Mini 500 - Cult Mafia - Game Over!

[vollkan]

Vote: Trojan Horse

You Greeks cannot fool me!

[vollkan]

*gasp* I do not approve of this.

Correct me if I am wrong, but wasn't the "edit" quoted by Pwayne part of Blackstrike's signature.

This is kind of obvious when you consider that blackstrike posted at:

Wed Sep 05, 2007 10:14 am Post subject: 13

But the signature edit thing reads:

Last edited by Dr. Blackstrike on Sat Sep 01, 2007 12:45 am; edited 1 times in total

Unless blackstrike has a TARDIS, there is nothing odd about it...

[vollkan]

How many townies are in the game?

Can't help you there.

I would say that in this game, a townie lynch is almost as good as a scum lynch.

Why? Townies are the lifeblood of the cult. No townies= no recruits, No recruits= good.

Therefore, any townie claim should be punishable by lynch.

Interesting. It is true that any claimed vanilla will almost certainly be cultised but a townie lynch is not "almost as good" as a scum lynch. If we get into the situation where someone is forced to claim vanilla, then we are basically forced to lynch a townie. It is not a good thing; it is a situation best avoided.

Plus, remember that even if the vanilla lynches hurt the cult, they help the mafia. There are two enemies we need to consider.

In short, if someone does claim vanilla they really force our hand. But that just demonstrates that the vanillas should do all they can to avoid having to claim.

Other things:

a) How much of an effect would it have on balance if the cult leader was the day one lynch?
b) How many townies are likely in the game? There need to be enough to give the cult a chance along with power roles to help us get the cult/mafia.

a) Depends on the set-up
b) I've never been in a cult game before, so I can't really say.

Therefore:

I think that townies should try get killed by the mafia. It hurts the cult.

This is so wrong!
IF every vanilla began to try and get killed by the scum (I assume that you mean that the vanillas should play very well and draw attention to themselves) then the logical response for the scum would be to target quieter players and for the cult to target the loudest. This ends up in WIFOM, of course, but the point is that imposing some sort of uniform strategy will only serve to sort power roles from vanillas. In short, your strategy does the very OPPOSITE of what you suggest its purpose is.

[vollkan]

Cross-posted.

Well my point is that townies are the lifeblood of the cult and if all the townies die than the cult is nuetralized.

Read my post above. This logic is utterly pro-scum. (I say pro-scum to distinguish it from anti-town that also helps the cult)

[vollkan]

I just read the rules again and we have exactly 4-6 recruitable people.

Reading from the front page:
12 players: 1 Cult. 2 Scum. 2-4 power roles.
Therefore, 5-7 are vanilla.

[vollkan]

I had a thought: how on earth are we going to handle claims at the start of the game? Once we've reached a consensus on who is scummy, should we demand a claim from that person? If we do, and that person says "townie", we're in a bit of a pickle. It may well be best to lynch them; they may be lying, and even if they're not, it'll deny the cult a possible recruit.

I said this back in post #34.

At this stage of the game, I think the only real difference the cult makes to play strategy is that it provides a good reason for lynching claimed vanillas. A vanilla lynch is still very bad, because it helps the scum, but it is better than the cult gaining members.

I don't think lynching vanillas is a good idea. Period. Lets get the cult recruiter D1 so we don't even have to worry bout it. Kk?

Easier said than done.

I'm gonna have to agree with this post entirely. Everything I've heard from you has been from a 'culty' point of view. You just really seem like you don't want to help the town that much and are more worried about eliminating the amount of recruitable townies...aka...the vanilla ones...

I'm not a fan of your play...and I think pressure would be a nice discussion starter right now...Unvote, Vote: Dr. Blackstrike

Hang on. You are saying that BS sounds 'culty' because he wants to eliminate the vanillas? And you voted on the basis of this.

While there may be instances where lynching vanilla is of benefit, I think those instances are rare. But yes, we are better of we dead vanillas then recruited vanillas.

To me, this strategy just seems like the cult is all that matters here. THERE IS STILL A MAFIA, AND THEY DO HAVE A WIN CONDITION. Lynching vanillas fights back against the cultists, but is basically helping the mafia get closer to a win.

You're misrepresenting what was said. Pwayne was clearly not calling for the lynch of vanillas, he was saying (as I have been also) that a dead vanilla is better than a claimed and therefore recruited vanilla.

I'm not advocating lynching townies as much as I'm advocating them trying to be killed in the night by the mafia. Why? I repeat, because it's another night that has gone by without a power role dying and one less potential cultist.

Wouldn't a townie want the mafia to kill the CULTISTS...so the town could, I dunno. Win?

There are real problems with vanillas trying to be NKed, I addressed those earlier. Of course, ideally the mafia will NK the cultists, but second to that the best thing is for the mafia to NK vanillas. It means we don't lose our power roles and it makes the cult's job more difficult.

Flame's voting basis is ridiculous. His subsequent attempts to justify it on the basis of pressure ignore the fact that discussion was happening anyway. Plus, he seems adamantly against the lynching of vanillas. "Period".

Unvote, Vote: Flameaxe

[vollkan]

Tell me right now, what is the fucking problem with not wanting to lynch vanillas? Nothing wrong with trying to lynch the goddamn scum.

Nobody is calling for the lynch of all vanillas; that's a strawman you have raised.

Let me make this perfectly clear to you: A lynch of a mafia or cult leader is great. That is what we want. However, if someone claims vanilla then it makes sense to lynch them, since they will in all likelihood be culted. It is not that vanilla lynches are good, nobody except the mafia will want a vanilla lynch, but it is a practical necessity in a cult game.

The way he (and alot of people so far) have been viewing this game is that it is Town Vs. Cult. I don't really like repeating myself so many times like this, but what the hell. Mafia. That should be all I have to say.

Way back in #34 I even said:

Plus, remember that even if the vanilla lynches hurt the cult, they help the mafia. There are two enemies we need to consider.

And you know what, in BS's next post he admitted I was correct. His plan was anti-town, sure, but he abandoned it once it was pointed out and it really just looks like a honest mistake.

Since then, nobody has said "Vanilla lynches are good" and ignored the mafia. The point, which you evidently miss, is that a dead vanilla is better than a claimed vanilla who will get recruited.

Get rid of the cult recruiter early, get rid of the scum later, win.

Your logic is just so wrong. You seem to be saying that we should not lynch claimed vanillas but we should lynch the cult recruiter. Fine. Let's say person X is the recruiter. If X is put at L-1, I wonder what role X will claim....vanilla most likely.

If you can explain to me how we go about lynching the recruiter (or Mafia) and being certain that they are the recruiter/mafia then I would love to hear it.

If you still think my vote was entirely baseless, please go back to pages 1 and 2 and read some of the things he had to say. They all look necessarily
anti-town to me. (Not from the culty perspective exactly, but anti-town.)

You've admitted the culty label was wrong.

His plan was anti-town, but he abandoned it once I pointed out how flawed it was. That said, he was correct about lynching claimed vanillas and he was right to suggest that vanillas being NKed is a good way for the cult to be weakened (though his plan was deeply flawed in terms of execution).

[vollkan]

There is one way around all the controversy: Nobody claim vanilla townie until the recruiter is dead. I think that is at the root of everything. If nobody claims, nobody gets lynched and nobody appears scummy for going after townies.

Well, there are two circumstances where people might claim:
1) My randomly mentioning it in discussion (I have seen this in other games, people just saying "I'm vanilla")
or;
2) At L-1 if they are forced to claim

1) is always a bad idea even in a regular game and here it provides a good case for being lynched.

2) is slightly more complicated. If a vanilla is at L-1 and is asked to claim, they basically have 3 choices:
a) Claim vanilla = Lynched
b) Don't claim anything = By not claiming they are indicating they are vanilla (or potentially scum/cult leader who does not want to risk claiming a power role). Hence, they are effectively doing the same thing as a).
c) Claim a power role. This gives rise to another 3:
i) They claim a role which nobody else has. No counter-claim & probably NKed
ii) They get counter-claimed. They will be lynched and counter-claimer gets NKed. Not good, obviously.
iii) They claim a role someone else has, but that person does not counter-claim. This should cause the power-claiming vanilla to be NKed. If not, then things get confusing.

All in all, things are messy...

[vollkan]

Cross-posted.

That being said, I DO NOT THINK ANYONE SHOULD CLAIM Day 1. There has been a lot of talk about claiming or when to claim, but I do not think it is a good idea.

See my post above for how messy the claiming thing is. The only circumstance where claiming today will be pro-town is if you are a power role at L-1, other than that a claim will likely be of no help.

[vollkan]

Just for the record, my vote on Flameaxe was and is totally random.

Then unvote.

Why is everyone voting Flameaxe?

I don't know about this bandwagon on Flameaxe; to me, he hasn't acted any scummier than anyone else.

I'll give my reasons:
1) Making a serious vote for BS on the basis of BS being 'culty'. A nonsensical justification (and possibly a freudian one)
2) Justifying the vote on the basis of pressure and discussion. BS was already talking and discussion was already happening
3) Misrepresenting the case for lynching claimed vanillas, presumably to legitimise his vote on BS

[vollkan]

Seems a bit odd that tyhess has gotten several votes on him in quick succession...

It's only 2; that's barely a wagon.

[vollkan]

Yeah, I don't know what's going to make me look scummy or not. (That probably made me look scummy, but I wouldn't know.)

Its not your problem IF you're town. Your problem is finding scum, not getting out squeaky clean.

For the record, I said almost exactly the same thing as Rump is saying now in my first game of mafia. The "everything I say can be turned against me" fear is something I had and which a lot of newbies whinge about.

[vollkan]

Mod Edit

Official Vote Count #5

Flameaxe[3](Dr. Blackstrike, Oman, vollkan)
tyhess[2](Trojan Horse, curiouskarmadog)
Dr. Blackstrike[1](Mastermind of Sin)

Not Voting[6](ac1983fan, theopor_COD, pwayne66, Flameaxe, Rump-Wat, tyhess)

I'll try to kickstart this:

Rump explaining

Mostly because he seemed to misinterpret BS's post to, as vollkan said, legitimize his post . However, looking back, I can understand how anyone would misinterpret that.

This doesn't explain anything really.
The reasons in brief given by me were:

1) Making a serious vote for BS on the basis of BS being 'culty'. A nonsensical justification (and possibly a freudian one)
2) Justifying the vote on the basis of pressure and discussion. BS was already talking and discussion was already happening
3) Misrepresenting the case for lynching claimed vanillas, presumably to legitimise his vote on BS

Fine, you think 3) is possibly understandable; but what about the rest of these?

Also, Tyhess respond to CKD and Pwayne.

[vollkan]

Mainly because he jumped to the Doctor's defence - I can see scum doing this if Doctor's town - he was incredibly scummy first three or so pages and doesn't want us to assert pressure and bullying tactics to catch scum - I see that as very anti-town whatever the method of game. Seperately I've seen a lot of scum do them list things, ppl think they look great, so scum do the odd one liners to impress. Anyways all for now.

Well, I also said that BS looked like he had simply made an "honest mistake" and Oman said that

I think our good doctor has tried (and phailed!) to come up with a good plan.

So, in terms of "defending" BS, Pwayne is hardly singular.

Something else,

Mainly because he jumped to the Doctor's defence

and now,

I don't like pwayne more for his suggestion to not use pressure votes and bully players etc. Plus his recent list doesn't sit too well with me.

Subtle shift. People criticise you for voting on the basis of Pwayne defending BS, so you shift you main reason to being the opposition to bullying, which was a minor factor from before.

Does this mean that your basis for suspecting Pwayne is that he is opposed to bullying tactics? If so, why does that make him more likely to be scum? I personally have no problem with bullying tactics, but I have encountered many players that oppose them.

[vollkan]

It's more the tone of your post that I find an over-reaction.

The post, I presume:

I don't like that vote on Pwayne at all. I think the defence of a play whos alignment is unknown should not factor into the concept at all. We have three factions here, only one of them knows who the others in their faction are (there is only one cultist now, scum know eachother). I don't like the idea of Pwayne being scum because BS looks scummy, but you say Pwayne is scummy is BS is town as well...hmmm.

I don't like it really.

I don't see any "tone" beyond a slight hint of Oman being suspicious of you. Given the basis for your vote, however, I think that is wholly reasonable.

FoS: Theo

[vollkan]

Ok looking back the tone doesn't seem all that bad, it did originally jump out at me that Oman commented on nothinge else and I found it puzzling that he (Oman) doesn't express any outright suspicion on me, it's more a defence of Pwanye if that makes sense - probably not. I guess if anything I over-reacted to Oman's original post

Wait, hang on. You accused him over-reaction but now you are saying you were actually puzzled he did not suspect you outright?

And no, don't try to turn this into a game of people defending Pwayne, the issue is people attacking your vote.

I've got my eye on pwayne because I found him defending Blackstrike more than anyone, asking Curious/Flame in 45 to not bully him, not use pressure votes to extract information.

Way to go and dodge the shifting I just pointed out:
[quote="Vollkan]
Something else,

Mainly because he jumped to the Doctor's defence

and now,

I don't like pwayne more for his suggestion to not use pressure votes and bully players etc. Plus his recent list doesn't sit too well with me.

Subtle shift. People criticise you for voting on the basis of Pwayne defending BS, so you shift you main reason to being the opposition to bullying, which was a minor factor from before.
[/quote]

Now what you have just done is to combine them all together as salient factors, but it is yet another shift from your previous positions.

As far as pwayne not being the only one to defend Blackstrike again I'm being overly attacking towards him, I will say he was more defensive than anyone else but Oman, Volkan do both show support for him only after Tyhess votes Blackstrike for acting oddly. Oman then shows support, Trojan follows up straight after - more a following kinda post - similar to his one above, Volkan you then do so.

I find it interesting that you represent several people taking a common position (which happens to be against your view or your vote) as "following".

Hence perhaps I'm being severly misguided on Pwayne's defensive nature, defensive players could just as likely be town/scum and without having any prior knowledge of meta-gaming of Pwayne unvote - after all I only re-read properly a couple of hours ago.

I don't see why you only recently re-reading affects your ability to vote for sensible reasons.

For that very slippery response, you've been upgraded to first class:

Unvote, Vote: Theo

[vollkan]

[quote"BS"]

Ok to finish early good list - Flameaxe, Curious, Volkan. Not really any vibe - MoS, Oman, ac1983fan, Trojan Horse. Not liking a lot probably due to newbishness/scummyness - RumpWat, Tyhess. Not liking even less - pwayne66, Dr.B.

Does anyone else see the odd thing I notice about this list?
[/quote]

The fact that Theo says he doesn't like one group due to "scummyness" but then lists Pwayne and BS as "even less" initially looked a little odd to me, but not after I thought about it. It looks like he is just saying that you two are the top of his suspect list.

Unless, as I suspect, you are talking about something else.

[vollkan]

My town-looking list includes: Pwayne and CKD for now (I feel like I've forgotten someone).

Scum-looking list includes: Flameaxe and Theo

Cult-looking list includes: CKD and tyhess (of course, it can only be one).

I'm not on the list; I may be the person you forgot.

And Oman. Everthing That I beleive about Theo was summed up by Vollkwagon.

I am a little put off by Tyhess's voting rationale. I really dislike it when people just vote on the basis of someone else being persuasive. Inevitably, we all form our impressions based off other people's arguments from time to time, but it still frustrates me a bit when Tyhess explains his actions simply by saying that I summed it all up.

I am getting a very newbie read on Tyhess, more than scummy at the moment.

[vollkan]

Now why am I voting for the suspected mafia instead of suspected cultist? Because I have limited experience with cults and I'm afraid that a town player would act remarkably like a cultist, especially a powerrole.

I'm gonna stick with scumhunting for now, I'm more confident.

I have thought about this myself. I think that as long as there is only 1 cult member (right now, the leader) the cult leader has no reason to act any differently from a pro-town player. I mean, if he hunts scum actively then he works against an immediate threat but, unlike townies, the cult leader benefits even if there is what to us is a mislynch. At the moment, he doesn't have any altar-boys to worry about, in contrast to the scum who obviously have their scumbuddies.

As the game progresses and the cult grows, I think we can expect its behaviour to become more "mafia-like". As it grows, it has more members to protect and, thus, there is more likelihood of us being able to sniff out some connections.

[vollkan]

I agree with oman about scumhunting at this point, but the cultists acting like the town at this point?? I would think that the cultist would rather be looking for vanilla townies as much as he's looking for the scum. That's how he's going to win-recruiting townies. If I was a cultist that would be my goal at this point.

Of course, the cult leader will be thinking about recruitment strategies, but that doesn't mean he will ACT any differently. The act is crucial because without behaviour it is impossible to hunt the cult leader. Hence, the cultist has no reason not to act like a town, at least for today.

[vollkan]

I have thought about this myself. I think that as long as there is only 1 cult member (right now, the leader) the cult leader has no reason to act any differently from a pro-town player. I mean, if he hunts scum actively then he works against an immediate threat but, unlike townies, the cult leader benefits even if there is what to us is a mislynch. At the moment, he doesn't have any altar-boys to worry about, in contrast to the scum who obviously have their scumbuddies.

As the game progresses and the cult grows, I think we can expect its behaviour to become more "mafia-like". As it grows, it has more members to protect and, thus, there is more likelihood of us being able to sniff out some connections.

Maybe we should stay away from the "future cult behavior tactics" conversation until the future. No need giving anyone advice how to act (now or) in the future. I do agree that the cult leader is most likely acting townish (or lurkish) Day 1.

Good point, but I don't think that what I said was a tactic so much as an inevitability.

[vollkan]

FOS:Oman for started the theo case

(which is crap)

and this:

Three words in brackets is hardly an argument. Could you elaborate on what you think is "crap" about suspicion of Theo?

[vollkan]

Oops...You're right.

Attention:

The Tyhess quote in the above is by ac1983, not Tyhess.

[vollkan]

Volkawagon your putting word in my mouth your scum too jsut like the people that can't count!!!!!!!

I really hope you aren't being serious...

Tell me why its crap, I voted theo for starting a crap case, and now I'm being fosed for that being a crap case. Tell me, who is scummier than theo right now?

If he thinks the Theo case is crap, then he doesn't need to point to somebody more suspicious, he just needs to argue that the case itself is flawed.

Also, MoS, do you have anything to say at all about this game (in which quite a lot is happening) other than one line remarks about the number of people here?

[vollkan]

No to me he needs to point to someone more suspicious. What he's basically saying is that this bandwagon is invalid. If this one is invalid, then he needs to propose a better one lest the town stalls.

No he doesn't. If I were to vote X on the basis of me not liking his avatar and you were to, rightly, call me out for that being a stupid vote reason there would be no onus on you to prove someone else was scummier than X.

It is more helpful to give an alternative, but it is not necessary.

[vollkan]

TRYING TO EDIT HAD ABSOLUTELY NOTHING TO DO WITH ANYTHING BUT TRYING TO DELETE A POST. Just so everyone know that and stops saying I'm scum for trying to edit my post.

Over-reaction much? I don't think anyone has said you are scum for wanting to edit.

Combine that with the fuss over not being able to edit his posts (which we aren't allowed to do), and tyhess has been acting like a

major newb

so far

Newb..not scum.

Guilty conscience perhaps?

[vollkan]

Combine that with the fuss over not being able to edit his posts (which we aren't allowed to do), and tyhess has been acting like a

major newb

so far

Guilty conscience perhaps?

I am beginning to see your point. However, newbies can always be newbie scum. Going to down grade however,

I didn't mean that newbies can't be scum. My point was that Trojan said that tyhess was acting like a "major newb" as though that was a factor legitimately warranting suspicion.

I agree that Tyhess is looking rather like newb scum: bandwagoning opportunistically and showing extreme defensiveness; but I think I want to see a bit more before making a firmer judgment.

FoS: Tyhess

I am interested to see how his reactions change with more slightly more pressure.

Also, I just noticed I had the "guily conscience" thing in the wrong place, if that wasn't obvious. It was meant to be below the Tyhess quote. Not that it is a major point or anything; but it doesn't really make sense where it is now.

[vollkan]

Mod Edit

Official Vote Count #8

theopor_COD[3](Oman, vollkan, tyhess)
tyhess[2](ac1983fan, Trojan Horse)
Flameaxe[1](Dr. Blackstrike)
Dr. Blackstrike[1](Mastermind of Sin)


Not Voting[5](pwayne66, Flameaxe, Rump-Wat, theopor_COD, curiouskarmadog)

Sorry; I just cross-posted.

[quote"Tyhess"]
Yeah I can see how that would look. That's just my style of play, changing quickly with what I feel is right, but I can see how that looks scummy.
[/quote]

Well, I said you were being overly defensive and then you go and make that rather calm post as I was typing.

I'd still like to know why you over-reacted regarding the editing thing.

[vollkan]

Sometimes I Just act weird like that. I didn't look at it like overreacting; I wasn't mad or anything, I was just throwing that out there because people kept saying it, and I wanted to use CAPS. I looked at it like having a good time writing a post. That's probably not a good idea in this game, but whatever.

That's all well and good, but you said:

TRYING TO EDIT HAD ABSOLUTELY NOTHING TO DO WITH ANYTHING BUT TRYING TO DELETE A POST. Just so everyone know that and stops saying I'm scum for trying to edit my post.

The only reference I can find to the edit is:

Combine that with the fuss over not being able to edit his posts (which we aren't allowed to do), and tyhess has been acting like a major newb so far.

Trojan only says you are being newbish (as I have already pointed out). He doesn't say you are scum for that alone.

Admittedly, Trojan does vote you seemingly on the basis of:
1) your wagoning
2) Your newbishness
But certainly, he did not call you scum specifically for the edit, and he is the only person that even has expressed any thoughts on it.

[vollkan]

I remember someone else mentioning that against me at one point, but now I can't seem to find it?????/

Tyhess votes Dr calls him weird and then he wants to edit posts.

Theo only mentioned it in a summary overview of the game; there was no judgment at all, not even one of newb.

[vollkan]

...I can't seem to find another mention of it either... I thought that there was one.

There were also a few mentions of the edit sig.

The fact is that there was never any accusation of scumminess about it.

[vollkan]

that being said, how do you play when you are scum? I assume the same way right? Or do you just make posts that have comments on game theory and personal playstyles versus actual game content?

Agreed. Earlier I said:

Also, MoS, do you have anything to say at all about this game (in which quite a lot is happening) other than one line remarks about the number of people here?

Now MoS has just moved into theory stuff, other than one post saying Flame and Theo seem "genuine".

[vollkan]

The follow up post ot that hardly has me thinking that either MoS has a developed plan on theo and Flame or that theo and flame really are genuine.

Unvote Vote MoS This is rediculous.

Can you explain this a bit more? I don't get what you mean, though you clearly think you have a point.

[vollkan]

Wait. I have a "developed plan" on theo and flameaxe? Does this mean they're town and I'm scum, and you think I'm playing them, trying to gain their trust?

I have more questions, but I want this answered first. No way I'm going to let you backtrack out of this one.

It's interesting that Oman states pretty clearly that he thinks that you have a "developed plan", so much that he says it is "rediculous" [sic]. However, in his next post, which was in response to me probing him to explain what he meant, he says:

He completly brushes over the fact that flameaxe came under the microscope not for vote hopping, but for his poor case on Blackstrike.

