Mini 471: End.

[NabakovNabakov]

Vote: Pickem

for trying to quicklynch the town.

and

FOS: Adel

for purposely avoiding interaction with him.

[NabakovNabakov]

^^Under that logic:

FOS: Adel, Pickem, Sir Tornado, and Me

and

FOS: Me X 4

for the above list of FOS's

If I've been counting correctly, I should have one Finger Of Suspicion left to point.

[NabakovNabakov]

Fair enough

Wagon: Teh Scummzs

Who are they again, Pickem?

[NabakovNabakov]

Ok, it's mildly serious time, guys.

Pickem, I will unvote you if you can make a single post without caps lock.

Final

Fos: ABR

for dropping the third vote on Adel. If we lynch her now, we don't get any diagrams later.

[NabakovNabakov]

CTD is scum in this game, I'm pretty sure of it.

Vote: CrashTextDummie

Ok, let's just go back over his posts:

Sounds scummy as hell to me.

[NabakovNabakov]

Wait... what? Our fountain exploded? Ok, guys, no need to look for the Mafia now, we'sa going after the terrists.
[/off-topic]

@Kravhen: Yes, it was time to get serious. I saw three votes on Adel in a row and smelled scum (even though BZ's was already there). The fact that you turned around and called

me

scum for being suspicious of a third vote being placed under stupid meta-game reasons hardly seems pro-town. Not liking early wagons =/= scum.

[NabakovNabakov]

Pssst,

Mod

, I've seen other Mods edit their votecounts into the top post no matter who's it is. If you really want Top of Page Vote Counts, feel free to piggyback.

[NabakovNabakov]

(I find her diagrams very useful, I might add)

Lying scum, nobody can actually make sense of her diagrams, we just stare at them until the drugs take over.

@Kravhen: I

hate

it when people do scummy stuff to see how others would react because I sometimes get the sneaking suspicion that they were actually doing scummy stuff for the sake of doing scummy stuff.

"Act, react, but don't act for a reaction."
-Me,

Mini 471, post 59

[NabakovNabakov]

Adel, I think your math is just a tad off. The highest you ever had was 4 votes. L-2 is 5.

However, the basic principle holds. I'm perfectly comfortable with jokes flying around the first two pages, and if somebody happens to accrue 2 or 3 votes because they're good at chess, no big deal. But when I see three votes on the same person in three posts in a row, I can't help but comment. I'm not calling Kravhen out as scum here, but it's little things like that which snowball into real discussion.

Now that he has calmed down, I will

Unvote

Pickem. He also gets a cookie.

[NabakovNabakov]

Villiage Idiot. A player so out of touch with strategy, grammar, and decorum that it is almost impossible to get a good tell or opinion out of them. They tend to lurk and every so often post an unexplained vote or cryptic sentence. (Not in the BabyJesus style, in a bad way)

[NabakovNabakov]

@Camisade: VI is an unofficial term coined by me to describe a horrible player. I have written volumes on the pros and cons of lynching them in other threads, you might even consider me an expert on the matter. Let's just hope I don't have to exercise my expertise here.

@ABR:
1)Quicklynches rarely happen, but they are often attempted. Botched quicklynches are usually the germ for D1 discussion.
2)I would probably say the vote was mildly anti-town because it wasn't helpful and was possibly harmful, but that doesn't mean it was malicous.

However

@Kravhen: Firstly, chill, dude. Secondly, I don't think you should be the one calling attention to the ways people are reacting, because I have never seen somebody get so defensive so fast. I also don't get why you continue to claim that your vote was valid. You voted her because she has confusing diagrams and I was uneasy about a bandwagon. Now you're trying to spin it off as a "valid" vote, and that's what really irks me. If your vote was stupid, say it was stupid, but I agree with Adel when she says that you're tying to turn this wagon into something more serious than it deserves to be.

@Adel: I agree largely with your analysis, but leave the threats behind. We all know you're an expert at wagoning townies and getting killed N1. I don't really think that's the kind of record you should be using to intimidate folks.

[NabakovNabakov]

You voted her because she has confusing diagrams and I was uneasy about a bandwagon.

The first part of that sentence covers the second part of your post. The second part of the sentence covers the first part of your post (confusing I know). My unease had nothing to do with the fact that Adel was being voted, I'm just uneasy with early wagons in general. If you had had 4 votes, I would have mentioned it too.

If you can't see where you're being defensive/losing your cool:

@Nabakov: I see where you're coming from, and to be honest, I didn't previously post after 100% analyzing the situation.

Here he is trying to relieve himself of responsibility when I turn up town.

Here you are trying to put FULL responsibility on me for whatever happens to you. It takes SEVEN votes to lynch you, you only have FOUR. Do you realize that out of those four votes, if you take out all the random and silly voting, only mine stays as a "valid vote"? If I was in your spot I wouldn't get too nervous if you were town because of that. Besides, if the random voters keep their vote on you, you still need THREE more votes to get lynched. I really don't see this happening anytime soon.

I just read the thread, noticed people suddenly get all serious after having made equally "stupid meta-game moves" and not get serious until a specific person gets targeted, and then both of them turning the attention to someone else... Meh, at the very least, I wanted to see how you guys were going to react.

When silly & random voting yields a bandwagon, there is something fishy going on. Placing a forth vote on someone on page two means that you are awfully willing to see a quicklynch based upon two or three posts from most people. How could you possibly be confident of someone's alignment on page two? Oh, that is right, if you are mafia than you know everyone else's alignment.

Once again, you are making my blowing my vote out of proportions and making it look horribly outrageous. I did not put the hammering vote on you. I also did not put you at Lynch -1. I put a fourth out of seven vote on you. And not any kind of fourth vote. This fourth vote is really the first valid one after 3 bandwagon votes. So just because there was a silly bandwagon i was supposed to not vote for you, or wait until the bandwagon dissapears before doing so? No way a silly bandwagon's getting in the way of my gut feeling that picked something up about you and made me drop one little valid vote.
Don't get me wrong though, if there was a 6-vote bandwagon on you, I wouldn't have voted. 6-vote bandwagon is ridiculous though.
If there was a 5-vote bandwagon, I probably would've had a bit of a hard time putting you at Lynch-1. Dont know what I would've done if that happened.

My vote's staying on Adel for now, my gut feeling is still there, and if you ever get nervous about 4 votes on Adel, well there are a couple of others that can take out their votes on her ( votes under "stupid metagame reasons" ) mine's staying.

With a vote that wasn't based upon solid analysis, on a player that said "what is with this wagon?". Page 2 is still randomness, yet you are willing to not only hop onto a silly wagon, but you are also willing to try to turn it serious and deadly, while avoiding responsibility for it.

unvote Albert B. Rampage vote:kravhen

My move may have been reckless and unusually offensive especially for page 2, but hey, at least I'm getting responses/results I wanted out of it. At least now you know, Adel, that you are under my loop. Weigh carefully every word you speak as they are going to be analyzed letter by letter. Be paranoid.

Do I really have to explain why that's defensive? I would be fine if it hewed closely to the logical side of thangs, but its full of repetition, emphasis by way of capitalization, and unnecesary superlatives. It smacks of "appeal to emotion" and you sound like you're under brutal attack, which in my eyes, you really aren't. The last part is just silly.

