie. Crub, you're next.

[Rishi]

Pretty much yeah, we have 2 possible claims:

• Vanilla Townie
• Cop with result on any living player

Crub, you're up.

Well, a doctor is possible in this setup. If someone is a doctor, should they not claim it?

[Rishi]

Ah.. okay.

EBWOP: I claim that I am not the cop.

[Rishi]

I really had a feeling there was no cop. If someone had claimed cop, I would have suspected a fake claim. I actually wouldn't be surprised if we didn't have a doctor either. I think we might have gotten the all-vanilla setup. Of course, it's hard to say. Scum haven't been hitting the most obvious target and so it could have been tough for the doctor to predict.

[Rishi]

Well, Guardian gave YogurtBandit an ultimatum to post a thoughtful, intelligent post by Tuesday evening, or YogurtBandit gets his vote. That seems fair to me.

[Rishi]

Well, What do you want me to do it on?

If you read the thread carefully, you'll know. Consider that part of your assignment.

[Rishi]

We've given YogurtBandit more than enough chances to defend himself. I think we've been more than fair. YogurtBandit obviously doesn't care if he wins or loses. It doesn't even matter whether or not he is town. If he is scum (which I think is semi-likely), then he could have won the game for the scum by posting something semi-reasonable.

Vote: YogurtBandit

[Rishi]

Huh. I thought somestrangeflea was Mafia. Who the hell was he investigating?

Also, I was half-expecting to be dead, so I am not sure what to do here. I probably should read this thread again.

[Rishi]

Oh I didn't realize Guardian was away. I never check the vacation thread. Yeah, we should definitely wait for him before we do too much here.

[Rishi]

Rishi what do you think?

Not lurking, but off to work right now. Expect a post when I get back, within the next 8-10 hours.

[Rishi]

Well, the main thing that anyone said about me was my "quick" hammer on YogurtBandit. YogurtBandit had been hanging on by a thread for DAYS and we kept giving him more and more time. If you want to make an argument that YogurtBandit would have put together a good defense if we gave him another day, then either you're using incredibly bad logic or you're really naive. Since I don't think either is the case, it feels like Guardian is grasping at straws here.

I have not found it looking through somestrangeflea's posts, but someone must have picked up a coptell from him and that is the main reason he is dead right now.

So, when somestrangeflea turned up dead, I said to myself, "Okay, someone is going to use this as an argument.

Someone

is going to say they had no reason to kill somestrangeflea, so they can't be Mafia." Well, the truth is that none of us had a reason to kill somestrangeflea unless there was a coptell somewhere. I don't understand Guardian's argument. Sure, I agree that Guardian's best target, if he was scum, would have been Crub. My best target, if I was scum, would have also been Crub. Crub's best target, if he was scum would be either me or Guardian. So the kill doesn't make sense for any of us. I don't think we can use it to arouse suspicion.

There are only a couple things that strike me as suspicious about Crub. First of all, I wonder why he isn't dead. Also, he does seem to be hanging back a lot and is certainly being less overt than Guardian. A lot of times, the people who are scum are subtle in their methods.

But the evidence against Crub is so slight compared to the evidence against Guardian. There's AmeliaLi's voting patterns; there's the way that Guardian came out gunning before he claimed to have received his role PM; there's the way that Guardian has been subtly levying against every other player in the game to keep his options open; there's the fact that Guardian kept insisting on going last in the Cop Claim yesterday; and now there's the not-so-subtle begging to let him win.

If I get outplayed by Crub, I'll just shake my head and say, "Wow, good game. You outplayed me." If I get outplayed by Guardian, I'll feel incredibly stupid because the signs were all there and yet I chose to ignore them.

I will give Guardian another chance to defend himself, but I can't honestly see myself wavering from a vote on him.

[Rishi]

Well, this is difficult. Both of you can't be scum, but both of you are suspicious of me . This doesn't do much to help me differentiate between the two. I am not going to focus on that right now though -- I will focus more on hunting if you like, but I feel that it is more important for me to focus on not getting mislynched right now.

You know, there's more to finding scum than just pointing the finger back at someone who is accusing you.

As for my "case" on you Rishi -- the sad thing is if I decided I wanted to make a case on either of you I could do so convincingly. However, when I'm town, I tend to be unsure of myself and I don't like making cases unless I am pretty sure I am

right

. When I am town I sway more, which is what is happening here. I don't feel I am "grasping at straws", though I see how you could see it this way.