His analysis of theo is in my mind incorrect, as even scum can have content, and that doesn't mean they're pro-town.

Basically his reluctance to jump on either of the major wagons for reasons I don't like make me think he's scummy.

Oman has a point in that MoS did ignore the main reasons for the flame wagon and that Theo having content doesn't make him pro-town, however two points also emerge:
1) Oman fails to make any further mention of this "plan"; and
2) He says you are scummy for NOT jumping on a wagon because your reasons for thinking Theo and Flame are pro-town are not good. Oman is basically saying that you should have joined the wagons unless you can articulate a good reason why not to, and he thinks you are scummy for that.

FoS: Oman

. This will upgrade if your explanation doesn't satisfy me.

[vollkan]

Sorry Plan was probably the wrong word to use. Perhaps "developed stance".

And what is a "developed stance"?

I think they're both scummy, and you're scummy for ignoring that they are or at the very least ignoring why.

MoS has ignored the actual reasons for the suspicions, but why does that make him scummy?

Also, MoS, what do you think of the

actual

cases against Theo and Flame?
Theo: The case is mostly in my post #145
Flame: My post #94

Actually I don't feel he should have joined the wagons. My point was more that he didn't and his reasons were unsatisfactory. I don't mind people not joining a wagon saying "theres enough on them" or "my gut says no" but the fact that he tried to put some "factual" (in the context of the game) reasoning behind it makes me uncomfortable.

He had no obligation to wagon, but you are going to suspect him if he doesn't give good reasons not to?

[vollkan]

I didn't read any cases on them. I wasn't going to be influenced in my opinions when asked to say what I think of them, because it's all too easy to just paraphrase the case and make yourself look good without really trying to say what you think. I only read their posts in isolation before saying how I felt about them.

Fair enough; this is a very reasonable thing to do.

So, your theory is that I'm scum and They're possibly scum

scumMY! I don't know you're scum. My theory is that you are connected to one if not both in some way. I don't think there is three scum in this game (rules post), but I believe there is a connection or if they're town., you're trying to form one (buddying up).

Oman; you are making my brain hurt. Your "developed plan" / "connection" thing is completely baseless conjecture. MoS has explained why he didn't see them as scummy; that doesn't mean he is buddying up and I really can't see the grounds for alleging a connection.

[vollkan]

[quote"Oman"]
Motives are hard to guess at in this game. But if you are scum with one of them it basically is a defence of them, to get them off the hook of being lynchbait.
[/quote]

If that's the case, why are you suspecting MoS? Sure, IF MoS is scum then maybe this argument has some persuasiveness, but given our current level of knowledge I can't see the basis for saying his behaviour is more scummy than pro-town/neutral.

[vollkan]

Correct me if I am wrong, but wouldn't it be wiser for White to post his readings for pages 4-11 before we argue with him?

For one thing, we are arguing with someone who doesn't know as much and, also, any debate now could taint his reread.

[vollkan]

My scumdar:

Mastermind of Sin:

Lurker and then just posted theory stuff. Things seem to have sparked off with #209 which was the “Theo and Flame seem genuine” post. Evidently, people think he has been overly-defensive, though I am a little unsure as to whether I would react differently if someone accused me of having a "developed plan". I don't think the suspicion of him is unreasonable or baseless, but I don't feel strongly about MoS yet.

Oman:

I noticed, as White has, that Oman seems to agree with me a lot. I was a little off-put by his “developed plan” thing, hence my FoS, but his subsequent explanation of it being “developed stance” made it slightly more sensible. A few little things here and there, but I don’t suspect him to any significant degree.

ac1983fan:

Lurker; nothing to say.

Dr. Blackstrike:

Newbish lurker. I never really developed any suspicion for him, mainly because he was so quick to admit his error with regards to that plan.

curiouskarmadog:

Seems pro-town. My scumdar hasn’t hit any pings yet for CKD.

pwayne66:

I was in agreement with him on the BS thing and was pleased he stopped the BS wagon. I think White is correct regarding the pacifism thing and sometimes taking things personally, but I am willing to put it down to playstyle more than scumminess.

tyhess:

Numerous scummy actions, but also a complete newb. He has suspicion from me, but I need to see how things develop.

Trojan Horse:

Seems legit; no pinging as of yet.

Flameaxe:

I suspected him early on, but by slipping out of the game everything has progressed beyond that point. I will be watching flame or his replacement.

White (r. Rump-Wat):

Very strong contributor and is doing well at moving discussion forward, which can only be a good thing.

theopor_COD:

When I voted him, he was being slippery as all hell. Has been rather lurkish since then and I really would like to see some more discussion to either confirm or diminish my suspicions.

On a completely separate note,

Vollkan - I particularily don't like that Vollkan has run into virtually zero opposition to all of his views. He comes across like a mediator and judge, his words supercede others. This I don't like. However he hasn't really done anything deserving of a scum metal.

This sort of thing is something I am noticing in a few games and it confuses me a little. I don't know exactly what it is in my behaviour that is taken as "judge"-like and, likewise, I don't know whether this is good or bad for me.

[vollkan]

Tyhess, I am a little confused.

theopor_COD: Still my vote. Possibility to change quickly.

And yet you express no suspicion of anybody, other then that you are watching BS over the stuff from page 2.

As such, why do you say you vote could change quickly? It almost looks like you are trying to give yourself a way out to jump on a wagon.

[vollkan]

I like Tyhess's idea to post your top 3 candidates, that way we can focus on who's the most suspect and maybe start pressuring them, perhaps get a day1 crack.

I object to posting "List your Top 3 Suspects" because it is very easily exploited by scum trying to latch onto a consensus. Scumdar posting is somewhat better because it provides a fuller picture.

That said, I will list the three people I think pressure will be most helpful on in terms of clarifying my impressions of them:

1) Theo - Early scummy behaviour and not enough posting from him since to really dissuade me. Hence, pressure could bring something out.
2) Tyhess - Newby and scummy. I am interested to see his reaction to pressure.
3) MoS - Even though I don't have particularly strong suspicion of MoS, I can see the arguments against him and I think a bit more pressure on him could be productive.

[vollkan]

BEGONE Unvote Vote Theo MoS is still heavily on my list but that conversation was just screwed!

Oman, why was that conversation vote-worthy? Yet alone BEGONE-worthy....

I think perhaps Theo thought you were fishing for a vanilla-tell.

[vollkan]

Vollkan: Defends trojan a bit, but in true vollkan style. Seems to be on the right side of everyone. Either agreeing or being agreed with. Works hard on either side of the MoS/Oman debate. Makes a comment about "If MoS is scum this has validity" (or somewhat) but I don't see how this is even logical. If we knew mos was scum we needent worry. I also don't like the way MoS's not reading the game was "rational"

Well, the "If MoS is scum this has validity" I think you mean this post:

Motives are hard to guess at in this game. But if you are scum with one of them it basically is a defence of them, to get them off the hook of being lynchbait.

If that's the case, why are you suspecting MoS? Sure, IF

MoS

is scum then maybe this argument has some persuasiveness, but given our current level of knowledge I can't see the basis for saying his behaviour is more scummy than pro-town/neutral.

That doesn't make sense, thanks for pointing it out. The bolded MoS should be "Theo and/or Flame". I was trying (and failed) to say that because most of what you had said against MoS was based on the Theo/Flame thing, I disagreed with suspecting him on the basis of potentially being a scumpartner. As in, relations are not suspicious on their own until a role is known.

As for the "rational" thing. I was saying that it was sensible for MoS to read the thread in isolation from our arguments. This is not to defend his subsequent refusal to comment on them. It's the same reason why I suggested we not argue with White until he had finished his reread. If people read with a specific argument in mind, it may prevent what is hopefully as close as is possible an objective analysis.

White I dislike white's analysises. Basically you're either newb, scum, or neutral.

If by "neutral" you mean pro-town, then what is the point of even saying this. You are basically saying "White is newb, scum or town". Ignoring the fact that newb is not an exclusive option, this is pointless.

If you don't mean pro-town, then what?

And why don't you dislike the analyses?

[vollkan]

MoS is in fact correct, In White's eyes players are newb, scum, or neutral (by which I mean No conclusion).

Ah okay. That makes sense then.

[vollkan]

It's kind of obvious really; I don't even think it is a town tell.

I think that the culist would be acting more to find out the town (ie lurking) than a mafia would be, considering he knows that all but one person is protown.

If I am correct, what Theo is getting at is that Tyhess said the cultist knows everyone else is protown. By this logic, there are no scum. Theo seems to be inferring that this means Tyhess is not scum based on the fact that he didn't say "he knows that everyone else is town or scum".

Frankly, I see no reason to deem it a town-tell. There is nothing preventing it being a scum error, or a scum tactic (much as I doubt the latter of these).

[vollkan]

Cross-posted with Pwayne.

hmm... I am torn here. It seems that people are begining to read the "don't claim townie" theory into the "I don't have to answer questions" theory. Is there a legit reason to believe that Oman is fishing for vanillas? If so I would like to hear it.

I see no town-tell, yet alone a "vanilla-tell". Hence, I don't get why Theo accuses Oman of fishing.

[vollkan]

On the other end of the spectrum, theo's original statement seems innocent enough. It seems to be more of an off the cuff statement than a case for tyhess' innocence. His reluctance to answer the question might be a reflection of that. (ie- he doesn't have a real reason).

Yes; the original statement is not suspect. I will leave it to Theo to explain why he used the word "fishing".

I can see where Oman's vote might be seen as an over-reaction, but my fear is this: that the town is becoming one where helping each other find scum is no longer the goal, rather seeing who got the

biggest balls

is. If this is the case, the mafia/cult's path to success will be lot easier.

What do you mean?

[vollkan]

I think that this goes right into what pwayne said...we are not working together at this point .... we need to try to narrow down who we are attacking.......i realize that I'm probably going to be one of the 3, but I think it will be the easiest way to find the scum.

How do you propose we "work together"?

Also you are implying that there is some benefit in only focussing on a small number of people.

[vollkan]

Here's why I disagree with you Tyhess:
Let's say A, B and C are the 3 people in the "spotlight".
The other players can be numbers 1,2,3,4,5,6,7,8 and 9.

Let's say during the course of the stuff against A, numbers 2 and 4 do something scummy. What do we do? We either keep focussing on A (which is wrong because it ignores things) or we shift to 2 and 4.
If, whilst on 2 and 4, person 5 does something really scummy then things move to 5. etc.etc.

Or, in the alternative, we go through A, B and C and nothing comes up. Then we start on 1,2 and 3. During the course of pressing 1, A and C do something scummy. Do we then flip back to A and C or do we continue on?

Maybe these example sound facetious, but the point I am making is that any effort to focus on a particular person/s will inevitably lead to an expansion of suspicion back to the original 12. You cannot expect 9 people to focus solely on 3 people and ignore the posting of every other person within the 9, particularly when there is no unanimous agreement on a "top 3".

[vollkan]

vollkan - agreed with me a lot and defended me a bit, somehow managed to put me at his #3 suspicion when he "doesn't feel strongly about MoS"

Way to completely misrepresent me by saying I suspected you at number 3 when I "didn't feel strongly".

I object to posting "List your Top 3 Suspects" because it is very easily exploited by scum trying to latch onto a consensus. Scumdar posting is somewhat better because it provides a fuller picture.

That said, I will list the three people I think pressure will be most helpful on in terms of clarifying my impressions of them:
1) Theo - Early scummy behaviour and not enough posting from him since to really dissuade me. Hence, pressure could bring something out.
2) Tyhess - Newby and scummy. I am interested to see his reaction to pressure.
3) MoS - Even though I don't have particularly strong suspicion of MoS,

I can see the arguments against him and I think a bit more pressure on him could be productive.

I was very clear that I was not placing you third because I felt strongly about you, but I was doing it because I felt there was a need for a bit of probing. You only took one snippet of a sentence and changed what it meant. You get a

FoS

for that.

Exactly. If you were scum, and for all I know, you might be, you'd be attacking me. Because scum feel that attacking the obviously scummy person makes them look protown, they are more likely to do it. Scum tend to stay away from attacking newbies that are scummy too much, because it's not protown to bully newbies around when they likely just don't know what they're doing. So, I gave them an IC target, someone they couldn't resist to jump on. And it seems to have worked. Now we just need to evaluate. That's what this whole game is about, isn't it? Look at what people do, who votes who, who defends who, and find scum. So let's do that.

So, we are expected to believe that you have intentionally been playing scummy so as to attract votes? The whole problem with this is that any suspicion or otherwise of people based on their responses to your wagon simply assumes that you are pro-town, which is a poor foundation on which to start basing suspicion of people.

Also, MoS, if this is your strategy, for how much of this game have you been adopting it?

[vollkan]

Wait. So you purposefully got us to vote for you, but since some of us are voting for you, then one of us is defiently scum. That makes a lot of sense. Basically what you're saying is that if anyone votes for you they were looking for an easy way out and they are scum. You said youself that you put yourslef in that position, meaning that you admit it is scumlike. So basically we're not suppose to vote for someome who puts them in a position to look like scum based on the fact that they say it'll make us look like scum.....

You make a good point.

If MoS is town, then it is quite likely I would say that scum is/are on his wagon. However, the problem is that MoS has been scummy by his own admission, he says intentionally. As such, I don't think the fact that people have wagoned on MoS is evidence of potential scumminess at this point of the game, because we don't know MoS's alignment. I mean, suspecting one of the wagoners might be valid, but it requires an assumption that MoS is pro-town.

He hasn't done anything overly scummy in my eyes, call it a defence or whatever but I feel he's pretty laid back and looking more to trap people than attack easy targets.

And you're okay with that? A "trap" as MoS has laid it is just as likely to catch town as scum; it is not helpful at all unless MoS's alignment is known and, even then, because it is so reasonable for town to jump on the wagon it really proves nothing.

[vollkan]

If MoS is town, then it is quite likely I would say that scum is/are on his wagon. However, the problem is that MoS has been scummy by his own admission, he says intentionally. As such, I don't think the fact that people have wagoned on MoS is evidence of potential scumminess at this point of the game, because we don't know MoS's alignment. I mean, suspecting one of the wagoners might be valid, but it requires an assumption that MoS is pro-town.

As I said with Tyhess, I fail to see how me doing this intentionally is relevant at all. If I was accidentally scummy, it wouldn't change what I did, and it wouldn't change who was going to attack me. It's not like all the scum could tell the difference between accidental and on purpose. They're going to act the same regardless, for the most part. There are town on every wagon, but people still look for scum on wagons, yes? There is no reason it can't be done in this instance. It's not like I was so obviously scum that no townie in their right minds would stay off my wagon. This is evidenced by the fact that only 4 people have voted me out of 11 possible. I gave the town a wagon, and there is very, very likely to be one scum found on it.

MoS does kind of have a point here; I myself am among those who were not convinced by the case against him. The early accusations of defensiveness seemed to have no basis of me and then things very quickly jumped to him saying it was intentional.

The problem is that nothing MoS has said can be seen to have any basis without knowledge of his alignment. Maybe the wagon is informative to MoS, but it says nothing to the rest of us other than that people chose to wagon on someone who was scummy (though I question the scumminess of MoS at least initially).

MoS, you say this was your plan, presumably you have some idea of how to make it actually function to our benefit? It is no good saying we should focus on the wagonners and not you, because that requires a significant assumption on our part.

[vollkan]

This still gets me. It seems that all of the MoS apologists have reduced his actions and the case against him as defensiveness while the case against him is about refusing to cooperate.

Key word in what I said was

The

early

accusations of defensiveness

I didn't buy that argument which seemed to be the main thrust of the case at the time.

He has refused to co-operate since then, though now he has merged that with his ridiculous "I'll act scummy to trick people" thing. Maybe he sees that as a contribution, though I don't.

For me, this bandwagon is and always has been about pressure. If the town is going to win, it is going to be because EVERYBODY posted content and answered questions. Instead we are rewarding and praising some attention starved, John Wayne wannabe by saying "It's ok if you don't want to talk" and "oh jeez, I don't know why everybody is being so mean to you..."

Don't interpret this as me pandering to his inaction; I have been saying all along that we should pressure MoS. That was the very reason I put him at number 3 on that list, if you remember. I hadn't seen anything notably scummy-defensive from him, which other people said they had, but I could see that his behaviour was odd and he definitely needed to contribute more.

By my count, MoS is at L-1. He shows no signs of making any contribution now that he has placed himself into this "I'll act scummy to attack my wagoners" thing because he sees that as his great contribution. And his posts are definitely beginning to take on a veneer of defensiveness (inc. swearing)

I see this situation as MoS not being overly suspicious in the sense of not having done anything I would normally characterise as scummy but, simultaneously, he is being consciously making no contribution which is of course anti-town and can be seen as scummy.

Oh, something else I noticed:

Unvote, Vote: Trojan Horse

This feels way off to me. You hope he doesn't think you're "too" scummy? I see no reason to make a post like this. You've made posts like this earlier, asking me if I was going to attack you now, or something like that. You keep acting like you expect to be scummy, you expect to get heat from other players. It's almost as if you expect to be lynched. Other than these remarks, you haven't seemed that scummy, so I don't see any reason a protown player would be worried about their scumminess. You haven't done anything of note for a townie to worry about.

Trojan was not on your wagon when you voted him (though he is now). If you are so damned sure that scum are on your wagon why did you instead choose to go for the obvious newb?

[vollkan]

Crossed with both of MoS's posts.

You can make as many assumptions as you need to make. You make all the assumptions. Making all the assumptions is better than making no assumptions. Assume I'm scum and work out who my partners might be. People are assuming I'm scum right now, but they aren't even trying to find my partners. I get accused of not being helpful to the town, yet the people attacking me aren't being any more helpful. If you're going to assume I'm scum, you should also assume I'm town and work out who might be scum in the situation. You need to consider all possibilities, and you aren't doing that. No one is.

MoS, there is value in studying relationships between players, but I don't really see your point. Why should we focus on making these assumptions when we don't know your alignment; any connections we do find are meaningless without that knowledge. Once we have that knowledge we don't have to assume, we can actually reason our way through things.

As I said before, it's logic to make all assumptions and see where it leads you. You don't just sit around going "hmm, I don't know whether or not this guy is scum, so I'll just sit here and not think about anyone else besides him until he's dead".

As I just said, this doesn't help particularly. The most you can conclude is "If X is town/scum then y is probably town/scum." Afetr X's alignment is known, the first stage of hypothesisng is not needed and the reasoning process if clearer and more conducive.

[vollkan]

Like I have said previously, you don't need to know my alignment to analyze this wagon. This is not a game of absolutes. You can look at all possibilities for my alignment and make conclusions based on what you find out. The wagon on me has very nearly kept everyone from focusing on anyone else in the game, and that's exactly what the scum want. You can't just wait for me to die before looking for scum. When I come up protown, what then? You just wasted an entire day looking at me and no one else. That's what White and Tyhess want us to do, and for all their talk about me not acting in the town's interests, neither are they. It's all double standards when it comes to those two.

Yes, there is value in that sort of analysis, but it cannot be practically used without alignment knowledge. That's the real problem here.

ie. Trojan's and Oman's votes do look opportunistic and I can see what you are saying about White and Tyhess being somewhat tunnel-visioned. However, because you have been scummy, I can also see how they may be justified in suspecting you and, as such, I don't think them to be wholly unreasonable.

[vollkan]

You think I'm not contributing? I'm one of the few people that are actually talking about more than one person lately. Nearly everyone that is attacking me has had blinders on for the last few pages. With 3+ people attacking me constantly, I don't really have time for much more than defending myself. Put yourself in my position and see if you would let yourself be lynched while you were off trying to find possible scum. I'm attempting to multitask, but I don't have a lot of breathing room to do it in. The few people that don't buy into my wagon are voices lost in the fog.

You intentionally act scummy, people hop on your wagon, you defend yourself and you call that a contribution? If you hadn't made this ridiculous play we could be actually doing this in a normal and more productive manner. Instead, you have brought the focus onto yourself by this ploy and are now getting irate about the fact that people have responded to you.

In addition, you yourself have acknowledged that I am not only attacking my wagoners. They are refusing to consider all the options, but I'm watching people who aren't on the wagon as well, as evidenced by your quote of my pressure on Trojan Horse. I'm not the one who is faking contribution, it's the people who are single-mindedly attacking me and doing nothing else.

Which just shows that this wagon thing is pointless...

How am I consciously making no contribution? I have been responding to the majority of attacks against me while looking for scum both on and off my wagon at the same time. What more do you want from me?

Okay, for scum off your wagon your target was Trojan. Hardly a particularly strong ground for suspicion either.

For scum on your wagon, anything you say is useless to us because WE DON'T KNOW YOUR ALIGNMENT! Saying "X is on my wagon and looks scummy to me for it" is useless to the rest of us. It doesn't help.

Trojan Horse is not an obvious newb. Trojan Horse has been around a while, so if you think that's newbishness you're seeing, you'd better look again. Trojan Horse has, now that I look at it, been around Mafiascum longer than I have. 3 years does not a newb player make.

You're right. I saw "townperson" and so I immediately assumed newb.

And what happens when protown players are either dead or no longer protown after tonight? What then? There will be even more distractions and misinformation being spread around, in proportion to the genuinely protown people left. Better to get people's opinions on possible connections now than to have them be dead or recruited tomorrow.

After X's alignment is known, you can go back to your hypothesis and see which one was accurate. You should not wait to do this until after you have lost the opinions of several players in the game. There is no reason to wait, any urging to the contrary is merely an indication of someone that wants to rush through the lynch without considering other options.

Okay, I agree with you here, but each of these involves your own death.

Having one scummy person to attack is not a justification for tunnel-vision. No protown player should ever assume that they are right about one person being scum and that no other options are possible.

Good point.

I believe I will do a reread of Tyhess and White and see what I think.

[vollkan]

May I also point out that not a single person has asked me to claim yet, which shows that they intend to railroad me to death without getting a claim first. This is NOT protown.

I considered doing so, but I wanted to wait to see how the other people reacted to you being at L-1 before I did. In case any of them (ie. Pwayne has now done it) decided to unvote or something. I figured it would be bad if you claimed and we hadn't seen how people responded to you being at L-1 and, also, that if you had claimed a power role when people might have wanted to unvote then it could have been needless.

[vollkan]

This is true. However, you aren't even voting me at the moment, are you?

No. I am not. That doesn't mean that I shouldn't ask for a claim when the time is appropriate though.

[vollkan]

Finally, what's this about -1? I never saw more than 5 votes on MoS at any one time. Did I miscount?

You're right, there were only 5 votes. I was getting mixed up with one of my other games where 6 were needed.

[vollkan]

and where exactly did the -1 conversation come up....I remember reading it and suddenly MoS was at -1 (and I thought "what, going to have to count that")...I have caught up to find that it was screwed up somewhere, now I read back I cant find the first mention of MoS being at -1. Also the flurry of unvotes look sort of suspicious too..