[NabakovNabakov]

^^ Oh, I guess roughly the same principles apply. There's no need to go about FOS'ing people who are town (remember, this is my perspective on the matter), but I don't see it as part of a scummy master plan. Being FOS'd every so often keeps me on my toes. I'm not reading Kravhen as particuarlly anti-town at the moment, but I don't think he's being pro-town either. His over-defense seems more newbie than scummy.

[NabakovNabakov]

Here's what I don't like about Adel's "birthday post."

Adel has proven that she has a tendancy to wagon townies when she's playing as town. This is an unfortunate tendancy, but it seems to be an essential element to her townie playstyle. That she

didn't

bus Krave into oblivion indicates a change in playstyle. Hopefully, this is a permanent improvement in her townie playstyle, but it's just as likely that her playstyle change stems from having an anti-town role as opposed to a pro-town role.

@Kravhen: While I admire the spunk that your choosen playstyle shows, remember that it is always the job of a responsible townie to weigh all options. I'm not sure if I want to be playing with a kamikaze. It could just be a cover to get away with scummy acts, but even if it isn't, I don't know how pro-town it is.

@Adel: I look forward to reading that LML quote in context.

[NabakovNabakov]

^^ No... it's from the newbie. Unless he's said essentially the same thing in two games.

[NabakovNabakov]

Vote: Blue Zebra

Not funny, not helpful. Stop lurking in plain sight.

ABR, same deal.

[NabakovNabakov]

Every thread needs some central conflict for people to discuss. Discussion just lagged because we diffused the conflict like civilized folks rather than lynching rashly. Now nobody's dead, but there are plenty of posts on record to examine for playstyle elements, tells, and associations. As they say, long days are good for the town.

I will

Unvote, Vote: DeadScilent

because she has said even less (just a random vote). I will go one step further by actually giving her a topic and asking her to comment on who she feels is most scummy at this point.

[NabakovNabakov]

Sir T: I do feel you misrepresented Kravhen a bit in your analysis. You took everything he said to the extreme and said that he contradicted himself several times just because he threw out multiple therories. As much as his request for a focus elsewhere seems scummy, I feel he has a bit of a point, and I'm becoming more and more suspicious of the poeple who now seem too intent on making Kravhen look scummy.

[NabakovNabakov]

Display all posts by kravhen, and read through them. It looks to me like he is digging a hole for himself, and that is the most charitable interpretation I can give his behavior . My vote for you is more of a presuure vote than anything. The only decent scumtell I have on you is your vote for pickem and then your unexplained unvote.

OK, I will agree that a hole is being dug, and that Kravhen may actually be the one doing it, but Adel is the one standing by the side in sunglasses with a shotgun in case Kravhen tries to stop. I think BZ has a point when he notes that Kravhen's only real offense was placing the fourth vote on Adel and trying to defend it. Was that fairly scummy? Of course, I was the first to comment on it. However, Adel has now latched on to it and blown the issue out of proportion. The argument has reached a point where the arguments and rebuttals themselves are the primary things being analyzed, and the actual actions have been completely forgotten. When an argument reaches that point, it's time for it to die.

As to the issue of BZ being scum, I can only post a firm Hmm... I almost posted an "I'd like to see more content out of him," but then I realized that he does post content, but in short, concise doses. I

would

like to get better aquianted with his playstyle before lableing his play however.

[NabakovNabakov]

Outing cop = NoNo. Please keep all speculations on pro-town powerroles to yourself, thank you.

With that aside, I think you make some very good points in that post. I would like to have a re-read and a re-look at Sir T. I would also like Pickem to make good on his word and commence the beatings.

[NabakovNabakov]

@Sir T: Mabye you don't vote until you're fairly certain, or maybe you just don't vote until enough other people are certain enough for you to comfortably follow along. Restricting yourself to late votes seems like scum trying to blend in or a townie who can't be bothered to make his own cases.

[NabakovNabakov]

So you adopt a moderately scummy playstyle so you can use it as town and scum?

That just smacks of laziness.

[NabakovNabakov]

It may be lazy of me, but I'm resorting to using my vote to pressure Blue Zebra into posting more. CTD parking his vote on BZ is a null tell for CTD and his replacement. I'm looking at the kindling and waiting for the fire to start.

Maybe I'm not interperting this right, but you're voting BZ to get posting, but you're also expecting a fire? An inane vote coupled with expectations for a major reaction is just... confusing.

[NabakovNabakov]

What? Like grammatical editing? Then why aren't you suspicious of me in all our games. I feel I am fairly skilled in the ways of grammar; (I can even manage most of it on the fly, without editing). Maybe my old school use of commas (i.e. lots of them) strikes you as ungrammatical.

[/off-topic]

[NabakovNabakov]

I was wondering what exactly do you do to get yourself lynched.

Hmmm... ABR = Jester/Martyr?

Nah, he knows how to act scummier than this. Start posting content please.

@Kravhen: From your supposedly "lynch-proof" position, do you have any suspicions you would like to voice? I feel it's always handy to have a few townies above total scrutiny because it allows more unorthodox ideas to surface.

Not many people are pinging my scumdar right now. I think I was right about BZ's leaning towards concise yet helpful posting, and Adel seems to be playing her most conventional here out of all our other games, though I would like to take a second look before I go on:

Vacation (21st-1st) with no internet access.

[NabakovNabakov]

I was speaking to Patrick, not you.

If you post in the thread, you're speaking to the town. It just seemed like an odd comment to make. You said something odd and explained it with a cryptic statement about getting yourself lynched (though I might have been applying "yourself" to the wrong person). In an unrelated matter, do you still like your vote on BZ? (Goes for Adel too).

[NabakovNabakov]

^^ I believe we could call that the "Not Town Enough" fallacy (More formally: The Burden of Competence). I've never played with him, but if Patrick is usually a very pro-town seeming player, then being somewhat less pro-town seeming is a slight point against him, but it would take some actual evidence of him being scum (not just less pro-town) to convince me of anything other than that he might be off his game.

@Adel: I don't like how you feel the need to play Sound and Light crew in this game. IMO, trying to focus the town on one specific player seems scummy, good scum-hunters should follow many leads. To a certain extent, focusing on one player and then leaving smacks of rolefishing.


Gone 21st to 1st. Don't remember if I posted that in this thread.

Unvote

(even though my vote was on another absentee iirc)

[NabakovNabakov]

Can't a guy go on a little vacation?

*sigh*

Have fun you guys.

[NabakovNabakov]

Mod:

Seeing how SV has yet to significantly post, would it be possible to have my spot back? I didn't think I was going to be replaced for going on vacation. This game seems like it needs my postiness.

This is, of course, if SV is cool with it too.

[NabakovNabakov]

Good to be back.

Will read/post in about 10-11 hours.

[NabakovNabakov]

Unofficially, I think DS has 4 votes right now (though Pickem's seems apt to return). In my opinion, this is not a good wagon. From reading the thread and limited experience with DS in another game ( all expeirence with DS is limited) I'm going to brand her the VI of this game.

Adel, Pickem, you already know what this means, but I'll spell it out for the rest of the town:

It is rarely in the best interests of the town to lynch a Villiage Idiot. By conventional measures, they are very scummy, but you have to realize that they are barely playing the same game as us. It is my belief that almost all tells dropped by VI's are useless, the only reason I would lynch a VI is because of a scummy voting record.

FTR, DS's record:

1:(Random) Eroto
2:(Invalid) CTD
3: BZ
4:(Quickchange)HB

The only parts of that record that are possibly scummy are the last two. She could have very easily been fishing around for the most likely wagon (in her clouded opinion).