You have not made a convincing case on either me or Crub yet. If you're really town, then you would give me a good reason to vote Crub. But you haven't given me such a reason.

I agree with you on ssf, though someone could have killed him just for the wifom nature of his being killed. Your pointing out that you thought someone would bring this up makes me wonder if you've spent too much time thinking about this . Other than that this post by you feels townlike though.

I have been spending a lot of time thinking about this. I hope you would to. We're at an important stage in the game. I don't think somestrangeflea got killed for the WIFOM argument. I think he got killed because someone suspected he was a cop. Then, I figured that someone could use the WIFOM argument to explain why somestrangeflea was killed.

I too wonder why he isn't dead. I don't think that me being "overt"/agressive is a scum tell, that is just me.

Fair enough.

A-Li's voting patterns are bad. I can't really say much about that. The only thing is that if you look at when she posts and when the hammers happen, she can definitely be seen as uninterested townie -- and I guess that was the case.

A disinterested townie or a scum flying under the radar.

I keep my options open as town -- I don't know for sure who is scum! As scum, I tend to do the opposite.

If you want to confirm the metagame of me on this, feel free to look at my wiki -- AM mafia day four is a perfect example of me doing what I am doing here as town. Mafia and Werewolves is a great example of how me being single-minded can be indicative of my being scum.

I don't care how you played other games - I care how you are playing THIS game. It's very easy to change up your playstyles between games and then point to another game as justification of your role.

As for me not receiving my role PM, ask the mod about it. I am not sure if he will be willing to confirm it (though I hope so) but I guarantee that he won't say that he sent me my role PM before he said he did.

I am inclined to believe you that you didn't receive your role PM at first. However, you were playing the game without knowing your role. You seemed sincere when you were doing that, and you seem sincere now. I think this actually works against you. It shows that you can seem pro-town even when you are lying through your teeth. It's a good trait to have, but it makes me less inclined to believe you right now.

Me insisting on going last in the cop claim yesterday -- I already explained this. And I didn't go last, even when Crub said "SSF, go". I went third, because that was what we agreed on.

You went third after I pushed for it. I was trying to get you to go FIRST and you refused. You were not being a team player during that claiming exercise - you were merely looking at things from your own perspective. That is what makes me suspicious.

I am begging for a town win here. Whichever of you is town, I implore you not to vote for me, as a quickhammer will ensue. At the very least, give us a few pages -- if you end up voting me, I will understand, but if you vote me without giving me a chance to explain myself you will be added to YB & SSF in clutching defeat from the jaws of victory.

I will not vote for you quickly. If Crub votes for you, I will not hammer without some discussion from you. But you have to set a reasonable length of time. I say that, if Crub votes for you, I will give you 48 hours to convince me not to hammer. If that sounds too short, let me know.

Rishi, if you are town, you should feel bad if your play here results in a loss, regardless of me being the more "obvious" choice. I really am not going to be pleased if you are town and you quicklynch me and then go "oh well, Crub outplayed us." I also disagree that "all the signs are there" and that you would be choosing to ignore them. I don't think my play in this game is very indicative of me being scum, at all!

Your opinion on your own play hardly proves anything. Heh. In my opinion, I am a handsome and sexy man. It doesn't make it true. I will feel bad if I lose, but I will feel a lot worse if I lose to you than if I lose to Crub.

Again, I implore whichever of you is town not to vote me quickly. At the very least, for a page or so, don't vote me

first

. It is incredibly ironic how well I can build a case when I know who needs to be lynched -- and if someone votes and the other player doesn't hammer, then that player will be guaranteed to be town.

I said I wouldn't hasty vote.

Any questions you have, please ask. If you are town and put a hasty vote on me, you are going on my

bad

list.

Aww, man. If I am on your bad list, does that mean I won't get a Christmas card and won't be invited to your birthday party? That kind of threat didn't work on me in 2nd grade and it doesn't work now. This is a game. For example, if one of my friends absolutely sucks at chess, that doesn't mean he's no longer my friend. Don't toss out-of-game threats at me for something that happens in a game.

[Rishi]

I think I made it clear that I wasn't going to be hunting in that post. Do you want me to hunt?

The best defense is a good offense. Go ahead and make your case on me and Crub. Crub and I both agree you are the most suspicious, so I think your best bet would be to convince Crub and me to vote each other.