It was my mistake. I said

By my count, MoS is at L-1. He shows no signs of making any contribution now that he has placed himself into this "I'll act scummy to attack my wagoners" thing because he sees that as his great contribution. And his posts are definitely beginning to take on a veneer of defensiveness (inc. swearing)

It is rather interesting about the "flurry" of unvotes that followed me making that blunder though.

[vollkan]

I'm sorry...where did I say this? Please quote the post and/or highlight the sentence.

Here.

About the claim situation MoS,

I'm not going to ask for a claim until -1

, and in a game where powerrole/vanillia means everything, I'm not going to take any claim too seriously.

[vollkan]

Haven't we just gone round in circles then?

CKD asks Oman why he asked for a claim if he was not going to take it seriously, Oman challenges to know where he said this, challenge is met, Oman then says he was not going to take it seriously

Oman,

If you were not going to take it seriously, why did you ask?

[vollkan]

Edit: should be why

would

you ask

[vollkan]

That one post preceding my vote made no difference to me, one way or the other. My vote was based on some very weak evidence (only for lack of anything stronger); it took quite a bit of time for MoS to start honing in on a potential suspect. Longer than I thought he'd take, if he were protown (based on some earlier games I found). I unvoted to give things some more thought; my concerns, weak as they were, were not "dealt with". I'll put the vote back on MoS if I can't find any better alternatives.

If your basis for voting was that you felt he was taking too long to find a suspect based on a meta-check why did you not say so initially? Instead of just saying:

This is about my gut feelings about him being scum.

[vollkan]

Yes, MoS, I know that; I meant when he initially voted.

[vollkan]

Ah; I completely messed up the order of things.

I thought the "gut feeling" post came first of all. Which made me think he hadn't explained it with everything.

Makes sense now.

[vollkan]

Flame's last post anywhere on MS was on Friday 21.

But, reading that "posts" list you access from profiles, I can read that he has posted in another game:

Sorry for not getting on earlier, packing for my trip. (Mod: I are is out of town till monday, as my PM said)

We can probably expect to hear from him today or tomorrow.

[vollkan]

[quote="TyhesS"
thanks, volkan.


And MoS. It's not about the ability to defend yourself. You actually have to do it, and in mine (and it seems white's) eyes, you have yet to do so.

Please show me where I haven't defended myself. I've been responding to accusations for over a week.
[/quote]

Tyhess, what accusations are you actually talking about?

MoS has spent the past week arguing about the contribution stuff and the "acting scummy on purpose" stuff.

If there is something he is meant to be defending against, could you actually specify what, because I can't see anything that has not been argued to death already.

[vollkan]

Mod Edit

Official Vote Count #23

tyhess[3](ac1983fan, Flameaxe, Mastermind of Sin)
Mastermind of Sin[2](White, tyhess)
ac1983fan[1](theopor_COD)
theopor_COD[1](vollkan)
Flameaxe[1](Dr. Blackstrike)
White[1](Oman)


Not Voting[3](curiouskarmadog, pwayne66, Trojan Horse)

---

Recall that a

majority of voting players

is needed for a lynch to occur at deadline. You have a little less than a week... I will consider extending deadline if there is a high demand for it, only because ac1983fan and possibly Dr. BS need replacement.

It might be a little early to start asking this but re:deadline..

Semi-baseless Lynch or No lynch

I'm always inclined to favour lynch over no lynch, though I think that we really need to significantly increase the amount of discussion going on so that we at least make as sensible a decision as possible.

I would not want a lynch right at this very minute, but I think with a renewal of discussion we can make a choice with some amount of reasoning.

[vollkan]

An extension to next Friday would be nice. I think we're getting pretty good activity now, but it's really dumb to have a lynch rushed when we're finally getting back on track with out discussion instead of just talking about me all the time.

For what it's worth, I would like an extension also.

[vollkan]

[quote="Flameaxe:]
To me, it seems like he is saying that the ones who didn't vote for the extension are more likely to be scum, because scum would most likely try to make the lynch rushed closer to deadline.
[/quote]

That's very WIFOMic thinking.

[vollkan]

To make this easier on me, and you for that matter, have anything in particular you would like me to really read in-depth and comment on in the last ~10 pages?

Don't you have ANY proactive interest in this game?

I mean, you should be looking through things yourself trying to hunt for scum. Rather than just be directed to things.

[vollkan]

[quote="MoS]
My meta was a small meta, nothing more. The people who did not ask for an extension are not scum because they didn't ask for an extension. They just are very slightly more likely to be scum. The fact that they later asked for it is a null tell. I'm not going to use that against them, it would be stupid.
[/quote]

I can see why you would deem it a minor tell, but I am not going to count it as a scumtell at all. Firstly, it doesn't necessarily demonstrate anything about the player that didn't ask (as in, I can envisage a town player just not thinking to ask) and, secondly, scum can easily exploit this sort of thing if people allow it to take hold.

[vollkan]

Where did I say "I am only going to comment and read what people tell me to read"? Please, point this out for me, because I am clearly incapable of doing so.

You said:

I don't have a lot of time for this 're-read' as I have not been home very often. Maybe I take longer than you to read, deal with it.

and

To make this easier on me, and you for that matter, have anything in particular you would like me to really read in-depth and comment on in the last ~10 pages?

That looks to me like you are saying that you aren't going to do a re-read yourself and that you want to just be directed to things.

No, you did not explicitly say "I am not going to read things for myself. Please just point me to stuff", but it is implied nonetheless.

[vollkan]

Just so happens I've already finished my read, the WHOLE read.

(_|_)<= Kiss it.

Oh dear, you've read the thread; whatever will we do....?

[vollkan]

Unvote, Vote: White

Your recent posts actually make me feel better about this. I don't like your reasoning in 656 to put it simple. I don't like the way you handled the MoS situation a while back. I expect your reply soon filled with "OMG nice baseless OMGUS!" that makes you feel happy, and self-loving!

Could you be a little more precise about things than "I don't like"?

Also, has the deadline been extended?

[vollkan]

No.

In that case,

Unvote, Vote: Flame

. This is just blatant OMGUS unless you have even some substantial basis to your "suspicion".

[vollkan]

Just a question. Why would a OMGUS vote deserve a vote?

Usually it wouldn't, but he is refusing to explain anything about it. My vote is intended to pressure him into detailing it.

[vollkan]

No, I just don't see why I'm obligated to answer your question.

You are not obligated to answer. But, if you have the town's best interests at heart you would want to do all you could to help us make the right decision.

[vollkan]

Alright then MoS, I'll commit. Not happy about it, but I'll commit.
Vote tyhess

Never was happy with all of his bandwagon hopping at the start of the game. Could just be newbishness, but it could also be an opportunistic scum, hiding behind the fact that he's a newb.

Sure hope I got it right.

Good grief...

Super Duper HoS: Trojan

Trojan, why would you coalesce with MoS? If you are town, you don't know MoS's alignment. Hence, it is completely nonsensical for a townie to to vote purely because someone else wants you to.

My vote remains on Flameaxe until he becomes a little more transparent.

[vollkan]

Cross-posted.

Horrible how? Cause I was pressured into voting, like White said? Or because I didn't commit until now?

Regardless, I'm in a d***ed if I do, d***ed if I don't situation right now. MoS votes me for not voting for anyone, and White votes me for being pressured into voting. What do you people want? Wink

So this is all about saving yourself? The pro-town thing to do is to vote based on suspicion, regardless of what anyone thinks of you.

Anyway, you're absolutely right, White. I guess that was just a frustrating moment for me; I'm getting a bit tired of having to waffle because I don't feel too strongly about anyone as of yet. But that's no reason to be pressured into a premature vote; we still have plenty of time to discuss.

Nothing is ever a reason to vote based on pressure from another player.

Uh-oh. I've just been pressured into unvoting. Now what'll I do?

You didn't need to unvote. You could have explained why you thought your vote was legitimate.

I may change my vote depending on your response.

[vollkan]

Trojan. *ahem*

So this is all about saving yourself?

You didn't need to unvote. You could have explained why you thought your vote was legitimate.

[vollkan]

Let's lynch Tarhalindur!

Vote: Tarhalindur

...er..I thought the random stage was...over..?

[vollkan]

Incidentally, that was NOT an attack on MoS. That was just an attempt at humor; hence the laughing smiley at the end. (I say this because my attempts at humor have been taken seriously- and as evidence of my scumminess- before.)

I don't know if I really am all that comfortable with your approach of "If I put a smiley face there it can't be held against me"

What you said insinuates something about MoS being hypocritical.

I can envisage this as a tactic so that you sort of "test the waters" for an accusation whilst being able to hide behind an allegation it was a joke. As in, if people were to jump up and say "Wow, he's right, MoS is a hypocrite", you get brownie points for scum-hunting but, if people ignore it, you are safe because you have not directly raised an accusation.

Also, keep in mind that a lot of players consider joking to be a scum tell.

[vollkan]

Ok all kidding aside (^^^^and I wasn't being serious), I honeslty don't know how much more we can get done until they post there comments. We have beaten each other to death for like a month, and nothing serious has happened in the last couple of days (except for oman completely ignoring my question)....I think 2 more opinons/set of attacks will be what opens the game up...We need to figure something out within the next week or so though.....

I agree with this. We've all had our views for a while now, so I think we need Tar and Kak to sort of add a new perspective.

[vollkan]

Ok, my own tentative deadline is for the 10th. I think it'd be best if we all start putting people on the chopping block and getting defences by then. That'll give us 2-4 days (I forget what the deadline is) to figure out what we're going to do and get organized. We can't just sit around and wait here for lurkers that evidently aren't even checking the thread.

Who else is in favor of cracking down around the 10th?

I agree. It's a real nuisance where deadlines simply roll over and things get rushed so this is good.

[vollkan]

Now it is time for my new theory which is actually MoS' theory on steroids:

Since at least one scum was on MoS's bandwagon:

Pwayne
thyess
white
trojan horse
Oman

it must be safe to assume that at lest one scum was on Dr. BS's bandwagon:

flameaxe
thyess
CKD
Trojan Horse

anything pop out? thyess and TH. hmmm...

Any reason why you have completely ignored the flameaxe wagon?

It was, at its peak:

Oman
Rump-Wat
vollkan
Dr. Blackstrike

If we include this one, we see that Oman has also been on 2 of the wagons. Oman was, however, first to vote MoS, so I don't think that necessarily counts.

Tyhess strikes me as most interesting if we are analysing it this way. Not only was he on MoS, but he was fourth on BS and third on Theopor.

[vollkan]

But still-I don't think we can analyze the bandwagons until we know the position of atleast one person-for all we know one of those people are (and actually one of them probably is) scum. I just don't see how we can analyze it yet.

That's why I said "if we are analysing it this way". I have said before that I don't think this makes sense as an analysis tool when you don't know anybody's alignment.

[vollkan]

Right now i'm still waiting on Kakeng and Tar to actually add some content. They've got 5 days left. If no content is added I don't mind a Tar or Kakeng lynch but i'd definintely significantly much prefer them to be replaced.

The only problem is the fact that lynching lurkers wastes the day in terms of information-gathering. That means that tomorrow we really have no better idea as to potential alignments. I mean, getting rid of a lurker is an advantage, but there is a significant opportunity cost.

[vollkan]

Hm.. I just can't think of adding anything new to the table, so I look at the person with the largest number of votes: Trojan Horse.

On pg 28, the Doc voted for him, citing he was sittingon a fence and just following what other said.

pg 29, theo voted for TH, pointing at post 699. Not long later, tyhess votes for him. Note that theo attacks Th while defending tyhess. I have to admit that TH was acting somewhat suspicious. Later pages erases most of my suspicion of theo thought.

Trojan ssems to like smilies for some reason. It has already been said, and while I agree, I can't decide if that deserves a vote.

But all in all, Flame attitude makes me more suspicious, so Vote:Flameaxe

So this is your contribution? A sketchy summary of some things relating to TH and you professing ridiculously vague suspicion of Flame and voting for it. Despite the fact that you don't actually discuss flameaxe ANYWHERE else.

This better just be a prelude to something big.

[vollkan]

I'm doing a breakdown of the players one by one.

And which player, if any, was your most recent post about?

[vollkan]

We still have 5 more days, what is the hurry?

So we can make an informed and properly-discussed choice. That's why. It's no good you posting an excellent analysis one day beforehand if nobody gets a chance to say anything.

Oh, what the heck. It's time to pull the patented Tarhalindur solution to an impending deadline as

vanilla town.

Unvote, Vote: Tarhalindur

I KEEL ME!

Mini 500 -

Cult

Mafia. Why the hell did you claim vanilla?!? *headdesks*
...we now have a sitting duck for the cult.

[vollkan]

Mod Edit

Official Vote Count #36

Kakeng[3](theopor_COD, White, Mastermind of Sin)
Trojan Horse[2](tyhess, pwayne66)
Flameaxe[2](vollkan, Kakeng)
Tarhalindur[2](curiouskarmadog, Oman)
White[1](Flameaxe)


Not Voting[2](Trojan Horse, Tarhalindur)

It could be a WIFOM.

He could be a mafia pretending to be a townie.(safest claim, I think)

Same for the cult.

He could also be a power role pretending to be a townie so the cult will waste a recruit, as claiming power role D1 is bad. Oh, and he could also be a townie.

Just my thoughts.

Vanilla is not the safest claim in a game with cult, because it basically flags that by the next day you are very likely going to be of cult alignment. For mafia, that sort of thing would be idiotic. This is not a WIFOM because if a mafia claims vanilla they are basically avoiding claiming that they are scum by claiming that they are going to become scum.

The power role thing is possible, but in this case Tar has voted himself and looks intent on killing himself off. That doesn't strike me as power role behaviour.

P.S I claim vanilla townie.

Rather than making such useless jokes (I assume and hope you are joking, judging by the emote) why don't you post something substantial.

[vollkan]

Alright. My view:=

Advantages of Lynching Tar

* Cult is less likely to have 2 members tomorrow. As MoS says, Tar is a known vanilla so he will be a less desirable cult recruit.
* No prospect of a "possible cult" Tar lingering

Disadvantages of Lynching Tar

* He's still a townie at the moment. Thus, this lynch has no prospect of helping us.
* No information value at all. We are not going to learn anything that we can use to associate people as scum.
* Basically helps the mafia by taking out the cult for them
* Prospect of cult recruiting elsewhere and grabbing an unknown

On a balance, I am going to state my opposition to a Tar lynch today.

I'm going to

FoS: Pwayne

for pushing Tar's lynch. Initially, it was a viable option for speculating, but I can't see any basis for forwarding it given the costs v benefits.

[vollkan]

Tar is a known vanilla

How is he?

He could be a power role claiming vanilla.

He could be cult leader claiming vanilla.

He could be scum claiming vanilla.


He is not at this stage a known vanilla as you say or whoever it was say. He just claims to be ditto Kakeng. I think both claims should be taken with a pinch of salt and we should lynch the scummiest person around, the person most likely to be mafia or cult and for me that's Kakeng.

I don't think I called him a known vanilla.

I have said:

Vanilla is not the safest claim in a game with cult, because it basically flags that by the next day you are very likely going to be of cult alignment. For mafia, that sort of thing would be idiotic. This is not a WIFOM because if a mafia claims vanilla they are basically avoiding claiming that they are scum by claiming that they are going to become scum.

The power role thing is possible, but in this case Tar has voted himself and looks intent on killing himself off. That doesn't strike me as power role behaviour.

...

Mini 500 -

Cult

Mafia. Why the hell did you claim vanilla?!? *headdesks*
...we now have a sitting duck for the cult.

I think that his actions are less likely to be anything other than a vanilla, but he isn't confirmed by any means.

[vollkan]

I'm in complete agreement with Pwayne. Anyone who thinks we should lynch a claimed Vanillia should DIAF, anyone who is with me in saying that this is not a good wagon and its stupid idea (unvote) gets muh townie brownies.

Pwanye gets them, Ckd does too but I'm more reluctant about him.

A suggestion Oman...lay off whatever brownies you are currently on.

[vollkan]

Some numbers for fun:

It is currently 9:2:1.
(For the following analysis, let wcs = worst-case scenario, bcs = best case scenario and CL = Cult Leader)

If we lynch vanilla-Tar

Lynch van-Tar = 8:2:1
Maf NK of town = 7:2:1
--Cult recruit = 6:2:2
--No Cult recruit = 7:2:1
Maf NK of CL = 8:2:0
--Cult recruit = 7:2:1 (since the cult doesn't lose if the leader is NKed judging by the role PM examples on page 1, it is possible that the leader could get NKed tonight but successfully recruit.)
--No Cult recruit = 8:2:0

As such, with a lynch of vanTar today our possible D2 openings (assuming mafia does NK) are:
6:2:2 (wcs) , 7:2:1, (with CL), 7:2:1 (without CL) and 8:2:0 (bcs)

If we do not lynch vanilla-Tar

Mislynch = effectively the same as above, though I would venture to say that it is more likely than not that the cult will recruit vanTar, which makes the 6:2:2 and 7:2:1 (without CL) outcomes slightly more likely.

Maflynch = 9:1:1
Maf NK of town = 8:1:1
--Cult recruit = 7:1:2
--No Cult Recruit = 8:1:1
Maf NK of CL = 9:1:0
--Cult recruit = 8:1:1
--No Cult recruit = 9:1:0

CL Lynch = 9:2
Maf NK = 9:1

As such, if we do not lynch vanTar, our possible D2 openings are those previously given for a van-Tar lynch, as well as:
7:1:2 , 8:1:1 (with CL), 8:1:1 (without CL) and 9:1:0 (overall bcs)

Now, quantitatively, we can therefore see that there is no good reason to lynch Tar today as a claimed vanilla.

Of course, my analysis has excluded the possibility of Tar being cult/mafia. My basis for this is that we are trying to determine whether we should lynch Tar purely on the basis of him having claimed vanilla. Thus, these possibilities should not come into play in determining his lynch.

The other major concern, coming from Pwayne, is the prospect of having Tar hanging round as an uncertainty. Which is more preferable, knowing that Tar is a likely cultist tomorrow, or not not having a clue who is a likely cultist? At least with Tar being claimed vanilla, we know to watch his behaviour like hawks.

All in all, I feel like I am flogging a dead horse here, but I will say it anyway: There is no good reason to lynch Tar (or any claimed vanilla) today.

Unvote, Vote: Pwayne

Unless there is some fault in my numbers, there is absolutely no pro-town basis for your stance. The non-numerical arguments you have presented justifying your position also flatly fail.

[vollkan]

1) How does this mean I am scum?

You are advocating something which is patently anti-town. As of yet, you still have not dropped this stance.

2) Are White and Tar scum for the same reasons?

White has not yet checked in with the increased analysing. If he adopts the same line as you, then he will set my scumdar off also (of course, this is completely redundant now because he will see the reaction you got).

As for Tar, my read on him is that he has realised how much he has stuffed up and now wants to prevent himself becoming cult. I don't think his actions are particularly scummy. Is seriously pushing your own lynch a scumtell?

Moreover, Pwayne, I don't like the fact that you try to raise the behaviour of two other people as even a partial defence.

3) What are the odds of a favorable outcome?

In terms of likelihood of a "positive" outcome, I can't be bothered calculating the precise probabilities of each possibility. This effectively boils down to the fact that you are advocating lynching somebody who appears more likely to be a town player than anybody else thus far. That makes a negative outcome more likely. If we lynch vanTar, then I think 7:2:1 is the most likely outcome.

[vollkan]

The scale I will be using is 0% = Absolutely town, 100% = Absolutely scum

MoS

- I didn't have strong suspicions of him early on in the height of the wagoning with his ploy. Since then, he has been participating well. Slightly scummy, but I think more likely town. 35%.

Oman

- A few little things earlier (most notably the "developed plan" farrago). He hasn't been very helpful. 65%.

Kakeng

- Well, our lurky lurker ac1983 was replaced by a lurkier lurker. Completely unhelpful and has actually refused to post (the whole "It's still plenty of time" thing). I'd be happy with his lynch out of a combination of his lurking and obstinacy. 60%

Tarhalindur

- I was among those who weren't sold on the BS wagon. At the time, it seemed reasonable, given that we hadn't properly analysed the reality. I believe his vanilla claim; his actions make no sense at all otherwise. Having said that, his recruitment is very likely so I will be watching him like a hawk. 30%

CKD

- In my last scumdar, I said he seemed pro-town and I maintain that here. I don't get very many pings at all. 20%

Pwayne66

- I didn't have much of a read of him in my last scumdar. He was ambiguous. His latest pushing of the Tar lynch hiked up my suspicion considerably. He has since dropped it so

Unvote

. 75%

Tyhess

- What I said in my last scumdar remains unaltered: "Numerous scummy actions, but also a complete newb. He has suspicion from me, but I need to see how things develop." 60%

Trojan Horse

- A lot of small things aggregating from him
, but nothing earth-shattering. 65%.

Flameaxe

- I didn't like him early on. His only post in this whole Pwayne-Tar affair was an "I told you so". His previous posts were all useless one-liners. 70%.

White

- Forceful, direct and active (sounds like a shampoo ) Maybe a bit aggressive at times, but I often get accused of the same thing when I move into an attack on people, so I feel comfortable attributing this to playstyle. 30%

Theopor_COD

- Not very much help. His most recent stuff has been pushing for Kakeng and entirely ignoring the wagon on Pwayne. If Pwayne comes up scum, I think Theo is a potential partner. 65%

[vollkan]

I'm going to be blunt. This game is pissing me off, it's not fun. It's 41 pages for chrissake. No wonder Tar asked for replacement. I'd ask for replacement but I couldn't pity the game on anyone else. It's just a continuation of people babbling on about the same old things. I know short day's hurt the town but the more I think about this game, the longest days ever hurt the town aswell. The thought of re-reading everything just fills me with dread. Ok rant over.

Agreed. In my own experience, D1 should never exceed about 25 pages or so. Otherwise it just gets to the point where everyone is debating over a myriad of stuff with nothing really to go by.

Volkan - go back you will see that I did not avoid the Pwayne wagon, I didn't vote him no, basically because I don't think he's all that scummy in the grand scheme of things, his wish to policy lynch Tar on claiming vanilla is stupid, but I don't want to unvote Kakeng and hop onto another wagon, because frankly I think Kakeng's scum. End of story.

I more meant that I had not seen you make an explicit explanation either way, but this clears things up.

We need to push this along.

Vote: Kakeng

[vollkan]

Mod Edit

Official Vote Count #41

Kakeng[5](theopor_COD, Trojan Horse, Mastermind of Sin, vollkan, Tarhalindur)
pwayne66[2](Oman, curiouskarmadog)
Flameaxe[1](Kakeng)
Trojan Horse[1](tyhess)
White[1](Flameaxe)

Not Voting[2](pwayne66, White)

---

At deadline, if there is no majority of voting players, no one will be lynched. I've explained this many times, but want to be perfectly clear: 6-5 with 1 not voting is a lynch, but 6-5-1 is not a lynch.

Also, no votes after 11:59 PM Friday EST will count, whether I check the thread right then or not. Feel free to continue discussion in twilight, but a "lynch" after then will not count.

You have a little over 48 hours from the time of this post until deadline.

No. It's 5.