Essentially, a VI is a gamble with 3:1 odds on lynching a townie. IMO, those aren't good odds, and it takes a lot to convice me to lynch a player I feel is a VI. I think it would be better for the town to move on.


I don't really feel there was much to comment on in my absence. The debate on DS between Pickem and Krav was kind of ridiculous, but I don't know as if either took a particuarlly scummy position (except the fact that Krav was hypocritically trying to focus the spotlight right after slamming Adel for doing so).

My biggest suspicion right now is probably on Blue Zebra. I think I've gotten a feel of his short/sweet playstyle, but I don't like what's coming out of it. Lots of votes in the beginning (the explanation for the Camisade vote is utter crap BTW), but now he just seems to be pushing wagons rather than joining them (Sir T and DS's respectively).

Vote: Blue Zebra

for pressure and thread-energization more than anything else. I hope some of the more intelligent players on the DS wagon will follow me.

[NabakovNabakov]

And I use it all the time as town. Pressure can be a useful thing. (For one, it got you off the hook.)

[NabakovNabakov]

I almost totally forgot we were under deadline.

Mod:

I would like to respectfully request a deadline extension. I don't think the town is at a decision making stage right now.

[NabakovNabakov]

@HB, if you took your vote off because you didn't get a (satisfactory) answer, why did you say you took your vote off because you got an answer?

Whether it was distancing, or it looked like the DS wagon was falling apart, it feels like HB's unvote was far more... tactical than anything else.

FOS: HB

[NabakovNabakov]

IMO, this whole damn game needs a kick in the pants. Camisade is trailing off, BZ hasn't posted in 4 days, Erotomachia is also quite gone, ABR has yet to post content, and Pickem hasn't beaten nearly as much shit as he said he would.

Mod:

Please prod all those you feel would be appropriate to prod.

FOS: Albert, Camisade

for having the most suspicious behavior of all our lurkers.

I'm also finding Sir T's play in this game to be pretty scummy. He's basically avoided posting real content this whole game. He started out by focusing only on the chess game with Adel, then switched to flat out attacking Kravhen with rehashed arguments. I have yet to see anything original from him, and I still don't like the way he explained his playstyle.

Unvote; Vote: Sir Tornado

(My vote will probably do more good if it's on a player who's actually playing)

[NabakovNabakov]

He started out by focusing only on the chess game with Adel, then switched to flat out attacking Kravhen with rehashed arguments. I have yet to see anything original from him, and I still don't like the way he explained his playstyle.

Chess game discussion was in the random stage...

What do you mean by rehashed arguments? No one had made any of those arguments in this game before me.

So, in what way would you like me to explain my playstyle?

You carried it along farther than most of us took the random stage. Even if it isn't scummy, I felt it should be mentioned if I was giving an informal timeline.

I saw you as mainly following on the coattails of Adel in attacking Kravhen. You took what she said and upped the volume. There are a few exceptions, but I definitely wouldn't go so far as to say "no one had made any of those arguments."

This is not "moderately scummy". I am currently appearing on "pro-town" list of most of the town in at least more than half the games I am in.

Something less stupid than this please.

[NabakovNabakov]

Does anybody else think ABR has a posting restriction or something?


@Sir T: Sorry about being cheeky and quoting just that bit, but I really didn't like that that was how you explained away my suspicions of your playstyle. I know this falls more under lynching the player than anything, but I think a playstyle like yours would be very easy for scum to hide in.

[NabakovNabakov]

@Sir T: Right, I get townvibes from your play in Big Love, and scumvibes from your play here. Because you're using the exact same playstyle in both, and we've already established it can be used by scum or town, it pretty much locks the meta-game on you being scum here.

Adel got to her conclusions somehow, possibly by logic (you can't quite tell with Adel). It was adding the black-white, supra-logical framework that you did that I termed "upping the volume." I'm not saying that taking a harder-line approach on Kravhen was all that scummy, but it wasn't all that original either.

@Krav: I would, I have a tendancy to have that type of paranoia too. I don't really see much of a chance for the Sir T wagon overtaking the Haut Boy wagon at this point. It would take 3 more votes (a tie would still go to Haut Boy). I'm attacking Sir T right now because I see him as the scummiest player, and I'm not one to just join the biggest wagon at deadline and hope for the best. I see the case on Haut Boy, and I think it definitely merits the votes he has right now; it would be a good idea to see him pressured, but I'm not sure if it merits a lynch. (I'm kinda' peeved with the Mod for just ignoring my extension request.)

I definitely think all analysis of the deadline will be totally irrelevant before we actually lynch.

[NabakovNabakov]

He can't say, "Well this is just how I always play as town. Here's an example of my scum play. See, totally different."

Sorry for refrencing an ongoing, but he started it.
[/childish]

[NabakovNabakov]

I'm not sure how accurate that VC is, but it seems like we're going for a Sir T lynch. I think that his behavior has been scummy for reasons I have outlined before (so there's no point in me rehashing them to answer why I got scumvibes), and in the deadline situation, he's the player I'm most comfortable with lynching.

However, I find this entire deadline to be very

un

comfortable, and I would have prefered it if we had had more time to deliberate. I feel many players like Albert, BZ, DS, and Camisade are sliding through this day without putting in their part, and no matter what their allignment, it's anti-town.

[NabakovNabakov]

I wonder if any changes in votes will count now that we're technically past deadline.

An unofficial vote count (based on Patrick's in 486)

Adel (5): Albert B. Rampage, deadscilent, Patrick, Erotomachia, Kravhen
Sir Tornado (2) NabakovNabakov, Blue Zebra
Albert B. Rampage (2): Camisade, Adel
Haut Boy (1): Pickemgenius


I'm not sure what to think about Albert's play the last few pages, it's very very obvious that he wants Adel lynched (possibly for meta-game reasons) and this is really his only activity the entire game. I don't like the blatant way in which he has campaigned for this (it definitely smacks of last minute pressure removal from a scumbuddy), but I'm also unsure of Adel's townieness. I'll keep my vote where it is for now because I'm very unsure of who to trust. Hopefully, that will become clearer after the lynch.

[NabakovNabakov]

Not a good D1. I still maintain that we were shoehorned into a lynch we weren't ready for, but we still need to step up the play if we want to catch scum.

I really did consider making a case on Albert, the way he awoke from pointlessness and campaigned for votes on Adel just hours before deadline (in order to get revenge on her for playing poorly in another game) was unquestionably scummy, and even moreso now that Adel has been revealed as our Doc. I know that Albert doesn't have a reputation for subtlety, but I couldn't even see Albert-scum being so blatant. This is essentially where we get to WIFOM, so I'll stop. But I will place a

huge

FOS: Albert

because Occam would have wanted me to.

Additionally: *Standard lurker speech* The first two people who posted today are dead, and only 4 people (myself included) have posted since.

[NabakovNabakov]

@Sir T: Strapped for time. I thought addresing Albert was more important, and the lurker thing was basically auto-pilot.

I'm not one of those players who, if the person they're accusing isn't lynched, just drops their vote back on them the next day. I still think that your early behavior concerning Kravhen was fairly scummy, but your recent analysis (525, 538) definitely strikes "lack of original thinking/suspicions" off my list of scumtells. My Eye is definitely still On You, but now that we've entered a new day, I feel like there's some room to pursue other lines of inquiry.