I didn't know ssf would end up dead today; I was quite surprised when it happened.

All three of us said this. One of us is lying.

Ok, so here you accept my metagame defense -- that me being aggressive is just me. Then you contradict yourself later...

It's not a contradiction. You're always aggressive. I'll accept that. But if you want me to look at the finer points of your play to differentiate how you act as scum and how you act as town, then that's easy to change. You can't change your overall play style, but you can change specifics.

OK, that makes sense if you think about it at the first level -- but think more carefully about my revealing that I had lied. Revealing that I had lied will

definitely

not serve to make myself look more townlike, and a mafia member would have 0 incentive to reveal such information.

That's plausible. Okay, I'll accept that.

I refused because both Crub and SSF had agreed I go last...

Yeah, but you could have alleviated any suspicion by offering to go second. I had already offered to go first. You did not consider, for even a second, that this decision would not have had lasting repercussions? You made your decision. Live with it.

By the way, I am curious why Crub was okay with you going last. Crub?

Look -- I can only be 100% sure of my own alignment. I know I am town. I wanted a townie claiming last. Therefore, with the information I had, I wanted to go last. Does that not make sense??

No, it does not make sense. Stick yourself in someone else's shoes for a second. Does any other player have any proof that you are town? You have to learn to see things from someone else's perspective. Seriously, this is just an argument that is full of holes. You honestly can't see how another person could see it as suspicious that you wanted to go last? Just admit it was a stupid play. I will be more inclined to trust someone who can admit to a mistake rather than someone who keeps touting the same fallacious reasoning.

Pretty much. Oh, and I won't particularly look for playing in games with you, which would be a shame, because up to this point you have seemed to be a very competent player, and a nice guy to boot.

I am a nice guy. But I am putting pressure on you to see how you defend. Don't take my in-game behavior as indicative of my out-of-game personality.

But it does mean that you don't really want to play chess with him any more if you want a good game of chess .

Point taken. I will not make a hasty decision here. I know you said you'll believe it when you see it. But, if you treat what I say with skepticism, how can you expect me to take everything you say at face value? Again, put yourself in someone else's shoes for once.

So um, what do you want from me? You seem to be twisting my arguments a bit; in a few places you really seem to be just blatantly missing what I am trying to say.

If I am misunderstanding you, then explain yourself. I am giving you the chance. No voting just yet.

I say that I haven't made a case because I am not sure what to think yet -- and you reply that I haven't made a convincing case yet. There seems to be a strong disconnect there.

So, you don't have to just say, "Here is who I think is scum." Just go ahead and build cases against Crub and me. You don't have to come to a definite conclusion.

It is interesting to note that the only thing you agree with me on is when I find Crub's being alive suspicious.

It is somewhat suspicious, but no one was sure whether or not there was a doctor. Maybe someone was going for a secondary target because they weren't sure if there was a doctor? I will say that somestrangeflea was extremely unlikely to be protected by a doctor, making him a guaranteed kill. That's another possibility on why he was killed.

[Rishi]

Sounds fine to me, Guardian.

[Rishi]

Sorry... very busy this week. Once again, not lurking. I will respond at some point today.

[Rishi]

That just sounds wrong to me -- like you both "think I am scum", and you both want me to try and convince you to vote each other. I don't understand why the townie of you wants me to do this, but I shall.

How about you think of it as just giving your thoughts on each player? Point out what you find suspicious and what you think seems town-like about the player and leave it up to us to decide? Surely you've been in games where you've been asked to give your thoughts on certain players?

The only benefit of going first as town is so people think you are townlike by cooperating -- almost all the benefits come when you go last.

Making people think you're townlike is a HUGE FRIGGIN' BENEFIT. Now, do you see my point?

I guess asking me to do these cases is really indirectly asking me to get a better opinion of who is scum and who isn't, so I now have some internal motivation for doing so.

Right.

[Rishi]

I am vanilla town. There would be no need for anyone to claim any role now. The fact that you suggest I should claim I am actually quite perplexed by.

I agree. The only thing a doctor claim would do now is create confusion. We would waste a lot of time wondering whether it was a fake claim.

If there is a doctor, he didn't successfully protect anyone in this game, so he has no reliable information and there won't be another night phase. So, for all intents and purposes, the doctor is now a vanilla townie.