At the start of this page it was:

Kakeng[3](theopor_COD, White, Trojan Horse)

White unvoted and then voted Pwayne whom White has since unvoted. That brings Kak down to 2.
MoS voted kak for 3.
I voted kak for 4.
You have now voted kak for 5.

And, I support the call for Kakeng to claim.

[vollkan]

@ Theo: I think Kakeng was joking with regards to the vanilla claim, based on the smiley.

[vollkan]

By "you", I think he meant Tar, not you, since you were voting way before and haven't changed it.

Yes. Bit of a mux-ip there.

[vollkan]

Yes.

[vollkan]

Unvote

This day is going rather badly...a claimed vanilla and now a claimed RB.

[vollkan]

WHY DID YOU ASK HIM TO CLAIM??? I thought we weren't going to do that?

*blink*
You would rather we lynched a power role?

Also, I didn't that the claiming thing got resolved. Most relevant are are:

right right, I agree that L-1 it is important to claim if you are a power role, just so the town doesnt lynch you, but the mafia will get you the following night...pretty screwed either way..but claiming at L-1 does help the town in the short run.

Secondly I, as a power role that might claim eventually, am not even sure if I wouldn't just claim townie. That's something I have debated back and forth. If I claim townie and live the cult might try to recruit me and fail. However if I claim townie we're left with my first point which is that I would be a bad recruit for the cult in the first place. If I claimed townie I wouldn't be a target for the mafia to kill therefore allowing me to keep my role alive and put it to good use.

[vollkan]

Flameaxe was the second highest scummy rating on my list and he is lurking. I would be just as happy with a Pwayne lynch right now, but in the interests of avoiding a No Lynch:

Vote: Flameaxe

[vollkan]

pwayne put it best- the only person who can make anything from a claim is scum. How do we know he isn't lying? What would have happened if he had claimed vanilla? Then we would have two tars. That's not good.

Scum characteristically claim vanilla when under pressure. If a person is under heavy suspicion/pressure and they claim vanilla, the usual play is to lynch them. Tar, on the other hand, had no reason to claim. I can't quite imagine a scumbag being so careless in a game like this. This is, of course, a massive WIFOM, but the fact is that a claim under pressure of lynch should be taken differently to one like Tar's.

And ckd- Honestly, in this game at this point, I would rather lynch a roleblocker than ask for a claim....not that I want to lynch a roleblocker, I just don't think that we are in a great position now- the 2 people that we had the best cases for are now claimed vanilla (who may or may not be recruited tommorow, and then we don't even know if he is vanilla) and a roleblocker (who may or may not be a roleblocker). If he is truly a roleblocker, he's going to be NK tonight. I would rather them try to talk themselves out of it than claim.

This is positively ridiculous.

For one thing:
1) If you want to lynch a claimed role, why not lynch Tar instead? I don't want to lynch either, but surely a claimed vanilla is a better candidate than a claimed power role.
2) The fact he is going to be NKed is a big problem now, but we might as well capitalise on it as much as possible by keeping him alive today to draw the mafia's fire at night.
3) How do you want them to "talk themselves out"? Neither of them was wagonned out of suspicion. Tar's lynch came up because of his claim; Kakeng's was lurking and refusal to help (a scumtell, but not major).

FoS: Tyhess

And yes I do realize that this gives a better chance at lynching scum and scum lynching the roleblocker than us lynching a roleblocker and scum lynching scum. Don't get me wrong though-I'm not for a Kak lynch at this point. I just don't like the ask for a claim.

The obvious implication of this is that you would prefer we accidentally lynch a power role.

If your scum, would you say you were scum? No, you would say your either vanilla or a power. If your vanilla, we have another tar situation. If you say roleblocker, the scums either going to lynch you because they know your a roleblocker/town (the only ones who truly know other than you), or if your scum and say that, you'll live and then we'll lynch you becuase the scum didn't NK you. Please explain how this benefits town at this point-I can see it later where you can say you protected/ investigated people, but not now.

It is true that, in this game, a genuine vanilla claim has stronger repercussions than in a regular game (where it simply says "This person is not a power role" to the mafia). However, it still works to our obvious advantage by not having power roles lynched. Furthermore, there is always the possibility of doctor protection/bodyguarding etc. to keep that power role alive.

The advantage of claiming is purely and simply that it stops us lynching power roles.

Still disagree?

[vollkan]

Makes sense, but goes with what I said earlier- someone mentioned he did the same thing in another game and came up town. Then tar mentioned that he did the same thing in that game and shouldn't be lynched because he was town last time he did it.

The difference here, though, is that Tar was not under massive suspicion. He claimed of his own volition without pressure.

Did you read the rest of my post where I said that I don't want to accidently lynch a roleblocker, but that I think it is better than to ask for a claim (as I have said, this puts us in a horrible position)

And yes I do realize that

this

gives a better chance at lynching scum and scum lynching the roleblocker than us lynching a roleblocker and scum lynching scum. Don't get me wrong though-I'm not for a Kak lynch at this point.

I just don't like the ask for a claim.

I thought by "this" you meant "us not lynching kakeng", not "asking for claims" which is what your latest post makes me think you meant.

You did also say at the end that you don't like claim asks.

Ok, but say he's scum.

1)

Then the doctor protects him, when the town he otherwise would have protected gets NK-I think in a game with a cultist that its not good. The disadvantages in my opinion

2

(he's lying, he claims town and we have 2 tars, he'll get NK when all he had to do is add info and he'd wouldn't be in a position to be lynched(atleast in Kak's case), or he

3

survives and there's a huge WIFOM situation (is he scum, or did scum let him go to have us lynch him) outweigh the advantages (not lynching him and possibly having him save someone). That's my thoughts. Correct me if you think there's something wrong with that, and I'll be for a claim from now on. At this point I'm not convinced of it in this game.

1) The doctor is not guaranteed success anyway. It's much better that he protect a known power role than to protect at random in which case there is only a 1/11 chance of him succeeding (by pure numbers). Furthermore, the front page explicitly states that the doctor saves "from

death

". The cult does not kill. Thus, that leads me to believe that the doctor may be unable to protect against the cult.
2) If he is lying, he is most likely scum but could be an idiotic vanilla. We have no reason to think he is lying though.
3) This applies in every game where there is a claim. Typically, though, the scum will want to NK power roles as quickly as possible. If they don't get rid of a RB, for instance, they run a risk of losing their NK two nights in a row.

[vollkan]

That's exactly why I think it was a false claim-he said that he did it in another game, and that he was town in that game, so that now that he did it in this game, he's obviously town. That's why I didn't like his claim (among other reasons already explained.

I disagree with you because the claim Tar made is not something that will help a scum in the long run. It flags him as a potential cultist and thus makes a lynch more likely. He could still be mafia, but it is a big gambit.

3)I get what your saying, but what would you do if he DOES make it past the night, and there was another kill (ie the scums kill)?

I would carry on as normal. All I would know is that Tar is likely scum. I would watch his behaviour closely, but I would not push for his lynch.

[vollkan]

I meant Kak, the claimed role blocker-what if he survives?

Ah.

If Kak survives (unlikely for power roles to survive in my experience) it is a WIFOM situation. The best thing we can do is just proceed as normal.

[vollkan]

Another newbish comment from tyhess. More grounds for lynching? Perhaps. I'd certainly prefer to lynch tyhess than Flameaxe.

Unvote, Vote tyhess

Note: I'm prepared to switch to Flameaxe at the last minute, if that's what it takes to avoid a no lynch. Better to lynch someone of average scumminess than to lynch no one.

Wait...you are voting Tyhess for newbiness as a grounds for lynching?

[vollkan]

Ok I think tyhess is town, and he just clarified a lot of thoughts for me.

Unvote, Vote: Kakeng

I'm sure that's the right play for today. I doubt he is a roleblocker. He replaced into the game, promised a lot of contribution, and did nothing. Then, when wagoned almost to a lynch, he came back, posted a roleblocker claim (unlikely to draw a counterclaim, but powerful enough that we might not lynch him). And he still doesn't give us an update on the analysis he promised. This is not protown at all. It looks like he was planning to lurk through to Day 2, got caught, and claimed a power role to save his ass, because as far as the mafia is concerned, every day they can live without dying is a plus, even if it's just a quick fix. A roleblocker claim can be ridden several days without lynch, as long as he gets lucky with his claimed targets. For example, he could claim to have targetted his scumbuddy, or he could claim against the dead person, or he could claim against someone the mafia feels is unlikely to have a power role (like Tar). This buys him several days of life, while we sit around lynching other people.

I'm pretty sure his play so far has been a scum ploy. It's clear he's not actually trying to help the town. Just look at his posts in isolation and you'll see what I mean.

Let's do this guys. We can lynch him before time is up.

I see where you are coming from...but something about lynching a claimed power role just instinctively rubs me the wrong way.

I'll vote to avoid a No Lynch, but I prefer flameaxe right now.

[vollkan]

I'll have to write that down.

"Next time I am scum in a game with vollkan, claim a power role. He won't lynch me."

I'm sure you see what I'm getting at here.

I know exactly what you are getting at: My attitude will hurt me in a meta-game sense.

I'm concerned about them, too, but Kakeng is a pretty obvious scum in front of us. Trojan is just too borderline for me to want a lynch on him yet. Flameaxe and Trojan will definitely need to be pressured tomorrow, but I don't think wagoning either of them is going to be productive. We need to show that there CAN be a lynch on Kakeng in the next 24 hours, and we need your vote to do it.

^.^ <3 Campaign speeches

Unvote, Vote: Kakeng

then. I would prefer flameaxe, but I can see where you are coming from here.

[vollkan]

(Oman can tell you I lurked my way to victory in N417.

You know I don't think this should be forgotten, the longer Flameaxe fails to add content the more he concerns me, his lurking now - its active lurking because he's posting elsewhere concerns me greatly.

I had completely forgotten about that; glad you found it.

Flame was scummy enough when he was posting, but this may add to the implications of his lurking considerably.

[vollkan]

The above post is the truth. I do have tomorrow off as of now though.

Let's see....
6 posts in other threads today.
14 posts in other threads Thursday
17 posts in other threads Wednesday.

Why am I unconvinced?

[vollkan]

The above post is the truth. I do have tomorrow off as of now though.

Let's see....
6 posts in other threads today.
14 posts in other threads Thursday
17 posts in other threads Wednesday.

Why am I unconvinced?

A) I'm enjoying bothering you about it.
B) How many of those posts were over 3 sentences?

A) Huh? Are you saying that you aren't posting here just to annoy us.
B) A few were. I don't see why this matters though; the fact is that you posted nothing here despite this game being in a rather hectic state of affairs.

I'll ask this clearly: Why did you post in other threads and not here?

[vollkan]

Because they were more important at the time.

Since I cannot reference ongoing games, let me just say that after reading your "most recent posts" thing I find this line pretty hard to swallow.

[vollkan]

On...?

The imminent deadline.

[vollkan]

Ugh, I see both sides of this Kak issue. I dont like the idea of lynching a claimed power role, but if one was going to claim to save their ass Day 1 that would be a good claim. I would rather leave Kak and save him for a cop investigation (assuming we have a cop).

I am still fine with my Pwayne vote, think this is the way to go today...or even an Oman lynch. I feel like both have been far scummier (in different ways) than Kak...also, tyhess, has been hiding under the shadow of being a newbie for too long, his comments are beginning to stick out to me too.

I will unvote if needed to help the majority voting, but I dont forsee me placing a vote on Kak

I largely agree with this, though I would prefer Flameaxe over Oman. I can't see things changing now that people seem to have put their foot down on the matter, but I will keep checking to make sure.

[vollkan]

13.5 hours....that makes it midday in my timezone, which means I can access the net easily.

Unvote, Vote: Flameaxe

I'm keeping my vote on Flameaxe for now. I cannot support the lynch of a claimed power role.

I'll have to write that down.

"Next time I am scum in a game with vollkan, claim a power role. He won't lynch me."

I'm sure you see what I'm getting at here.

I've been thinking about this for a while now, and it doesn't make any sense to me. Why even bother asking for claims if it is more sensible for me to ignore them?

In any case, Flame pings my scumdar more than Kakeng (as I said back in #1017).

If it looks like things are heading to a No Lynch, I will change, but there is no reason why I should be voting Kakeng right now.

[vollkan]

So much for cult mafia...

Anyway,

I would say that the night benefited us a lot. Anybody care to disagree? The only thing that could have been better was if we had lynched right, but even given what we now know, I still think it was the right move given the circumstances. Obviously I didn't want to lynch a roleblocker, but I really don't think we had another choice........But without a cult to deal with now, we have a 7 to 2 advantage and with

what seems to be a serial killer (or something of that sort).

I think the advantage is clearly in our corner now.

It's much more likely to be vig than SK IMO. I'm usually the type to focus on worst-case scenarios, but this is a semi-open set up and we were told "2 mafia and a cult".

Furthermore, 3 scum groups is hideously unbalanced, particularly when one of them is a cult which can grow in size.

I mean, if the game opened at 8:2:1:1 (town:mafia:cult:SK) it would be possible for D2 to open at 4:2:2:1 which basically castrates the town in one day.

Hence, I think it far more likely that the current situation is 7:2 with a vig of some sort. However, we

must

remember that it could be 6:2:1 if CKD successfully recruited yesterday.

EBWOP- you think kak knew anything about MoS, or that was just his hunch?? Maybe a day cop or something???? (i don't think so since he was a roleblocker, but you never know.....)

HIGHLY unlikely.

He was revealed as roleblocker and he never mentioned anything about a cop. More likely he was just suspicious of MoS for pushing his lynch.

[vollkan]

However, we must remember that it could be 6:2:1 if CKD successfully recruited yesterday.

Could he have recruited if he was killed? Which choice get processed first? At anyrate, if CKD did get a recruit, would it be dangerous? I would think that It wouldn't be able to recruit and therefore completely harmless (except in the end game possibly...)

Read the sample role PMs on page 1. The CR's (cult recruit) PM says nothing about inheriting the power after the leader dies or anything. And, if we look at the "failed recruitment" pm, it explicitly says "The cult leader tried..." I am pretty sure that Guardian would have mentioned something as significant as an inheritance ability, since it would really alter the game dynamics and would make the cult quite broken.

We can't assume that CKD being killed took priority over a possible recruitment. As such, there is a probability that we are in 6:2:1, with the final 1 being the cult recruit, who is effectively a powerless SK and an uninformed minority.

As far as danger goes, I think this is quite interesting. If it got down to something like 3:0:1 (which would be LYLO with a SK) then it wouldn't actually be LYLO. A mislynch would make it 2:0:1. Another mislynch causes a 1:0:1 draw.

In other words, it is virtually impossible for a CR to win now, unless a situation like 1:1:1 arises where the townie is a vig and the vig and mafia kill themselves in cross-fire.

[vollkan]

I am not now and have never been a member of the cult. I was not recruited yesterday. That's really all I can say. There is no case for me to rebut, other than that I have been "too townie".

Anyway, my alignment list thing with %s. My last post of this nature was in Post #1017:

MoS

: No change from last time in terms of my level of suspicion. The Kakeng thing is a bit of a null to me right now, though it might become relevant later on. 35%

Oman

: As with my last scumdar, Oman had a few tells early on and was unhelpful. Nothing has happened to shift this. 65%

Tarhalindur

: I believed his vanilla claim, so my feeling is that he is either vanilla or CR right now. Just going by his behaviour, 30%.

pwayne66

: The tar lynch thing was very scummy yesterday. He dropped it, but I still suspect him for it. 70%

tyhess

: Scummy actions but very newbish. 60%

Trojan Horse

: Numerous scumtells aggregating up. 70%

Flameaxe

: Lurking, unhelpful and scummy. This guy is topping my list. 75%.

theopor_COD

: Not very much change since yesterday. 55%

I intend on doing a reread of Flameaxe to reassess whether my suspicion is actually warranted.

[vollkan]

Tar is looking like either vanilla or cultist. Much as I don't like his unorthodox tactics, they are consistent with his play yesterday and, thus, I do not think Tar is our lynch at this state. He has done nothing I can peg as scummy.

I don't like this either. Your going into MoS's "if you vote for me you're scum" theory, which I didn't like in the first place. You should have given a reason for your vote-and I doubt Oman was trying to avert the attention from Flameaxe, given that you posted 0(zero) facts against Flameaxe. Adding this to what you did last round (self vote, etc), I'm going to

Vote: Tar

I don't like the "judging reactions" thing either, but I have never actually seen that sort of thing done by scum. My first encounter of it was Nelly632 in Mini 486 and he was town. In fact, his self-voting actually did help catch a mafioso (Oman).

Flame's posting of late is interesting. After Tar explains his vote was for reaction-testing, Flame says:

And unexplained votes...aren't?

and then after Tar votes Oman, Flame says:

You do realize that this is...day 2, right? I'm not exactly sure that

a baseless vote on someone to judge reaction you would do now...It seems like regular day 1 behavior, but you are pushing it now.

The thing I notice here is that Flame's posts are, as per usual, entirely devoid of any real content. His criticism of Tar's voting is weak and he doesn't really make any comment as to his own suspicions, simply saying what it looks like.

I think that if Flameaxe is scum I'm going to take a very close look at you as a possible scumbuddy, and vice versa.

That's exactly the kind of response I would expect from a scumbuddy who sees his partner get voted with no explanation (Kate as scum responded that way when inHim tested her scumbuddy Falcone in Newb 399; all other relevant games are ongoing).

Oman and/or Flameaxe could use some pressure right about now, based on that reaction alone.

Vote: Oman

This is a good point, and I also think it is interesting that Oman asks Pwayne to clarify his vote for Flameaxe.

Neither of these is an overwhelming buddy-tell, but they are to be considered. It's also interesting that these tells are coming from two of my top picks on my scumdar posts, but we should wait until one of their alignments is confirmed before we take these as being very meaningful.

For now,

Vote: Flameaxe

.

[vollkan]

Yes, but that's what Tar said he was doing. He said he was hoping someone would attack him, which was a scumtell.

No, tyhess, it is not a scumtell. I hate the tactic because it usually is not a great help (though I have seen it succeed in the past) but it is not a scumtell. In fact, whenever people pull stupid stunts they have always come up town for me. That doesn't mean I consider it a town-tell (WIFOM obv), but it is not a scumtell.

[vollkan]

I didn't mean what he did was a scum tell(which is what I think you thought I meant)....I meant that he said that if someone voted for him and overreacted it was a scumtell....

*blink* Erm...aren't you voting for Tar? And you did say this

I don't like this either.

Your going into MoS's "if you vote for me you're scum" theory, which I didn't like in the first place.

You should have given a reason for your vote-and I doubt Oman was trying to avert the attention from Flameaxe, given that you posted 0(zero) facts against Flameaxe. Adding this to what you did last round (self vote, etc), I'm going to

Vote: Tar

and

I however don't think its reasonable. There were other people already pressuring Flameaxe, so if he was trying to get a reaction from someone other than Flameaxe, he didn't have to vote without a reason. Same thing if he was trying to get a reaction from Flameaxe- there was no reason to vote without a reason since others were already pressuring him.

This is just added to the long list of things I haven't liked about Tar:
1) self vote (twice)
2) saying he used that tactic in another game and he was town in that game so he's obviously town in this one.
3) claiming vanilla without being asked to do so.

4) Using the same strategy as MoS, probably just because MoS talked himself out of being voted for.

My vote stands.

FoS: tyhess

for blatant contradiction.

[vollkan]

Tell me if my understanding is off, but it looks like tyhess was simply REPEATING Tar's claim about a certain behavior being a scumtell. I don't see where tyhess AGREED that it was a scumtell. So I don't see the contradiction here.

No. There is a contradiction.

Tyhess listed the fact that Tar was using MoS's strategy as a factor in his suspicion of Tar. However, tyhess has now just said that he does not think it is a scumtell, after I challenged him on it being a scumtell.

[vollkan]

You misread my quote volkan, or I misread yours. My original quote meant that tar said that if anyone voted/overreacted that it was a scumtell. I repeated what he said as a reason for me voting for him. Then you said that it wasn't a scumtell. I thought you misread my sentence, and I was saying that I wasn't repeating that it was a scumtell but that Tar said people voting/overreacting was a scumtell, not that what he did was scumtell. I haven't seen that strategy enough to term it a scumtell, however; I just don't like it, and that is what I said in the comments you quoted.

I misread your post that said:

Yes, but that's what Tar said he was doing. He said he was hoping someone would attack him, which was a scumtell.

I thought in here you were saying that people attacking Tar was a scumtell.

UnFoS: Tyhess

[vollkan]

Aye Trojan, I'd go for a Flameaxe lynch.

I thought you would have learnt by now how much casual lynch support raises my eyebrows. You haven't mentioned any suspicion of flameaxe up until now.

[vollkan]

First up, nice analysis Theo. Particularly, your look at tyhess has made him look less suspicious in my eyes; supporting the idea that he is probably a newb town.

I think flame is scummier than you do, but that may just be that I tend to be pretty harsh on non-contribution generally. In any case, it gives me something to think about.

I'm starting to wonder at a Flameaxe-Trojan scumpair. Just look at Trojan's posts selectively and search for "flame". Go down the list: the few times he mentions Flameaxe, I'm sure you'll see a pattern.

I ran things through Gemelli's mafia parser and I see your point. Taking the relevant quotes/quote extracts:

I don't know about this bandwagon on Flameaxe; to me, he hasn't acted any scummier than anyone else. Then again, I don't know who else to go after.

Gonna take a good look at flameaxe's posts next. If I agree with the bandwagon, I'll jump on; otherwise, I'll be back to square one.

As for Flameaxe, I still don't think there was much of a case against him either (don't repeat the arguments, vollkan; I read them already).

Flameaxe: Was subject to an early bandwagon. I didn't quite buy the reasons for it at the time, and I still don't. Oy vey... I'm starting to realize that I've put most people into the "possibly scummy, but no hard evidence, I dunno" category, including Flameaxe. I gotta kick this scumdar again.

Flameaxe: Not posting since Monday, despite early contributions.

I am glad Flameaxe is back, and that he had a legitimate reason for his absence.

I'll take a look at the Flameaxe/White thing now

Okay, looked over Flameaxe/White. You know what? I'm sure the scum were sitting back and laughing there for a minute, glad that the heat was off them for a while. This whole thing started off with Flameaxe saying that his schedule had gotten in the way of a deep analysis; something I can certainly sympathize with, given what I have on my plate right now. It looks like White just saw an opportunity to apply a little pressure to Flameaxe and look for scumtells. And then Flameaxe responded in kind. Natural mafia play. Null tells from both.

The current bandwagon is Flameaxe now? Never saw anything all that scummy from him. Like Tar, I better look over Flameaxe's posts. (Again, there's a good chance I'll join in simply because lynch is better than no lynch.)

Another newbish comment from tyhess. More grounds for lynching? Perhaps. I'd certainly prefer to lynch tyhess than Flameaxe.
Unvote, Vote tyhess

Note: I'm prepared to switch to Flameaxe at the last minute, if that's what it takes to avoid a no lynch. Better to lynch someone of average scumminess than to lynch no one.