Your analysis of the Adel wagon is one of those very lines:

On deadscilent: I still hold to VI in this case, but that doesn't mean there isn't information to be had (it's just better to forget the semantics). I think the majority of your analysis fits with erratic VI behavior. The vote for Adel was mysterious, but she actually provided more precedent for it than many of the other things she did.

On Patrick: I pretty much agree with what you had to say here. To a point, I understand Patrick's insistence that we end up with

some

kind of lynch at the end of the day, but I'm not sure if that meshes with his vote for Adel, as he seemed to find both her and Sir T equally scummy.

FOS

On Erotomachia: I do think it was odd that he basically said "I'm willing to do this, but post a case first." It seems kind of wishy-washy, but I guess he

was

deciding the lynch for that day. More than any of the other players, he was badgered by ABR into his vote, but that doesn't exonerate him in the least.

FOS

Hitting preview, I can see that Patrick has posted a defense, but it focuses more on the extraneous and the theoretical than the hop itself. I would also like deadscilent and Erotomachia to comment.

@Albert: Have you decided why I'm scummy yet? I can't wait all day.

[NabakovNabakov]

@Sir T: If you can find the right perspective, just about any post can be seen as "possibly scummy." Besides, I didn't say I got massive pro-town vibes from the posts. I just said that they weren't derivitive of anybody else's, something I had seen as scummy in your eariler posts.

@Patrick: I guess that's what I get for just scanning a post before adding an"on hitting preview" comment. I saw extraneous bits and theory, but I guess I missed why exactly you thought Adel was scummy, so I owe you an apology. However, I think it's odd (especially because you claimed to have had your suspicions of Adel for a while) that you've waited until now to spell them out. In reading your posts at the time, it's just lots of vague "Adel is pretty scummy" remarks. My head was really half-way between those posts and current posts.
[/backpedal]

@Albert: I don't know what being at the "bottom" means exactly, but have fun at the show.

[NabakovNabakov]

^^ I don't think revenge can be counted out as a factor. At the very same time Albert began campaigning for Adel's lynch, Newbie 415 had just ended. Adel's poor play (as a Doc nonetheless) sank the game for the entire town. I believe Albert has said his actions were "based on the newbie game," but I don't think that means he learned a meta-game lesson about Adel's playstyle (if anything, the game indicated that Adel-town can be erratic).

However, when it comes to in-game motives, I think you're generally correct in your evaluation. I don't think he ever actually said he wanted to stop a Sir T lynch, but it definitely shouldn't be ruled out as an ulterior motive. Whether or not the lynch had a factor of meta-revenge just alters if it was a handy excuse for Albert-scum or a horrible motive for Albert-town.

[NabakovNabakov]

Where's everybody?

[NabakovNabakov]

Such is the way of a game with a VI.

However, I'm growing ever more impatient for Albert's case. I expect better from him.

[NabakovNabakov]

Albert, should my expectations of you really be

this

low?

Awaiting Theo's post and DS's replacement. Additionally, Haut Boy hasn't posted all day.

Sorry I don't have much to contribute at this point. My eye is still on Albert even though he was probably acting more out of vendetta than anything else. I'm still holding some suspicions on Sir T, and I will be watching the replacements to both lurkers with scrutiny.

[NabakovNabakov]

That's quite a wall of words. That's probably 10 time's Camisade's total verbage. I look forward to your conclusions and will hold questions until you make them.

Hmm, both you and Pickem have pointed out how I ended up defending the two confirmed townies. In a way, that's no so remarkable as I find myself defending a lot of people. I just thought the argument between Adel and Kravhen needed moderation if the town was going to actually find scum (to bad that didn't work).

[NabakovNabakov]

ChronX: Allow me to introduce you to a little concept called WIFOM. Speculations about when, how, why, or where the scum did something aren't exactly prohibited, but they rarely lead anywhere conclusive. The scum could have killed him because he was on to one of them. OR the scum could have killed him because he was "on to" a lot of people, many of whom might be townies. BUT the scum might have already considered that we'd think that, so they thought it would be perfect cover for killing him if he really

was

on to one of them.

Do you see how that can go on forever in an endless yet completely unproductive cycle? The scum did what the scum did, and we won't know why until the game is over.

[NabakovNabakov]

I'm not sure what the mod was on about there, but it could have been something somebody said in a discussion forum. Like I said, it's not an official offense per-se, but most people have agreed that it doesn't really get you anywhere. WIFOM might be overused in some quarters (we're much more... cautious on this site), but NK analysis is pretty much it's epitome.

[NabakovNabakov]

Damn

Bye Patrick. That'll teach you to mix mafia and talking to people. *dons tinfoil hat*

I'm still awaiting conclusions from Theo, but I'm beginning to think that ChronX's comment about summary versus content had something to it. He also seems much too critical of his past self. I got lurker vibes from Camisade, but the way Theo has treated them seems over the top.

[NabakovNabakov]

@ChronX: We don't have to shut down the game just because Sir T based a vote on a poor meta. It was a stupid, nay, scummy thing to do, but the show must go on. A lot of effort gets put into games, and shutting them down is avoided unless absolutely necessary.

FOS: Sir Tornado

for trying to spin an unfortunate incident into a bandwagon.

[NabakovNabakov]

FOS: Sir Tornado for trying to spin an unfortunate incident into a bandwagon.

One vote is a bandwagon?

Note the "trying." Your vote wasn't made on in-game reasons, so it couldn't have been used to punctuate arguments or apply pressure. (How is somebody supposed to defend themsevles against something like that?) I see no other explanation than a poor attempt at a wagon.


Welcome back Kravhen!

...maybe Adel can replace Patrick.

[NabakovNabakov]

No she doesn't. She was the lynch, and was therefore dead N1. She knows nothing more than we do.

[NabakovNabakov]

I'm fine with the "Player X acted A in this game where he was town, but he's acting B in this game. Let's vote him." meta-game. But I think it's a far cry from "Player X reguarly chats with Player Y outside the thread, so he might have slipped that information."

To a small extent, it's a valid argument (though you're taking too narrow a perspective by saying whoever slipped to Patrick is scum), but it crosses the line. In much the same way we're not supposed to discuss the game outside the thread, it seems unethical to bring in things having nothing to do with the game (or mafia itself really) and use them as arguments to try to get somebody lynched. There's a reason that Patrick withdrew from the game. It was to avoid exactly the kind of behavior you're exhibiting right now.


I too am glad that Deadscilent has gotten a replacement. VI's (scum or town) are a horrible strain on any game. Now we will have a chance to determine her allignment for ourselves (and we already have a handy in-thread meta-game of Kravhen's town play).

[NabakovNabakov]

Pickem: I don't get what you're saying. My main complaint about VI's is that they're unscrutable. Now that we have a competent player in that role, we will actually have behavior to examine. How is that far from the truth?

[NabakovNabakov]

Pickem: You read into me too much. All I said is that we now have a basis to form an opinion. I only mentioned the meta-game as an aside. I don't propose to rigidly adhere to it (you know I'm not a huge meta-gamer), I would treat it as I would a meta from a seperate game (looking for common tells and behavioral tics). I'm not sure how smart it would be to give wieght to differences in who New Kravhen defends or attacks (as opposed to Old Kravhen), it's too obvious WIFOM and feels vaguely unethical.

[NabakovNabakov]

^Looks like somebody got prodded


Has Theo just completely dissappeared? We got half a summary and nothing else.