[Rishi]

No hammer.

I'm town.

I'll admit that Guardian made a decent case against Crub, but I don't know how much it helped. Before, I was 90% sure that Guardian was scum. Now I'm only 80% sure.

As I promised, I will give Guardian some time to convince me to vote for Crub.

[Rishi]

Happy scumday, Mert.

And, by giving Guardian some time, I mean ten minutes. Go.

But, seriously folks, I would like to finish this game out before I leave for Gen Con. Realistically, I'll probably place a vote Friday.

Crub, for now you don't need to convince me about Guardian. I think the case against him is strong. However, Crub, I do expect you to defend yourself against whatever Guardian says.

If I start to change my mind, I'll let you guys know.

[Rishi]

Yep sure thing Rishi. I tried to address everything that he mentioned in his previous post is there anything else you want me to address?

Nah, you're good for now. Waiting to hear from Guardian.

[Rishi]

Your post where you built the case on Crub was a very long list. It's difficult to see what your main points were. What I would like is for you to summarize what you said in that post in a shorter, most distilled format. Also, I would prefer if you drop the appeals to emotion. Just stick to the facts and logic.

As for the case against you Guardian. The voting record is just what caught my eye.

My main suspicions on you (just to summarize):

1) Yes, the voting record. That's just what caught my eye. That's not super-serious. We all have a pretty bad voting record at this point.

2) You were playing before you received your role PM. You never really addressed this, but this is actually a HUGE point for me. You were very sincere when you said, "I can't see how AmeliaLi is scum" to the point where I actually believed you. Then, when you admitted you were lying later, I figured out that you could be absolutely believable even when you were giving us bald-faced lies. It led me not to believe a single thing you said.

3) It's not the fact that you actually went third in the claim, but the fact that you wanted to go last and kept insisting on it. And the fact that you can't see why this is suspicious. The stupidity defense doesn't work. I actually think you're a pretty good player and I can't see how a good player wouldn't see this, unless he was lying.

4) The ass-covering post in twilight after I dropped the hammer on YogurtBandit. First, you come down on YogurtBandit pretty hard, making it clear he was going to be lynched. You put him at Lynch -1. I drop the hammer. You immediately jump in and say, "Oh, that might have been bad" which serves no purpose unless you want to plant the seeds of suspicion on me later. The lynch already happened. You can't prevent it. And the only way that you would have already known the results of the lynch? You were Mafia.

5) You asked Crub to claim doctor when it was fairly pointless. I think this fairly strongly implies that you felt there was a doctor in the game. You must have suspected that one of us was the doctor and that we'd protect each other. That's why I think you killed somestrangeflea, because you knew there was no way he'd be protected.

6) The fact that you CONSTANTLY feel the need to repeat that you are a townie. You mention it in practically every post. We already know that you are claiming to be a townie. Why do you feel the need to repeat it unless you're trying to convince us it is true? Or maybe you're trying to convince yourself?

7) The fact that you constantly cover up your arguments with emotion. You realize that the arguments are not that strong, so you resort to begging. And I'll tell you what - I find it really distracting. Even when Crub criticized you for it, you continue to do it.

8) Even in this last post, you say, "I see the case on Crub as being about as strong as or even more strong than the case on me." WTF?! I mean, of course scum would say that! One of you is scum. Your opinions don't matter any more. OBVIOUSLY, Crub will say that you're more suspicious and you'll say that Crub is more suspicious. If you really wanted to try to convince me at this point, you would have said, "Well, I know that Crub looks less suspicious than I do... but blah, blah, blah." This is another example of how you fill your posts with irrelevant arguments to make it SEEM like you are saying a lot, when you're really saying nothing.

You can't just appeal to emotion without any evidence behind it. I don't want your subjective opinion or begging, I WANT THE FACTS in the clear and concise format.

I might have missed some major point, but I'll let Crub fill in any gaps. That's what's at the front of my mind.

Tuesday (a week from today) is the day I leave for Gen Con. I'll drop the hammer on one of you then. Sound fair? This has been a short game, so I don't want to drag out this endgame any longer than necessary.

[Rishi]

This was a good post, Guardian. You made a lot of good points and kept the emotional play to a minimum. This is what I want to see.

I am not going to respond to any attacks on my play. I would rather see Crub respond to your post, actually, because I think it would reveal a lot about his alignment.