I said at the end of day 1 that I didn't understand the Flameaxe bandwagon; I considered Kakeng and tyhess to both be better targets. Well, I finally have a reason to be suspicious of Flameaxe; one that didn't arise until the end of the day, too late for me to respond to it. We were all scrambling to find someone to lynch (way better to take a shot then to no lynch), but Flameaxe seemed content to just sit back and let us fight. Maybe he didn't care if we ended up with a no lynch?

So now my eye is on MoS for holding back a bit at the start of day 1, and on Flameaxe for holding back at the end of day 1. And that's about all I've got.

Didn't phrase that so well, I guess. I'm just saying a protown player should be more concerned about what happens in those final hours than Flameaxe appeared to be. He could've been confident that the town was going to do the wrong thing anyway (either through a mislynch or a no lynch), so why rock the boat.

Then again, Flameaxe was one of the bandwagons at the end, wasn't he? So he should've had some concern if he WAS scum. Man, now I'm talking myself out of my reasoning.

Flameaxe wrote:
I went to bed the night before we went to night, planning on posting the next morning, but woke to a self hammer by Kakeng. Quite simple bodily processes.

Heh. Fair enough.

Probably just noticed a few of us saying things against Flameaxe, and decided to go with the crowd.

Of the three current bandwagons, my preference would be for a Flameaxe vote, due to his unhelpfulness at the end of day 1. But since jumping on any of these bandwagons would bring that person's vote count to 3 (oh no! 3rd on the bandwagon! must be scum! lynch lynch!), I'll content myself with a FoS: Flameaxe for now.

The emerging "pattern" of support is fairly apparent. I'm not a big fan of linking scumpairs until the alignment of one is known, but this definitely is something that is worth looking into. Both flame and trojan were also high on my list yesterday (Trojan = 70% and Flame = 75%)

[vollkan]

Another good post by Theo, summarising the case against Trojan.

So many things to respond to. It'll take time.

I guess I'll just do the same thing Flameaxe did and say

"Town being useless"

Two points:
1) After my previous post (the Flame-Trojan links), I was somewhat surprised to see Trojan at it again.
2) The "town being useless" thing is no excuse or defence for your actions. I appreciate there is a lot to respond to, but why even bother saying "town being useless" when it is evidently a dodgy excuse.

Uh! Unvote Vote Trojan Horse Not only were the two arguments very persuasive, but also this line:

Finally; at some point, we should pitch in and do one of these breakdowns for theo. Not that I think he's scum; I just think turnabout is fair play.

That is a useless line and everytime I've seen it its scum trying to deflect.

I really have a problem with people voting solely off other people's arguments; it always reeks of opportunism to me.

Furthermore, I don't quite understand why you place weight on the request for a Theo analysis (an effort to add in some superficial original content, perhaps?). Theo might well be scum, so it should make sense that we do an analysis of him. I understand Trojan could be attempting a deflection, but it's hardly a particularly viable strategy.

[vollkan]

Oman needs to die.

Why??? You're kind of starting to piss me off-you keep acting like your so much better than all of us at this game. I think that we should look into theo as well, but maybe that really has happened in a game before and that's why he's saying that. And I also hate posts that give us no information (ie:Oman needs to die)

Uh!

Unvote Vote Trojan Horse

Not only were the two arguments very persuasive, but also this line:

Finally; at some point, we should pitch in and do one of these breakdowns for theo. Not that I think he's scum; I just think turnabout is fair play.

That is a useless line and everytime I've seen it its scum trying to deflect.

Uh huh...

I must be missing something here, but what is the connection between the two quotes you just posted and said "uh huh" about?

[vollkan]

That should suffice for now. Obviously didn't respond to everything theo said- would've taken too long. Took long enough as it is. Anything else I need to respond to?

I'm largely satisfied with your responses.

Could you explain this one though:

[quote='Trojan"]
I'll have to vote for MoS or tyhess based on weak evidence. Give me something better to go on, if you have it.

Asks for someone to vote for!! [/quote]

[vollkan]

Flame, seriously, do you have any constructive thoughts at all?

Let's look at your past few posts:

This quote is useless and not funny either.

This isn't messing around. This is how I'm playing right now. Suck it up and deal.

Quick, every jump on.

RAMEN, BITCH!

I personally read it as if it was a rhetorical question...

Plus, Oman always needs to die, regardless. Oi.

Wow. Give me a bit to digest.

A few questions for Flameaxe while I do.

1) Do you think that the town has legitmate concerns about your contributions? -Yes

2) If so, why the lack of content? -Dunno really, started as a simple 'I dun have time' unintentional lurking, I just really haven't been able to get back into this game quite as easily as others.

3) If not, do you care to explain why? -N/A

Teh boldz are mine, yo.

Town being useless.

etcetera.

You aren't being helpful at and, tbh, you seem rather proud about the fact that you are doing absolutely nothing.

[vollkan]

I included that post because it shows clearly your own awareness that your behaviour is useless, and you can hardly call it a "constructive" contribution.

[vollkan]

Flameaxe is at -1.

I'm giving you a little more time to change your tune, Flameaxe. I got the hammer out. Contribute, or it's hammer time.

Interesting. You did not ask him to claim.

Flame should claim before anybody drops the hammer.

[vollkan]

Okay, that makes sense then.

I hadn't registered the claim in my head.

[vollkan]

Right, first up we are in 4:2 LYLO now, which means

extreme caution

is needed. I'll remind you all: A wagon over 2 votes could trigger a quick-hammering.

As for my scumdar:

Oman

- As I have been saying consistently now, Oman was unhelpful early on with a few tells. His hammer for flame was very odd. 70%

Tarhalindur

- Either vanilla or cultist. Either way, lynching him is a bad idea. On behaviour alone, 30%.

Pwayne

- His Tar vote was scummy. He has been of no real help and his flameaxe vote had very little reasoning behind it. 70%.

Trojan Horse

- Numerous small scum tells aggregated, but he cleared them up rather well yesterday. Still scummy, but significantly less so. 65%.

Theo

- Early on, he wasn't much help and I was pretty suspicious of him, particularly for going after Kakeng and ignoring Pwayne. Since then, his contributions have been solid and seemingly pro-town. Based on his early behaviour, I am not going to rule him out, but I do not suspect him highly either. 55%.

[vollkan]

Crossed with Tar:

So, we're at lylo.

First order of business: Mass claim time?

Second order of business: Reading the thread for a change...

Trojan said it well: Absolutely not.

Let me show why:

Mislynch D3 = 3:2

MafNK = 2:2
We NEED the vig to NK mafia here to make it 2:1.

Now, on D4 if we lynch mafia we win, which should be easier because the vig can confirm himself.
However, even if something goes wrong and we mislynch D4, it becomes 1:1 with vig and mafia, giving us a draw. (At least, I think it is a draw)

In contrast,
if the vig is outed, the vig dies and the 2:1 situation is true LYLO.

Now,

Mafia lynch D3 = 4:1

MafNK = 3:1
--Vig NK mafia = 3:0 WIN
--Vig NK town = 2:1 (see above. This is LYLO if vig has died, and lynch-or-draw if vig lives)
--Vig no NK = 3:1

In the 3:1 scenario,

Mislynch

= 2:1
MafNK town = 1:1
--VigNK mafia = 1:0 WIN
--Vig NK town = Vig no NK (since same target) = 1:1

In that situation, we again need to maximise the vig's survival

And, obvious

Maflynch

= 3:0 win

Therefore, there is no good reason to out the vig today and it will be very harmful.

[vollkan]

Okay, Tar mentioned a massclaim, which could be good, and I'd be happy to do it.

Secondly, we obviously have a doctor in here. And either a roleblocker or our SK/Vig didn't kill last night.

This post is just weird.

Oman, there were 2 kills last night.

Mastermind of Sin, townie (town), killed night two.
tyhess, townie (town), killed night two.

It is not "obvious" that we have a doctor and our RB was lynched D1.

Moreover, I severely doubt we have a SK. This is a semi-open setup where we were told the scum and, moreover, a SK would make things hideously unbalanced. We've been over this already.

Moreover, I don't get why, in light of the numbers, you would support a mass claim at this stage. There is no advantage in a mass claim.

[vollkan]

1

...Seriously? My one vote from two days ago is still ringing your scumdar? It's not like I lynched a claimed power role or anything...

2

Whats more, what is your beef with lynching flameaxe? I seem to recall seeing you on that wagon as well, its a little late to be having second thoughts.

You're getting awfully emotional there.

1) Time lapse does not alter things and I am surprised you would use it as a defence. I attacked your vote at the time, and I stand by that. Granted, I will certainly be looking for things more recent, but you must see that your vote is a factor in my suspicion of you.

2) I don't recall criticising the wagon on flame in a general sense. Indeed, I think the wagon was justified. My problem is the lack of reasoning behind your vote. You referred to "reasons stated". The nearest clear attack on flame was 6 days earlier in a scumdar post, but in that post you did not clearly differentiate flame over Oman or Trojan. In that sense, my problem is that I never really saw you explaining

why

flame was the most scummy. You just seemed to decide he was scum.

[vollkan]

So?

Nothing right now, actually. Emotion can be a slight scum-tell, but I am going to treat it as a nullity for the time being.

The reason I noted it is the majority of your posts seem very restrained and controlled. This was an exception. I don't know exactly what

You seem to miss the point of my comment. I'm not defending my vote. I'm curious why my ONE single solitary vote on a claimed vanilla, two days ago, out weighs your concern for SEVERAL votes on a claimed POWER ROLE that occurred since then.

Your Tar vote was scummy; you aren't defending that. As to why I see so much significance to it: Your reasoning was scummy and equated to finding an excuse to lynch a claimed townie. MoS in 1064 argued convincingly in favour of lynching Kakeng, though I had reservations about the lynching of a claimed power role.

As for the flameaxe stuff, I did not say you did not make those comments or explanations. My problem was that I couldn't see things building up.

You said

Oman- I think that it is really really scummy that he jumps onto so many bandwagons b/c scummy people like to jump on lots and lots of bandwagons. Bandwagon hoping is a scummy thing to do.

tyhess- I think he is scummy. I have said so before. I think it is just as likely that he is making newbie mistakes.


Flameaxe- I think flameaxe is scummy. Not wanting to play by the same rules as everybody else is scummy. Making infrequent posts is scummy. Making contentless post is scummy. Some people think that Kakeng is scummy because they think that making contentless posts and lurking is scummy. I think Flameaxe is more scummy that kakeng is scummy because flameaxe has been scummy the whole game. That is scummy.

Trojan Horse- Being wishy-washy is scummy. Trojan Horse is wishy-washy, therefore, I will go out on a limb and say he is scummy.

...there you go.

then some posts later it was

Vote:FlameAxe

He's actively lurking and waiting for this deadline to expire.

And then you just moved to calling flame "scum" in your next PBPA.