*Shrug*

[NabakovNabakov]

@Theo: I'm not inclined to just give VI's a completely free pass, but I generally prefer waiting around for them to be replaced (as they almost ineveitably are) to lynching them for being confusing/confused. But the points you bring up do make good sense if we can assume DS was fairly lacking in subtlety (which I think we can). I'm keeping a close eye on New Kravhen as a result.

@ChronX: Albert hasn't exactly gotten a free pass. We're all very pissed at him and it was a stupid thing to do, but I challenge you to spin it into a real scumtell. You can't just scum hunt by indentifying people who play poorly or oddly, you have to look for genuinely scummy motivations. You yourself have commented that Albert's dumbass lynch was cross-gaming. Could that have been a cover? Yes. But at that point, you're pretty much at the mercy of WIFOM.

Blue Zebra seems to be playing a much slower game than the rest of us. It took me a minute to realize that his FOS came 10 pages and one day ago. However, the reasons are still pretty valid, and I will give this one to Albert, this thread needs a good deal more bandwagon. If Eroto won't post, we'll make him post

Vote: Erotomachia

But a general

FOS

on the numerous other lurkers fouling up this game. I defintely count Pickem and Albert among those, and would say that Blue Zebra probably goes up there too. He doesn't post much (Posts-per-thread or words-per-post) and that makes me think he might be hiding, but I just get more of a feeling of conciseness rather than lurking.

[NabakovNabakov]

We have to vote for someone, NOW.

I thought we were close to deadline. I therefore retract this statement.

Why don't you just pretend there's a deadline? That way, you'll actually participate.


I've been considering the attitudes that some of our replacements have taken towards their predecessors. Both Theo and Kravhen have come in for fairly scummy looking characters (Camisade and DS respectively).

Camisade's main crime was lurking and nodding, and Theo came right out and said how scummy that was. Initially, it struck me as odd that he was being pretty brutal to the person he replaced. If he was town, it seems counterintuitive to draw fire towards yourself for something you didn't even do, and about the same principles apply if you're scum. However, I've been seeing some pretty solid stuff out of Theo, and it seems to me like he was just getting past demons out of the way of actually playing.

Kravhen has replaced in for DeadScilent, our VI. While

I

tend to take a stance most reads on VI's are crap, there seems to be a consensus that DS acted scummy. Kravhen's response has been to emphasise how glad he is to know that DS is not, in fact, scum and how happy he is that he can get down to scum hunting (though he seems to be pretty light on that so far). Kravhen himself is a tricky issue. A former townie replacing a scummy-looking VI is not easy player to get a read on

What is comes down to is that we've ended up with two players (three if you count ChronX replacing Haut Boy replacing CTD) who have shady yet hard to defend histories. In some ways, I think Theo is being hypocritical when he votes Kravhen for DS and fingers ChronX for CTD/Haut Boy but expects us to ignore Camisade. I can see where cases based on precessesors can be valid, but I hardly think they're lynch-worthy. I'm far more suspicious (not very) of Kravhen for the way in which he ferverntly mainatined DS's innocnence upon replacing in than I am for all of DS's actions combined. But that's just me.

[NabakovNabakov]

Patrick may have used the "too scummy to be scum" fallacy, but he used it incorrectly. The better snippet to apply here would be the"asinie =/= scum" truth.

[NabakovNabakov]

That might grow legs actually. Interesting....

You're considering kravhen? Why? On Day 1 everyone was pretty much agreed that deadscilent was the VI, and I don't see what kravhen has done today to base a vote off of.

I mayself am not considering Kravhen/DS at this time. But I wouldn't be surprised to see it get some momentum. Pickemgenius seems to have no attention span, so would be a good likely candidate to pile on eventually..as an example.

*Raises eyebrows*

To me, this sounds quite like scum speculating in-thread. "Well this wagon looks like it has momentum. On the other hand, this guy could be an excellent candidate for piling on to."

Town motivation for a lynch: "I think this guy is scum. I have made my case or agreed with somebodys else's case."

Scum motivation for a lynch: "I think this guy is probably going to get lynched. The cases on him are pretty convincing. This could 'grow legs.'"

That post falls squarely into category SCUM. Combine that with the third vote on the Albert wagon which seemed to be "growing legs" at the time, and I think there's a pretty solid case in just the past few pages.

Unvote; Vote: ChronX

@Sir T: It was pretty clear to me that Deadscilent was playing a different game than we were. I realize this is a matter of opinion (and as such, you're entitled to yours), but she seemed to have no conception of the basic strategies and subtleties of mafia, and I think it's unwise to put stock in a read from a player like that.

[NabakovNabakov]

You're kind of twisting the context of my original post on its ear. Theo had asked for a vote count, I gave one, he posted that he was pretty sure he was voting Kravhen, which I misunderstood at the time to mean he was thinking of voting for him (I had missed his post where he already had). I was simply musing aloud that such a vote would probably attract other votes, and thus was interesting. Why interesting? It could be scum, it could be scum bait. Interesting.

Since the vote was ALREADY cast and hasn't attracted a following, I was wrong. My bad.

This whole post reeks of straw. It shifts the fault to a much easier to defend source (a misunderstanding in VC correction). The circumstances under which your were stimulated don't matter one bit, all that matters is that your responded in a very scummy manner. Instead of posting

any

sort of opinion on the Kravhen (or possible-Pickem) wagon in your "musings" you simply estimated its chances of success. You say that you were considering "scum, or scum bait," but you take the side of neither, leaving yourself open and free of commitments as scum like to be.

The only in-game issue I've really seen you commit to in this thread is that it was bad for Albert to lynch the Doc, Albert is therefore bad. That can hardly be considered revolutionary and seems like the stilted logic of scum looking for the easy lynch.

Case in point:

I stand on my vote of Albert. Nothing scummy about voting to -3 the guy who lynched the doc.

[NabakovNabakov]

I posted without reading Nab's post.

Good work there Nab, and upon further review, I'll have to say I agree ChronX smells scum.

Its odd that you'd say that NabNab's analysis is good work when in the previous post you whined in your own defense that:

Well, at least, scum likes to find any little detail they can and turn it in some kind of tell.

NabNab is manufacturing a case out of, to use his own word, "straw". Its nothing. NabNab is trying to make a case on me bacause he must be scum.

unvote ABR
vote NabokovNabokkov

OMGUS?

My case on you is comprehensive and based on your play since replacing in. I don't allow myself to be convinced by weak cases, and I certainly don't allow myself to make them.

PBPA:

First two posts (594/5) are too long to quote in polite company.

594 goes off on a WIFOM streak, which I simply considered as misguided at the time. He posits the idea that Kravhen was NK'd because he was on to something (DS specifically) and places an IMGEOY, but that idea gains no traction (NK speculation = useless), so it never appears again.

595 mentions the fact that Camisade had been holding a low/constant level of suspicion before being replaced (though not actually accusing him of anything scummy, just saying that others have), and then completely ignores the fact that Theo promised conclusions and analysis in a coming post. ChronX posits bussing as an easy way to reconcile it with his above post accusing DS, places an IGMEOY, and promptly drops it when the idea gains little traction.

Geez I pay you a compliment and you toss out a cryptic nugget like that?