[Rishi]

I'm going to do another read-through tonight. If I feel 100% sure after it, then I will cast a vote. I hate to do this while Guardian is on vacation, but I have a feeling whether I cast a vote tonight or two weeks from now, it'll be the same. So why wait?

[Rishi]

I have some limited access at the hotel. Rishi, I have no problem with you voting Crub while I am away on vacation. Feel free.

If you mislynch me while I am on vacation, I will probably want to strangle you. However, if you feel you are making the best decision you could possibly make, go ahead.... I'm not lying when I say this would be the 4th time I've found scum in endgame and lost...

Again, appealing to emotion. This does not help you.

[Rishi]

Well, as promised, I did another read-through. A couple of things caught my eye that I had forgotten about:

1) Crub thought I was trying to "buddy up" with him on Day 3. He pointed this out and tried to distance me. If he were scum, I think he would appreciate having a buddy and play into it. But, here's the most important thing: he never brought it up again. He was honestly trying to distance me because he thought I could be scum. If it was simply a tactic to make me think he was town, don't you think he would have made some reference to it later?

2) Guardian is very emotional before someone gets voted for, but then not so much afterwards. He claims to be a very emotional player and says he will be very angry at YogurtBandit if he turns out to be town. But, he never even brought up how angry he was with YogurtBandit later. This leads me to believe it's just a tactic.

3) Guardian makes some contradictions. Here are two big ones: in an early post, Guardian says that saying someone is too townie is bad logic. But then he uses that argument himself later against Crub. The other big one: in post 306, he says that I can vote when I can make an informed decision. In post 312, he threatens me with physical violence if I vote against him. I don't appreciate a bully.

4) On Day 3, Guardian was throwing out suspicion against anyone. Except in one late post (after I noted that somestrangeflea was suspicious), Guardian kept insisting that he was getting a pro-town vibe from somestrangeflea. I'm taking this statement at face value, whether or not Guardian is scum. We've seen a few times how Guardian has trouble looking at things from other people's perspectives and if he really got a pro-town vibe, he seems to be the only one who would kill somestrangeflea.

By the way, Crub, if he were scum, and realized that Guardian was getting a pro-town vibe from somestrangeflea, might have killed somestrangeflea for that reason. Yes, if Crub was scum, he might have lost the Crub-Guardian-somestrangeflea endgame. BUT the Crub-Rishi-somestrangeflea endgame would have been ridiculously easy for Crub. I can't see him not taking that opportunity.

Also, as far as the "Why isn't Crub dead?" argument.... AmeliaLi was obviously fairly disinterested in this game, whether she was Mafia or town. Remember, the first two deaths were her doing. It could be that she was not paying much attention and just killed the two most vocal players in the game (DeliciousGoldfish and Ripley).

And finally, Guardian, here's your nail in the coffin. Both Crub and I repeatedly told you to not post any more appeals to emotion, and you did it anyway. Not only that, but you say that you might want to strangle me. I don't appreciate that. And, if you're taking the game that seriously, maybe you need to step back a little.

*fingers crossed*

Vote: Guardian

[Rishi]

That's really awful play by somestrangeflea. Not only did he not say anything, but he actually voted for Lateralus! I honestly can't believe that someone could play THAT poorly.

Very well played, Crub. Congratulations. Of course, you had enough people digging their own graves to help you out. Out of curiosity, why kill somestrangeflea?

I think this was a badly played game for town all around. I don't think that DeliciousGoldfish or Ripley can be blamed for the loss as they were killed early. I also don't know if Honary Hitchhiker can take credit for the win, but that's another matter.

Anyway, Guardian, when you calm down a bit, I hope that you will realize this is just a game. If you're really 0/4 as town in endgames, maybe you should look at your own play and take this game as a learning experience. The main mistake I think I made was not giving Day 4 enough time. But, I was so convinced that you were scum, another month wouldn't have helped you. Don't blame everyone else for your loss. I know I made mistakes, but you did too. If you don't want to play any more games with me, that's your choice, but I don't have the same bias against you.

[Rishi]

Yeah that sucked. I was planning to remove the vote later, since I really didn't expect a quickhammer from YB.

I partially blame him, especially because he was town. >=(

OR you could have said, "I'm the cop. Lateralus is innocent. Don't lynch him." That would have given us two confirmed townies (if we believed you). Town would have won.