As I said before, my problem was that you were not explaining why flame was becoming more scummy to you from that initial scumdar post I quoted.
~~~~~~~
As an aside, I intend on doing a PBPA of Oman soon.

[vollkan]

As promised,

PBPA of Oman

14: Random votes Pwayne
23: Another random vote for flameaxe
27: Says Pwayne is obv scum or recruiter
64: Seems to have a favourable view of BS. Makes an attack on flame and votes (3rd on wagon)
73: "I think that we shouldn't force townies to claim, but lynching them isn't too bad an idea." Suggests town should go after mafia and mafia should go after cult.
92: He agrees with me that powerrole claims should not be countered, and agrees that there are wifomy.
99: Says Pwayne seems pro-town for his analysis. Questions Rump's opposition to the flame wagon.
101: Thinks Rump's defence of flame is contrived.
104: Explains origins of phrase "townie brownies"
115: More critique of Rump. Also prods tyhess, querying why he has no opinions.
119: Clarifies that newbies often try to protect themself
126: Is thinking Flame and Rump as mafia
133: He doesn't Theo's vote on Pwayne.
137: Defends Pwayne's defensiveness by arguing it is just his playstyle
140: Votes Theo
141: Unvotes, and then votes Theo (he forgot to unvote in 140)
144: Affirms his vote stands
148: Attacks Theo for fence-sitting because he called Rump and tyhess "newbish/scummy"
153: Attacks tyhess's word choice and says he is inclined to change to tyhess
160: Affirms he is going after mafia, not cult
182:

Tell me why its crap, I voted theo for starting a crap case, and now I'm being fosed for that being a crap case. Tell me, who is scummier than theo right now?

This is an interesting quote since he dodges the issue of whether or not the case is crap, to demand an alternative to Theo.
184: Awaits with baited breath
186: Again:

No to me he needs to point to someone more suspicious. What he's basically saying is that this bandwagon is invalid. If this one is invalid, then he needs to propose a better one lest the town stalls.

Oman is not defending his own wagon; he is simply demanding an alternative.
190: I have attacked Oman on this very point. His response:

[quote="vollkan"
If I were to vote X on the basis of me not liking his avatar and you were to, rightly, call me out for that being a stupid vote reason there would be no onus on you to prove someone else was scummier than X.

A good point, though would you relaly feel the wagon is valid based on avatar? [/quote]

He really avoids what I am saying by just calling it a "good point"
194: He will not make judgments on the edit fiasco
196: Asks MoS to explain why he finds EITHER Theo or Flame to be pro-town, saying he thinks they are both anti-town. Oman thinks CKD is pro-town.
208: Nothing
210: Accuses MoS of wifom
217: Effectively a QFT of CKD.
219: Votes MoS for having a "developed plan" on theo and flame, with the alternative being theo and flame are genuine
222: MoS is scummy for not jumping on Oman's wagons for bad reasons. A very odd thing to call a scumtell.
225: After I FoS Oman, he says "Developed stance" not "developed plan"

Oman is basically saying that you should have joined the wagons unless you can articulate a good reason why not to, and he thinks you are scummy for that.

Actually I don't feel he should have joined the wagons. My point was more that he didn't and his reasons were unsatisfactory. I don't mind people not joining a wagon saying "theres enough on them" or "my gut says no" but the fact that he tried to put some "factual" (in the context of the game) reasoning behind it makes me uncomfortable.

227: Further clarifies the meaning of "developed stance" as being that was MoS calling them pro-town without evidence.
230: Accuses MoS of being scum with flame or theo and of buddying up to the other.
233: "My biggest problem was not that he didn't see them as scummy, but that he gave crap reasons for it, AND ignored half the case, Vollkan."
235: Clarification
237: Requests clarification
239: Can't stand metagame
241: Is unsure as to what MoS is, but thinks he is not protown
310: Explains that he agrees with me a lot because I am persuasive and authoritative. <3
317: Applauds someone for "Calling MoS out"
319: Nothing really
321: Same
325: Attacks tyhess's scumdar list as "sketchy"
340: More anti-metagaming sentiment
343: Asks for clarif. from Theo
345: Same
348: Votes Theo for accusing Oman of fishing.
350: Scumdar

Tyhess: Gets bit uppity about the edit thing.

Vollkan: Defends trojan a bit, but in true vollkan style. Seems to be on the right side of everyone. Either agreeing or being agreed with. Works hard on either side of the MoS/Oman debate. Makes a comment about "If MoS is scum this has validity" (or somewhat) but I don't see how this is even logical. If we knew mos was scum we needent worry. I also don't like the way MoS's not reading the game was "rational"

MoS: I still don't like that post about Flameaxe and theo, for the same reasons that he ignores a lot of game content when he posts them. He ignores a question from me in 211 about blackstrike. MoS either doesn't read or is constantly twisting people's words (see: 228) ZOMG NOTE:
MoS wrote:
You don't have to be sure of our alignment
SINGULAR! Theo and MoS a team? Or Flameaxe and Mos? (I'm not sure to who he refers). MoS wants me to metagame him (?)

244 Mos likes to WIFOM himself in 3rd person. 248 MoS proves he doesn't read the game by saying I called him scum.

CKD: Absolutley owns MoS in 214

Pwayne: Posts without comment on the action Then gets into it and calls MoS on a few things. Now I find this interesting as it would have been almost easier to go after me had Pwayne been scum. He could have got vollkan on side, and with him, the town. Pwayne scores high townie brownies for it.

Blackstrike: Is he still here? I thought he posted a "will post content" and then bailed. But it turns out he came back...just ...not to post content.

White I dislike white's analysises. Basically you're either newb, scum, or neutral.

353: Agrees with MoS that White is not making conclusions
356: Sarcasm to Theo
358: More of the same
363: Agrees with me when I question Theo's accusations of fishing by Oman
421: Promises content
422:

FTR, I can't pick a lynch atm. Theo is crazy, as is MoS, but I'm willing to bet that MoS has a plan and Theo will come good. I'm gonna put a vote on the player I think has been the most sketch so far without reason.

Vote Tyhess

MAJORFOS: Flameaxe I am against voting for lurkers when the only thing they've done in ages is lurk.

Tyhess has changed his stance on MoS a fair bit without seeming to, his posts are contradictory and sometimes even within themselves. I disagree right now with the other 3 major wagons.

430: Is confused by MoS and doesn't know what to think
448: Votes MoS
451: jokes
454: nothing
481: Unvotes MoS for a rational explanation
484: nothing
487: nothing
489: Requests clarification
492: promises content
494: is drunk
498: A claim would not be the be-all-and-end-all
500: Attacks CKD
502: Gets caps lock rage over CKD querying why Oman wants claims if he is not going to take them at face value
504-512: spam
548: Votes White, reasons unclear
555: nothing
558-560: More anti-White
573: Queries about deadline lynch
576: Will favour lynch at deadline
596: Thinks CKD is a "wildcard"
598: Wants extension
600: nothing
626: interesting post:

Unvote Vote Flameaxe

You're doing little for the game, and my white vote is doing nothing where it is.

Very little explanation and his reason for leaving white is curious
628: baited breath
630-633: Asks for content from flame
678: Unvotes flame, returns to white
727: Thinks Trojan's "Pressured to vote" was odd
739: accuses Trojan of backpedalling
751: Baits breath
767: Apologises for LA
780: Would support the lynch of Trojan, white or tyhess.
783: nothing
797: Wonders if we should wait for deadline
822-878: Nothing
886: Votes Tar for bandwagoning 4 days out of deadline
888-958: nothing
963: Pwayne and CKD get townie brownies.
965: MoS gets townie brownies
981: He misread Pwayne, since he thought Pwayne was against lynching Tar. Votes Pwayne
983: "Sure, You and CKD are pro-tar lynch, who you accept is a vanilla. So you're pro-town lynch."
986: Wants pwayne to die
989-996: nothing really
1035: Suggests a scum RB is plausible
1042: Votes tyhess for "trying to be town"
1123: Questions about cult. INterestingly, says "Tyhess was dumb, but I wouldn't vote on it."
1126: cultists will work against scum
1129-1140: nothing really
1156: Votes Tar for acting invulnerable.
1160: Queries why Pwayne voted flame
1169: Says tyhess is "scummy as hell". This is another flip in his view of tyhess
1172: "I'm fine with pwayne's vote, it seems logical."
1181: Agrees with me and FoSes tyhess for the apparent contradiction
1189: UnFoSes
1194: Would support a flame lynch
1197: " Its casual lynch support, because I casualy support the wagon, whether it lynches or not is really regardless, I just want the activity." Doesn't care about the outcome of flame's lynch
1201-1215: nothing really
1218: Votes Trojan for "That is a useless line and everytime I've seen it its scum trying to deflect."
1222: Oman admits I "persauded him mightily"
1233: humour
1261: The hammer
1263-1267: Nothing really
1278: Supports massclaim
1280: retracts

~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~
Overall, some scumminess and lack of original content, often just agreeing with me. Nothing overly-obvscum though. The flipping on tyhess is particularly odd, along with the "developed stance" debacle. Possibly scum with Pwayne.

[vollkan]

Vollkan has two points about my scumminess. First: Some weird theory that my stance against Flameaxe wasn't developed enough (oman, is that you?) to justify my vote. This is in some bizzare way, a scum tell. I would defend myself here, but I see no need. If Vollkan would be so kind as to demonstrate his superior stance developing skills as they pertain to Flameaxe, I will. While he is at it, he could show me Theo's, tyhess', and Oman's.

I'll repeat what I have already said.
In the scumdar post you did not differentiate flame. Then you vote flame for lurking (rightly so) and then you move to calling flame "scum" in your next scumdar (that's all you have to say)

My quibble with this is that you never explained why flame had become scum. He was scummy with other people in the first scumdar, then you voted for lurking, then he was simply "scum".

I'd like to know when it was, and why, that your opinion on flame cemented such that he became obvscum to you and, moreover, why you neglected to explain this.

As for my own suspicions, I was consistent:

Flameaxe: I suspected him early on, but by slipping out of the game everything has progressed beyond that point. I will be watching flame or his replacement.

I voted him in 672 for an OMGUS attack on White
In 714 I maintained that my vote stood until he opened up, ending his anti-town behaviour.

Flameaxe - I didn't like him early on. His only post in this whole Pwayne-Tar affair was an "I told you so". His previous posts were all useless one-liners. 70%.

In 1045 I vote flame for his lack of contribution and to avoid No Lynch
1078: I maintained I would prefer flame to kakeng
1081: I comment on his scummy remark that he had lurked to victory in another game
1074: I accuse him of deliberately lurking
1098: I would prefer flame over Oman

Flameaxe: Lurking, unhelpful and scummy. This guy is topping my list. 75%.

The thing I notice here is that Flame's posts are, as per usual, entirely devoid of any real content. His criticism of Tar's voting is weak and he doesn't really make any comment as to his own suspicions, simply saying what it looks like.

...

For now, Vote: Flameaxe .

I think flame is scummier than you do, but that may just be that I tend to be pretty harsh on non-contribution generally. In any case, it gives me something to think about.

That's my own. I was consistent that flame was the scummiest.

I will do the other three player's if you want me to; it could prove worthwile.

As for the vanilla stuff, I do not defend those posts. However, they were all made before 992 where I proved numerically that lynching vanillas was a bad thing. At the point in the game where those posts were made, I had not completed this analysis.

I happen to agree with him on his Oman stance. His Oman-Pwayne stance is ridiculous.

How is it ridiculous?

[vollkan]

After 992 and your analysis, I changed my position as well. If we both believed the same thing, and changed our minds at the same time using the same data, how can you be so critical of my position?

You did change your position two posts later, but in 993 it looked like you were still trying to argue for the lynch:

I don't have a clue what these numbers mean, but if they say what you claim, then I am mistaken. How does this mean I am scum? Is white scum for saying:

....

We certainly should! This lynch isn't about whether I am right or wrong, it is about a favorable outcome for the town. The numbers you have provided seem to be the odds that I am right that Tar in vanilla townie and that the cult will recruit him. What are the odds of a favorable outcome?

If you were not advocating the lynch here, I apologise, but I took it as meaning that you were trying to ignore what I had written, despite acknowledging what my numbers had meant in the first part.

I knew there was something wrong here, because I would not have suspected you so strongly if what you are saying is the case. And I found it. Back in 951 I also looked at your position critically and FoSed you for it:

Advantages of Lynching Tar
* Cult is less likely to have 2 members tomorrow. As MoS says, Tar is a known vanilla so he will be a less desirable cult recruit.
* No prospect of a "possible cult" Tar lingering

Disadvantages of Lynching Tar
* He's still a townie at the moment. Thus, this lynch has no prospect of helping us.
* No information value at all. We are not going to learn anything that we can use to associate people as scum.
* Basically helps the mafia by taking out the cult for them
* Prospect of cult recruiting elsewhere and grabbing an unknown

I had been thinking about it for some time and these were my results. The argument still persisted after this, evidenced by the fact that I needed to make a quantitative attack in 993.

me 75%
FA 70%
TH 65%
Theo65%
Oman65%
Kak 60%

Despite this he opts to vote for Kak (his number 6) in post 1022

You're ignoring the fact that, between those posts, Theo and MoS had been calling for Kak's lynch with the "let's lynch the scumz". The deadline was imminent and he was the only lynchee that had agreement. Oh and I unvoted in 1037 after the claim.

A- You can't call me scum for suggesting that we lynch claimed vanillas without being a hypocrite.

Not a hypocrite. I had officially had opposition since 951. Your argument struggled on even after 993, though it was clear by that stage that you had seen your line was not in the town's interest, since you also said

I don't have a clue what these numbers mean, but if they say what you claim, then I am mistaken. How does this mean I am scum? Is white scum for saying:

B- My contribution, stance, developed reasons whatever you want to call it for thinking that FA was scum and then voting to lynch him are better more solid, more consistent, and less suspicious than Oman's, tyhess' and Tar's, and at least as good as yours and theo's, possibly better. Your case is contrived and weak (which in itself is inconsistent and worthy of suspicion). At the very very least, my stance on FA was by far the least weak.

I was judging you relative to my own, rather than relative to anyone else. I'll look over Oman, tyhess and tar soon to see if what you are saying is true. If so, that constitutes a cause for suspicion of them as well.

C- You have made ZERO connections between me and Oman! You have said I am scummy (a fact that you fail to support yet continue to hammer away upon) and two that Oman is scummy (with which I agree)

C+P from my PBPA of Ouman

99: Says Pwayne seems pro-town for his analysis.
133: He doesn't Theo's vote on Pwayne.
137: Defends Pwayne's defensiveness by arguing it is just his playstyle
350:

Pwayne: Posts without comment on the action Then gets into it and calls MoS on a few things. Now I find this interesting as it would have been almost easier to go after me had Pwayne been scum. He could have got vollkan on side, and with him, the town. Pwayne scores high townie brownies for it.

963: Pwayne and CKD get townie brownies.
1172: "I'm fine with pwayne's vote, it seems logical."

It could be a scumlink, it could be buddying, it could be nothing. I don't intend to think on it any further unless one of you comes up scum. The point is that there is a possible link there, and that it is only in the town's best interests if we are aware of it.

[vollkan]

It's not the case has been altered; my line has been consistent. It's simply that we are narrowing things down in terms of specificity.

The second issue is that I did not find my post 951 until after I had made my first post.

First it was:

1) Anybody that pushes an anti town idea is scum
2) pwayne66 pushed an antitown idea
therefore) pwayne66 is scum!

See ^ that is a very broad analysis of my suspicion of you.

after I pointed out that you pushed an anti town idea as well, you changed you theory so that it excluded you:

1) Anybody that pushes an anti town idea past post 992 is scum!
2) pwayne66 pushed an antitown idea past post 992
therefore) pwayne66 is scum!

That makes it more specific. And, on that note, you make it sound like I have suddenly become aware of the fact that I did support the vanilla lynching. If you read 951, I make it quite clear that whilst I initially thought it was a valid line of argument, the discussion had moved firmly against it.

This despite the fact that there can be no doubt that post 992 is what changed my mind. But you were aware of this right? That is why you change your position again to better make it fit:

1) Anybody that pushes an anti town idea past 951 is scum!
2) pwayne66 pushed an anti town idea past 951
therefore) pwayne66 is scum!

Okay, let me draw things back to how I see them so we can understand our respective positions:

I think that anybody who advocates a position that is demonstrably anti-town is scummy when that position has been refuted, if they fail to properly address that refutation.

That's a broad general rule.

In your case, you continued to argue your line without really having regard to the counter-case right up until 993 when we first got the hint that you were realising that there were problems in your position. Before that, you had failed to respond directly to my points, instead arguing your position with MoS. It was the gap from 951-993 where my suspicion formed. And it was only after hard numerical evidence that you backed down.

You have a clear agenda and I am not playing along with it. If anybody else has questions about this, I am game.

I know some of this has been confusing because of the 951 mux-ip, but I think you should see my position now.

[vollkan]

Long story short, I am sorry if you feel that I didn't give post 951 the consideration that it deserved. I was fighting off what I thought was a surprising situation, multiple posts from MoS, CDK and others. Oman was totally missing the point and was siding with me. You saying that I didn't consider the counter-cases is insulting. All I did that entire time is consider and defend my position against counter cases. It was the very fact that I consider your post 992 that caused me to change my po

Alright.

I think we are both clear on this then. If what you say there is the case, then your ignoring it is understandable. Of course, I will take it with the usual grain of salt.

Perhaps you think I should have done so in 951 rather in 992. There were 14 hours between the two posts. I was asleep for several of them. If that is your case, so be it. I have no further defenses and I don't think any further defenses are necessary.

Heh. I checked the times and you are right. This clears things up significantly.

[vollkan]

To everybody attempting PBPAs. For your own convenience and so that the post numbers are accurate it is a good idea to use this Mafia Thread Parser

To operate it,
1) Enter the thread's home URL in the first field. For us it is (remove quote marks) "http://www.mafiascum.net/forum/viewtopic.php?t=6131"
2) Enter the name of the player you wish to PBPA. This is not needed, though if you just want to see votes. But if you enter someone's name ALL their posts will be shown in full
3) Click the little box to ignore guardian ^^

Someone I am in a game with named Gemelli developed this as a means of sifting through things and I use it all the time. The other nifty thing is that all post numbers are hyperlinked to the thread. So, if you read something that makes no sense out of context, you just click the link and it takes you to the actual forum.

[vollkan]

And now the final installment:

PBPA of Theopor

74: Apologises for forgetting the game
81: Promise of content
132: Balanced attack on BS. Votes Pwayne for defending BS and for opposing pressuring tactics.
136: Doesn't like Pwayne's recent list and affirms his disagreement with Pwayne on pressuring.
139: Says the tone of Oman was an over-reaction. This is..strange.
143: Turns out the tone wasn't that bad after all. Affirms suspicion of Pwayne but unvotes because of Oman's suggestion that Pwayne has a defensive playstyle meta.
177: The Pwayne thing was a "misunderstanding". Acknowledges that he is under suspicion for it but "at least it generated discussion". Is neutral on tyhess and thinks ac1983 is scummy.
179: Corrects somebody
189: Asks why ac1983 wants to defend him so much
216: Wants to hear from ac1983
252: Votes ac1983
264: Thinks ac1983 is not going to reappear.
290: Still waiting for ac1983
303: Can't be arsed doing anything until ac1983 shows up
311: Won't comment on everything until ac1983 responds. Quotable quote:

Day One I'd rather concentrate on one or two people than analyse and comment on everything going on, doing it only makes you night kill fodder.

That makes me tingle a little
326: Reaffirms he is going to use a narrow scope, at least until ac1983 posts.
330: Accuses tyhess of fence-sitting
332: Questions flame
341: Wonders if tyhess made a town-tell slip
344: He didn't mean a scummy slip, just an error
346: Orders Oman to stop "fishing" because Oman wondered why Theo said it was a town-tell. An odd accusation from Theo
355: "I don't need to explain why I think that particular post of Tyhess strikes me as a townish thing. It's pretty obvious really." Is not budging until ac1983 posts
373: Misrepresents tyhess.

Seriously though theo wtf are you talking about.....

I was starting to think that you might be protown,

[theo's underlining] but then you post this and no one else can figure out what your talking about??? With 10 other players, not counting you or myself, you would figure one of them would know what your talking about. Please explain.

My underlining, is this despite your list of suspicion? And the fact your vote is on me.

As for the cult issue which everyone has gone ape at me over, Tyhess included, it was the fact Tyhess commented that the cultist knows that only one other person wasn't town. When obviously there's two mafioso. Seems pretty stupid if your scum and can't remember how many of em they are, meh maybe I'm reading too much into it, Tyhess's play doesn't exactly deserve a pass does it.

The underlining thing is my concern. Theo makes it look like tyhess is voting for someone that tyhess considers to be pro-town which, in fact, is ignoring that tyhess was basically saying "You were beginning to look protown"
374: Clarifies something
375: (rightly) Accuses flame of being evasive.
376: Responding to a question from me about the weird "fishing" thing, theo says: "fishing for information". He then goes and says Oman is good for building discussion. More weirdness. If it was just fishing for information, why bother ordering Oman to quit.
392: More "waiting for ac1983"
393: "I don't like Flameaxe's or Blackstrike's lack of content lately either." That's the entirety of it.
395: Wants to hear from his main suspects ac1983, flame and BS
400: More suspicion of BS
404: Criticises white, promises content
407: Promises content, and suspicion of ac1983
425: promises content
426: The promised content.
Things to note:

ac1983

Criticises ac1983 for suggesting BS is "pro-town but flawed". Theo says: "Blackstrike is pro-town. Nothing else. " This contradicts his earlier stuff about suspecting BS. Accuses ac1983 of picking on an easy target, one that Theo himself was picking on. ac1983 gets 8/10

CKD

He likes CKD, mostly because their views align. 3/10

BS

"more silly than anti-town" 5/10

Flame

A well-deserved 6/10 for lurking and being useless.

MoS

Likes MoS. 3/10
550: promises content
590: promises content
647: Doesn't like ac1983 still, and TH is now giving off scumvibes
655: Won't let kak off the hook for ac1983
664: More anti-ac
706: Votes TH for the "horrible" post 699
FTR

Alright then MoS, I'll commit. Not happy about it, but I'll commit.

Vote tyhess

Never was happy with all of his bandwagon hopping at the start of the game. Could just be newbishness, but it could also be an opportunistic scum, hiding behind the fact that he's a newb.

Sure hope I got it right.

718: Thinks TH is picking on an easy target
723: Thinks TH is scum
730: TH has said he sees nobody worth lynching other than tyhess, MoS, CKD and White. and theo responds with "Not even ac/kakeng?" More oddness..
731: At least TH stuck his neck out
738: TH and kak are major suspects
741: Asks white whether he thinks TH is scum
746: Prods tar and kak. Wants TH lynched
829: TH and kak are scummiest
876:

Unvote, Vote Kakeng

I'm still pretty happy with thinking Trojan's scum but AC1983's replacement Kakeng is probably even more likely scum with his great lack of input.

TH is scummy, but kak is more likely to be scum because he is not giving input.
879: Comments on ac1983's lack of content
914: Wants kak lynched
916: "I think it's more likely he's scum. Simple."
920: Wants kak lynched for lurking. Distinguishes from Tar and BS because they were, respectively, more pro-town in appearance and foolish. This is also a strange post; don't know why it bugs me though.
921: Wants kak lynch, and prefers TH to Tar
952: Criticises me saying Tar is a known vanilla
961: Asks Pwayne to name his quotees.
973: Tar doesn't deserve a free pass
975: Doesn't want Tar lynched
977: "Pwayne - Do you think Kakeng is more/less scummy than Tarharlindur?"
979" "And Blackstrike?"
1013: This is quotable

What I see against Kakeng is that he is lurking. Is this a good enough reason to lynch? What do we learn from his death?

And he's scummy and he's not very helpful and ac1983 fell down a big hole got outed as likely scum and left. And yeh I've got a fetish for him because I think he's scum, the only other person who concerns me as much is Trojan, mind I don't like Oman much lately either.

He's really egging on the kak lynch and being rather ambiguous about things. Also, leaves his options open for Trojan and Oman. Doesn't explain why Kak is scummy or why Oman is.

1019: Is pissed off at the games length
1024: Votecount
1027: "we'll have to wait and see"
1028: Didn't see white's unvote
1048: Unvotes kak on claim. Prods flame
1068: Agrees with MoS on kak. Also suggests suspicion of TH and flame
1071: Votes kak
1080-1094: Complaining about flame's lurkin
1111: Time for a reread
1166: is really bugged by Oman
1192: Promises content
1203: tyhess PBPA. Thinks is decent overall
1204: A correction
1205: Flame PBPA. "I'm pretty unconvinced if he's actually scum being useless or town being useless."
1211: Promises more content
1212: Likes my flame/TH post
1216: TH PBPA. "This guy just strikes me as scum, in every way. " Votes
1218: Promises content
1232: Prods TH and flame
1237: Is pleased with TH's response and swaps to flame
1248: Probes TH for content
1251: Points out flame's hypocrisy regarding MoS not being helpful
1286: Is having problems reading. Wants masslcaim
1289: Retracts massclaim call "ought to read first". Promises content

~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~
A definite shift towards becoming more helpful over time. The early blind focus on ac1983 is strange, but not "scummy". Just weird. There are a few other oddities which are suspicious in aggregate, but nothing that I would be prepared to vote on. His latter content is definitely very helpful. I'll say 55%, mainly just for the early stuff.

[vollkan]

Gack! Not the final installment ; I was being too optimistic. I still need to do Tar, TH and Pwayne.

I might go lazy and not do TH since he has been done adequately by theo.

[vollkan]

Okay, I'll just do Tar's then and we'll work out who can do Pwayne's later.

Expect it sometime later on today.

[vollkan]

PBPA of Dr. Blackstrike/Tarhalindur

13: Random vote for tyhess.
28: "any townie claim should be punishable by lynch." and "townies should try get killed by the mafia. It hurts the cult."
33: Affirms that townies should try to die
36: Stands corrected (after I argued against him)
38: Being killed is better than being recruited.
39: Wrongly says we have 4-6 vanillas.
41: Realises blunder after I point it out
43: "If a townie is killed in the night by the mafia, a power role has escaped for another night AND a potential cultist has been removed."
49: Says he doesn't want townies lynched, he just wants them to be killed by mafia. Votes flame because "I'm not sure I like how you play either. "
75: Thinks time has been wasted talking about him. Suggests dealing with mafia to get them to go after cult.
107: "Seems a bit odd that tyhess has gotten several votes on him in quick succession... "
146: FoSes Theo for exclusively picking on pwayne for defending BS
242: Promises content
272: Doesn't like White's attitude
295: Basically just playing the newbie card.
<Exit: Dr. Blackstrike>
<Enter: Tarhalindur>
607: Promises content
614: Strongly supports deadline extension
788: Promises content
801: Votes MoS because his playstyle is off
882: May need to be replaced
885: Votes kak. "When in doubt and close to deadline, voting for the largest bandwagon is rarely a bad idea."
887: Self-votes and claims vanilla
894: Unvotes
905: Realises error and says self-voting in his case is consistent with town play. Votes CKD.
910: Votes self-again because he is likely to be recruited, making him a better candidate than Kak.
1022: Joins kak bandwagon
1046: Unvotes again. Needs to look at flame
1079: Votes kak
1085: Flameaxe concerns him, but a lynch is better than a no lynch
1151: Votes flame
1154: Was just reaction testing. Unvotes
1164: Thinks flame is scum with Oman. Votes Oman because Oman criticised Tar for thinking he was invulnerable. This vote is odd, because he had been attacking flame more than Oman. Usually this would ring as a scumbuddy tell, but obviously that's impossible given flame's alignment. So, just odd.
1252: Promises content
1273: Suggests massclaim
~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~
Right, BS was a newb and he did play the newbie card a bit but, by and large, I don't think he was particularly scummy. Tar vote hops a lot, but that seems to just be a playstyle thing. There is the odd vote for Oman, that I really do not know what to make of. My gut feeling is that he is a recruit, just going by how the two most odd things, the Oman vote and the massclaim call, have occurred after N1. And, also, because I think his chronic lurking may be an effort in self-preservation, although it could just be vanilla boredom.

[vollkan]

PBPA of Pwayne

7: Random votes CKD
16: Votes BS for the edit sig
17: Forgot to unvote. Votes BS
18: Unvotes
26: Thinks sig thing is amusing.
31: Thinks lynching townies is a bad idea, suggests lynching them the following day when they are more likely cult. This ignores the mafia.
32: Any roleclaim is bad
37: Affirms previous
45: Thinks that pressure on BS is counter-productive in making discussion
50: Setup speculation. Thinks our priority should be the cult.
51: More of the above
58: Doesn't like the BS wagon and thinks we are being too light on lurking
62: Thinks we should determine a course of action and deal with the lurkers rather than pursuing BS.
76: Orders that nobody claim vanilla until recruiter is dead.
96: Scumdar #1:

The world according to pwayne:

Mastermind of Sin- I'm not thrilled about his random vote in the middle of page 4 or his lack of an apology for his absence. It's not that I need an apology, or that accidents don't happen, It would just show some sort of interest in helping the town.

Oman- Can't get a good feel on him. Has posted calm and reasonable insight. Has his sights on Flameaxe and I don't know that I blame him.

ac1983fan- I can't anything here.

vollkan- seems legit. suspicions of flameaxe might be a little aggressive.

Dr. Blackstrike- early questions cast suspicions about his loyalty. I have no particular reason to believe him town but don't think that his question betray his allegiance.

curiouskarmadog- first to jump on Dr. BS and his questions were legit. May have stayed on the "Dr. BS bandwagon" too long though.

tyhess- continues to vote Dr. BS b/c he is "weird". This seems, well... weird.

Trojan Horse- seems intent on contributing to the discussion

Flameaxe- Seems a tad defensive. that's not scumtell but it should be noted. Like CKD, I can appreciate a little pressure on the doc intially, but he seems to try too hard too build a case that isn't there.

Rump-Wat- His "Flameaxe was suspicious and now isn't but initially it was a random vote" stance is bothersome. I would like to know specifically what was suspicious about flameaxe and what happened to stop the suspicion.

theopor_COD- was absent for quite a while and as far as I am concerned is still. Can't list any real pros or cons.

123: Wants explanation for someone's unvote
124: Crossposted
134: States that he was not defending BS, and was just seeking strategising.
149: Thinks bullying tactics can be abused.
155: Thinks Theo is either deliberately misrepresenting him, or is failing to understand things.
161: Acknowledges that Theo is just making an error after theo admits so
172: Prods ac1983fan to explain a vote and FoS
204, 206 - nothing
212: Thinks flame is scummy
243: An "I'm confused" post
247: Criticises MoS's insistence that Oman beat out a full case against him when Oman is abused for not accepting blindly that flame and theo are pro-town.
251: Voting |= wanting dead. Wonders why MoS thinks we should blindly accept statements that "X is pro-town"
257: Promises content
265-286: Arguing with White. Basically just over playstyle which makes it kind of ooc
287: New scumdar:

I lied. I put a quick one together today. I included my first list on page four and inserted any changes.

Mastermind of Sin- I'm not thrilled about his random vote in the middle of page 4 or his lack of an apology for his absence. It's not that I need an apology, or that accidents don't happen, It would just show some sort of interest in helping the town.

He has explained this and argued it with White. I never thought this action was scummy, only disrespectful. That said, I am much more concerned with his actions, evasiveness and defensiveness toward Oman.

Oman- Can't get a good feel on him. Has posted calm and reasonable insight. Has his sights on Flameaxe and I don't know that I blame him.

Also doesn't seem to take much seriously. This could pose trouble later on as it provides opprotunity to say "I was just playing then" if asked questions about actions.

ac1983fan- I can't anything here.

Nothing has changed here. This absolutley has to stop.

Vollkan- seems legit. suspicions of flameaxe might be a little aggressive.

Here, I agree with White. He is in a mediator role so far, and it bothers me. The tagteam action of MoS and himself against Oman, is troubling as well.

Dr. Blackstrike- early questions cast suspicions about his loyalty. I have no particular reason to believe him town but don't think that his question betray his allegiance.

needs to post more. Considering that he is on a lot of people's lists, he ought to be concerned with ridding himself of those suspicions. If he isn't, that seems suspicious.

curiouskarmadog- first to jump on Dr. BS and his questions were legit. May have stayed on the "Dr. BS bandwagon" too long though.

Nothing new IMO.

tyhess- continues to vote Dr. BS b/c he is "weird". This seems, well... weird.

Hasn't improved in my view.

Trojan Horse- seems intent on contributing to the discussion

No changes.

Flameaxe- Seems a tad defensive. that's not scumtell but it should be noted. Like CKD, I can appreciate a little pressure on the doc initially, but he seems to try too hard too build a case that isn't there.

Needs to be around more. I don't really hold the Dr. BS situation against him, but given the lack of anything else to judge, it's all I have.

Rump-Wat- His "Flameaxe was suspicious and now isn't but initially it was a random vote" stance is bothersome. I would like to know specifically what was suspicious about flameaxe and what happened to stop the suspicion.

Now White. If I had to guess, I would say protown. I can't imagine scum benefiting from bringing this much attention to themselves (WIFOM anybody?). Likes to stir the pot. I will be curious to see how this works out.

theopor_COD- was absent for quite a while and as far as I am concerned is still. Can't list any real pros or cons.

I am hard pressed to find anything either protown or controversial about this player.


Vote:MoS

PS. I realized that I forgot AC while I was typing this out. That speaks volumes to his/her contribution to this game.[/b]

316: More attacks on MoS. Confirms vote.
324: Nothing
333: Is voting MoS for evasiveness, not defensiveness
334: nothing
338: Affirms 333
359: Disagrees that Oman is fishing
364: Doesn't suspect theo for raising the fishing accusation
368: nothing
383: Supports the top three thing
389: Suspects MoS, Vollkan and tyhess. He's pretty vague. For this reason, he thinks the three most in need of pressure are MoS, theo and tyhess.
397, 398: nothing
440-469: Hates MoSes "scum are wagonning me" thing.
471: unvotes
520: Explains that he unvoted because he did not want a hammer of MoS
524-537: More squabbling with MoS over the wagon thing and MoS calling people protown without explaining
541: nothing
571: Thinks the MoS wagon has gotten opportunistic but it was initially legitimate.
547-612: nothing.
618: accuses TH of backpedalling
766: Promises content
790: Scumdar #3

My 4 most scummy- TH, tyhess, MoS, Flameaxe,

and in no particular order-

Mastermind of Sin- My thoughts are documented at length.

Oman- I haven't changed my position here either. At one point I said that I felt he a lackadaisical approach to the game, and White said he felt he took the game too serious. He posts alot of one liners and responds when asked to (which is more than I can say for most of the people here...) but hasn't seemed too keen on initiating conversation.

Kakeng (r. ac1983fan)- jury's out. Seems to be trying to reread (30+ pages...)

vollkan- initially scummy by association to MoS, IMO. If I were to be honest, I'm seeing nothing bad on him for now.

Tarhalindur (r. Dr. Blackstrike)- yup...

curiouskarmadog- rightfully calls me out for lurking after the Extension request. Does appear to me to be flying under the radar.

tyhess- Early bandwagoning. but his playstyle seems to be improving. Too little too late?

Trojan Horse- wishy washy. Vollkan said this "If I put a smiley face there it can't be held against me" I think this is spot on.