This is in reponse to Pickem pointing out that NK speculation is bull and refrencing a very odd section in 954 where ChronX calls Pickem a "clear townie" due to his relationship with DS. That he choose to single out Pickem (I was the one who made the original VI post), and considered it purposed as a "compliment" strikes me as odd. It was probably buddying as opposed to protecting a buddy seeing as how Pickem was the first vote on the ChronX wagon.

Yes. The town lynching Adel becasue someone had a metagame issue with her and cross gamed was much more productive for the town. Thats getting a free pass too, since it would be "WIFOM" to suggest that maybe ABR did that with the EXCUSE that it was metagame but really it was game driven.

WIFOM is thrown around too much...the whole early game is WIFOM. Its a game of logic and deception.

<snip>

In a game of logic and deception, WIFOM can't be thrown around enough. Mafia is not a game where one throws caution to the wind or dismisses a concept like WIFOM because it isn't resulting in enough action. I'm not sure if acknowledging that the case on Albert is WIFOM (at best) and then directly pursuing it is scummy or just stupid. Saying something sarcastically doesn't make it false.


ChronX then takes a few posts to bemoan the meta-state of the game so far. Not much pro or con there. Actual play picks back up at 658:

We have to vote for someone, NOW.

Why? And why have you gotten a free pass for the horrible bandwagon you led against Adel?

A blunt continuation of the flawed case on Albert. He eventually concedes the flaw but continues the case:

Couldn't HE have explained that more verbosely? I am not saying his bandwagon on Adel was scummy per se (/agree, endless loop of WIFOM to go down that road with nothing else to go on)...he just doesn't really add much to the game when he ISN'T lynching the doc. IMHO.

Vote: ChronX

Strong case, there. Do you have a posting restriction?

A hint of overdefensiveness here.

I don't like the fact that Albert is being let off due to the "too scummy to be scum" fallacy.

Who's using the "too scummy to be scum" fallacy?

At least one place, Patrick in 557 said:

Even if Tornado turns out to be scum, I wouldn't rush to crucify Albert. It would be a very bold scum move to try and create a counterwagon so late in the day to save a scumbuddy, with a high chance of failing, then backfiring and getting Albert into trouble as well.

I think this has been the general theme of the discussion about ABR leading the lynch mob to Adel. To wit: 'Scum wouldn't do that, he just lost his mind'.

vote Albert

Huh?

A vote for Albert because Patrick made an observation that might have been a fallacy that doesn't really apply to the situation anyway. An interesting thing to note about ChronX's offense against Albert leading up to this vote:

At no time does ChronX actually accuse Albert of being scum.

He accuses him of leading a bad bandwagon and he accuses him of being a poor contributer, but he can never actually muster the case or the guts to actually say he's scum. Once again you get the conflict of lynching to lynch Vs. lynching to lynch scum.

The rest of ChronX's play has already been closely covered.

Summary:
-Opening fishing for leads to a wagon. Judging by how quickly they disappeared, his IMEGOY's on DS and Theo were clearly faked.
-Odd (buddying?) behavior in relation to Pickem
-Doublethinking WIFOM (both acknowledging and ignoring it)
-A cooked-up vote on Albert on evidence which has been repeatedly proved as flimsy
-Paying more attention to wagons than players
-Overdefensiveness/OMGUS


Lynch please.

[NabakovNabakov]

I don't see the ChronX case. If he made a weak argument against me, it only makes sense that he unvoted. The question here is why did ChronX vote you ??

It's not the strength of the argument. It's the motivation. A "die suck scum die die lynch die kthxbye" argument is annoying, but at least it shows more conviction than what ChronX has done.

[NabakovNabakov]

Hmm...

It seems that De3ist and Theo have made my long-windedness a bit wasted, but I'll post what I had going before I hit preview.



"A few points:

Calm =/= not attacking people- It's very possible to have calm, focused attacks (like mine) or impassioned defenses. To call a player "calm" is very different than calling a player "wishy-washy." A calm player who is still willing to defend or attack players based on what they see as scummy or not is a far cry from a player who refuses to take a position (like you or Erotomachia). If you would read theo's post again, you might notice that his evaluations of Eroto and myself are not identical.

Please detail the flaws in my logic. How was I twisting the context of your posts?(and does the context really matter?) Why is my argument made of straw? Why is my reasoning specious? What actions of yours am I misrepresenting? All I've heard is a load denunciations and very little rebuttal. This sidebar with Theo's evaluations of me and Eroto is just another straw man. Face my arguments head on and prove them wrong.

Also, nice snip on my actual case against Sir T.


@Albert: I would probably look at Eroto if I wasn't able to vote ChronX. He's been acting along very similar lines and lurking to boot (he's been especially quiet since the ChronX case picked up), but his case is more proving a negative, and I feel much better with the positive scumtells I'm getting off ChronX. (Positive in the mathematical sense)"

Another addition:

@ Albert: You flatter me, but from an objective standpoint, I don't think an anecdote and reverse psychology is enough to justify a lynch.

[NabakovNabakov]

Considering myself lucky to have lived until now ( as deadscilent's replacer ), it's time for me to

Claim: Watcher

.

Last night I followed NabNab. He paid Sir Tornado a little visit. 'Nuff said.
Before me, deadscilent followed Albert but didn't see him visit anyone.

Obviously, I will

Vote: NabNab

and encourage everyone to do the same. I've never been a watcher before and I would've claimed yesterday if it could've saved my skin at the brink of a lynch on me, but thankfully I live for one more day just like I had hoped because I wanted to have a target of my own after deadscilent's N1 action. I targeted NabNab because I've always had mixed feelings about him and I was interested in what he could show me.

I'm pleased, very pleased.

Obviously crap.

Vote: Kravhen

Think about what's happening here. It's very likely that we're in LYLO. Watcher is something that's unlikely to be counter-claimed. The scum need one more townie lynch. They were guaranteed support from Albert, so that just means convincing one other townie before they pile aboard. I still think Albert is (severly misguided) town, but Kravhen is obvscum.

I realize that this is a word v. word situation. Here's his:

NabNab did something quite different. He elaborates on his position.
IMO, that second part of your post stinks, alot. What I mean is, I think thats the part that gives you away. Just like BlueZebra, I'm convinced.

Unvote Vote: ChronX

Way too easy.

Oh wait, I thought it was:

I targeted NabNab because I've always had mixed feelings about him and I was interested in what he could show me.

*shrug*

[NabakovNabakov]

There is no counterclaim. I stayed in my house last night. I am a townie. This town is right on the brink of losing, and it's too bad that there's no evidence I can call upon to refute this bogus claim; it's too bad that Albert's arrogance may very well lose the game for us.

But it's not too late. The scum have put their cards on the table for this one. If we can see through the bluff, wrapping this game up might not ba as hard as it seems.

[NabakovNabakov]

Wrapping it up = getting all the scum in the next three days. We're at a pivitol point. If I am lynched, the town loses (barring any setup wackiness). If we lynch scum (you), we have a good chance of catching all the scum based on how they acted today. The context isn't that hard to understand. You were just twisting my words.

[NabakovNabakov]

I was wondering why I was getting such voiciferous support from D3isted. I guess the scum didn't count on a

real

investigative role targeting me last night.

But, split as we are, I don't think NabNab, D3isted, Pickem, Kravhen, and Albert are going to come to a conclusion by ourselves. I'd like to hear more out of Eroto (characteristically noncomittal), Theo (bascially gone since Kravhen's claim), and BZ (single "gut" vote). This is not a time for silence.

[NabakovNabakov]

I'm down with that.

Unvote; Vote: Desisted

(Simulpost)

Huh? I can see no discernable reason why D3isted would be scum, but forgetting an investigation + self-voting = WTF?

[NabakovNabakov]

Actually, I believe 3 townies Vs. 3 scum = townies endgamed.

Even if the townies know who all the scum are, the best they can manage is 3 votes, not a lynch. That day would probably be ended by a deadline where whichever group was lucky enough to place all their votes first wins (a kind of coin-flip usually avoided by mods).

If we

don't

lynch today, then we get another day. Could be useful in figuring out which claim to trust (a.k.a. the one that gets NK'd).

[NabakovNabakov]

Guys. Two words. Mafia Godfather.

The Mafia Godfather who made the kill last night?
You're really reaching now.


Good catch on DS's claim.

[NabakovNabakov]

Guys. Two words. Mafia Godfather.

The Mafia Godfather who made the kill last night?
You're really reaching now.


Good catch on DS's claim.

Why wouldn't he make the kill ? Knowing you, your probably the most active.

What does being active have to do with making a kill? I'm amazed and impressed at your ability to ignore everything in your mad pursuit of my lynch, but if you honestly want to "sort this out," you might want to take a step back and look at what's happening here. You

vowed

to lynch me yesterday, don't you think it's possible that the scum are just playing off that? Are you just going to completely dismiss DS's claim? Are you just going to assume that not only am I scum, and not only did I make the kill last night, but I'm a Godfather too? Seriously man, show a bit of perspective.

[NabakovNabakov]

Ok

Unvote

Here's an idea that I've had brewing for a day or so:

Basically, Kravhen's claim and D3isted's claim can't

both

be true. One has to be lying, and I don't think anybody lies at LyLo other than the scum. Therefore we have two situations:

Kravhen is not lying, D3isted is: I am scum, D3isted is scum, the third scum can probably be gleaned by what goes down during the other two lynches.

D3isted is not lying, Kravhen is: Kravhen is scum, I am town, the other two scum might be able to be gleaned from what goes down today and tomorrow.

Now at first, I thought that a "No Lynch" would provide a definite result. The scum kill the investigative role who's telling the truth, and we instantly know where to go from there. However, there's a good chance the scum will just kill off whoever and leave us with much less info. On the one hand, free investigation! But on the other, we don't know which one of those investigations to trust. (Well... I will, but that's beside the point)

So a "No Lynch" will likely (we never know) not be definitive, but if we're trying to sort things out, I don't see how another night's info won't hurt. Another confirmed townie, another investigation from the

real

cop to follow once we lynch the fake watcher. There will be a choice to be made, but I say we make it with the most info possible.

Vote: No Lynch

I never liked him that much anyway.

[NabakovNabakov]

Wait a second, why are you even speculating when you know your own alignment? If you are really town, then it should be obvious kravhen is lying.

It's very obvious to me, but saying that over and over isn't going to convince anybody, and it takes more than one person to lynch. A No Lynch could provide others with concrete information.

I'm town, you're the cop, we just need a way to prove it to everybody else. I suppose the possibility of my being Godfather throws a wrench in the works, but I still don't see what everybody finds so appealing about the idea. I know there's some WIFOM involved, but think about it, would a Godfather, who just raced the lynch of a townie, even

consider

making the kill himself?

@Albert: So we all unvote to try to sort things out like civilized people and your conclusion is to randomly pile on to somebody else? I'm still wondering if you're a jester or something.

@Pickem: Can we

please

have a post that makes use of word-wrap?

[NabakovNabakov]

*sigh*

Despite it's flaws, the No Lynch plan still seems like the right idea to me, but the whole point was to try to build some sort of consensus, so I guess it's not going to work any better than pointing fingers did.

Unvote

Damn these conspiracy theories!

However, I'd like to hear from D3isted why my idea makes me scum.

Anyone want to help me out with the numbers?

The two claims are diametrically opposed

unless

I am a Godfather and made the kill last night. As far as a 3 scum setup is concerned with no Vigs or Docs or other wackiness, we're in LyLo as of now. I don't see what a mass-claim would accomplish.

[NabakovNabakov]

I think Nab, D3sisted and krav are all be town...

"Why?" Is a good question (I think Theo already covered it nicely)

"Then who?" is also good.

And then, of course, "Why?" again.

[NabakovNabakov]

I think Nab should give us a lengthly analysis, as I think he is insightful town. Godfather roles aren't that common in normal minis anyway.

Finally.

I'm perfectly willing to provide insight on individuals, but it would be ridiculous not to comment on the past few pages.

Once again, the game is broken into a dichotomy. There is one missing variable that can cause the game to go down one of two paths. I almost tried to do this post by listing the truths what would apply to a situation where Kravhen is lying and a situation where he's telling the truth. I got so far as "Kravhen is Lying: He is scum, Albert is his scumbuddy" before I stopped. It just

doesn't

make sense that way.

If you were scum fake-claiming watcher, and things started to go south, what would you do? You would distance, that's what you'd do. Only insane people would tie themselves directly to town

or

scum the way Kravhen did. If Albert is scum, then you're just taking him down with you for no fucking reason. If he's town, he'd obviously refuse to back the mason claim. Kravhen made an absoultely idiotic play, but I don't think he's gone off the deep end yet.

So what does that leave us with if we still want to think Kravhen is scum? Traitorous Masons? It's a possibility, and judging by the power dynamic as Kravhen described it, it would actually possible for

either

to be the scummy mason, but that bascially takes that argument into a pretty wacky realm (Side-Note: If the Mason PM confirms the innocence of the partner, it would be helpful if

both

Albert and Kravhen were to confirm that). Just rememberd,

one

more possibility, WIFOM. Rereading the above section, I realized that I could be falling for an amazingly complex ruse, but I think that's even less likely than the traitorous mason idea.

So here's the other end of it. Kravhen is telling the truth. He and Albert came up with a stupid plan that almost lost it for the town, and it was only a lucky cop investigation (that required a frickin' claim) that saved us. It seems absolutely bizzare and completely outside the realm of "good" play, but at least there's

something

to it. There's motive, there's a plan.

In summary:
@Kravhen/Albert: What the fucking hell?! Are you

retarded

you insane motherfuckers?! That claim is ridiculous! ... but I believe it.

So I've basically come to the conclusion that the following players are town:
-Me (duh)
-D3isted (duh again)
-Albert (As I've maintained on faith)
-Kravhen (Major surprise)

So 3 of the following 4 players must be scum:
-Pickem
-Theo
-Eroto
-Blue Zebra

Not bad for a crazy-ass day, but there's always the slight possibility of mislynching even now. I'm not sure what Albert means by analysis (I am

not

doing 4 full-game PBPA's), and I don't have a whole lot of time to even do blurbs on the players right now (they're coming though). I think with the list of possible scum pared down to so few, connections should make themselves much clearer, so it might actually be a better idea to develop some idea of the scum

group

and go from there. I need to spend some time with these new insights and threads with the player filters turned on. What Kravhen did was asinine, but it might have also been the key to winning this game (in a roundabout manner).

[NabakovNabakov]

Why the strikethrough on Theo?

Can we have something beyond "roflcopter" on Kravhen's claim?

[NabakovNabakov]

Hmm...