Flameaxe- I can understand not liking white, his aggressive gameplay or his demanding style. Its the overall lack of contribution that bothers me, not just your responses to white.

White (r. Rump-Wat)- overly-aggressive and at times distracting. Seems pro-town despite this because of his inquisitiveness and his insistence that we all answer all the question asked of us by everybody.

theopor_COD- I hate to say it, but after 30+ pages, I still don't have much of read on him. I'll go back and see what else I am able to come up with.

Vote:Trojan Horse

793-815: nothing
830: Quotable

Now it is time for my new theory which is actually MoS' theory on steroids:

Since at least one scum was on MoS's bandwagon:

Pwayne
thyess
white
trojan horse
Oman

it must be safe to assume that at lest one scum was on Dr. BS's bandwagon:

flameaxe
thyess
CKD
Trojan Horse

anything pop out? thyess and TH. hmmm...

832: Admits 830 was partly in jest
834: just posted 830 to make an observation
842-848: Nothing.
897: "if Tar lives past today he is going to be a cult member"
906: Supports Tar's lynch if "If it is between lynching a lurker for lurking or lynching somebody that we are likely going to have to lynch anyway. "
908: The awful zombie movie post. Votes Tar
911-918: nothing
923-927: Argues CL will target Tar
929: Compares cult targeting Tar to mafia targeting doctor
930: Lynching Tar removes a liability
935: Tar is best lynch today
942: Tar is scum tomorrow
948: MoS and CKD are opportunistic
949: Rejects a wifom accusation
959-960: acknowledges the wifom of lynching Tar
966-968: nothing
976: Argues with MoS on tar
978: Has no read on kak
980: thinks BS was "genuine and misunderstood"
982: Prods Oman for explanation
984: Oman doesn't have a clue
993: Acknowledges the implications of my numbers. Wants to know why I suspect him more than White/Tar
995: Understands the numbers
997-999: Admits folly and moves towards kak
1000: meta comment on kak
1003: Suggests we move for info maximisation
1005: ICANHASSCUMDAR #4

Mastermind of Sin- Pinged hard as early scum. Now I just think that he is abrasive. He has his infamous "I act scummy to lure scum" moment. I have come to believe that he made some serious errors early on and rather than fessing up, he created this bogus excuse.

Oman- Every bandwagon known to man. Has lots of FOS as a result. After today he's going to rightfully find himself in hot water.

Kakeng (r. ac1983fan)- What can I say. I think he is town via my gut.

vollkan- Still pinging scum to me, but I've got nothing, he does everything protown... a regular Mr. Robinson.

Tarhalindur (r. Dr. Blackstrike)- Yup. I defended BS earlier for saying what I am getting lynched for today. Its all ironic. Probably town.

curiouskarmadog- Seems genuine and consistant in his outrage. He did annoy me by challenging my Vanilla Tar logic. I still feel that he went out of his way to distort my position in the most unflattering light. I don't think it was malicious. We were both caught up in an emotive and contraversial debate.

tyhess- The jury is still out. He pings and then flies under the radar a bit.

Trojan Horse- I have a hard time reading him as well. Wishy-washy. Could be just impressionable town?

Flameaxe- This guy. Doesn't want to play by the same rules as the rest of us. Sticks in head in rarely and then only to make contentless posts. You think Kakeng is bad, this guy has done it the whole game.

White (r. Rump-Wat)- Pisses me off and rubs me the wrong way. That doesn't mean he is scum. It doesn't mean he is town either. Has a quirky fetish with knowing everybodies scumdars. This could be protown or proscum.

theopor_COD- speaking of quirky fetishes, this guy has been obsessed with getting AC/kakeng lynched since around page 5. He must be irked, b/c he almost got his wish until I came along.

1008: Accuses white of inconsistent suspicions
1009: Looks at main suspects:

Oman- I think that it is really really scummy that he jumps onto so many bandwagons b/c scummy people like to jump on lots and lots of bandwagons. Bandwagon hoping is a scummy thing to do.

tyhess- I think he is scummy. I have said so before. I think it is just as likely that he is making newbie mistakes.


Flameaxe- I think flameaxe is scummy. Not wanting to play by the same rules as everybody else is scummy. Making infrequent posts is scummy. Making contentless post is scummy. Some people think that Kakeng is scummy because they think that making contentless posts and lurking is scummy. I think Flameaxe is more scummy that kakeng is scummy because flameaxe has been scummy the whole game. That is scummy.

Trojan Horse- Being wishy-washy is scummy. Trojan Horse is wishy-washy, therefore, I will go out on a limb and say he is scummy.

...there you go.

1012-1039: nothing
1043: votes flame for active lurking
1099: Notes that MoS has been defending flame
1100: vote count
1102-1104: Doesn't like selfvote
1105: Thinks kakeng's claim rings true
1120: Criticises an attack by MoS on tyhess
1121: Wonders if tar recruited
1133: Scumdar #5

Mastermind of Sin - Scum. He jumped back on my radar. Yesterday, immediately after a bandwagon against Flameaxe started, he changed his stance to go after a very popular choice, Kakeng ( a diversion?) . This occurred after he passionately defended the call to get a role claim (so much so he voted for tyhess for disagreeing with him). So what's the point of getting a role claim if your going to kill a power role anyway? He then goes on to defend Flameaxe's absence (he also defended Flameaxe in his first few posts. Oman called him out on it. This is when MoS famously decided to stop answering questions in order to flush out scum.) Today he lists flameaxe as scummy with no explanation (distancing?).

Oman - Admittedly, I mixed him up with tyhess on my last scumdar. I'm on the fence with Oman.

vollkan - Again, not much to say. I got heckled for saying in effect that he was so townie that he had to scum. Now it seems that he is so townie that he has to be cult makes more sense. I'd like to see him come under some pressure.

Tarhalindur (r. Dr. Blackstrike) - I'm convinced he is/was town. Maybe cult now, but the way I see it, he is not a priority.

tyhess - I'm off the fence. tyhess is town.

Trojan Horse - I didn't like his vote on tyhess considering that TH acted like tyhess's position was ridiculous despite having held the same position in the past. I would likely lean towards scum here.

Flameaxe - scum.

theopor_COD - I'm on the fence here.

1137: MoS is changing on flame
1146-1147: nothing
1158: Attacks Tar
1159: Votes flameaxe "for reasons I have already stated." This is the vote that I had problems with
1161: Explains vote was partly for active lurking
1213: promises content
1255: Doesn't like flame's style. (Frankly, I don't think anybody could possibly like flame's play)
1272:

2 players (vollkan and theo) were in on both townie lynches. Oman was only on Flameaxes but his hammer vote seemed really contrived to me. Those would be my top three at this point. I am actively going back to review NK's to see if there is anything to be learned there.

1281: Wonders why I suspect him
1282: Clarifies
1284: Argues with me on the flame vote
1288: opposes mass claim
1291-1294: the argument with me
1296: notes that Oman gave brownies to CKD and MoS
1298: Supports PBPAs
1301-1303: More of the argument
1305: TH PBPA
1308: About the Gemelli Parser
~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~
As I have already said, my biggest problems with Pwayne are the vanilla lynching support (which he has made an explanation for) and the flame vote. He has made many posts in this game, of significantly varying helpfulness. One comment I would make is that the Oman-Pwayne links don't flow from Pwayne to Oman. Pwayne is kind of vague to neutral on Oman.

[vollkan]

Scumdar percentages at this point in time:

(See PBPA end analyses for justifications)
Oman. 65%
Tarhalindur. 40%*
pwayne66. 70%
Trojan Horse. 70% **
theopor_COD. 55%

* I think Tar is a recruit, based on the weirdness. However, his own behaviour in sum is about 40%. BS struck me as a genuine newb and Tar hasn't set me off.

[vollkan]

EBWOP:

I forgot to conclude the double asterisks on TH

** Reasoning on TH in post 1274

[vollkan]

Woo, quadrupost!

Guardian, would you be so kind as to prod thepor and Tar with a sharp pike or, failing that, a PM?

Mod Edit: done.

[vollkan]

Tar being the recruit would also explain his lurking. He basically needs a string of No Lynches in order to have any hope of success. The best way to achieve a No Lynch is to prevent the town from being informed enough to make a lynch.

[vollkan]

My numbers were off in the last post.

He doesn't need a "string" of no lynches; he only needs one. In fact, more than one will cause him to lose, and the mafia to win.

[vollkan]

No, Ouman, we have 6 people alive. If Tar is recruit, it is 3:2:1 (town:mafia:cult)

The numbers according to vollkan:

These numbers ignore where vig and mafia target the same person. You are all smart enough to know it just means no change from the main limb of the numbers.

I have bolded all the scenarios where Tar can possibly win.

Mislynch

Mislynch = 2:2:1.
MafNK town = 1:2:1 (Tar cannot win here, because it goes NL, mafia NKs town and D4 opens at either 0:2:1 or 0:1:1 (if vig was the town) causing the mafia to win)

--VigNK mafia = 1:1:1

--VigNK Tar = 1:2:0 Mafia win
MafNK Tar = 2:2:0
--Vig NK town = 1:2:0 Mafia win
--Vig NK Mafia = 2:1:0

Mafia Lynch

Maflynch = 3:1:1
MafNK town = 2:1:1

--Vig NK town = 1:1:1

--Vig NK mafia = 2:0:1 Town win
--Vig NK Tar = 2:1:0
MafNK Tar = 3:1:0
--Vig NK town = 2:1:0
--Vig NK mafia = 3:0:0 Town win

No Lynch

No Lynch = 3:2:1

MafNK town = 2:2:1

(MafLynch on D4 makes it 2:1:1, mafNK town makesit 1:1:1)
--Vig NK town = 1:2:1
--Vig NK mafia = 2:1:1
--Vig NK Tar = 2:2:0
Maf NK Tar = 3:2:0
--Vig NK town = 2:2:0
--Vig NK mafia = 3:1:0

In 1:1:1,

MafLynch = 1:0:1 Cult win

Town lynch = 0:1:1 Mafia win (?)
Cult lynch - 1:1:0 Draw if vig is the remaining pro-town player, mafia win otherwise

The interesting thing is that because of the way the numbers have rolled so far (ie. the fact we have a 3:2:1 scenario) Tar only ever actually wins if it gets to the 1:1:1 situation, where he can still only win if the town player chooses to let him win.

[vollkan]

So the best numbers for Tar would be to help us catch the scum.

Yes, actually.

Notice there is one 1:1:1 outcome for each of mislynch, maflynch and nolynch

The mislynch one is actually the easiest for Tar to achieve. See, the vig won't be lynched, which means that the vig has a 2/3 chance of hitting the mafia (there is one other townie and two mafiosi) and triggering 1:1:1 (assuming the mafia NK town and not Tar)

The mafialynch one has the vig with a 2/3 chance again; there are 2 other townies and 1 mafioso. Tar needs a townie NKed to cause 1:1:1

The No Lynch one depends on the vig choosing not to NK, meaning it is really up to how confident the vig is.

Hence, I don't think that Tar really stands to benefit all that much no matter what happens. Which would explain his lack of interest.

[vollkan]

Ignore the "yes actually" at the start of my previous post. I wrote that before I realised that mislynch also has odds of 2/3; I initially made a maths blunder and had 1/4.

[vollkan]

Actually, there is one major reason why it might be to his advantage to help.

See, the mislynch Tar win requires a mislynch and a Vig NK of mafia. In other words, it requires a poor town decision and a good vig decision. These two may not be consistent with each other, since a mislynch tells no information about scumpartners and makes more people suspect. Thus, it is less likely to cause a good vig decision (ie. one that kills a mafioso)

In contrast, the mafialynch one requires a good town decision and a good vig decision, as well as giving the vig more information on which to use scumlinks to find a target.

Hence, Tar, your best bet is actually to help scumhunt

I noticed you left out vig No Killing. I suppose it has little outcome on the results.

To see the no vig outcome, just look at the mafia NK line only.

[vollkan]

I really wonder if Tar's return has any causal connexion to my numbers...

Anyway, you've promised content and a fresh perspective is just what we need right now.

I've just been owned in a lot of other games

[vollkan]

Without further ado- Vote: Oman

He needs to squirm abit. He is taking his position most suspicious too lightly.

Why is Oman most suspicious? I don't recall you having recently made any case against him.

Trojan Horse - Numerous small scum tells aggregated, but he cleared them up rather well yesterday. Still scummy, but significantly less so.

Do you have anything to add to this?

No.

Question - why is Theopor being completely ignored?

There's a pretty strong case against him, IMO, especially given how much he seemed to focus on the Cult early in D1.

As I think my PBPA showed, he was suspect early on, but then began being very helpful. I think my 55% rating is probably accentuating the later stuff, which makes me wonder if I should be paying more attention to what he said early on.

I'm almost ready to vote pwayne, firstly he's broken the ice on the voting, but mostly, TH is suddenly not that scummy.

I definatly will think about this.

Breaking the ice is not necessarily scummy (though usually scum are the ones to break the ice). His latest posts have been weird also. He prods me to find out if am reconsidering TH and then says he is "all ears" for a case on Theo.

Some thinking is definitely in order.

[vollkan]

1) Process of elimination

So, rather than actually going looking for evidence or a case, you are content to vote purely because other people appear

less scummy

than Oman. That's frankly ridiculous. If Oman is your number #1, build a case, look for evidence, give him an interrogation. The reference to the hammer vote is a start, but the responsible thing to do is to look for more.

My turn! When oman votes for me are you going to ask him the same question or are you going to let him slide like you did with FA?

It seems that your pal has suggested that he is ready to vote for me and despite the OMGUSiness of it, coupled with his lack of a "case" against me , he practically gets a pat on the back from you.

All I said was that your last few posts have been weird and that I needed to think things over. You are over-reacting.

If Oman does OMGUS vote you, I will come down on him as well. He is right to question you though and to think about it.

Interesting...

Most recent scumdar.
Oman. 65%
Tarhalindur. 40%*
pwayne66. 70%
Trojan Horse. 70% **
theopor_COD. 55%


scumdar in 1274 (your "case" against TH)

Oman - 70%
Tarhalindur - 30%.
Pwayne - 70%.
Trojan Horse - 65%.
Theo - 55%.

The funny thing is this: Since then you have accused Oman and I of being scum together, yet you think he is less scummy now than when you though only that "Oman was unhelpful early on with a few tells".

TH is more scummy yet you have not changed your position or case. BTW...

On the Oman thing: It's pretty simple. My looking for scumlinks is independent of my individual suspicions. At that point, if you had come up scum, Oman would look more suspect to me. Oman, as an individual, looked less suspicious, despite the

possibility

of a scum link.

On TH: It's a variance of just 5% and it mostly just reflected how I felt about him relative to other people as a result of going over the PBPAs. Given your PBPA of him, I intend to look over TH's responses to theo again, as well as looking at theo himself.

[vollkan]

Mod Edit

Official Vote Count #55

Oman[1](pwayne66)


Not Voting[5](Oman, vollkan, Tarhalindur, Trojan Horse, theopor_COD)

Can you understand why I don't like your vote, though?

In a LYLO situation, a strange and unexplained vote, justified only by "process of elimination" is scummy. I just did a PBPA of Oman and found nothing excessively scummy, yet alone voteworthy. If you can find a different angle, by all means go ahead; it's often the case that different people will read and weight things differently.

[vollkan]

The three reasons?

1)

Process of Elimination

- This is NOT a reason to suspect someone. It is not positive evidence for somebody being scum. It may be a cause to want to read Oman more closely, but it doesn't make him suspicious. It might also suggest that you yourself are not reading hard enough.
2)

Contrived hammer vote

- There may be something to this. After all, Oman's justification was that a self-hammer will give us less information. What more did we learn other than that Oman was prepared to hammer, apparently to get information? Hence, there is some basis for calling it contrived.
3)

Need to squirm...Taking his position most suspicious too lightly

- And if he was getting edgy you would accuse him of being over-reactive; if he was ignoring it entirely you would accuse him of being evasive. Given the lack of any actual case, I fail to see precisely how Oman

should

have reacted to the suspicion. How people react to pressure/suspicion is more dependent on playstyle than anything else.

These are not reasons to vote somebody.

[vollkan]

One of the big ones was number three where I suggested that Oman needed some pressure. Can you understand why I might be frustrated that you just took the bullet for him?

On the pressure thing: By all means, go ahead and pressure him. But a mere vote does nothing without a case, or at least a potent question.

I didn't "take the bullet" by any means. All I am saying is that if you think Oman warrants pressure/suspicion you need to actually find evidence.

[vollkan]

Nothing. I was just reiterating my point that a pressure vote is pointless when there is no case you are trying to get a response to, unless the person is lurking and you just want them to say something.

[vollkan]

This is funny, because I feel the same way about the position that you put me in. If I drop my vote and try to build a case, you will say that I am wishy-washy. If I maintain my vote and begin to ask questions, You will say that I am trying to appease you. If I do neither and maintain my vote without asking questions, you will say that I am maintaining a position without building a case.

Dropping your vote and building a case is not wishy-washy. When I accuse people of being "wishy-washy" I mean that they are saying things like "X could be town or scum but I don't know".

Keeping your vote and asking questions would not look like blatant appeasement; it's just a nulltell. Maintaining your vote and doing nothing will be useless.

My problem was the act of voting itself, so whether or not you maintain it doesn't bother me. What does bother me is if you don't look for evidence to substantiate it.

Oman is not scum hunting and Oman is not trying to remove himself from suspicion. I fully intend to ask questions when I am ready to, but if it means I have to clear my strategy with you first, why don't you just do it and save us some time. I just didn't get the impression that you were interested in busting any balls but mine.

Oman can't move himself from suspicion until he is questioned. You don't need to "clear your

strategy

" (interesting word choice....) with me, but you do need to produce a tangible case before anything else.

I don't have any preference for busting your balls; it's just that you have been saying the most things that I have problems with. Admittedly, you have been saying more than most people, so that may not mean too much.

[vollkan]

1) Do you believe that Oman's post offered any content or questions?
2) If not, why defend the post?
3) Please explain the ice breaking scum tell.
4) What about my posts were weird?
5) Why did you push that my reasons for voting FA were weak when Oman's were so very clearly weaker?

I like listed questions.

1) Oman said that he was almost ready to vote for you because a) You'd broken the ice; and b) You had suddenly dropped the suspicion on TH. He also said he needed to think about it. I will wait to see what his "thinking" comes up with. For now, I have no problem with him saying he needs to think about things.

2) The post looked to me like a lead-in into actual analysis.

3) I said it "is not necessarily scummy (though scum are usually the ones to break the ice)". Like reactivity, it can be a scum-tell but it is very player-dependent also. If I thought it was a scum tell, I would have FoSed you by now.

4) I will list what I considered weird at the time:
a) Voting for pressure without a case (we have since been through this though)
b) Asking me whether I had anything to add on TH (again, we have since been over this)
c) The "I'm all ears" comment. It looked like you were trying to get theo to build up a case.

5) My problem with your vote was that you voted on apparent suspicion where we never saw that suspicion building up to the point of flame being above everyone else (we've been over this). Oman's hammer was very odd, but there isn't really any line of questioning to pursue on it, since he was explicit that he was hammering purely for the purpose of avoiding a self-hammer. It's a bizarre reason, to be sure, but there is no line of interrogation to flow from it. In your case, the vote was for suspicion, so it is relevant to look at how that suspicion formed. In Oman's case, the vote was "to hammer". The obvious question we might ask of Oman is why he chose to hammer FA when he was suspicious of TH, but his hammer explanation deals with that question, even if it is a poor explanation.

[vollkan]

3) Well, I happen to think that Vollkan and I are both town. I also happen to think that Tar is at worst a recruit. As you said yourself: Process of elimination. The reason I haven't voted you is that I don't feel thats enough. I'm much more afraid of the lurkers, but theo has been replaced in other games. My suspicion of TH was based on a suspicion of Flameaxe (which was rather weak) upon Flameaxe's "Town reveal" I almost disregarded TH. Which is probably the wrong thing to do.

4) I'm not big on %s but right now I'd say:
Scum: Pwayne, TH(possibly theo, but the lurking is adding to it)
Town: Vollkan, Oman, (theo or TH) (poss Tar)
Cult: Tar/Vollkan (not discounting this, he'd be a great cult asset, therefore likely target)

5) My suspicion of TH was based on a suspicion of Flameaxe (which was rather weak) upon Flameaxe's "Town reveal" I almost disregarded TH. Which is probably the wrong thing to do.

Anyway, after being forced to review my own scumdar Vote Trojan Horse

I must have missed something here.

You think that yourself and me are pro-town (you "think" you are protown?) and that Tar is at worst a recruit. Okay fine, that leaves theo, TH and Pwayne. Judging my your scumdar, I gather theo is your lowest suspect of those three, leaving TH and Pwayne.

What I do not understand is why, if "process of elimination" is an inadequate reason to vote Pwayne (as you say), you have chosen to vote for TH. As you say, your "suspicion of TH was based on a suspicion of Flameaxe (which was rather weak)".

FA was town and (to the best of my knowledge) you have not yet actually given any further explanation as to why TH is scummy to the point of meriting a vote.

[vollkan]

As promised, a look over TH's responses to theo's PBPA:

For convenience:
Theo's PBPA of TH
TH's Response

As I read TH's Response:
1) He rebuts the suggestion that he was following CKD in prodding MoS by saying that he only cared

because

it was MoS. The strange thing is, that even in theo's own analysis he quotes TH saying:

Okay, MoS posted a bunch of times (in other games) yesterday evening. So he's definitely around.

He makes no mention of the fact that MoS being MoS is actually important.

2) Theo made a point that TH was using a "broken scumdar" as an excuse for finding scum, lumping this (for some reason) with the point that TH had given an early defence of FA. TH doesn't address the first of these and instead solely responds to the FA point, saying he just didn't find FA more scummy than anybody else on average. In other words, he avoided the point about not using "broken scumdar" as an excuse for not scumhunting.

3) Uses this impaired ability to scumhunt as an excuse for his "nicey-nicey" scumdar.

4) Theo makes a good point that TH actually makes himself sound scummiest, and calls this being apologetic. TH says that he just wanted to be "comprehensive".

5) The whole giving in to MoS's pressure and voting tyhess thing he puts down to frustration at being wishy-washy and having nothing to go on. This is effectively an emotional excuse and TH doesn't seem to be a particularly emotional player. Possible inconsistency.

6) Argues that we should consider lynching lurkers because we don't want the scum to be able to hide. The problem with this is, obviously, that town are just as likely to be lurking as scum are. Hence, lynching them is hardly helpful.

That makes 6 issues which, on closer inspection, still give cause for concern.

Can you please discuss these TH?

[vollkan]

I'm gonna steal a

*headshake*

from TH here. Oman votes for TH with weak reasons. Vollkan gives him a playful swat and a half hearted reprimand and then proceeds to coach Omen on what his reasoning should be. I think I have our scum pair. Going to do some research.

Okay, let's compare my two responses:

Why is Oman most suspicious? I don't recall you having recently made any case against him.

What I do not understand is why, if "process of elimination" is an inadequate reason to vote Pwayne (as you say), you have chosen to vote for TH. As you say, your "suspicion of TH was based on a suspicion of Flameaxe (which was rather weak)".

FA was town and (to the best of my knowledge) you have not yet actually given any further explanation as to why TH is scummy to the point of meriting a vote.

I'm hardly being inconsistent here. In both tone and substance, the two are effectively the same.

Fine, Pwayne, we had an argument following those points, but that was largely just because you responded to me and listed your 3 points when I requested a case. Those 3 points are NOT a case, which is why I argued against you.

If Oman responds to me with similarly dodgy reasoning, I will attack him as well. I came down no harder on Oman initially than I did on you; it was just that we got into a debate over it. Oman has been vague in his subsequent post and has still failed to properly justify his vote. Don't think I haven't taken note of that.

[vollkan]

I'm not going to say why you think vollkan is going easy on me. But you're wrong on me, I'm town

Softclaiming noted.

[vollkan]

Tar posted in this game today (at least in the superior timezones).

Check the previous page.

[vollkan]

Okay, so I didn't mention IN THAT POST that my concern was that it was specifically MoS that hadn't posted yet. But I did mention it a few posts later. Post 89, to be exact.

This is true. Thanks for resolving that one.

Well, if there's any doubt about my scumdar being broken, check out the four players who have been nightkilled so far. I suspected them all at some point, but only one turned out to be a bad guy (and he was the cult recruiter, not a scum).

Well, it does not really indicate brokenness. I think everybody has suspected almost everybody at some point. My issue, as you no doubt gather, is that a "broken scumdar" is a rather convenient excuse.

But as for my being "comprehensive", I think I've been consistent in that regard. When theo was doing breakdowns of various players during day 2, I wanted us to pitch in and do one for him. When you were doing breakdowns today, vollkan, I did one for you. Is it silly for me to add in what I expect to be the main argument against me, when I do my scumdar for everyone else? (Ok, maybe it's silly, but I did it anyway.)

Well, I don't doubt you being comprehensive. The thing is that I see "self-scumminess" admissions as a form of apologetics and damage control. Sort of like that if you confess your sins you will be absolved and not get hunted down for them. It isn't necessarily a scumtell, but it has an unhelpful neutralising effect which is anti-town in the long run.

Call it a meta, if you want. I don't want the game to degenerate into a lurk-a-thon, which would only help the scum. I want people to talk. (If a scum managed to lurk the whole game, and survived the whole game, and won, I'd be REALLY mad. Fortunately, doesn't look like that'll happen;

the only remaining player who could be called a serious lurker is Tar, and I really doubt he's scum.

)

This is an aside point:

Tar is really worrying me right now, based on some things I have seen meta. I have seen him pull some pretty nifty gambits before and know he is adept at appearing protown. It wouldn't be out of character for him to claim vanilla as scum and thereby render himself lynch immune. I mean, we've seen virtually nothing from him other than completely unreadable play by Dr. BS and then Tar popping up, claiming vanilla and then retreating.

Theo, for similar reasons of lurking, is also a concern (given his earlier play).

[vollkan]

NOOOOOO Now I need to distill the thread.

Why does that register in my head as "NOOOO Now I need to justify my actions"?

[vollkan]

Speaking of which, finding a replacement for theo (and Tar?) is going to be a chore

[vollkan]

I guess the fact that Oman has had more votes/unvotes than anyone else is deceptive

As you have now learnt, number alone is a bad indicator.

Yes, TH, I do think so. Basically it leaves someone (me) to be questioned. The scum try to take me down with it, or the town post good questions about it, or whatever, the point is its a very strong topic that leads to very very revealing conversation (okay, so maybe its not as good as I wished it was).

Well, for starters, I do not blame you for the "hammer". I say that because TH said:"Oman, why did you hammer Flameaxe?"

I hold as a rule: First on the wagon is just as culpable as the last.

My quibble is purely with your "vote". Your explanation makes [sense[/i], but it just doesn't strike me as a good reason. I mean, self-hammering is stupid because it prevents someone being caught on the wagon, but hammering to prevent self-hammering seems just as pointless.

[vollkan]

Yes, I know that. I just can't make sense of it given that if you want information, the best way is to wait for someone else to hammer. I can't see myself hammering a person purely because I don't want that person to hammer themself when I could wait to see who else would be willing to hammer so I could have another potential suspect.

I don't think you're scummy for it; it's just something that I don't quite get.

[vollkan]

Good to see something substantial Tar. It gives us another perspective on things, which can only help.

Trojan Horse also looks pro-town for much the same reasons - he posts lots of analysis to go with information. The main strike against him is his indecisiveness early in D1 (wishy-washiness is usually a scumtell), but his later actions lead me to believe that this is the result of inexperience instead of being scum.

This seems a sensible way of rationalising TH's behaviour. He has posted what looks like very genuine analysis of late, so it is quite plausible that his earlier stuff was just characteristic inexperience.

Oman is probably scum - from what I'm seeing, he's posted a lot of information but very little analysis, especially good analysis. This is scummy - I've seen many scum attempt to use information in the place of analysis in their attempts to blend in (no example atm - the best example is in an ongoing game).

Just so I am sure I follow you: What you mean is the posting of things like observations without actually trying to undertake further reasoning and argument, right?

I may do a reread of Oman with this in mind. I tend to focus more on people's actions and suspicions than whether their content is meaningful, so this could make me see something new.

Mod, have you tried the townies that have died in this game? They could replace in (and would be more up to speed).

That's a good idea. Ideally it would be either MoS, tyhess or flameaxe, since they are the most up-to-date, obviously.

[vollkan]

That's what happens when you copy quote tags

[vollkan]

I don't mind saying that I'm liking possibility #3 more and more...

Did I miss a post where you explained this being likely?

One thing I will say: I'm not going to cast a vote on anyone until theo has been found or replaced. We need to get that sixth voice into the mix.

I support this. Another perspective is always useful.

[vollkan]

Hmm troj is attaacking me (the group's target) and theo (absent) how interesting.

You made me think of something, well two things:
1) @TH, you just made a post in which you declared Oman's actions to be "reasonable", with the obvious exception of the hammer which you (rightly) questioned. And yet, you have now moved towards again indicating you are suspicious of Oman and theo. The only intermittent change I can see is that Tar also expressed suspicion of Oman (going with the group perhaps?). If Oman's actions were "reasonable" what makes him still seem to be your prime suspect?
2) @TH again:
a) What has made you think it likely that theo is scum? In your last scumdar you had him ranked equal with Pwayne and myself and you have made no intermittent remarks which make him seem more likely scum.
b) Furthermore, what is the basis for the "Oman/theo" connexion?

[vollkan]

You were already voting for him.

But yes, arbitrary changes in suspicion on that scale are definitely odd.

[vollkan]

Yay! We have full participation again. Thanks MoS.

[vollkan]

I guess I'm in the same boat as pwayne here. It's process of elimination. You saw my PBPA of you, vollkan; I haven't seen anything scummy from you yet. (I have doubts about my scumdar, but that's unavoidable.) Tar is either townie, cultie, or an extremely brazen scum (last one not likely, IMO). So that just leaves Oman, pwayne, and theo/MoS. And while Oman has only been of average scumminess so far (IMO), average scumminess puts him at the top right now. I'm going back and forth between Oman-pwayne and Oman-theo/MoS.

Ah okay, you are using a process of elimination. It's not a method I like (as you can tell from my criticising Pwayne for making a vote based on elimination), but it explains your suspicion at least.

One other thing I should mention: my thoughts on who the vig might be are also coming into play here. If I think someone is likely to be the vig, I naturally won't think that person is likely to be scum. So as not to help the scum, I won't say WHO I think the vig is. Just so you know that I'm thinking about it.

You should be thinking about it, definitely, but yes, say nothing.

That being said, the reason Oman shouldn't be dead yet is that with 6 people alive, and 2 mafia left, our best option is clearly to no lynch. If we lynch today, we have to lynch correctly. If we no lynch, the mafia eliminates a suspect for us, and we have a better chance of lynching scum the next day. This also gives our power roles (if we have any left) a chance to act once more without pressure of losing the game right away. With the cult leader eliminated, time is on our side. We need to no lynch today to improve our chances of beating the mafia.

Vote: No Lynch

I crunched the numbers a few pages ago:

Mislynch

Mislynch = 2:2:1.
MafNK town = 1:2:1 (Tar cannot win here, because it goes NL, mafia NKs town and D4 opens at either 0:2:1 or 0:1:1 (if vig was the town) causing the mafia to win)
--VigNK mafia = 1:1:1
--VigNK Tar = 1:2:0 Mafia win
MafNK Tar = 2:2:0
--Vig NK town = 1:2:0 Mafia win
--Vig NK Mafia = 2:1:0

Mafia Lynch

Maflynch = 3:1:1
MafNK town = 2:1:1
--Vig NK town = 1:1:1
--Vig NK mafia = 2:0:1 Town win
--Vig NK Tar = 2:1:0
MafNK Tar = 3:1:0
--Vig NK town = 2:1:0
--Vig NK mafia = 3:0:0 Town win

No Lynch

No Lynch = 3:2:1
MafNK town = 2:2:1 (MafLynch on D4 makes it 2:1:1, mafNK town makesit 1:1:1)
--Vig NK town = 1:2:1
--Vig NK mafia = 2:1:1
--Vig NK Tar = 2:2:0
Maf NK Tar = 3:2:0
--Vig NK town = 2:2:0
--Vig NK mafia = 3:1:0

Now, obviously our situation is not true LYLO. Even on a mislynch, we can still win, but it requires a successful vigging, which is a very dire gamble. Obviously, mafia lynch is the best outcome.

As for no lynch: The best possible scenario to result is 3:1:0, where the mafia target a recruit and where the vig hits mafia successfully. However, with 5 potential targets, there is a 3/5 chance on pure probability that the vig will fail, in which case we will likely end up without a majority (unless vig and mafia target the same person obviously).

MoS has much more experience in this than I do, but I wonder whether the knowledge of just one player's alignment (assuming the vig abstains on the risk) is going to be worth putting ourselves in a situation of 3:2 or 2:2:1?

[vollkan]

I was addressing a post by Oman where he was wondering how things work if Tar is cultist:

Hold on.

1:2:2 (is this right?)

NL
Vig/mafia cross-Kill: 1:1:1 Tar would claim and win regardless.

You're right 1 No Lynch and Tar wins.

I'm not sure who I feel happy lynching today. It would suck to lose this today or tonight.

Obviously, the "Tar" in my analysis can be just substitute for generic "cultist", but in the context I was looking at Tar.

[vollkan]

The vig kill is a horrible crutch to depend on for winning the game. If we lynch today, the vig only had a 50% chance of hitting scum tonight. I don't want the vig to kill anymore. I would rather depend on lynches and the input of all the players living to decide our lynches than depend on one player's opinion (even mine) to win the game for us.

Hmm. You are talking about a mislynch I assume, since the probability is only 50% where there are two scum. In the event of a mislynch, if the vig does not NK we have 2 scum and 2 non-scum, meaning that we have no hope of lynching mafia. If the vig succeeds, our situation is still only 2:1 or 1:1:1, both of which are worse for us than having no lynch and no vig.

We need to lynch someone today, and regardless of whether we lynch scum or not, the vig needs to kill tonight. Then we'll have 3 left the next day, with (hopefully) at most one scum left. Sounds like "the numbers are in our favor" in that situation, and they won't be if we no lynch.

As I have said,
Mislynch = 3:2 (that's non-mafia : mafia, obviously there can be a cultist.)
MafNK = 2:2
VigNK = 2:1 (good) or 1:2 (loss)

If we no lynch and no vig, we end up at 3:2. I severely doubt that 2:1 is better than 3:2 at all, yet alone when it carries the risk of a 1:2 loss.

Also, before we lynch someone, we can always publicly discuss who the vig should kill the following night. That way the vig kill isn't dependent on "one person's opinion" (unless the vig decides to go against the crowd).

We faced a similar situation in another game I was in. I was adamantly against any sort of directing, but the compromise we reached was that each player listed four preferential candidates. On the numbers here, though, vigging seems insensible.

[vollkan]

Let's look back to the numbers again:

I'm going to simplify things by ignoring all the cult stuff. Besides, it is kind of easy to work out how a cult fits into things (just take off a townie and add on a third faction person)

Mislynch

Mislynch = 3:2
MafNK town = 2:2
--Vig NK town = 1:2
--Vig NK mafia = 2:1

Now, if the vig does not NK (or NKs the same townie as the scum), it goes to 2:2 No Lynch automatically. The vig then needs to kill scum (P=2/3) to have a hope of drawing it. Even then, there is a 50% chance of the scum NKing the vig. If they do so, we lose.

Mafia Lynch

Maflynch = 4:1
MafNK = 3:1
--Vig NK town = 2:1
--Vig NK mafia = 3:0

No Lynch

No Lynch = 4:2
MafNK = 3:2
--Vig NK town = 2:2 (see above for 2:2)
--Vig NK mafia = 3:1

~~~~~~~~~~~~
As Oman says, a lot of this has to do with claims. I would love to be able to do probability analysis of this, but unfortunately the claim situation makes that rather more difficult than I am used to.

[vollkan]

Another effort by me to rationalise things:

Mislynch

-Well, in the event of a mislynch the vig needs to NK to give us a hope of winning. The vig has a 50% chance of success causing 2:1 and a 50% chance of failure giving rise to 1:1, or 2:2 if vig targets the same as mafia. A No NK will make it 2:2, preventing a win.

Maflynch

- The vig has a 25% chance of lynching mafia to make it a win for us. The vig has a 75% of hitting a townie, which makes it either 2:1 or 3:1, depending on whether vig hits the same as the mafia. Now, the question is whether it is worth the risk of losing the ability to No Lynch D4 in the 3:1 scenario for the 25% chance of success. Frankly, I think our chances of success are better from a lynch than a vig, but I expect that people will see otherwise with me here.

No Lynch

- The vig has 2/5 chance of giving us a 3:1 D4 and a 3/5 chance of 2:2, which squanders any hope of a win. Here, I would be more convinced that no NK is the best move, given the significantly more serious risk.

~~~~~~~~~
In the simplest terms, I think the question that determines what we do today is this:

Is a possible 3:1 situation (the most likely best scenario) or a 2:1 situation (the next best) that much better than 3:2 that we should risk the consequences of a mislynch?

MoS is answering firmly in the negative. I am inclined to agree with him, but I do think this is a matter we need to debate. In complicated issues like this, it is all too easy to lose track of things (the claim issue for one).

Also, I don't know how the claiming thing affects these outcomes.

[vollkan]

Here's why: let's assume that the vig does not kill anymore, as MoS wants. (And actually, I now think that it IS best that the vig doesn't kill, unless it's necessary to save the game.) So day 4 dawns with 5 players left, and now we must lynch both scum, one by one. And what happens if we do? If there's a surviving cultie, we STILL lose. The vig would have to be the other survivor at the end for us to win, and I really doubt the scum would miss the vig with both of their nightkills.

Let's see...assuming there is a cult now (sorry to be so confusing with this):
NoLynch D3 = 3:2:1
MafNK = 2:2:1 (taking the likely worst-case scenario)

D4 opens at 2:2:1

MafLynch D4 = 2:1:1
--MafNK = 1:1:1
Mislynch D4 = 1:2:1
MafNK = 0:2:1. Loss. Mafia win.

Okay. I think we may have struck a problem. The 1:1:1 scenario requires No Lynch and cross-kills to win. As I said, the mafia will go for the cultist and the cultist will go for the mafia, each hoping the other takes out the townie. It makes for a sort of prisoner's dilemma, but it is not a good situation for us, since he have to rely on the scumdar of two individuals.

Moreover, even if we did "rely on the vig" as MoS suggested, that still puts us in 1:1:1 in the

best

scenario (hit mafia) and 1:2:0 in the worst.

1. Why can't the vig save us if we mislynch Day 4? If we mislynch day 4 (after a no lynch today and a no kill tonight), we will have 2 scum, 1 vig, and 1 other player left. We must then hope that the vig hits scum (likely) and the scum misses the vig (not likely). And that only gets us a draw. We'll have no remaining chance of winning in this scenario.

It actually looks like you are correct, given the numbers above.

2. Why are you so sure Tar is the cultist? I'm not totally sure. It's possible that there is no cultist; perhaps CKD tried to recruit, and failed. But if there is a cultist, Tar is the likeliest, since he revealed himself to be a vanilla townie day 1.

As I said earlier, it wouldn't surprise me if Tar was pulling a gambit here. The worst part is that if he isn't mafia, the mafia will know he is likely to be cult (because he can't be mafia). As we can see above, though, the problem is independent of Tar being the cultist. If we have a cultist, the above situation will happen.

4. How do you know Tar is NOT the vig? Do you think he would've pulled those antics day 1 if he was the vig? That's even less likely than him doing it as scum.

If he is vig, claiming vanilla was an immensely risky move (given the "Lynch all Vanillas") sentiment, but one that has paid off.

If he is mafia, same thing.

I don't think it is so unlikely that he would attempt this as either since it has 3 effects:
1) Cult fails to recruit N1
2) He safeguards himself from NKs (vig or mafia)
3) He safeguards himself from lynches

5. Why can't the vig kill the next night instead of tonight, if we no lynch today? I never said the vig should kill tonight if we no lynch today. He definitely shouldn't. And he definitely should kill night 4, if things go no lynch- no vig- mislynch up to that point. But that can only get us a draw, and we'll probably lose, as I said for #1.

See above, again.

MoS, I think your plan may be faulty on the basis of it not factoring in the cult adequately.

[vollkan]

Cross-kills?? What cross-kills? The cultist (if there is one) doesn't have a nightkill. If it gets down to 1:1:1, we are 100% toast unless the final protown player is the vig. (Then the scum can be lynched, and the vig can kill the cultist.)

Sorry. There is another game where I am having to do this same sort of stuff and it may have an SK in it. So 1:1:1 has become synonymous with "need cross-kills to win" in my brain.

You're absolutely correct.

[vollkan]

Let's see...assuming there is a cult now (sorry to be so confusing with this):
NoLynch D3 = 3:2:1
MafNK = 2:2:1 (taking the likely worst-case scenario)
D4 opens at 2:2:1
MafLynch D4 = 2:1:1
--MafNK = 1:1:1
Mislynch D4 = 1:2:1
MafNK = 0:2:1. Loss. Mafia win.

Okay. I think we may have struck a problem. The 1:1:1 scenario requires No Lynch and cross-kills to win. As I said, the mafia will go for the cultist and the cultist will go for the mafia, each hoping the other takes out the townie. It makes for a sort of prisoner's dilemma, but it is not a good situation for us, since he have to rely on the scumdar of two individuals.

Moreover, even if we did "rely on the vig" as MoS suggested, that still puts us in 1:1:1 in the best scenario (hit mafia) and 1:2:0 in the worst.

Bolded is wrong.

A mislynch on D4 after a No Vig puts us at 1:2:1. Thus, if the mafia hit the vig (0:2:1), it doesn't matter if the vig succeeds; we still lose.

[vollkan]

The vig kill is a horrible crutch to depend on for winning the game. If we lynch today, the vig only had a 50% chance of hitting scum tonight. I don't want the vig to kill anymore. I would rather depend on lynches and the input of all the players living to decide our lynches than depend on one player's opinion (even mine) to win the game for us.

Hmm. You are talking about a mislynch I assume, since the probability is only 50% where there are two scum. In the event of a mislynch, if the vig does not NK we have 2 scum and 2 non-scum, meaning that we have no hope of lynching mafia. If the vig succeeds, our situation is still only 2:1 or 1:1:1, both of which are worse for us than having no lynch and no vig.

We need to lynch someone today, and regardless of whether we lynch scum or not, the vig needs to kill tonight. Then we'll have 3 left the next day, with (hopefully) at most one scum left. Sounds like "the numbers are in our favor" in that situation, and they won't be if we no lynch.

As I have said,
Mislynch = 3:2 (that's non-mafia : mafia, obviously there can be a cultist.)
MafNK = 2:2
VigNK = 2:1 (good) or 1:2 (loss)

If we no lynch and no vig, we end up at 3:2. I severely doubt that 2:1 is better than 3:2 at all, yet alone when it carries the risk of a 1:2 loss.

Also, before we lynch someone, we can always publicly discuss who the vig should kill the following night. That way the vig kill isn't dependent on "one person's opinion" (unless the vig decides to go against the crowd).

We faced a similar situation in another game I was in. I was adamantly against any sort of directing, but the compromise we reached was that each player listed four preferential candidates. On the numbers here, though, vigging seems insensible.

You know, that's a rather big change of tune from the way you were talking earlier today when you were responding to my mass claim suggestion...

Crossed with Tar:

So, we're at lylo.

First order of business: Mass claim time?

Second order of business: Reading the thread for a change...

Trojan said it well: Absolutely not.

Let me show why:

Mislynch D3 = 3:2

MafNK = 2:2
We NEED the vig to NK mafia here to make it 2:1.

Now, on D4 if we lynch mafia we win, which should be easier because the vig can confirm himself.
However, even if something goes wrong and we mislynch D4, it becomes 1:1 with vig and mafia, giving us a draw. (At least, I think it is a draw)

In contrast,
if the vig is outed, the vig dies and the 2:1 situation is true LYLO.

Now,

Mafia lynch D3 = 4:1

MafNK = 3:1
--Vig NK mafia = 3:0 WIN
--Vig NK town = 2:1 (see above. This is LYLO if vig has died, and lynch-or-draw if vig lives)
--Vig no NK = 3:1

In the 3:1 scenario,

Mislynch

= 2:1
MafNK town = 1:1
--VigNK mafia = 1:0 WIN
--Vig NK town = Vig no NK (since same target) = 1:1

In that situation, we again need to maximise the vig's survival

And, obvious

Maflynch

= 3:0 win

Therefore, there is no good reason to out the vig today and it will be very harmful.

That's an awfully big swing for you to make from the input of just one player. It reeks of scum changing his opinion to suit the new circumstances.

HoS: Vollkan

I can't identify a change in opinion. Am I missing something?

In the earlier (second post quoted) I was arguing that we should not consider a massclaim because the vig will be necessary if we were to mislynch.

In the later (first post quoted) I was arguin that a mislynch is, at absoulte best, 2:1 which is not as good as No Lynch No Vig.

[vollkan]

It doesn't matter that it isn't our choice. The fact remains that you said No Vig was "dubious", clearly evincing that you didn't think the No Vigging was a good idea. As MoS said, and as I have shown through the numbers, a No Lynch with a misvig is utterly dreadful.

Anyway, we've seen the numbers. Our best bet is to No Lynch and No Vig.

Vote: No Lynch

[vollkan]

I screwed up badly there. I read the post by MoS where you called for us to keep voting no lynch and I was completely unaware of the 50% thing; I thought I was putting it at "No Lynch -1".

Anyway, I agree that it's time for the claiming.

[vollkan]

Whilst I doubt it makes for any practical difference, I would be more inclined to have something like:

Each person lists the names of the other 3 players (not including themselves or Tar) in preferential order. Then, we add up the scores of each player and proceed from their.

So, a hypothetical list
1) X
2) Y
3) Z

X has 3
Y has 2
Z has 1

As I said, it probably doesn't matter, but I've found this system to be a good way of making decisions.