I keep tying to explain why I think Kravhen is being genuine, but I keep bumping up against the "too scummy to be scum" fallacy, and I know that won't hold water. But I think there is an angle. Kravhen claimed Masons with Albert. OK, could be the last ditch maneuver of scum. Just about the entire town epxresses their entire lack of belief. Only after this happens does Albert confirm. Even if Albert and Kravhen had decided on this as their backup plan, provide a single reason why Albert would back Kravhen's claim when just about the entire town was against him.

I did decide to take your advice though, and I'm almost certain where my scum shoes would be right now if they wanted a mislynch. They'd be voting Kravhen on a policy lynch and praying for the hammer. Somehow, voting the fake-claiming mason-of-a-crazy-person seems

too

easy.

[NabakovNabakov]

Unvote

(No Lynch is just silly at this point)

Still examining possibilities, but I don't like either of the votes that just went down.


@BZ: Are you proposing an Albert-Kravhen-Eroto scumgroup?

[NabakovNabakov]

Eroto?

Classic lurker. Fake or non-existant scum-hunting. I suspect working him over would have been one of the top priorities of the day had we not been waylaid by all this silliness (I remember somebody voted him right off the bat). He hasn't said much of substance or placed a vote

all day

. The lack of content is obvioulsy a scumtell, but I don't know what to make of the lack of voting.

[NabakovNabakov]

Hmm. Would I be wrong if I were to propose you are a scum that, faced with this outworldly scenario, cannot afford to let the chance slip to mislynch a last townie for the win? By being extremely aggressive towards me, at first glance one might think he's just being extremely town because my scenario is pretty fucked up, scenarios like this are ones that almost never happen in game, yet scum keep dreaming about them, about THE slip, THE odd move, that one clumsy play that will allow them to move into attack phase while looking townie for doing so. It's very interesting for me to see how this develops. I believe a good townie would always leave space in his mind for every possibility, every little bit of chance for a scenario to exist, to be openminded rather than narrowminded stuck on what's most obvious. It's lylo, after all. And you seem way too dead set on getting me lynched, with other, scummy, people roaming around. From my perspective it feels like you'll be a pissed off/disappointed scum if I do get out of this interesting crap and then lynch a scum

I still support the Mason claim, but

this

is ridiculous.

If you are assuming that I am town, then D3isted would have to be the worst scum in the world if he was scum at all. You talk about "THE" slip... that slip came when you claimed evidence you didn't have on a townie in LyLo. All the scum would have had to do to take advantage of that slip was vote me. Under no circumstances does "Claim an innocent on the falsely accused townie in LyLo in the hopes that you might be able to policy-lynch the accuser" come up in the scum playbook. Additionally, you're in no position to tell us what a good townie should do, espeically when you're advocating caution and not jumping to conclusions.

@Pickem: Would you like to elaborate on your "silent confidence" in regards to BZ?

[NabakovNabakov]

If we end up with one vote on each person do we win a prize?

Waiting for Pickem's explanation of his vote. This could be important.

[NabakovNabakov]

I'm no master of game balance, but I wouldn't say that Cop+Doc+Masons is game-breakingly unbalanced. Cop + Doc + RB/Vig doesn't seem uncommon, and a Mason pair is a bit stronger than an RB or Vig, but not much. (Remember, they're most effective after one has died anyway.)

I would say Cop + Doc + Masons leans towards the town about as much as Cop + Doc (the setup Pickem is basically proposing) leans towards the scum.

This just seems to be a case of outguessing the mod.

[NabakovNabakov]

3 scum+cop+doc+7 townies= the generally accepted most balanced game. *there was a poll somewhere in MD*

I believe that was decided to be the "classic" mafia setup. I don't know what guarantees were made on balance.

I just don't understand your logic here. When Kravhen made his second claim, you basically fence-sat for a couple pages, only piping up when somebody threatened you personally, and then came down with a vote for Blue Zebra. Now, you claim that your entire veiw of the game has changed because of

balance issues

? I don't buy that.

cop+doc+2masons=unbalanced.

fuck how was something that obvious so blind to me. better yet how has everyone missed that fact.

Do you really expect us to believe that this made you smack your forehead and realize that Albert/Kravhen are scum?

This is just a screen of bullshit to mask a change in tactics. Not enough people were taking interest in Blue Zebra and you had been backed into a corner in explaining your vote ("fuck BZ"). Albert wasn't so bad an idea.

D3isted-Cop, well intentioned as he is, was guaranteed town support
Theo-scum had already established a precedent for distrusting the claim
If you could have gotten me or BZ (known wagoner) aboard, Eroto-scum could have done the only thing he's good for and hammered. Odds weren't half-bad.

Seems like this town will see another day.

Vote: Pickemgenius

[NabakovNabakov]

You seem to think kravhen would be scum even without the balance issues. Why did you vote for me instead?

i wanted you to say stuff.


like stuff like you just said.


that is actually being helpful.

Also bullshit. You never made any indication that you were voting for pressure/content. On D2 you said you would lynch BZ if you couldn't lynch ChronX, and today, you called your reasons for voting him "obvious."

Can we just lynch Scum #1 already?

Also, Scum #3 hasn't posted in a week.

Mod:

Prod Erotomachia Please.

[NabakovNabakov]

@D3isted: You're exactly right. If Kravhen and Albert are scum, Kravhen put Albert in a very uncomfortable position. If Albert confirms the claim, it links the two. If Albert denies the claim, Kravhen is guaranteed lynched and Albert will get put under some heavy suspicion. (BTW, I would say that denying would actually be the best choice for Albert-scum. A situation where Kravhen fingers a total townie as his masonbuddy as he goes down would probably be plausible enough to keep the D4 lynch off)

But here's the big question, Why the hell would Kravhen put Albert in that spot? If you want to talk about decisions that don't make sense, let's talk about that one first. Actually, why would Albert

tell

Kravhen to put him on the spot? Remember that Albert was the one who told Kravhen to claim ("You're being stupid. Let go"). I dare you to tell me how Albert's actions, as warped as Albert is, can make

any

sense as scum.

[NabakovNabakov]

@Kravhen: It would be grossly against the idea of a Closed Setup if the Mod were to confirm or deny the existence of any roles, but I think it's fair to clarify what rules would apply to those roles whether or not they existed.

I believe most games have confirmation-talking, but I have seen a few that didn't. But I'm pretty confident in saying that unless a Role PM expclicitly states that confirmation-talking is forbidden, people will do it in good conscience.

[NabakovNabakov]

That game rocked. I'm gonna miss the rush.

[NabakovNabakov]

Eh

At least you voted. Eroto was MIA most of D3 when we could have really used his vote. If he had been more active, this game could have ended with a Kravhen or Albert lynch.

I personally have to say I was shocked when Kravhen came out with his Watcher claim. I even PM'd Atticus to make sure there wasn't some kind of mistake. Once he unclaimed, it all made so much damn sense that I couldn't help but pull the win out. I'm just ever so glad D3isted took the bait and investigated me. I would never have come down so heavy on ChronX if I wasn't trying to draw the investigation.

[NabakovNabakov]

It would have been completely out of character for me to drop the 4th vote in that situation, but I too had my eyes peeled for the hammer opportunity.

[NabakovNabakov]

Wait?

What?

I didn't even bother to check who had what role. I just assumed Kravhen and Albert were telling the truth.

So let's see:
Albert basically acted like a Serial Killer without a kill
D3isted helped lynch a confirmed innocent
Kravhen fake claimed... twice

Suddenly I don't feel so proud of winning this game.